Evil Dead [Remake]

JP Liz V1

There is a thread already

Defiler Of The Coffin

New trailer for this here: http://uk.ign.com/videos/2012/10/24/evil-dead-red-band-trailer

Looks like they've got rid of the slapstick and upped the gore. Could be a good one! Cottage looks like a right hellhole.

Will Henrietta make an appearance I wonder?

Professey Chin

I dont trust it

Mickeroo

Seem to be going more for the feel of the first film, looks too much like the first film if anything. Doesn't look like they're holding back on the violence though (tree rape and everything).

Going by the hand dismemberment they've replaced Ash with a female character.

I'm going to watch it (somehow) but a remake of Evil Dead just seems so senseless. The originals relied so much on Raimi and Campbell remaking it is like remaking a Marx Brothers or a Charlie Chaplain movie. Without Ash there and Raimi behind the camera it's just not Evil Dead.

Basq

That looks godawful..

..what a suprise!

richymcdermott

What the hell was that ?

I at least them at some aspect make it like the originals in some way or form but this is just a 21st century horror cliche film ..

Feels like they just stuck in evil dead in there so it got some exposure but this seems more of a cabin in the woods sequel than a evil dead film

Ah well , was too be expected , still makes me sad it has come down to this

Basq

Also, I'm gonna find it hard to take any horror movie set in the woods seriously after seeing 'Cabin In The Woods'.

Birneybau

Evil Dead 2 is my favourite film ever.

This one can fcuk right off!

pixelburp

Defiler Of The Coffin wrote: »

New trailer for this here: http://uk.ign.com/videos/2012/10/24/evil-dead-red-band-trailer

Looks like they've got rid of the slapstick and upped the gore. Could be a good one! Cottage looks like a right hellhole.

Will Henrietta make an appearance I wonder?

You say this like it's a good thing.

It's the same trailer as the dodgy camera-version released the other week & my opinion hasn't changed for the HD: it looks dreadful. And it's sad fans are deluding themselves as to its qualities, simply because Campbell & Raimi are producers - this only guarantees they'll make money from fans' disappointment.

Kiith

That looks ****ing awful.

Duggy747

People wanted Evil Dead 4 with Bruce getting the shìt kicked out of him, not this.

It's being released with Cabin In The Woods so fresh in people's minds and thus will constantly be compared to it leading up to it's release when we'll find out if it's any good or not.

To me, it looks like a movie that should've been out during the gore porn stage a few years ago.

johnny_ultimate

It really looks fairly appalling. I'm actually one of the rare people who prefer Evil Dead 1 to its follow-ups (down to its ramshackle, devil-may-care charm) but I'm still extremely pessimistic about this.

I find it hard to describe, but a lot of recent horror 'remakes' have this very generic, greyish colour scheme. While the trailer suggests a few Raimiesque askew camera angles, there's just something ugly and unimaginative about the images presented in that brief preview.

Professey Chin

The camera moving through the woods just looks wrong. And sounds extremely wrong!

FlashD

Watched the trailer

*yawn....

Liam McPoyle

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It really looks fairly appalling. I'm actually one of the rare people who prefer Evil Dead 1 to its follow-ups (down to its ramshackle, devil-may-care charm) but I'm still extremely pessimistic about this.

I find it hard to describe, but a lot of recent horror 'remakes' have this very generic, greyish colour scheme. While the trailer suggests a few Raimiesque askew camera angles, there's just something ugly and unimaginative about the images presented in that brief preview.

Fully agree,I rate ED infinitely higher than DBD.

DBD is a remake for all intents and purposes that tones down the nastier violence and replaces the blood with green and blue ooze to bypass the hassle that ED encountered with censorship and bannings.

Links234

Mickeroo wrote: »

Seem to be going more for the feel of the first film, looks too much like the first film if anything. Doesn't look like they're holding back on the violence though (tree rape and everything).

That's one thing I didn't expect from a remake, I thought they'd have to tone it down a lot, or remove that bit entirely.

I think a lot of people forgot that the first movie was quite serious in tone and incredibly shocking for the time, so I'm kinda surprised that they didn't go for the slap-stick tone of the sequels as that's the Evil Dead most people would be familiar with. Also, after Cabin in the Woods, a more toned down comedy-horror would make sense.

The first Evil Dead was my favourite, really scared and shocked me when I first saw it, so I might give this a look... but it's probably gonna be pants

I think that this could actually work. Far too many remakes of late have been watered down imitations of older films which throw in a certain amount of piss taking of the original. I doubt Evil Dead 2.0 is going to be a classic but it looks like a decent enough gore soaked romp in the woods which does seem to be trying too hard shock with extreme violence.

pixelburp

Links234 wrote: »

That's one thing I didn't expect from a remake, I thought they'd have to tone it down a lot, or remove that bit entirely.

