Michael Ledo Jim (Zachary Knighton) and Grace (Sophie Bush) are college kids going away for spring break. They reluctantly pick up John Ryder (get it) played by Sean Bean. John is a psycho and carnage is spread throughout New Mexico.This is a me-too hitchhiker film which differentiates itself at about 50 minutes into the film as cop cars flip over to the tune of NIN. The gas station stop gave us signs of cleverness and indeed the acting and lines were better than many "B" horror films, but the film needed to go beyond better than most to earn high honors in a crowded genre. John Ryder needed to be a distinct colorful character and wasn't.Guide: 38 F-words by IMDb count. No sex or nudity.

cmovies-99674 PROS: The part of the film that had potential was the acting. The genuine fear that the two main actors showed was impeccable. As the movie progressed so did the acting. Through all the scenes you saw a different snapshot of how dynamic the acting was, from insanity to humor the whole movie was very capable. Another very good part of THE HITCHER was the action scenes. The whole movie was able to keep some sort of tension which was helpful. It also had a really nice idea that started well and ended well. To add on, then ending was very well crafted. It gave you exactly what you wanted, some sort of sigh of relief.CONS: The biggest con falls on the plot. The movie jumps around to many locations with little to no correlation. This makes it difficult to establish motive from the characters. One of the most important things in movies is cause and effect, and in THE HITCHER those two pieces rarely connected. To clarify, there were many good ideas, but they weren't put together in a logical way. The movie was all over the place. Another issue that I had was the way the movie was sold. It was said to be a big new "thriller," but the movie was by far a thriller. The film was just pure horror.www.chorror.com

stevenholley80 You would think that this being a remake might already spoil the plot for moviegoers but on the contrary this movie has some different twists that should keep you on the edge of your seat even if you saw the first movie with Rutger Hauer. Our evil villain does not as expected seem to make me skeptical that one could be in a major motion picture such as fantasy movie J R Tolkien's 2001 movie "Lord of the Ring's" as to an evil villain in this movie but I notice he does not miss a beat in being convincing in this new role. The plot COULD have been a little more complicated for my taste which is why I don't give it 10 stars. What there is of a plot does not take a rocket scientist to figure out. Other than that you throw in some twists and you actually do have a pretty surprisingly darn good movie. I would say it definitely deserves more than one star which is what they give it as a critique at Time Warner but I think they have thirteen year old little girls rate their movies. All in all I can say I enjoyed watching this movie very much and to my surprise it's not Sean Bean from "The Lord of the Ring's" who's acting carries the movie as I expected, but the two new young up and comers that were the main character's who's acting was surprisingly good. I can not right off tell you their names but I will be sure to go back and take a look after I finish my review because they were that good, enough for me to want to do that. I need to find their names so I can look for them in something more current. Hopefully they will be a little more seasoned which is what I expect to find if I am fortunate enough to find them in something else more recent. This movie is about six years old and I am honestly surprised I have not seen them since. Anyway good movie. Check it out on that night when you and the little lady are on the couch and you want the her holding on to you for dear life and protection as she freaks out during the scary parts which there are plenty to go around. Better than a horror movie in that respect because this is believable unlike most horror movies.

Spikeopath Few remakes of old and beloved horror films succeed in winning over the old guard. They sometimes gain some fans from the younger sphere where those not familiar with the old version dwell, but with one or two odd exceptions, they rarely make a hit with the horror faithful even if they make money at the box office. The Hitcher, a remake of the 1986 Rutger Hauer starring film, is another in a sad line of poor horror remakes. Which is a shame because the casting of Sean Bean in the psychopathic hitcher role looked a decent one and we were promised a new take on the story. Sadly the makers have stripped away exactly what made the original film work so well.Gone is the loneliness of a single driver and the rising of terror and confusion that he faced, in place is a sexy courting couple (Sophia Bush and Zachary Knighton) taking on the un-charismatic-by-the-numbers hitcher of the title. It rarely feels like the suspense laden movie it should have been, it's more a picture dominated by yawn inducing passages of knowing what will happen next. Logic and momentum are in short supply, as is the ambiguity so strong in the original, while the final confrontation between good and evil is far too short. Without doubt some of the action and deaths are well executed by director Dave Meyers and his team, there's enough visually to keep this from total damnation in stinkerville. While Bush's heroine shows some resourceful spunk when the unoriginal screenplay allows her to. But really all this film achieves is in making us rue remakes even more. 5/10