- Plot Summary
The Carter family — Bob and Ethel, their children Lynn, Brenda, Bobby, Lynn’s husband Doug, and baby Catherine — embark on a road trip through the American Southwest to celebrate their silver wedding anniversary.
Milam’s Musings
+4
Wikipedia
+4
Roger Ebert
+4
During their journey, they stop at a gas station where a strange attendant suggests a “shortcut” through the hills. The family follows that route, but soon their vehicle is sabotaged (tires slashed), causing a crash that strands them in a remote, desolate desert region.
Wikipedia
+5
Wikipedia
+5
Roger Ebert
+5
They soon realize they’re not alone: mutated, cannibalistic dwellers, victims of past nuclear testing and genetic damage, lurk in the hills. The Carters are hunted, terrorized, and forced to defend themselves in a fight for survival.
Wikipedia
+5
Wikipedia
+5
Roger Ebert
+5
Among the family, Doug undergoes a character arc: initially cautious and fearful, he must rise to protect his loved ones.
Milam’s Musings
+2
imdb.com
+2
- Notable Elements
Visuals, setting & atmosphere
One of the film’s strong suits is its harsh desert environment. The barren, sun-bleached hills, blasted earth, abandoned vehicles, and tumbleweeds create an oppressive, isolating mood. The sense of being in an “atomic wasteland” is reinforced by remnants of nuclear test zones and ruined outposts.
Wikipedia
+4
Wikipedia
+4
Roger Ebert
+4
The mutants are brought to life with practical effects, prosthetics, makeup, and costuming. Their grotesque, tortured look helps reinforce the horrific stakes.
Wikipedia
+4
imdb.com
+4
Milam’s Musings
+4
Key scene: the night attack
One of the most intense sequences is the night assault on the family’s trailer. Shadows, sudden violence, fragmentation of viewpoints, and the shock of brutal attacks heighten suspense. Many critics and fans point to this as a standout moment.
imdb.com
+2
Milam’s Musings
+2
There are scenes of extreme violence and sexual assault (e.g. an attempted rape) which make the film disturbing and controversial.
Wikipedia
+2
Wikipedia
+2
Character arcs & performance
Ted Levine as Bob Carter brings a solid, grounded presence. The transition in Doug (Aaron Stanford) from bystander to protector is, for many, one of the more emotionally resonant threads.
Milam’s Musings
+2
imdb.com
+2
However, some characters fall into horror clichés (familial divisions, panicked reactions). Roger Ebert critiqued that some of the dialogue and character decisions feel stuck in horror tropes rather than real human logic.
Roger Ebert
Pacing & tension
The film often balances slower tension building with bursts of violence. Some critics say it’s well-paced overall, but others note that parts lag or rely heavily on audience expectations of horror setups.
Wikipedia
+4
Milam’s Musings
+4
imdb.com
+4
- Themes & Messages
Civilization vs. primal survival
A central theme is how civilized people respond when stripped of safety, social order, and infrastructure. The Carters’ veneer of normal life is tested when survival becomes raw and primal.
Consequences of abuse (nuclear testing, neglect)
The mutants are descendants of people who refused to leave lands used for nuclear tests. Their deformity, rage, and violent existence are tied to the legacy of human hubris and governmental abuse. The film hints at the moral responsibility borne by society for what it leaves behind.
Roger Ebert
+4
imdb.com
+4
Wikipedia
+4
Family, sacrifice & moral compromise
The lengths to which family members will go to protect one another are tested. Some characters must make brutal choices that challenge their moral boundaries.
Fear of the “other” / inhuman enemy
The mutants represent both physical terror and the unknown. They are portrayed as monstrous, but the film also asks: how much of them is the product of abandonment and a neglectful system?
Unlike holiday or tradition-linked films, The Hills Have Eyes is not themed around positive sentiments. It evokes dread more than hope, and its “rebirth” is more about survival and vengeance than renewal or joy.
- Personal Impressions
Strengths
The film does its horror job well: it scares, unsettles, shocks. Many sequences are viscerally effective.
The visual design, makeup, and setting are strong. The mutant designs are grotesque and believable in their world.
The emotional throughline for Doug is effective: seeing a fearful man forced into doing what must be done gives stakes beyond just “who lives/dies.”
It’s a remake that leans into the strengths of the original while trying to modernize brutality and tension.
Weaknesses
Some character decisions feel contrived or too convenient to push scares. For instance, the “wrong gas station / bad detour” trope is overused, and Ebert criticizes that the characters act less like people than horror archetypes.
Roger Ebert
The mutants are under-developed mythologically: we don’t get much depth into their motivations beyond “they attack.” Ebert notes they are “engines of destruction” rather than layered antagonists.
Roger Ebert
The film tilts toward sensational violence; some viewers may feel it edges into exploitation.
The ending and final acts veer into melodrama, betraying the gritty mood earlier. Some critics feel the film’s thematic ambitions (e.g. commentary on government or human neglect) are underutilized.
imdb.com
+3
Rotten Tomatoes
+3
Wikipedia
+3
Overall, The Hills Have Eyes (2006) is a strong horror reimagining. It retains a raw, punishing core while introducing emotional stakes and updated visuals, though it occasionally stumbles under genre pressures.
- Audience Recommendations
You might particularly enjoy this film if you:
Are a fan of survival horror / “family in peril” narratives
Don’t mind graphic violence, gore, and disturbing sequences
Appreciate practical creature effects / makeup work
Want horror that combines tension, shock, and character arcs
If you prefer psychological horror, less explicit violence, or horror with subtlety and ambiguity, this may push too far for you.
- Conclusion & Rating
The Hills Have Eyes (2006) is a brutal, intense horror remake that mostly succeeds where many remakes fail: it offers visceral thrills, solid set pieces, and emotional stakes. It doesn’t always balance its ambition with restraint, and its characters sometimes slip into archetype, but its power lies in its rawness and atmosphere.
For horror fans seeking a compelling, punishing ride, this film delivers. For others, some scenes may be too intense or the logic too thin.
Final Recommendation: Recommended for genre fans willing to endure the darker side of horror.
Rating: ★★★★☆ (4 out of 5 stars)
🎬 Trailer