I think a lot of people forgot that the first movie was quite serious in tone and incredibly shocking for the time, so I'm kinda surprised that they didn't go for the slap-stick tone of the sequels as that's the Evil Dead most people would be familiar with. Also, after Cabin in the Woods, a more toned down comedy-horror would make sense.

The first Evil Dead was my favourite, really scared and shocked me when I first saw it, so I might give this a look... but it's probably gonna be pants

Funny, that did occur to me & it left me wondering: I'm of an age where I'm hurtling towards a similar generation that would have got all hot & bothered over the original Evil Deads' 'obscene' violence. I wonder if my hatred for this trailer & the gore-porn genre in general is just me experiencing that generation gap first-hand, that what's shocking to me now will be normalcy tomorrow.
I don't think I am, considering I'm a big fan of oft-times gory 80s horror such as The Thing - I do believe there's a slightly nasty direction in the tone & presentation of violence / gore on-screen these days - but I still wonder if I've just become an old fart without realising it

Links234

pixelburp wrote: »

Funny, that did occur to me & it left me wondering: I'm of an age where I'm hurtling towards a similar generation that would have got all hot & bothered over the original Evil Deads' 'obscene' violence. I wonder if my hatred for this trailer & the gore-porn genre in general is just me experiencing that generation gap first-hand, that what's shocking to me now will be normalcy tomorrow.
I don't think I am, considering I'm a big fan of oft-times gory 80s horror such as The Thing - I do believe there's a slightly nasty direction in the tone & presentation of violence / gore on-screen these days - but I still wonder if I've just become an old fart without realising it

Could be!

lots of films in the 80's would still out-shock today's efforts though, look at Robocop! and that's not even a horror movie. if there's a difference, it's probably more to do with older films simply being dated in comparison to what we have now, and rose tinted glasses overshadow what is some pretty horrid blood and guts!

Tusky

Love the original, lukewarm to the idea of a remake...but I actually like the trailer. People saying it's less slapstick must be thinking of Evil Dead II. Evil Dead itself was more serious in tone..

Mickeroo

I could have sworm there was another longer thread on this but couldn't find it, either way here's the red band trailer, its NSFW/gory as hell so do not watch if you're easily offended/disgusted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvDLWlxxcak

It looks pretty full on but I just dont see the point of an Evil Dead film without Ash.

mikom

Mickeroo wrote: »

It looks pretty full on but I just dont see the point of an Evil Dead film without Ash.

It looks humourless.

Professey Chin

Not hopeful at all

Mickeroo

mikom wrote: »

It looks humourless.

Well in fairness I think they're going for the feel of Evil Dead 1, which wasnt exactly a barrel of laughs itself.

indough

Mickeroo wrote: »

Well in fairness I think they're going for the feel of Evil Dead 1, which wasnt exactly a barrel of laughs itself.

yeah it is only funny in hindsight, with the crap effects, poor acting etc. it would have been considered a shock/gore film at the time.

Liam McPoyle

One thing that instantly jumps out to me about the trailer is the effects work,most of them,in the trailer at least,seem to be man made/practical effects which can only be a good thing.

Im not holding out much hope tbh but will certainly go see it when it comes out.

Links234

I kinda want to see it, but... not really looking forward to it that much.

Bullseye1

I'll be seeing this one in the cinema. I agree with Mickeroo the first is nothing special, it's the second movie which is the classic.

Fysh

Eesh. Guess I won't be bothering with this. Pure gorehounds should have plenty to enjoy from the look of the trailer, but i'm not sure I see the point in rebooting The Evil Dead as yet another humourless horror film. I know the first one was pretty dour, but we all know that's not the film most people think of when they think Evil Dead.

johnny_ultimate

Always amazed I seem to be in a minority when it comes to thinking that The Evil Dead is superior to its two sequels. I think it has the most assured, unusual tone of the lot - a perfect mix between pitch-black comedy, multi-coloured gore and bizarre horror. It's not 'hide under the covers' scary or anything, but its certainly much creepier and unnerving than its given credit for. That it does all this while being completely self-aware and self-depreciating is what makes it so much better than your derivative cabin in the woods sort of films.

Not that I don't like the sequels - they're both a hell of a lot of fun - although their full on wackiness loses something in the process (especially Army of Darkness). The first though remains a brilliantly demented and very funny horror-comedy, and has a ramshackle, devil-may-care attitude about it that makes it still a thoroughly watchable slice of cinematic madness.

