Evil Dead (film) remake

[Neil]

Bruce Campbell suggests it's genuine...

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Bruce-Campbell-Joins-Twitter-Confirms-Evil-Dead-Remake-25643.html

[Mr. Clean]

Still haven't gotten a chance to see Drag me to Hell. Watched like 10 mins of it in the desert. It's on my to watch list though.

[MinionZombie]

Ugh ... nevermind a bloody remake. I'd much rather have Evil Dead 4 - it could be set a couple of decades into Ash being trapped in the future (like at the end of Army of Darkness), and then a way for him to get back presents itself ... just an idea.

One thing about the remake - I really do hope those rumours of Ashton-f***ing-Koosher (a Don Vito reference there, FYI) are just that. I suppose at least the original guys are involved in remaking it ... perhaps it might actually have a purpose beyond sucking cash out of the wallets of us horror fans, us notorious gluttons for punishment, us most curious of zombified cats.

[krakenslayer]

But if they were to make a sequel to Army of Darkness, one problem would be choosing which ending to treat as canon. The future ending makes most sense within the context of the movie, but it was only used in Europe so nobody saw it. The S Mart ending is the one everyone in the US knows, but it's terrible, completely incoherent and makes no sense (Did Ash just "get away" with dismembering all his friends at the cabin? Why isn't he in an asylum? Why does he still have a job? Where did the witch come from if she didn't know who Ash was?). Not a good springboard for a movie.

I guess Sam Raimi has never been particularly beholden to endings; if you watch the start of Evil Dead 2 and AoD. The first twenty minutes of Evil Dead 2 are pretty much a remake of the first film anyway, which is why I'm not totally against this one. However, I would rather see Bruce Campbell in a starring role in a theatrical released picture. If they must have a youngster, I hope they pick a nobody. Start putting "stars" in these movies and you'll kill the magic.

[bassman]

The S Mart ending is the one everyone in the US knows, but it's terrible, completely incoherent and makes no sense (Did Ash just "get away" with dismembering all his friends at the cabin? Why isn't he in an asylum? Why does he still have a job? Where did the witch come from if she didn't know who Ash was?). Not a good springboard for a movie.

Damn dude.....That's some pretty deep analyzing for a movie as silly and slapstick as AOD. I don't think anyone making the film put that much thought into it.


As for the remake - Meh....whatever. Never been a big fan of the original. I prefer the series in reverse of the order they were released. AOD, II, and ED. The original seems like it's trying too hard to be a legitimate horror film and comes up short. The other two work because they embrace the silly stuff a bit more.

[ZombieGrrL]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[AcesandEights]

Evil Dead Remake...


rumours of Ashton-f***ing-Koosher

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b205/DougOBrien/obiwan.jpg

[MinionZombie]

hehe, well I think those 'Koosher' rumours are just nothing, but it was a rumour nonetheless a couple of years ago *shudders*

Kraken - good points. The S-Mart ending doesn't make an awful lot of sense (but it is fun), but yeah, it'd have to be the ending where he slept too long (such an Ash thing to do, lol) ... seeing as they're insisting on going ahead with it, I agree that it should be with complete unknowns (and preferably not the kind of unknowns who just "want to be famous", the sort of unrealistic L.A. teens who just whine and shop in malls, you know?) ... however one of the key things I love so much about The Evil Dead is that it's a bunch of kids making a horror movie, in the woods, on their own, using money loaned to them from Dentists (etc), being very ingenius in making it, and then going on to become the UK's 'number one video nasty' ... you're never going to get that from a remake ... I just hope they really go for the ingenuity route, rather than the money route and make it all polished.

As I've said though - I'd much rather an Evil Dead 4 get made (it could totally work - and My Name Is Bruce was bloody good fun - which also had that indie ingenuity vibe to it, albeit in a post-2000 kind of way).

[glazedoverdead]

Hell yesssss!!!!! Remake that film Raimi!!! Give em Hell!!!

[MinionZombie]

A friend of mine said today that she'd read that not only is a remake happening, but there's talk of an Evil Dead 4 (starring Campbell, presented/produced by Raimi, but not directed by Raimi) - now, I don't have a link to this article she was reading, but if that is indeed the case, that's taken me by surprise ... I would really love to see an Evil Dead 4.

Take all that with a pinch of salt, naturally, it could be a big old whopper of a rumour, or maybe it's something of more substance ... time will tell.

[bassman]

The scripts being revised by....Diablo Cody? Main writer and director also listed....

http://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/diablo-cody-working-on-drafts-of-evil-dead-4-fede-alvarez-confirmed

I bet fans are gonna looooove this news....

[rongravy]

Yeah, a fourth movie would be awesome, a remake would not. I'd rather have a Bubba Ho-tep sequel.

[MinionZombie]

Yeah, a fourth movie would be awesome, a remake would not. I'd rather have a Bubba Ho-tep sequel.

Cody? Yeah, she wrote Juno which was good, but then she wrote Jennifer's Body which was shit, and really exhausted beyond all recognition that Cody-fied dialogue schtick. I really do hope she does a good job - it's Evil Dead 4 after all - but ugh, that news doesn't inspire me much. :shifty:

Hopefully 'working on a draft' means it was originally written by someone else, and she's just been brought in to do some 'polishing' (although I hope that doesn't involve lots of sarcastically ironic "wettie" talk and whatnot).

[AfterMovieDiner]

This was such utterly depressing news. I love the Evil Dead movies but the thing that makes them work is Raimi directing and Campbell starring take that away and it's 'stupid people go to cabin and get picked off by demons they inadvertently summon'. Evil Dead was already remade by that hack Eli Roth in Cabin Fever. The saddest thing about the ED remake news is that it's Bruce, Sam and Rob producing it. Why come together to do this? why not come together to actually make a decent film? a new film starring Campbell not the tedious idea of ED 4. It's just frustrating and sad... Just like Drag Me to Hell was frustrating because Raimi without Campbell always feels... well... less than.

[blind2d]

Yeah, I'd rather see an original idea than a sequel or remake, but hey, if the original people are involved, it might not be complete wash.
If made, rent first.

[AfterMovieDiner]

With hints that Campbell might appear in the last portion of the film and with the main characters being changed... just maybe I might have to give it a go because... just maybe it could be a way to energise the franchise, re-introduce Ash and... who knows...
That's about the only way I would accept this film.

[MinionZombie]

The good thing about this project is that Raimi, Tappert, and Campbell are involved ... the bad thing about the project is that Diablo-friggin-Cody is doing re-writes on the script, and that it's another ruddy remake. As I've said many times, I would much rather have an Evil Dead 4 with Campbell as Ash ... but then maybe it takes a bloody remake in order to make that happen ... who knows, eh?

As for Evil Dead in general, I friggin LOVE that movie. It's in my Top Ten of All Time ... so it's not a barrel of laughs to hear it's getting remade ... but it can't be as bad as The Fog remake or ... ugh ... the remake that dare not speak its name. :sneaky:

[AfterMovieDiner]

yeah I don't see the whole Cody thing either, didn't she write a horror movie that flopped already?

I made a joke once about, "it's not that I wouldn't want to see Juno raped by a tree" but it actually offended people...
and yet I repeated it here *laughs* sorry if anyone was offended by the idea of a fictional character being attacked by foliage but anyway....

As for the original holy trinity being involved it both fills me full of hope but also makes me sad that this is what they chose to come together for...
I can only assume they are pushing to reinvigorate the money's interest in the franchise because otherwise Campbell, especially, is going back on a lot of what he has said in the past
about remakes and sequels.

