The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition)
|
List Price: Our Price: $10.49 You Save: $2.49 (19%) Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours Buy Used: from $0.63 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition)
Movie Review: Excellent!!!
Summary: 5 Stars
Before you reply I'm I on crack!!The question you should be asking yourself. Does the HD DVD look and sound great on your HDTV and your surround sound system and the answer is Yes Yes Yes!!!!.You didn't buy this movie because you didn't like it.Repeat after me you brought because it was good buy for your collection and HD DVD and DVD Version will blow your TV and Receiver on it's butt!!.The movie isn't great but it's sure entertaining watch and listen to.Enjoy!!Movie Review: Sean Bean Needs More Screen Time
Summary: 3 Stars
Having been preemptively tainted by the original performance of the 1986 version with Rutger Hauer (in a good way, Hauer was magnificent), I wasn't expecting much more other than the hope of "greater gore," which this flick definitely delivered on, especially with a "side-splitting" scene that I was happy to use my slow-frame on. Sean Bean definitely needed more screen time, much like the Australian-based thriller "Wolf Creek" managed to provide for their villain. If you're a fan of watching thriller / gore flicks for the fun of it than you will definitely enjoy yourself.Movie Review: Not exactly original or unique, but a pretty suspenseful little horror story
Summary: 4 Stars
Never having seen the original 1986 version of The Hitcher, I probably enjoyed this film more than I might have otherwise. Even still, this film suffers from what has been a noticeable saturation of recent horror movies with a "killer on the highways" motif (think Joyride, Jeepers Creepers, etc.). Basically, this 2007 film doesn't really offer viewers anything new or different, but I think it succeeds pretty darn well at what it does in fact deliver, due in large part to Sean Bean's menacing performance as the heavy in the story. You'll never hear me complain about the casting of Sophia Bush, either; she's particularly sexy when she gets mad. I can't say I was all too impressed by Zachary Knighton, but that had a lot to do with his character, who was something less than the kind of knight in shining armor a character played by Sophia Bush deserved. I must say I loved what they did with the lead male character in the end, though. For once, I saw a "don't you wish" moment come true before my delighted eyes.
So, Jim (Knighton) picks up Grace (Bush) at college to head off for some spring break shenanigans. Driving through a New Mexico rainstorm that night, the unobservant Jim all but runs over some weird dude just standing there in the middle of the road. Grace convinces her boyfriend to high-tail it out of there, but the weird dude turns up again when Jim stops for gas. Jim can hardly refuse to give the guy a ride up the road (thereby completing disregarding Grace's wise counsel), but it doesn't take long for "John Ryder" (Bean) to reveal his true nature, which is far more mad and dangerous than even Grace could have imagined. Jim and Grace don't know why this stranger is tormenting them, but they find themselves reluctant pawns in whatever dangerous game he is playing. The guy just keeps turning up everywhere they go, murdering many a person along the way. The kids can't even go to the cops because they would seem to be implicated in every crime he commits. All they know to do is to keep running, desperately trying to shake this stranger who seems intent on destroying them utterly.
The story is solid enough and the acting is pretty decent (especially from Bean and Bush), but the special effects probably stand out the most among the different aspects of the film. There are some thrilling car wrecks, the blood and gore is realistic (even though, unfortunately, we see few of the actual kills directly), and the pacing is good. It's a little on the short side, though, running a grand total of eight-four minutes. Still, in the end, I have to say that The Hitcher is not a bad movie by any means - I don't think it will scare the vast majority of viewers or grip them in quite the same fashion as similar films such as Joyride, but it's still very much worth watching.
Movie Review: Sean Bean
Summary: 3 Stars
The only reason I watched and wanted this film is because of Sean Bean...I don't know why I like him, but I just think he is a fabulous actor...THE ORIGINAL RULESS!!!!Movie Review: Almost more of an action film than a horror film
Summary: 3 Stars
Despite the fact that this is supposed to be a remake, it almost isn't. I mean, the basics are here: creepy hitchhiker, young Samaritan, etc. But this version of the movie is nowhere near as subtle as it probably should be.
There are some significant changes - the eponymous hitcher is now terrorizing a young woman along with the young man. There is a lot more blood and gore (which really is just a sign of the times, as far as I'm concerned). And sadly enough, there almost seems to be less purpose. As if we are simply supposed to take at face value the fact that there is this crazy man and he's terrorizing these kids and blahblahblah.
One big problem I have is that the hitcher - "John Ryder" (LOTR trilogy's Sean Bean) - is about two steps away from being a freakin' supervillain. There is a body count of at least 20 or so people here....all tagged by Ryder, seemingly without much in the way of effort. He does away with these folks like he's simply swatting flies or kicking puppies. And the reasoning? Who knows? There isn't enough given in the manner of reasoning.
The kids aren't bad. Of course they do tons of stuff that the standard person outside of a horror movie would NEVER do, but that's par for the course. By the way, how come no one ever takes a quick, hassle-free plane ride anymore? They all wanna drive across the most remote regions of the country.
My other major problem is that the most memorable (at least to me) moment of the original film is recreated here...and then some. It's one thing to include the most notable scene in the movie...but couldn't we have had a bit more in the way of subtlety? Yeah, I know we all like things to be amazingly realistic and gruesome nowadays, but I really think the moment could have benefited from a touch more discretion. The way it was done, I kind of just sat there and though "Oh wow. Look at that."
There were good things about the movie. I really liked the lighting. I'm not sure if Sean Bean is a cinematographer's wet dream or if the lighting just happened to look especially good around him, but the highway scene in the Trans Am looked awesome, as did the end of the movie (also on the highway).
There were also some really badass cars in this movie. That 442 was gorgeous. The stunts were also well done.
Overall, not a bad movie at all, but it's really best that you try not to think of the original when you sit down with this one.