"Hills Have Eyes" Remake Too Intense for the MPAA

**RebelMan** · 11-30-2005, 02:32 PM

Source: Empire Online/Comingsoon.net
November 30, 2005

Empire Online talked to The Hills Have Eyes remake producer Wes Craven, director of the 1977 original, who says helmer Alexandre Aja's version is so intense and gory that the MPAA has given it an NC-17 rating for now.

"It's a very strong picture and we're trying to figure out what to do with that, without ruining it," Craven said, "We have to deliver an R rating."

Story Spoilers Ahead! If you're wondering why, Craven says that the mutants' attack on the family in the trailer from his film remains in the remake but is considerably amped up.

"It's intense. Very intense. The attack on the trailer in my film was horrible, but it was over fairly fast," adds Craven. "This one goes on almost ten full minutes. It's fairly faithful to the original, but Alex added other things that also make it worse, what's happening to these people. It's protracted. It's a long, slow process rather than being a chaotic, relatively fast process. It's just too much for people that have to rate it, by a mile."

While cuts are still being made for the R rating, Craven says you can expect the more intense version on the DVD.

Fox Searchlight Pictures will release the film on March 10. It's the story of a family road trip that goes terrifyingly awry when the travelers become stranded in a government atomic zone. Miles from nowhere, the Carters soon realize the seemingly uninhabited wasteland is actually the breeding ground of a blood-thirsty mutant family...and they are the prey.

11-30-2005, 10:55 PM

they should just release it as nc17. Hell House of a 1000 corpes was nc17 and it was pretty damn tame

**RebelMan** · 12-01-2005, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TrineX:
they should just release it as nc17. Hell House of a 1000 corpes was nc17 and it was pretty damn tame

"House of 1000 Corpses" was not rated NC-17 it was Rated R. The Director's Cut of it might be rated NC-17 but that cut was never released to the public.

Coprophagia · 12-01-2005, 01:30 AM

sweet jesus yet another remake, everyone thats been doing remakes are out there to destroy the originals

**open32** · 12-01-2005, 01:57 AM

Major theater chains wont show NC-17 movies. They never make any money ether. The biggest DVD retailer Walmart wont sell them. Becouse of this they rarely make them that way anymore.

I saw house of 1000 corpses on DVD and my version wasnt NC-17.

**RebelMan** · 12-01-2005, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by open32:
Major theater chains wont show NC-17 movies. They never make any money ether. Becouse of this they rarely make them that way anymore.

The only movie that was ever shown in Major Theater Chains to the public way back in the day as NC-17 Version & Rated R Version was "Showgirls". They showed it to the public first as NC-17 waited a couple of months then re-released it to the public in the Theaters as Rated R.

12-02-2005, 01:16 AM

i'm sure major theaters would not balk at the idea of releasing a in demand movie. Also.. why would they not release the movie on nc 17? Am I the only one that thought this movie was yawnerific?

**open32** · 12-02-2005, 01:49 AM

They dont release NC-17 movies becouse of bad public reputation and opinion. Also NC-17 movies never make a lot of money. Another reason is the owners personal views like in the case of walmart, No NC-17 DVDs and no Explicit music CD's. I know United Artists and Regal have polices of no NC-17 movies. The movie Havoc was NC-17, it had to be remade, those two theater chains wouldn’t even show Aristocrats.

12-02-2005, 01:35 PM

who buys movies from walmart in the first place? If you buy movies/games from walmart.. shoot yourself now.

Besides, walmart is a hypocritical *****. Everyone knows GTA is a violent game.. right? Guess who sold the game when it came out on opening day? Can walmart plead ignorance when it edits music cds? All it comes down to is the buck.