Also the director's short film wasn't that amazing. We have seen tons of these 'I made a short sci-fi film with CG graphics on my home computer' type pieces recently and even a few features that came from that: District 9, Monsters and Skyline... all I saw when I watched it was a guy who didn't have a good idea or any story to tell. Give me story and characters over CGI any day of the week (that's why District 9 actually worked!)

Still.... *sigh* this be the world in which we now all live I guess... Diablo Cody.... jesus!

[bassman]

I made a joke once about, "it's not that I wouldn't want to see Juno raped by a tree" but it actually offended people...
and yet I repeated it here *laughs* sorry if anyone was offended by the idea of a fictional character being attacked by foliage but anyway....

Dude....there's a thread around here where we all discuss the pros and cons of sleeping with a zombie. I think your statement is safe with this crowd. :lol:


I think Diablo Cody has too short of a career to condemn her so soon. I actually enjoyed Juno, but that probably had more to do with Jason Reitman's direction rather than her 'witty' dialogue. I watched Jennifer's Body and got a few chuckles, but it was definitely a different style than Juno. So who knows? Maybe she's got some tricks up her sleaves? She actually seems like a pretty cool gal and nerd on the Spaced commentaries. She may be a huge fan of the original Evil Dead and do it justice?

[AfterMovieDiner]

I know, I was probably hard on Cody because I actually sort of like her.
Like you I liked her comments on the Spaced DVD and Juno was good (I especially like the Herschel Gorden Lewis nod) but I guess I just never understand why a fan of anything would want to work on a remake? if she's such a fan why didn't she say... er... don't do that, that idea sucks!
Also I don't want Evil Dead teenagers walking around spouting references or using moderately entertaining quips instead of dialogue.

Watching Juno again I noticed she writes the same sort of speech patterns for all her characters and it doesn't entirely work or sit right either.
I guess my reaction was more to do with, why should Cody working on an ED remake impress me or make me forgive them for doing it in the first place....

and the Juno tree joke was just something I found funny, wasn't necessarily a comment on the movie itself, although I am not sure how long it will hold up as a classic everyone proclaimed it to be when it came out.

[bassman]

Also I don't want Evil Dead teenagers walking around spouting references or using moderately entertaining quips instead of dialogue.


Maybe it's just the area I live in, but it's already like this for the originals. The local mall and Hot Topic are populated with just as many Evil Dead items as there are post-Big Fish Tim Burton items. And the ED series is litered with one-liners that I hear all the time. I hate to say it to you guys that are big fans of the series, but the ED series is already a "hip" thing to reference....

[AfterMovieDiner]

I actually meant Cody writing the teenagers in the movie with her trademark quippy "clever" dialogue. That's what I didn't want to see.

Also I know, it is annoying, how mainstream and popular the whole Campbell/Evil Dead thing has become. I liked it all back when I saw Army of Darkness when
I was 13 and I was the 18 year old scouring old VHS warehouses for copies of Moontrap on ex-rental...

So, although it doesn't really matter to anyone else, it matters to me, I am not being 'Hip' when I reference it. Sadly though bassman, I do know what you mean.

I actually think, if anything, the more popular it all has become, the more jokey it all is, the more the original reason of why the series was great gets lost in a sea of merchandise and maybe the lazier the original 3 people involved have become.

I still loves me a bit of Bruce Action though.

[Neil]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52207


about a group of friends trying to help their best friend Mia detox from drugs and alcohol, who go to the fated cabin, find the Book of the Dead, and all hell breaks loose as the demons torment Mia in the cabin, trying to force their way into our world. No Ash here - these are just normal people thrown into something far beyond their frame of reference.

[MinionZombie]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/52207

Hmmm...:shifty::rockbrow::shifty:

[krisvds]

Hmmm...:shifty::rockbrow::shifty:

Yeah. So, the demons try to force their way into our world through a girl fighting an addiction? Regardless wether they play it for laughs (evil dead 2/3) or not (the original) this doesn't sound like the evil dead to me...

[Neil]

Little bit of news - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/59095


It’s very obvious that this new adaptation of EVIL DEAD is not meant to play to the sensibilities of those who loved EVIL DEAD 2 or ARMY OF DARKNESS for their comedic elements, but instead to those fans of more modern gross-out horror, considering how much of that tongue splitting they showed in the trailer. (All of it.) It was mentioned during the panel, though, that there was a lot of attention to detail in the movie, so fans of the hardcore fans of the originals could have fun little references and nods to look for. (In the trailer, I noticed that the car looked quite a bit like the classic Oldsmobile, but I didn’t see enough to confirm it with certainty.)

[Mike70]

Also I know, it is annoying, how mainstream and popular the whole Campbell/Evil Dead thing has become. I liked it all back when I saw Army of Darkness when
I was 13 and I was the 18 year old scouring old VHS warehouses for copies of Moontrap on ex-rental...


i'm right there with you on this one. i far preferred when the "evil dead" movies were "ours" and not such a pop culture thing. gathering around the tv to watch "evil dead II" and do bong hits was a beloved teenage/early 20s ritual among my friends and i. it seems somehow cheapened by all the attention.

that's just me and i'm fast becoming a crochety, cranky old man about things i grew up loving.

[LouCipherr]

Only one word can describe this: ludicrous.

'nuff said.

[MinionZombie]

Any trailers been upped for it yet? One was put out there at NYCC I think, but it wasn't YouTubed when I looked.

Saw a picture and a poster for it - the picture was a version of Shelly, but no white eyes - just sore looking eyes - I was not impressed by that. The white lenses of the originals was far better - that milky void was far more effective. Sore looking pupils still look too human. :(

I liked the design of the title text on the poster though.

[AcesandEights]

Only one word can describe this: ludicrous.

It's spelled Ludacris, or Luda for short, and it has not been confirmed that he will be in the remake yet, but I like where your head is at, Lou.

1137

[LouCipherr]

It's spelled Ludacris, or Luda for short, and it has not been confirmed that he will be in the remake yet, but I like where your head is at, Lou.

1137

:fin:

:lol:

[Trancelikestate]

Oy, this is circling the bowl faster than the robocop remake. :( I feel like Hollywood is patronizing us. It's like they love shooting themselves in the foot.

[krakenslayer]

I'm still trying to establish whether this is a "reboot" proper, or a movie with different characters set in the present day but in the same universe as the originals. I've seen things to indicate either possibility. If it's the latter I'll give it a chance, if it's the former it doesn't exist to me. I guess it hinges on whether this Bruce Campbell cameo actually has him playing an older, battle-weary, demon-hunting Ash, or if he's just playing some shmoe changing a tyre at the side of the road or some such lazy, wishy-washy fan-service.

[Trancelikestate]

That might be cool, and even has a comic book feel. I'd be down with that. I guess Collin Farrel isn't playing Ash so it's got that going for it too.

[slickwilly13]

That is not a deadite. That's Linda Blair possessed.

Which one would terrify you more in real life?

http://i49.tinypic.com/1znv5fd.jpg

[LouCipherr]

Which one would terrify you more in real life?

http://i49.tinypic.com/1znv5fd.jpg

"I'll swallow your soul! I'll swallow your soul!" :shifty:

[bassman]

Any trailers been upped for it yet? One was put out there at NYCC I think, but it wasn't YouTubed when I looked.

Bootleg here: http://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/bootleg-evil-dead-footage-leaks-and-the-films-composer-is-announced

Catch it while you can. It actually looks quite scary and very bloody. Even has the ol' tree rape scene.

[MinionZombie]

Bootleg here: http://www.joblo.com/horror-movies/news/bootleg-evil-dead-footage-leaks-and-the-films-composer-is-announced

Catch it while you can. It actually looks quite scary and very bloody. Even has the ol' tree rape scene.

