Let down by guessable ending and plot holes

Rating: 5/10 (22 August 2006)

I haven't seen the end yet but I know at least one gets away. And why? Because there's a baby in it. Hollywood would never let a a baby die.
A lot of the rest of it is derivative but then its a remake so maybe this had all the original ideas. In which case - a bad choice for a remake.
The make up for the villains was all a bit 'one eye normal and the other halfway down the other cheek' kind of thing. Like 'Wrong Turn' and shed loads of others.
Lots of other bits were very Texas Chainsaw.
Biggest plot hole - Why do the villains always keep the strongest victim in really pathetic, easily escapable captivity (it took less than a minute to get free)and yet kill everyone else they clap eyes on - apart from the baby of course. Later they did that bit when instead of killing him instantly in the multitude of opportunities they had - they toyed with him (mucking about with his hair etc.) ultimately taking their eye off the ball and getting killed themselves.
There are dozens of other plot holes - like why assume you've killed everyone at ANY time? Particularly the kids, both of whom behave like the one guy they kill must be the last villain alive when both were previously attacked by two other villains they don't, at the time, know are dead. One of them wasn't, in fact.
At the end they are miles away from anywhere, in the middle of the desert, still unaware of how many other loonies are left alive, in exactly the same situation as they were at the start but with a burnt motor home, less amunition, no food or water and half the family dead. Yet they act like they're home and dry.
Add to this a dog that instinctively makes moral judgements and discerns whether people are good or bad, and you have a bit of a stupid film.
Have seen the end now - guess what - I was right about the baby.
Nothing special.