Also, i don't know about you, but I'm more favorable of a horror movie if it is rated R vs rated PG 13. I can only assume NC 17 would be 100 times better for a horror movie

**open32** · 12-04-2005, 03:34 AM

I agree, a PG-13 horror movie is a waste of time

12-05-2005, 02:58 PM

too soft.. when I hear pg13.. I instantly think.. ok they cut all the good stuff

11-30-2005, 02:32 PM	#1 (permalink)
RebelMan AgEnT oF ChAoS Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Web Posts: 10,944 My Profile	Source: Empire Online/Comingsoon.net November 30, 2005 Empire Online talked to The Hills Have Eyes remake producer Wes Craven, director of the 1977 original, who says helmer Alexandre Aja's version is so intense and gory that the MPAA has given it an NC-17 rating for now. "It's a very strong picture and we're trying to figure out what to do with that, without ruining it," Craven said, "We have to deliver an R rating." Story Spoilers Ahead! If you're wondering why, Craven says that the mutants' attack on the family in the trailer from his film remains in the remake but is considerably amped up. "It's intense. Very intense. The attack on the trailer in my film was horrible, but it was over fairly fast," adds Craven. "This one goes on almost ten full minutes. It's fairly faithful to the original, but Alex added other things that also make it worse, what's happening to these people. It's protracted. It's a long, slow process rather than being a chaotic, relatively fast process. It's just too much for people that have to rate it, by a mile." While cuts are still being made for the R rating, Craven says you can expect the more intense version on the DVD. Fox Searchlight Pictures will release the film on March 10. It's the story of a family road trip that goes terrifyingly awry when the travelers become stranded in a government atomic zone. Miles from nowhere, the Carters soon realize the seemingly uninhabited wasteland is actually the breeding ground of a blood-thirsty mutant family...and they are the prey.

11-30-2005, 10:55 PM	#2 (permalink)
TrineX Guest Posts: n/a	they should just release it as nc17. Hell House of a 1000 corpes was nc17 and it was pretty damn tame

12-01-2005, 01:30 AM	#4 (permalink)
Coprophagia Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 668 My Profile	sweet jesus yet another remake, everyone thats been doing remakes are out there to destroy the originals

12-01-2005, 01:57 AM	#5 (permalink)
open32 Administrator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South Florida Posts: 7,934 My Profile	Major theater chains wont show NC-17 movies. They never make any money ether. The biggest DVD retailer Walmart wont sell them. Becouse of this they rarely make them that way anymore. I saw house of 1000 corpses on DVD and my version wasnt NC-17.

12-02-2005, 01:16 AM	#7 (permalink)
TrineX Guest Posts: n/a	i'm sure major theaters would not balk at the idea of releasing a in demand movie. Also.. why would they not release the movie on nc 17? Am I the only one that thought this movie was yawnerific?

12-02-2005, 01:49 AM	#8 (permalink)
open32 Administrator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South Florida Posts: 7,934 My Profile	They dont release NC-17 movies becouse of bad public reputation and opinion. Also NC-17 movies never make a lot of money. Another reason is the owners personal views like in the case of walmart, No NC-17 DVDs and no Explicit music CD's. I know United Artists and Regal have polices of no NC-17 movies. The movie Havoc was NC-17, it had to be remade, those two theater chains wouldn’t even show Aristocrats.

12-02-2005, 01:35 PM	#9 (permalink)
TrineX Guest Posts: n/a	who buys movies from walmart in the first place? If you buy movies/games from walmart.. shoot yourself now. Besides, walmart is a hypocritical *****. Everyone knows GTA is a violent game.. right? Guess who sold the game when it came out on opening day? Can walmart plead ignorance when it edits music cds? All it comes down to is the buck. Also, i don't know about you, but I'm more favorable of a horror movie if it is rated R vs rated PG 13. I can only assume NC 17 would be 100 times better for a horror movie

12-04-2005, 03:34 AM	#10 (permalink)
open32 Administrator Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South Florida Posts: 7,934 My Profile	I agree, a PG-13 horror movie is a waste of time

12-05-2005, 02:58 PM	#11 (permalink)
TrineX Guest Posts: n/a	too soft.. when I hear pg13.. I instantly think.. ok they cut all the good stuff

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)