Well that's gory. :stunned:

I'll definitely watch it ... really unsure about it, mind. Didn't like that preview image (too Linda Blair-ish, which doesn't fit here) ... it's got the gore goods though, so that's something. We'll see ... it'll never beat the original though, not a chance, these remakes never ever do. Hmmm...

[capncnut]

Garbage. 42 karat garbage. When the only redeeming feature of the trailer is a chick slicing her tongue in half with some dude mumbling "What the fuck is it?", it is indicative of being of the same stable as Hostel and similar pieces of cinematic turd made for shock value.

Seriously, this is so predictable. You even got some dude slicing his arm off with a chainsaw in a kill ripped straight from the sequel. And what's with the shaky cam? Has it been infected by one of those parkour dickheads from Day of the Dead '08? The only thing missing was the theme from The Benny Hill Show.

Paying to see this is supporting twatism. Full stop.

[Trancelikestate]

Garbage. 42 karat garbage. When the only redeeming feature of the trailer is a chick slicing her tongue in half with some dude mumbling "What the fuck is it?", it is indicative of being of the same stable as Hostel and similar pieces of cinematic turd made for shock value.

Seriously, this is so predictable. You even got some dude slicing his arm off with a chainsaw in a kill ripped straight from the sequel. And what's with the shaky cam? Has it been infected by one of those parkour dickheads from Day of the Dead '08? The only thing missing was the theme from The Benny Hill Show.



Paying to see this is supporting twatism. Full stop.

My Man! And yes, of course the milky white eyes were far more effective. Like robocops costume. I got an idea, lets make it look less scary and basically like 28 days later contacts. ;)

[slickwilly13]

Garbage. 42 karat garbage. When the only redeeming feature of the trailer is a chick slicing her tongue in half with some dude mumbling "What the fuck is it?", it is indicative of being of the same stable as Hostel and similar pieces of cinematic turd made for shock value.

Seriously, this is so predictable. You even got some dude slicing his arm off with a chainsaw in a kill ripped straight from the sequel. And what's with the shaky cam? Has it been infected by one of those parkour dickheads from Day of the Dead '08? The only thing missing was the theme from The Benny Hill Show.

Paying to see this is supporting twatism. Full stop.

I agree 100%. I am glad others feel the same about this. I will watch it, but my expectations are very low even after viewing the trailer. I am a fanatic of the first movie. I have every line and scene memorized. I am just not feeling it. I want to, but I am having a difficult time accepting this as The Evil Dead..

[bassman]

FSAWXGVVweg

I've never been a huge fan of the original, but this doesn't look half bad....

[MinionZombie]

Thanks for posting, Bassman.

I've had a good going through it and I've ended up doing a trailer analysis, where I also put my thoughts down regarding remakes, and the original Evil Dead...

http://deadshed.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/evil-dead-2013-remake-trailer-analysis.html

Too long to post here, plus I included a whole bunch of screenshots.

[aaron2]

Hahahaha.......The most funny horror film i have ever seen my life..will go to see it:D

[Neil]

Bold claim!

http://s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/10186/original/evil-dead-2013-teaser-poster.jpg?1353440026

[slickwilly13]

Newest Trailer from RB.


http://www.youtube.com/evildeadmovie

[krisvds]

Not that bad. In fact, I like that trailer a lot.
Film seems like a return to the original's video nasty feel. Much will depend on how good the actors are in selling the dread and if there is any suspense to go with all that gore.

[bassman]

Yeah, I think too many people are letting their love of the the original cloud their judgment. Looks like a good horror flick to me...

[MinionZombie]

I'll definitely see it - but when? Hmmm ... not sure ... at least the original guys are involved in producing it, and I like the idea of giving a young upstart the chance to direct it - although hopefully it's more a case of a creative sort taking their big break with both hands and really doing something cool, rather than just copying the original movie.

When I first heard it was going to happen, I wasn't impressed at all - then I heard the original producers were involved, so that improved my opinion of it (better than just some dickheads from Platinum Dunes coming along yet again).

Now, there's been some wailing about Diablo Cody writing the screenplay, and while yes, Jennifer's Body was aggravating, and epitomised what was wrong with her writing (while Juno was at times annoying, but mostly good and fresh), she also scripted Young Adult - now, while the movie itself wasn't amazing, I noticed more of a maturity to Cody's writing. It wasn't riddled with annoying slang words that nobody has ever heard of, or Juno-like hipsters, so perhaps we'll get a better script than initial fears would have us believe? We can but hope.

[MoonSylver]

Yeah, I think too many people are letting their love of the the original cloud their judgment. Looks like a good horror flick to me...

Just to play devils advocate, I don't know if it's clouded judgement via love of the original per se in ALL cases, as much as becoming jaded via disappointed expectations coupled with a general violation of principles. ;)

[MinionZombie]

Just to play devils advocate, I don't know if it's clouded judgement via love of the original per se in ALL cases, as much as becoming jaded via disappointed expectations coupled with a general violation of principles. ;)

Plus the makers of so many remakes/reboots/rehashes not bothering to truly figure out why the original was so successful, nevermind the fact that they routinely fail to recognise that you can't recreate several decades worth of fanbase and cinematic icon status creation. Some go so wide of the mark (The Fog, A Nightmare on Elm Street), while others play to fans without anything new (Friday the 13th) ... the reasons for The Evil Dead's success and status are numerous and hard-to-define. Another key ingredient that is missing from so many remakes is respect - for the movie being remade, and for the fanbase of the well-established original.

Hopefully The Evil Dead is on the side of decent remakes like The Hills Have Eyes 2006.

[Neil]

M_epa-IP7rM

[MinionZombie]

For some reason all that whispering from that chick pisses me off ... but then again, that "Secret Escapes" advert with the brunette who's whispering to the camera really winds me up, so that's no surprise that this chick here whispering away irks me.

Naturally I'm gonna end up watching this ... but blimey, I don't know ... there's that curious cat thing going on that we horror fans are so susceptible to.

[slickwilly13]

For those who have not read or heard the news, it received a NC-17 rating and will be trimmed down for the theater. I hope the NC-17 rated blu-ray will come with the book as a case.

[slickwilly13]

No new news, yet. But I found this. The Evil Dead in 60 seconds.


M9On1HsPqzo


I also found a Swedish rip-off called, Wither.

s8Iy1lmpFNE

[slickwilly13]

I accidently posted this on the ED4 thread. I found the script for this movie, if anyone is interested.

[MinionZombie]

Some initial audience reactions to a screening of it here:
http://dailydead.com/evil-dead-early-impressions-from-sxsw-work-has-started-on-a-sequel/

Apparently it's generally gone down pretty well - and there are rumours/talks of a sequel getting made.

[Neil]

+ve feedback from AICN - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61373


I think Alvarez did right by the franchise. His deadites are a bit more Exorcist than they are Raimi, but he nailed the tone, he cast the perfect lead and his DP Aaron Morton shot a straight up gorgeous horror movie. It’s refreshing to see a practical effects-driven gorefest that isn’t treated like a B-film.

I liked the movie a whole lot and if this was the cut version they screened tonight then I don’t know what the hell to expect on the eventual unrated DVD…

[MinionZombie]

The continual talk of the gore does worry me somewhat ... I want to know if the characters are going to be fun to watch, you know? There's a lot of focus on the gore aspect here. I hope it isn't too flashy, if that makes sense? I don't want it to feel too slick, I want it to feel like the modern equivalent of a down and dirty low budget horror flick - a significant part of the charm in the original movie for me is that truly independent filmmaking spirit behind it, a bunch of friends coming together to make a batshit crazy horror movie. It won't have that same vibe (this is a far larger production by comparison), but hopefully it'll feel good to watch as a hugely dedicated fan who adores the original.