Mickeroo

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Always amazed I seem to be in a minority when it comes to thinking that The Evil Dead is superior to its two sequels. I think it has the most assured, unusual tone of the lot - a perfect mix between pitch-black comedy, multi-coloured gore and bizarre horror. It's not 'hide under the covers' scary or anything, but its certainly much creepier and unnerving than its given credit for. That it does all this while being completely self-aware and self-depreciating is what makes it so much better than your derivative cabin in the woods sort of films.

Not that I don't like the sequels - they're both a hell of a lot of fun - although their full on whackiness loses something in the process (especially Army of Darkness). The first though remains a brilliantly demented and very funny horror-comedy, and has a ramshackle, devil-may-care attitude about it that makes it still a thoroughly watchable slice of cinematic madness.

I've never considered the first one a comedy in any shape or form. I always found it very creepy and tense regardless of how the effects have aged though.

pixelburp

Mickeroo wrote: »

I could have sworm there was another longer thread on this but couldn't find it, either way here's the red band trailer, its NSFW/gory as hell so do not watch if you're easily offended/disgusted:

Here was the other thread, so perhaps the two could be merged?

Still think this looks like a trashy goreporn film, trading on the goodwill for Raimis film. Or more accurately, his sequels; there's no doubt the first tends to get forgotten, or assumed to have the same levels of comedy as #2 & 3.

Liam McPoyle

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Always amazed I seem to be in a minority when it comes to thinking that The Evil Dead is superior to its two sequels. I think it has the most assured, unusual tone of the lot - a perfect mix between pitch-black comedy, multi-coloured gore and bizarre horror. It's not 'hide under the covers' scary or anything, but its certainly much creepier and unnerving than its given credit for. That it does all this while being completely self-aware and self-depreciating is what makes it so much better than your derivative cabin in the woods sort of films.

Not that I don't like the sequels - they're both a hell of a lot of fun - although their full on whackiness loses something in the process (especially Army of Darkness). The first though remains a brilliantly demented and very funny horror-comedy, and has a ramshackle, devil-may-care attitude about it that makes it still a thoroughly watchable slice of cinematic madness.

Agree 100% ED,is IMO,infinitely superior to DbD.

Ive said it on here before somewhere but DbD is basically National Lampoons presents Evil Dead.

snausages

Yeah, I'm not sure if the original is meant to be taken as a comedy. Well, tree-rape isn't funny anyway. I don't think the film is anywhere near as intelligent or self-reflexive as it might seem. Love the sequel though. Army of Darkness not so much.

charlie_says

I looked up the Evil Dead on Wikipedia and it showed up as the Evil Dead Trilogy.



I THOUGHT THERE WAS ONLY TWO FILMS! OMG

I haven't seen the first one....I always thought that the evil dead 2 = army of darkness and evil dead 2 was the first one, never having seen the title sequence just out of happenstance.

Guess what I am acquiring right now! Sweeeeeeeet!

Zombienosh

indough wrote: »

yeah it is only funny in hindsight, with the crap effects, poor acting etc. it would have been considered a shock/gore film at the time.

I disagree completely with this.
I think Evil Dead 1 is the best of lot. The effects are amazing for the budget and time this was made. The creativity that went in is impressive.
The film has this genuine kind of creepiness throughout, and the demons look and act so impressive. A true classic horror IMO.

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Always amazed I seem to be in a minority when it comes to thinking that The Evil Dead is superior to its two sequels.

+1 on this

I prefer the first, the 2nd has a totally different approach that while still being good, just seems more a free for all. The first had some proper horror tones to it. The 3rd in the series is very cheesy & hasn't held up well at all

indough

Zombienosh wrote: »

I disagree completely with this.
I think Evil Dead 1 is the best of lot. The effects are amazing for the budget and time this was made. The creativity that went in is impressive.
The film has this genuine kind of creepiness throughout, and the demons look and act so impressive. A true classic horror IMO.

you say that you couldn't disagree more yet you are not actually disagreeing with anything that i said. yes the film makers were operating under constraints, but what difference does that make? i didn't mention budget because bad looking and comical effects that people laugh at are still bad looking and comical regardless of how much money or effort went into them.

my point was that the film is only viewed as funny now because it hasn't really aged that well, bar perhaps the demon chase effect which is still kind of creepy.

in fact it is still my favourite of the three films because it wasn't trying to be hilarious and actually attempts to be a decent horror. i can see why the 2nd is more popular but i am not a huge fan of slapstick comedy so there are scenes that do nothing for me.

FlashD

I can't remember ED1 but I always thought ED2 is kind of a remake of the first, just wackier and more full on with the effects..... but it is still set in the cabin.

