MovieChat Forums > The Evil Dead (1983) Discussion > I have to say I like the remake MUCH bet...

I have to say I like the remake MUCH better

posted 7 years ago by npiazza91
5 replies | jump to latest

I was born in 1991, so all of these 70's and 80's horror films were before my time. My introduction to horror was Scream, which made me want to watch all the Freddy and Jason movies, which I still love today (most of them anyway).

Anyway, I'm doing a horror slasher marathon. I'm picking the biggest slasher franchises since the 70's including Evil Dead because I just love the concept of it all, and it's still kind of a slasher even though it's crossbred with the possession genre. SO far I have watched Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween, Phantasm, Friday the 13th, Friday the 13th Part 2 and The Evil Dead. I had seen all of these films before, but my memory on most of them was hazy. Here is how I rank them.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Friday the 13th Part 2
Friday the 13th
Halloween
Phantasm
The Evil Dead

As you can see, The Evil Dead is at the bottom. Let me just say that I didn't hate the movie, I didn't even really dislike it, it was just a clusterf- of randomness with way too much OTT blood effects and lots and lots of screaming and laughing. It was just...a bit too weird. Phantasm had the same issues, but at least it had a narrative, and the Tall Man is a great villain. Halloween is great for its time, but it hasn't aged well, and I found myself pretty damn bored all things considered. Friday the 13th same thing, but I really like the outdoor camp setting of Camp Crystal Lake, and some of the deaths were awesome. Friday the 13th Part 2 was better, it had a better cast, a stronger story and better kills, pretty much upper tier of slasher films. Texas Chainsaw Massacre is, in my opinion, a masterpiece. It's one of my favorite horror films of all time now.

Anyway, going back to what I was saying about The Evil Dead...I just can't get behind the original. The remake blew me away...it was pure horror, the atmosphere was spectacular, and they accomplished what I believe to be a very scary movie at a minimum CGI, which is pretty awesome. Maybe since I wasn't around in the 80's I wasn't able to appreciate the original, maybe the film is truly a product of its time. I do have to say that Ash is an awesome protagonist. I have never seen the sequel, so here's to hoping I like it better, especially after hearing all the good things about it.

[–] KingCobra686 7 years ago

The original was super low budget. Some people dont mind that and some do. I like the atmosphere that they were able to generate with so little money for effects.

I personally dont think that the Friday the 13th movies have aged that terribly well. I like watching them, but they are fairly slow paced with a generic villain and not much going on.

[–] npiazza91 7 years ago

I agree with you o teh atmosphere actually. The first 30 minutes or so was fantastic. The atmosphere, the fog, the cabin in general, it was pure haunted house and it was just awesome. Even when Cheryl got possessed it was pretty cool and effective, I love that card scene. The film started to lose me when Ash's girlfriend got possessed and was just sitting their laughing. I mean yeah it was creepy, but it was so over the top, and you had a million things going on at once it was like too much stimulation. I know that must sound ironic coming from someone who was born in 1991, but there was a few times I wanted to tell the movie to relax a bit. I mean you had Cheryl in the basement constantly banging, Ash's girlfriend was laughing, the other girl gets possessed, it all happens in such a short amount of time, and it just gets even more ridiculous as it goes on. If they would have taken out a few things and separated all the chaos with a few talking scenes to further the story and characters, I would have liked it a lot more. It was 30 minutes of build up and atmosphere, and then an hour of random chaos that didn't sit too well with me. I still liked the movie and I can see why it's a classic...who knows it may grow on me the next time I see it.

[–] Wuchak (8100) 6 years ago

It was 30 minutes of build up and atmosphere, and then an hour of random chaos that didn't sit too well with me. I still liked the movie and I can see why it's a classic...who knows it may grow on me the next time I see it.

That's the exact problem I had with the movie: The set-up of the first half, which includes the arrival of the five to the cabin, the attack on Cheryl in the woods and then her possession and initial assault of the others, is all well-executed and compelling. From there, however, the movie gets redundant with further attacks in the same location, the cabin. Sure the attacks in the second half up the ante, but they're basically ugly demon-possessed people attacking whoever's not possessed. It's just one similar attack in the same setting after another and it gets old after a while.

[–] atd8vii (592) 5 years ago

I think part 4 is the best in the series personally, and you can easily watch it and piece together what happened in the previous films. The first one is iconic because of Betsy Palmer but it's ok at best, part 2 was enjoyable but sack head Jason was kind of lame for me, 3 is just plain awful.

[–] atd8vii (592) 5 years ago

I love the original, I was born in 1987 and grew up with 70's and 80's horror flicks, some of the classics I have mixed opinions about but ED was a unique case. I saw it in early 2003 I think and I can't remember feeling so incredulous and scared at the same time, at first I couldn't believe how cheap and poorly made it was, but it still left me feeling uncomfortable throughout (and this was in broad daylight) and I realized that I was actually scared when watching it, much more so than TCM, Halloween, NOES and Friday the 13th which I had seen all by that point.

The remake was pretty good, but it doesn't have that replay value that this one has, I think that can be put down to its sense of humour.