Speaking of the gore though - hopefully it does turn out to be a jolly good time. No doubt we Brits will also be getting the cut version on our screens ... I hate it when that happens ... why can't we start from the uncut version and have that submitted to the BBFC? Why do we also get the American theatrical cut? I'd wager we could have every moment of gore from this in our 18 rating just fine ... but perhaps they want to hold it back so they can specifically target that version for home video. :rolleyes:

By the way, on April 15th (IIRC) we Brits are getting a special edition Blu-Ray release of Evil Dead 2 (with all the supplemental material found on the 25th Anniversary release from last year in the states) - so you'll be wanting to get in on that. :cool:

[Neil]

More AICN love - http://www.aintitcool.com/node/61375


EVIL DEAD is a very worthy addition to the franchise - and yes, it is a franchise - and I'm dying to see this again with a crowded house full of horror fans. These guys and gals did good.

One more thing - the score. Roque Baños does incredible work, and the score is batshit insane. It's the music Cthulhu would listen to if he was rolling on the beach in a convertible with the top down. I want this soundtrack in the worst way.

[MinionZombie]

Hmmm ... I might go and check this out at the cinema next month when it opens here in the UK.

I'm hoping it's going to turn out to be a worthwhile remake that can sit alongside the originals comfortably and not in any way offensively to the original, or the fans. The remake will never top the original movies for me, but it was never going to stand a chance of doing that anyway, so let's just hope that it holds up as a good horror flick, and hopefully a high mark in post-2000 horror.

Colour me cautiously optimistic - when I first heard of an Evil Dead remake my mind naturally went straight to the myriad of pointless and poor remakes (some of them downright offensive to the fans and the genre), but you hear little bits, and see little bits, along the way that make you defrost gradually ... so yeah ... cautious optimism.

[rongravy]

Just saw it at a 10 pm showing. I was definitely not impressed, but I wasn't a big fan of the original.
At least it had Brucie in it. My kid said he was in the coda, so stick around for that if you see it and care.
Nice gore when they had it. I give it a solid D+.

[Trancelikestate]

Thanks for the spoiler RG.

[slickwilly13]

*Hands Trance an ax.* Use it like Scotty in the 1st movie. We had a 10 pm showing, too. But I will not watch it, until Sunday morning or early afternoon.

[rongravy]

Thanks for the spoiler RG.
Woops, sorry about that. I was just trying to heads up anybody who... nevermind.


*Hands Trance an ax.* Use it like Scotty in the 1st movie. We had a 10 pm showing, too. But I will not watch it, until Sunday morning or early afternoon.
Lol, bring it.

Besides, can't be spoiled anymore than letting you know it isn't worth watching. What a turd it was.

[MoonSylver]

Besides, can't be spoiled anymore than letting you know it isn't worth watching. What a turd it was.

Meh. Do not agree w/ the Grave-ster. Found it to be solid. Certainly not a shallow, watered down cash grab anyway. They seem to have put some effort into making a real horror movie with a number of little touches for the fans. I'd probably put it up there w/ TCM in terms of solid remakes that hew in the same mold as the original but still do their own thing. They did not skimp on the blood & gore for sure. Added a little bit of story, which was ok. Gave it a "mission" (other than just trying to survive & get out) which was...eh.... Played it dead straight. None of the offbeat humor & quirky charm of the earlier one(es), but that was to be expected. It did get a little gonzo crazy toward the end, which was fine with me.

Overall, as a fan of the originals, if they were an A-(#1) to an A+ (#2) I'd say this one was a B+?

[slickwilly13]

I will watch it with a buddy, Wednesday morning at a theater that serves food and beer. That should help......and some green, before I go.

[rongravy]

Meh. Do not agree w/ the Grave-ster. Found it to be solid. Certainly not a shallow, watered down cash grab anyway. They seem to have put some effort into making a real horror movie with a number of little touches for the fans. I'd probably put it up there w/ TCM in terms of solid remakes that hew in the same mold as the original but still do their own thing. They did not skimp on the blood & gore for sure. Added a little bit of story, which was ok. Gave it a "mission" (other than just trying to survive & get out) which was...eh.... Played it dead straight. None of the offbeat humor & quirky charm of the earlier one(es), but that was to be expected. It did get a little gonzo crazy toward the end, which was fine with me.

Overall, as a fan of the originals, if they were an A-(#1) to an A+ (#2) I'd say this one was a B+?

I do agree the gore was superb, but it was missing the cool camp of the originals.
Btw, what about Army of Darkness? No grade?

[wayzim]

I do agree the gore was superb, but it was missing the cool camp of the originals.
Btw, what about Army of Darkness? No grade?

I don't know about Moon or anyone else, but Army was such a nice surprise in that they pulled out all the extreme gore -which should've killed it ( was it ultimately rated PG-13? ) - and yet it was still an Evil Dead film. I actually saw this on the big screen and fun was had by one and all - A+

Wayne Z

[MinionZombie]

I don't know about Moon or anyone else, but Army was such a nice surprise in that they pulled out all the extreme gore -which should've killed it ( was it ultimately rated PG-13? ) - and yet it was still an Evil Dead film. I actually saw this on the big screen and fun was had by one and all - A+

Wayne Z

When I first saw Evil Dead 3/AoD, I didn't like it at all - I wasn't keen on the setting and the overtly comic tone ... but a few years later I returned to it and I've loved it ever since. I love all the ED movies, but the first is still my favourite of them all for numerous reasons - but the other two stand out on their own and I enjoy each film for different reasons ... they also fit different moods, which is nice.

I would like for Evil Dead 4/AoD2 to be a bit darker/gorier than AoD, but not hugely. I definitely think you can get away with much more grue in a horror comedy these days than you could back in the very early 1990s, just as long as the story is interesting and the tone is right. So fingers crossed that AoD2/ED4 happens. :)

As for the rating - it was an "R" in America, and over here in the UK it's a "15" ... a 'softer' outing that ED2, and far 'softer' (in terms of gore) than ED1, but I suppose there's still enough in there to keep it as an "R", albeit a 'soft R'. I hope they don't tone down/soften/kiddify AoD2 - but with their dedication to all-out-grue in the ED remake, I'm feeling confident they won't slap us fans in the face and give us what we've been after for years. :cool:

[MoonSylver]

I do agree the gore was superb, but it was missing the cool camp of the originals.
Btw, what about Army of Darkness? No grade?

I purposely left it out, just since 1 & 2 vs this one are so directly cross comparable , whereas AoD is it's own thing. Plus, I have mixed feelings about it. It's an awesome flick & I love Bruce in it, but prefer the darker tone of the earlier films & would have preferred the original ending remain intact. That said, A to A-.

But yeah, this one is lacking just a tad in the "camp" department, played as straight & serious as it is. But then again, that's really something you probably can't manufacture. It's most likely in your DNA as a filmmaker or not. I don't think you can fake it. So I won't hold that against them too much. :)

[slickwilly13]

1# at the box office. It made over 26 million during the weekend.

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=800789

[slickwilly13]

I watched it on Wednesday with a platter of nachos, hummus with pita, and a rootbeer. The movie was not terrible, but it did not top first two movies.

I did not find the deadites frightening in this movie. Sure, they are more dangerous, but did not look as nasty as the deadites in the first film.

The gore was superb and practical. The movie showed a lot of carnage for a hard R. I look forward to viewing the NC-17 version. I give it a B-.

[Neil]

Well, found it pretty generic and generally myeh TBH. A couple of scenes were nice a gory.

Still don't get why the daughter from the beginning (flash back) appeared at the end again? Other than to facilitate a final battle.

6/10. I enjoyed The Cabin In The Woods more tbh if only it felt far more original.

