Okay, hear me out...Hills Have Eyes Part 2 isn't completely trash?

So, I just subjected myself to The Hills Have Eyes Part 2 (1985) again. I know, I know, instant death sentence to my credibility, right? Everyone rags on this movie, and for good reason. It's undeniably cheap, the acting is...well, it EXISTS. And don't even get me STARTED on the dog flashbacks – who thought that was a good idea?! But, and this is a BIG but, is it entirely without merit? I'm not saying it's a hidden gem, more like a slightly polished turd. Rachel, the protagonist, is mildly interesting in a 'tortured survivor' kind of way. And while the motocross team is mostly cannon fodder, I kind of enjoyed the sheer absurdity of the situation. They are legit testing a new super fuel, seriously? It is very 80s. The editing is all over the place but you can't deny the low budget cheese of the whole thing. Some of the death scenes, while poorly executed, have a certain... grit? Maybe I'm just a sucker for practical effects, even when they're laughably bad. I mean, come on, it's a direct sequel to Wes Craven's original. We all can agree that Craven's original is great, so could he have been on set for this one or did he just let his son go crazy? It just feels like they had a loose idea of what made the first one work and then threw everything at the wall to see what stuck. I'm clearly grasping at straws here, but am I the ONLY one who finds a sliver of something redeemable in this mess? Or am I just completely insane and should be banned from watching movies forever? Tell me I'm not alone in finding some twisted enjoyment here. Or, you know, confirm my descent into madness. Either way, I'm ready for the ridicule.