Mickeroo

FlashD wrote: »

I can't remember ED1 but I always thought ED2 is kind of a remake of the first, just wackier and more full on with the effects..... but it is still set in the cabin.

Well technically only the first act is a remake/recap. Once you get the long shot of the camera flying through the woods, house and into Ash it's into sequel territory since that's the last shot of the first movie.

frank reynolds

Have been eager to see this since viewing the trailer about 3 months ago. it's coming out in cinema on 18th April - FINALLY!

do you think it will be good? is it a good thing that they have taken out the comedy aspect from the original?

i know bruce campbell wont be in it, but apparently, he and Sam Raimi have given their full blessing for the remake.

thoughts....?

youtube!

NO JUST NO

frank reynolds

youtube! wrote: »

NO JUST NO

could you elaborate a bit there?

youtube!

frank reynolds wrote: »

could you elaborate a bit there?

Why remake an absolute classic? It's absolutely one of my favourite horrors ever and the fact that the original was so innovative and yet low budget just adds to the charm of it for me.
It doesn't matter what they did, how much of a budget they used who stars in it or who recommends it , I know it will be always inferior. Basically the Evil Dead is sacred and should not have been touched.
Just my opinion.

frank reynolds

youtube! wrote: »

Why remake an absolute classic? It's absolutely one of my favourite horrors ever and the fact that the original was so innovative and yet low budget just adds to the charm of it for me.
It doesn't matter what they did, how much of a budget they used who stars in it or who recommends it , I know it will be always inferior. Basically the Evil Dead is sacred and should not have been touched.
Just my opinion.

i do agree with you somewhat actually yeah. Evil Dead II was/is one of my favourite films, let alone favourite horrors. it's definitely in my top 10 films anyway.

i'm looking forward to seeing it all the same, i want to see ANY part of the franchise, even if it is a remake.

now, the rob zombie halloweens were sh!te compared to the originals, and i LOVE the original, so hopefully they havent done what he did and basically it's exactly the same film, just with extreme gore.

but it probably will be

youtube!

Yea I love Evil Dead 2 just as much also,fantastic movie. I just know that the track record of remakes particularly horror remakes are really terrible. You don't have to reach too deep to see abominations such as for example

Texas Chainsaw Massacre

The Wicker Man

Amityville Horror

The Hills have eyes

Frightnight

Friday 13th and so on and on and on. All true classics all terribly remade.

Ask any kid these days about these classics and they have seen the remake so they reckon those originals are probably **** too, TBH I had no idea there was eve a remake in the offing but I have been so disappointed in the past that I am not even interested anymore to keep up. I am old school I guess.

indough

people tend to forget this, but there are quite a few remakes that are better than the original. also, the new evil dead film is reviewing quite well going by the few early reviews i've read, so i would be hesitant to dismiss it simply on the grounds of it being a remake

youtube!

[QUOTE=indough;83864360]people tend to forget this, but there are quite a few remakes that are better than the original. also, the new evil dead film is reviewing quite well going by the few early reviews i've read, so i would be hesitant to dismiss it simply on the grounds of it being a remake[/QUOTE]



Bet you can't name 5 in the horror genre. I don't bother with reviews I just make my own mind up. After being constantly disappointed I do tend to write off remakes I am afraid, maybe one day I will miss a good one but I somehow doubt it. I am not saying this one isn't a good movie in it's own right, but all too often it's just cashing in on the original's cult status instead of just making a decent film with a different title ,of course it all about profit not integrity,the golden age of horror is long dead.

indough

youtube! wrote: »

Bet you can't name 5 in the horror genre. I don't bother with reviews I just make my own mind up. After being constantly disappointed I do tend to write off remakes I am afraid, maybe one day I will miss a good one but I somehow doubt it. I am not saying this one isn't a good movie in it's own right, but all too often it's just cashing in on the original's cult status instead of just making a decent film with a different title ,of course it all about profit not integrity,the golden age of horror is long dead.

well the thing, invasion of the body snatchers (78) and the fly are undebatables really. then there are remakes such as dawn of the dead, the blob, the amityville horror, the crazies, and one you mentioned, the hills have eyes, which i would personally put comfortably ahead of their originals, but which many may disagree with due in most part to rose-tinted glasses. those are just off the top of my head so there will no doubt be plenty more

admittedly a few of those may not be great, but are still better than what came before them

Fysh

The problem with the "some horror remakes are good" argument is that recent releases tend not to support that argument. The Friday the 13th and Nightmare On Elm Street were anything but good, most of the US J-Horror remakes were bland recreations of the originals, Quarantine wasn't as good as [REC], the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake was dull and unimaginative. Honestly within the last 5 years or so, I'd say only The Crazies has been an improvement on the original.