[Andy]

Yeah i just caught this tonight and was left very.... meh

Its not a bad movie but it just really made me want to rewatch the originals!

The zombies are farrrr too easy to kill! i was annoyed.

[Neil]

I haven't watched the original in a looooooooooooong time. Maybe I should!

[slickwilly13]

So, we are in agreement this is "Evil Meh".

- - - Updated - - -


I haven't watched the original in a looooooooooooong time. Maybe I should!

That sounds like a great idea. I am feeling the itch, too.

[ProfessorChaos]

someone i know had two free passes to the movies the other weekend, the gf and i sat through this film.

not impressed, tbh. like all modern horror films i've seen over the last decade or so, it was just full of cheap startle/jump moments and over-the-top gore trying to make the audience sick.

thank f*ck i didn't pay anything to see it.

[bd2999]

I thought the gore FX were pretty cool. Nice use of practical special FX throughout and only a bit of CGI. That was going for it. The twist with who makes it was unexpected. There were also some really discomforting scenes in the movie. That said, I liked the original more. This movie was more of a gross out flick than anything. That said it was probably the best one that I have seen in theaters. Shocked it got by with an R rating really.

[krakenslayer]

The Good:

The practical effects.
The gore.
The visuals/cinematography.
The pacing.
The references/tie-ins with the original.
The general set-up (close enough to the original to feel like an Evil Dead movie, different enough to feel original).

The Bad:

The po-faced, literal-minded, humourless tone.
The conceptually confused nature of the prophecies and other main plot points. (The "Abomination" is just an end-boss Deadite?)
The fast-and-loose treatment of elements linking it to theoriginals (I am aware this is a feature of the series, but in this case it felt as if the movie was confused as to whether it was set in the same universe as the others or not)
The generally undeveloped (nurse, glasses guy) or unlikable (main guy, junkie girl) characters
The replacement of nameless, borderline-Lovecraftian entities with vanilla Judaeo-Christian demons

[slickwilly13]

So, how many of you stayed, until the end of the credits? Pissed?:D

My buddy was. "What?! You made me stay for that?!"

[MinionZombie]

Since when was this moved to "Dead Remakes"? :confused:

Surely this should be in "Horror" - Evil Dead was never about zombies ... they're Candarian Demons.

/total-nerd-moment. :D

[Neil]

Agreed... Moved...

[MinionZombie]

Evil Dead 2013:
http://deadshed.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/evil-dead-2013-all-out-stream-of-fan.html

I've seen it, and I've reacted to it in an extensive point-by-point nerdy analysis of the pros, cons, and wibbly-wobbly-in-between bits of the flick.

One thing's for sure - there's a shit-ton of gore, some of which really made me wince - oh, and Jane Levy rocks in this movie ... and the pre-title sequence is completely unnecessary.

Anyone else seen it yet? Thoughts?

[LouCipherr]

I have, and it was a completely "meh" experience for me (as most remakes are). I want my 2 hours back.

And WTF was with the after-credits sequence? Was that really necessary? And what purpose did it serve? Oh yeah... none. :rolleyes:


I'm not sure which was worse - this one or the Texas Chainsaw remake.

[Trancelikestate]

It wouldv'e been so easy to, during that final fight, have a portal open up and Brucie come stumbling out all old looking and then kick some ass. How many nerdgasms would that have caused? A little cheesy maybe but that's what these movies are. It was a bit confusing the whole after credits thing. I like my idea WAY more haha.

[shootemindehead]

Thought it was OK. But, I was never a fan of the original anyway.

[bassman]

Thought it was OK. But, I was never a fan of the original anyway.

Same here.

Someone fill me in on the after credits sequence. I missed it...

[Trancelikestate]

They just show Bruce's face and he says "groovy". That's it. My idea is wayyy cooler. haha.

To be honest I can't take the original. There's too many high pitched noises. It's simple as that. But I'm all about part 2 and AOD.

[bassman]

Yeah, I just found it on youtube. Makes absolutely no sense....

[slickwilly13]

And WTF was with the after-credits sequence? Was that really necessary? And what purpose did it serve? Oh yeah... none. :rolleyes:


Now you guys understand why my buddy was annoyed, after the Bruce stinger. The look on my buddy's face was priceless, though. It was worth that, alone.


Btw, the script had a different ending.

[MoonSylver]

I'm not sure which was worse - this one or the Texas Chainsaw remake.

A Nightmare on Elm Street. :lol:

[MinionZombie]

Thought it was OK. But, I was never a fan of the original anyway.

HEATHEN! :lol:


A Nightmare on Elm Street. :lol:

The pinnacle of name-rape remakes ... what a load of bollocks that was.

As for the post-credits scene, I think it's really just a little wink to the fans of the original and nothing more really - or it could be a hint at 'hey, if this works, we might get AOD2 out of this'.

I think it was wise to keep Ash entirely out of the remake - you can't beat Bruce, so why bother trying? I think it would have been too weird for newcomers for BC to suddenly turn up via a portal tacked into the finale - I want Ash kicking arse in the original series for an entire movie, not slap-dashed into the remake.

It was interesting watching the extras - Raimi and Tapert were up for it, but Campbell was dead set against it until they said they wouldn't include Ash.

[LouCipherr]

A Nightmare on Elm Street. :lol:

Touche' moon! You are more correct than you know.. :lol:



As for the post-credits scene, I think it's really just a little wink to the fans of the original and nothing more really - or it could be a hint at 'hey, if this works, we might get AOD2 out of this'.

All it did was remind me how awesome the originals were, how much I wish there was more Bruce/Ash flicks, and how terrible this current remake was.

To even use Bruce as a link to this POS remake is... well... blasphemy on a level I don't care to describe. :lol:

And, we'll never get an AOD2. As much as I'd LOVE to see it happen, it's just not going to. :(

[MinionZombie]

I have more faith than you, Lou - they're working on a script for AOD2, and I think all the key players would want to give it a bash - the fans are certainly clamouring for it in droves.

[LouCipherr]

I have more faith than you, Lou - they're working on a script for AOD2, and I think all the key players would want to give it a bash - the fans are certainly clamouring for it in droves.

Yes, I agree. You have WAY more faith than I do, MZ! :D

The fans (me included) really do want it, but sticking with my typical curmudgeon attitude, I have to ask - how often do we, the fans, get what we really want? I've heard ramblings about an Evil Dead 3 for years, and what do we get instead? This remake. :rolleyes: Now there's talk of an AOD2 script - but will it ever see the light? I'd bet my next paycheck it never gets past the script stage.

Call me skeptical, but I think I have very good reason to be. ;)


***edited to add: MZ, your description of the ANOES remake ("The pinnacle of name-rape remakes") couldn't be more spot on. :thumbsup:

[MinionZombie]

I've heard ramblings about an Evil Dead 3 for years.

***edited to add: MZ, your description of the ANOES remake ("The pinnacle of name-rape remakes") couldn't be more spot on. :thumbsup:

1) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/46/Army_of_Darkness_poster.jpg/220px-Army_of_Darkness_poster.jpg

:sneaky::lol::p

/couldn't resist

2) ANOES2010 was the definition of pointless. Badly structured, not scary, and it just took a bunch of scenes from the original and did a direct copy - but made the scenes infinitely worse - and there was the clearest definition of why CGI isn't better than practical - the shape coming out of the bedroom wall. It was a bit of spandex with a light under it in 1984, in 2010 it was obvious CGI that clearly wasn't occupying the same space as human beings. Feckin' stupid movie ... Samuel Bayer should stick to making music videos.

Ugh ... what an awful, awful movie ... a real floater that just won't flush.

[MoonSylver]

2) ANOES2010 was the definition of pointless. Badly structured, not scary, and it just took a bunch of scenes from the original and did a direct copy - but made the scenes infinitely worse - and there was the clearest definition of why CGI isn't better than practical - the shape coming out of the bedroom wall. It was a bit of spandex with a light under it in 1984, in 2010 it was obvious CGI that clearly wasn't occupying the same space as human beings. Feckin' stupid movie ... Samuel Bayer should stick to making music videos.

Ugh ... what an awful, awful movie ... a real floater that just won't flush.

There's a reason I threw that one into the discussion. ;) After years of resisting I finally broke & started catching all the remakes when they hit the $5 bins, out of scientific curiosity if nothing else. Most of them I found to be mediocre to ok to not bad. ANOES was by far the worst of the lot IMO. So if you're going to throw out bad remakes Lou, don't hold back. ANOES is the one to beat IMO. :D

Now, that said, I made my feelings known for ED when I saw it in theaters. I'd like another viewing on DVD. Honestly I thought it was far above average for a remake, that some effort was put into making a good horror movie, & that they generally succeeded. True it pales compared to the originals, but that was always bound to happen most likely. There's a reason cult classics are so few & far between. You can't manufacture lightning in a bottle. But I still contend this one was a solid effort that didn't flinch from delivering the horror goods.

[MinionZombie]

A fair assessment there, Moon - it's by no means dreck, but it isn't up there with the very few remakes that have been worthwhile - with ED2013 they get some things right, but get other things wrong ... ... I wish someone would have at least gone over the dialogue though (clearly Diablo Cody's hiring for a 'polishing of the script' was pointless - the woman who's known for good dialogue is totally absent here ... so we end up with thudding moments like "you know I'm your brother" and other such dud lines) ... throughout I was thinking "don't say that, say this", "you should have stopped that exchange a sentence sooner", or "say nothing at all here - just play it on the face!" ... ... it's only some of the dialogue, but the gear crunches in the script are quite loud and distracting when they happen.

Otherwise though it is - as you say - a solid remake. It is though, naturally, nowhere near the same league as the original trilogy - and I absolutely adore the first film - but there were numerous things I liked about the remake, it was just a pity that there were some easily avoidable pitfalls that were stumbled into along the way. A few tweaks at script stage, and some slightly bolder direction in other places during production, would have blew off the dust and placed a cherry on top. Hopefully the inevitable sequel will sidestep these issues ... as well as bring AOD2 along with it.

[LouCipherr]

So if you're going to throw out bad remakes Lou, don't hold back. ANOES is the one to beat IMO. :D

While I agree to an extent... I see your ANOES and raise you one RZ's Halloween. THAT was as much of an abomination and a spit in the face of the original as ANOES' remake was.


*sees MZ begin to retort* Don't even try pal, I'll tear it to shreds. :lol:


Moon - you seriously thought the ED remake was 'far above average for a remake'? Damn dude, I knew you had some screws loose, but I didn't realize the engine was broken. :lol: :p :D

[MinionZombie]

*sees MZ begin to retort* Don't even try pal, I'll tear it to shreds. :lol:

http://breakbrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/you-talk-too-much-armpit-funny-girl-picture.png

Tried to find something appropriate ... that's the best I could do ... well, could be arsed to do, anyway.


Moon - you seriously thought the ED remake was 'far above average for a remake'? Damn dude, I knew you had some screws loose, but I didn't realize the engine was broken. :lol: :p :D

Considering most remakes are feckin' awful hunks of shit that just refuse to be wiped away, no matter how much paper you shove between those cheeks, Evil Dead 2013 stands way above that lot. Although it's not in the very rarified atmosphere of Hills Have Eyes 2006, Piranha 2010, or The Crazies 2010.

1) HHE2006 - I like the original, but the remake is actually a bit better in my personal view. The 3rd act is certainly superior to the 3rd act of the original ... although that sequel-to-the-remake that followed was abominable ... but so was the original HHE2. :lol:

2) Piranha 2010 - I saw the original for the first time the other week and it's alright, but only alright ... I was a bit bored by it, to be honest, even if some bits were quite cool. The remake though just takes the essential (the killer fish) and does it's own thing, and does it very well. It's pure bawdy fun filled with gore ... it's a shame that the 3DD sequel was just utter, inept trash.

3) The Crazies 2010 - equal to the original. Each version does things better and worse than the other, so in the end it's a tie - and I was initially opposed to the remake, but was very pleasantly surprised.

Evil Dead 2013 is definitely below the above levels, but it's way above ANOES2010, The Fog 2005 etc.

There are other remakes that I like and enjoy - but consider to be nowhere near the same league as the original. I love the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but I quite enjoy the remake, even though it is in no way better ... although Jessica Biel in a soaking wet tank top and arse-hugging jeans is a jolly good try. :lol: ... I also rather enjoy Halloween 2007 (and even have a bizarre likeness for H2, which really gets Lou fired up :elol:), but that said, it's still nowhere near the brilliance of the original. Were they necessary? Nope. But did I enjoy them? Yeah - but with the caveat that they're inferior products by comparison.

[LouCipherr]

Tried to find something appropriate ... that's the best I could do ... well, could be arsed to do, anyway.

:lol:

I was going to post a dog getting swatted with a rolled-up newspaper, but you didn't give me the chance... Darn. http://enderzero.net/smilies/poke.gif


Considering most remakes are feckin' awful hunks of shit that just refuse to be wiped away, no matter how much paper you shove between those cheeks, Evil Dead 2013 stands way above that lot.

I am much more harsh on remakes. There are a few, an extremely limited few (probably counted on one hand) that might be better than or come close to the originals, but most fail on epic levels. Not saying ED failed on an 'epic' level, but it just feels like, to me, it didn't even live up to the name on the title card.



As a side note: I've seen you mention and profess your love this flick before, as has Dj and others, but what is your guys obsession with Piranha? I mean, if you liked that, you should be watching Sharktopus, Two-Headed Shark Attack and Sharknado and singing their praises! C'mon, MZ. It's fun to shame yourself!

Oh, wait. I see you already did that....you watched... Piranha. http://enderzero.net/smilies/bolt.gif




*pokes head back into room*

Did I hear someone mention RZ's Halloween 2 being good? *tightens fist around rolled-up newspaper* I DIDN'T THINK SO.

*wanders back out of the room*

:lol:

[MoonSylver]

While I agree to an extent... I see your ANOES and raise you one RZ's Halloween. THAT was as much of an abomination and a spit in the face of the original as ANOES' remake was.

I know you'll go thermonuclear, but once I actually saw it, I didn't think it was so bad, IF you completely remove the original from the equation & make no comparisons what so ever. :|



Moon - you seriously thought the ED remake was 'far above average for a remake'? Damn dude, I knew you had some screws loose, but I didn't realize the engine was broken. :lol: :p :D


Considering most remakes are feckin' awful hunks of shit that just refuse to be wiped away, no matter how much paper you shove between those cheeks, Evil Dead 2013 stands way above that lot. Although it's not in the very rarified atmosphere of Hills Have Eyes 2006, Piranha 2010, or The Crazies 2010.

...

There are other remakes that I like and enjoy - but consider to be nowhere near the same league as the original. I love the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but I quite enjoy the remake, even though it is in no way better ... although Jessica Biel in a soaking wet tank top and arse-hugging jeans is a jolly good try. :lol: ... I also rather enjoy Halloween 2007 (and even have a bizarre likeness for H2, which really gets Lou fired up :elol:), but that said, it's still nowhere near the brilliance of the original. Were they necessary? Nope. But did I enjoy them? Yeah - but with the caveat that they're inferior products by comparison.

MZ for the win. I didn't even have to lift a finger. Thanks for taking care of the light work. ;) Glad ONE of you gets it. :D

[shootemindehead]

Both 'The Hills Have Eyes' and 'The Crazies' remakes were excedingly better than the originals. They both show how a remake can be done well, when in the right hands and when not just a cash in. Although 'The Evil Dead' had more than a sniff of "name rape" about it, it was still done rather well. I have to admit, though, that I watched it on the laptop, while having my arse beaten by Rafa Nadal on the xbox, so I don't know how I'd rate it, if I'd sat down to it properly.

It certainly came out better than any number of recent genre remakes that anyone would care to mention, that's for sure and the opening was great. The decent amount of gore and wince moments were appreciated, even if the protagonists seemingly brushed off their wounds with remarkable ease. But, in this time of PG13 bollocks, it's quite refreshing to have a bit of guts thrown about the screen.

As I said though, I was never that pushed on the original and frankly, it only enjoys an inflated reputation because of its video nasty days. It's really not that good. In any case, Sam Raimi's films, like Wes Craven's, are lack luster to say the least and usually leave me with the words "try better next time FFS" in my mouth, 'A Simple Plan' and 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' excepted, of course.

If most remakes actually reached the level of 'The Evil Dead', I'd be happy with that.

[MinionZombie]

*pokes head back into room*

Did I hear someone mention RZ's Halloween 2 being good? *tightens fist around rolled-up newspaper* I DIDN'T THINK SO.

*wanders back out of the room*

:lol:

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/803457280/hFDAC879A/

:elol:

There's huge problems with it, but then in some scenes - particularly in the Director's Cut (RZ's DC's are always better than the theatrical versions IMHO) - are just great. I have a perverse liking of H2 in spite of all it's flaws. :p

Piranha 2010 - what's not to like about that flick? The original was no masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, and doesn't hold up terribly well, but the remake just wants to have fun and it certainly has an awful lot of fun, delivering lashings of gore and a shed-load of tits in your face. What's not to like?! :D


MZ for the win. I didn't even have to lift a finger. Thanks for taking care of the light work. ;) Glad ONE of you gets it. :D

http://meme-lol.com/wp-content/uploads/meme-lol/LOL-High-Five.jpg

[LouCipherr]

I know you'll go thermonuclear, but once I actually saw it, I didn't think it was so bad, IF you completely remove the original from the equation & make no comparisons what so ever. :|

Ok then, riddle me this, Moon - if you have to 'completely remove the original from the equation & make no comparisons what so ever' then I have to ask: what was the point?? If you have to 'completely remove the original' in order to enjoy it, that = EPIC FAIL on the remake scale. If they are going to call it a "remake" or a "reimagining" or whatever BS term they want to use, then it needs some comparison to the original - otherwise, it's not a remake. :p

<ahem> Ok, now that my "light work" is done, let's continue...

:lol:



There's huge problems with it, but then in some scenes - particularly in the Director's Cut (RZ's DC's are always better than the theatrical versions IMHO) - are just great. I have a perverse liking of H2 in spite of all it's flaws.

You, sir, need a CT scan. I think there's a tumor in there somewhere.. :lol:


Piranha 2010 - what's not to like about that flick? The original was no masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, and doesn't hold up terribly well, but the remake just wants to have fun and it certainly has an awful lot of fun, delivering lashings of gore and a shed-load of tits in your face. What's not to like?! :D

"What's not to like?" I mean, I don't mind the tits, but other than that... I can't even answer that question with a straight face! :lol: And this is coming from a dude who watched Sharknado, Sharktopus, and Two-Headed Shark attack, all three of which I'd rather watch than Piranha. At least they made it deadly clear what kind of movie they were.

"Did they get my penis?!" Indeed.

c'mon! :lol:

[MinionZombie]

And this is coming from a dude who watched Sharknado, Sharktopus, and Two-Headed Shark attack, all three of which I'd rather watch than Piranha. At least they made it deadly clear what kind of movie they were.

Which makes your disliking of Piranha 2010 all the more bizarre, plus, the movie totally makes it deadly clear what sort of movie it is! It's killer fish, gore, and tits!

You've got a screw loose, chum. :sneaky::D

[LouCipherr]

I have plentyof screws loose, that's not news. :lol: :D

You must be right, because I did like those other flicks, but... there's a difference between them.

Like I said, it felt like Piranha was trying to be serious even though it had comedy elements to it. Sharknado, Sharktopus and the like, on the other hand were marketed as stupid (and fun), the previews and trailers were stupid, and I'm pretty sure they knew exactly where those movies stood in the broad spectrum of things. Piranha feels like it wasn't sure what category it wanted to be in. It tried to be serious in some parts, and in others, it was just flat-out goofy.

And, sorry, if I'm going to watch a stupid/funny horror movie, I'd rather see a chainsaw-wielding Ian Zering be swallowed whole by a massive great white swirling around in a tornado above only to cut himself out of the belly 2 minutes later unharmed (HAH!) than see Jerry O'Connell get his dick bit off by an ancient, angry fish. Not funny. Stupid.

:lol:

[MoonSylver]

Ok then, riddle me this, Moon - if you have to 'completely remove the original from the equation & make no comparisons what so ever' then I have to ask: what was the point?? If you have to 'completely remove the original' in order to enjoy it, that = EPIC FAIL on the remake scale. If they are going to call it a "remake" or a "reimagining" or whatever BS term they want to use, then it needs some comparison to the original - otherwise, it's not a remake. :p

<ahem> Ok, now that my "light work" is done, let's continue...

:lol:

:bored:

Riddle easily solved. Because it doesn't hold a candle to the original, & bears similarity to it in name(s) only. So why WOULD I bother comparing them?:rockbrow: Makes about as much sense as comparing the two "Dawn of the Dead"'s.

So, based on that criteria, I had to judge it based as a stand alone flick, free of comparison to the original. Based on that, I thought it was aight to not bad. Pretty good "making of a serial killer" type flick.

TBH, if they HAD made it totally as its own thing, devoid of the name association of JC's "Halloween" I would have enjoyed it a bit more. But then again, from a "business" perspective, you draw publicity, curiosity, & a built in audience from that "franchise" association. Sad but true. :|

Sweat, not even broken. :nana::lol:

[LouCipherr]

Riddle easily solved. Because it doesn't hold a candle to the original, & bears similarity to it in name(s) only. So why WOULD I bother comparing them?:rockbrow: Makes about as much sense as comparing the two "Dawn of the Dead"'s.

:bored:

Which is done all the time, by everyone on this forum and all over the internet. The comparisons are there for a reason. If you 'remake' a film, you had better certainly expect it to be compared to the original film, regardless if it's "bad" or "good".

So based on your criteria above, when a remake doesn't hold a candle to the original, we can't compare the two... but, if a remake is decent enough it's ok to compare it to the original. You realize that's a double standard, right? :lol: And I think RZ's Halloween shared many similarities to the original than just 'name only', RZ just screwed up the story.


Hey, Moon, you actually have to do some work to break a sweat, dude. :lol: :p :D

[shootemindehead]

*Settles back...cracks open a beer...gets ready for the Lou vs Moon rolled up newspaper fight*

:poke:

[MoonSylver]

:bored:

Which is done all the time, by everyone on this forum and all over the internet.

So if 1 billion chinamen eat rice, I should eat rice too, right? :rolleyes:


So based on your criteria above, when a remake doesn't hold a candle to the original, WEcan't compare the two...

Got a mouse in yer pocket? You can do whatever you like pal, I'm speaking strictly for myself. :D



but, if a remake is decent enough it's ok to compare it to the original. You realize that's a double standard, right? :lol: And I think RZ's Halloween shared many similarities to the original than just 'name only', RZ just screwed up the story.

Point missed. It's not if "decent enough it's ok to compare it to the original". It's if they ACTUALLY remake the original or not! Night '90, for example, stuck to the original. So there is ample room for comparison. Movies like RZH, or DOTD'04 are so different from the source material that comparison is really futile. They end up being almost completely different movies. It's almost an apple/oranges comparison at that point. So all I'm left with is how was the film on it's own.

I know I've done it before. It's an eay trap to fall into. And some comparison is inevitable. But all I'm saying is, on it's own, it's a decent flick. Compared to the original? The original is a superior film.


Hey, Moon, you actually have to do some work to break a sweat, dude. :lol: :p :D

Exactly. And so far whipping yer ass wouldn't exactly qualify as "work:". :elol:


*Settles back...cracks open a beer...gets ready for the Lou vs Moon rolled up newspaper fight*

:poke:

http://ist1-2.filesor.com/pimpandhost.com/6/6/9/3/66934/1/8/X/0/18X0O/SISSY%20FIGHT.gif

[LouCipherr]

Point missed? Perhaps point was not made clear enough. :p

To say a remake can only be compared to the original if it sticks 'close to the source' (or in your own words, "if they ACTUALLY remake the original or not") is not within the realm of reality. If it uses the names, characters, basic story line, and even takes the TITLE of the original film for God's sake, then there is no reason whatsoever that comparisons cannot be made. We here on this forum, you and I included, do it on an almost daily/weekly/monthly basis.

In fact, in this very thread you compared the original ED to this remake, saying the original was superior but that this remake was pretty decent. This remake of ED bears about as much resemblance to the original film as RZ's Halloween does to Carpenter's original, so how can you possibly compare the two ED's using your prerequisite for comparison?

[MoonSylver]

Point missed? Perhaps point was not made clear enough. :p

I don't belive there is one, TBH. I think you're arguing for it's own sake & attempting to draw conclusions from my own words that aren't there, but I'll play along. :)



To say a remake can only be compared to the original...


Where did I say ever? Emphasis yours not mine...



... if it sticks 'close to the source' (or in your own words, "if they ACTUALLY remake the original or not") is not within the realm of reality.

Maybe your reality, not mine. :p I'm perfectly capable of watching a movie, divorcing myself from the original for an hour & a half, & then when it's over judging it BOTH based on comparison to the original AND on its own. If it's a direct remake, then sure, we can sit down & start discussing point-by-point comparisons. If the two are wildly different, why bother, other than in terms of relative quality?

Hell, technically you can compare ANYTHING if you're of a mind to, even things that are only alike in the broadest sense. You really CAN compare apples and oranges. They both food. They're both fruit. But to say " an apple is better than an orange"...well, you're really comparing two different things...

And sometimes you can enjoy one of two ALIKE things WITHOUT comparing them. :eek: I like steak & I like hamburgers. If I sit down & enjoy a burger, why would or should I compare it to a steak? They're both beef, so why not, huh? Maybe because a burger is a burger, that's all it's ever going to be, it's going to suffer in comparison, I enjoyed it on its own merits, & it's only similar to steak in the most superficial sense in that they both came from a cow.



If it uses the names, characters, basic story line, and even takes the TITLE of the original film for God's sake, then there is no reason whatsoever that comparisons cannot be made. We here on this forum, you and I included, do it on an almost daily/weekly/monthly basis.?


I know I've done it before. It's an easy trap to fall into. And some comparison is inevitable.

Did you fail reading comprehension or are you just being deliberatly obtuse? :rockbrow: :lol:


In fact, in this very thread you compared the original ED to this remake, saying the original was superior but that this remake was pretty decent. This remake of ED bears about as much resemblance to the original film as RZ's Halloween does to Carpenter's original, so how can you possibly compare the two ED's using your prerequisite for comparison?

You seem to be obsessed with absolutes. As if there's some Big Book of Movie Reviewing, writ by my own hand, that I'm supposed to be adhering to to. I'm more flexible than that. I can enjoy a film on its own & still draw a comparison in terms of overall quality. You seem to be taking one sentence...


I didn't think it was so bad, IF you completely remove the original from the equation & make no comparisons what so ever.

...& turn it into some kind of commandment that I'm supposed to be following. Lighten up Francis. :lol:

Now...

http://cdn.arwrath.com/4/40652.gif

...are you done picking nits? I got shit to do. :lol:

[LouCipherr]

Where did I say ever? Emphasis yours not mine...

-sigh-

Taken out of context. Nice.

Read much? (yes, I can make cute quips too. :rolleyes:). I reiterated your own rule that you can 'only compare a remake if it's "actually" a remake of the original'.

Remember?


It's not if "decent enough it's ok to compare it to the original". It's if they ACTUALLY remake the original or not!

:lol:

Circular logic. Cool, I get it. :lol:

[AcesandEights]

Easy, guys.

Remember that the burden of the remake and agony of the reboot weighs differently on each man's soul.

[LouCipherr]

Oh, I'm cool, me and Moon always are. I just wanted to see where the line was drawn in the sand for him on this subject.

Apparently, it's very wavy and changes with the tides. :p :lol:

[MoonSylver]

-sigh-

Taken out of context. Nice.

Read much? (yes, I can make cute quips too. :rolleyes:). I reiterated your own rule that you can 'only compare a remake if it's "actually" a remake of the original'.

Remember?

There you go again...



Oh, I'm cool, me and Moon always are. I just wanted to see where the line was drawn in the sand for him on this subject.

Apparently, it's very wavy and changes with the tides. :p :lol:

No, just not subject to a strict-ironclad-all-or-nothing-baby with the bathwater approach. :moon:

I'm cool though. If I wanted to really argue with someone who tries to pick apart my sentences, doesn't get me, and is completely irrational, I'd call my ex-wife!

http://24.media.tumblr.com/0c30920b44bb8bff9ae5872ec397adb9/tumblr_mpy3ha4E551rly3n3o1_500.gif

Come to think of it, you remind me of her...:nana:

[Andrew Crevier]

Dang...Loved this new Evil Dead, and I've been a hugh fan of the original material. I understand that hardcore fans never want to see a classic get remade when the source films are so strong. For the most part I'd like to see these companies re-release some of the older horror movies theatrically across the globe (unfortunately they won't), but put Evil Dead in the context of the current generation of Paranormal Activities and Sinister? This and Cabin in the Woods and John Dies at the End - these are the movies a new generation of horror fan needs to get hip too. I was laughing in the theatre imagining younger folks going to check this out - having no realization that a horror movie could be this bloody fun and intense. What a breath of fresh air. No matter how well a classic is treated, there will be those who just aren't capable of having fun on the new ride. It's like wooden roller coaster aficionados attempting to have fun on Space Mountain. This is one of my favorite remakes --- and, besides The Thing, the rule is that the original will always be more special.

[slickwilly13]

I watched a Swedish clone last night called Wither or Vittra. It was not too bad. The movie is probably as good as the remake of The Evil Dead, but of course, cannot top the original. It is pretty much a similar movie, except it is a creature from folklore, instead of deadites. Has anyone watched Wither?

[MinionZombie]

I watched a Swedish clone last night called Wither or Vittra. It was not too bad. The movie is probably as good as the remake of The Evil Dead, but of course, cannot top the original. It is pretty much a similar movie, except it is a creature from folklore, instead of deadites. Has anyone watched Wither?

Personally, I've never heard of it before. Will keep it in mind in case it rolls around on The Horror Channel or something.

[Geordie9]

i watched this couple of weeks ago and just didnt enjoy it at all. I just dont think Evil Dead is the same without Bruce Campbell. Same as Nightmare on Elm Street without Robert Englund, i couldnt even watch that shitemare on elm street remake, had to turn it off