Comments on: SXSW Review: ‘Evil Dead’ Is A Grim, Humorless, Ultraviolent Update Of A Horror Classic

By: Chad P

Chad P — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Dear Mr. Reviewer: please go watch the original evil dead film and tell me how many humorous scenes or one liners are in it. I'm so sick of ignorant people who don't recall the the first film is straight up horror and gore, no comedy at all.

By: LESTER

LESTER — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

It sounds like your mistaking The Evil Dead 1 with The Evil Dead 2. Common mistake given that both play like an origin story, but the origina T.E.D. is pure horror while T.E.D.2 is a slapstick comedy horror film. I don't expect most people to know that distinction, but I do expect it from Indiewire – especially in a review.

By: SC

SC — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

I read your review and like most negative reviews (3 negative to 10 positive) you seem to be confusing The Evil Dead 1981 with Evil Dead 2 Dead By Dawn. Did you even watch the original? Bruce and Raimi said it was not a comedy it only came off like that because of the budget they had to work with ,poor acting and effects. This new evil dead is what they were actually trying to make but did not have the money or actors to do it right. I just don't understand how some critics don't like the new one because it's Humorless? The first was not very funny, no one liners and Ash was not the focus until the last 15 min. Do yourself a favor, revisit the original (not 2!) and don't act like you know what your talking about when you have no clue. How you became a critic for IndieWire is beyond me. If you want something funny go watch Cabin In The Woods. But if you want an actual disturbing,gross,and just plain creepy movie this is the movie for you. P.S. As a fan of the original movie witch I saw back in 1983 in the theater with a packed house witch no one found funny at the time(most people were scared shitless) I saw the new one at SXSW and thought it was very well done and a great homage to the original. 8/10*

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

It was pretty easy to see they'd fuck a remake up by sheer fact that they still can't adequately explain what a Deadite is.
They're an ancient non-satanic demon race that possess people to gain a corporeal form but also eat souls and immediately maim people because… Why?
It's a fault of the original too in being very clearly based on Lovecraft (particularly Shub-Niggurath) but not really developing a context for the antagonism. Basically, just what the hell does it plan on doing after having a possession party with college kids?
Maybe we're looking at it the wrong way and it's not a demon but a benevolent spirit of the forest that wondered, "What's the life of this upright ape like?.. OH GOD! IT'S AWFUL!" *stab* *stab* *stab*

By: Woodey

Woodey — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Not sure about the "humor" in the first one. The first one was scary and it did scare the crap out of me when I watched it in the theater. I remember telling my dad when we watched the 2nd one to be prepared to be scared, we laughed instead. The first one was scary and had not a drop of humor in it, the sequels are a different story.

In regards to the review, I tend to agree that remakes are very hit (Friday the 13th) and miss (Nightmare on Elm St). I will still see this movie in the theater and hope that I am not disappointed. I do hope that there is some substance to the movie and not just full of shocking scenes. I have watched so many horror movies that its very hard for me to be shocked, I tend to want some quality to my horror and not just in your face scene after scene, it gets old fast.

Bottom line is nothing will top the original, but I don't expect this movie to. It would not be fare to hold it to such a standard and it will make me look it it in a much harsher way. I just want to be entertained and I hope it does that.

By: joseph

joseph — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Horror hardcore fans are the worst. It can\’t possibly be bad, right?

By: Arch

Arch — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

With such a comment on these mediocre french films I'll probably be on the same page as this reviewer.
For those who saw only good review they should check out Shock Till You Drop and Corey Mitchell's review on Bloody Disgusting. The movie may not be that terrible, but as Corey says at the end of his article: "[B. Campbell said] you can dust off your DVD any time you like and watch the original. Seeing this remake makes me want to do just that."

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Serious question, Cory: Have you actually seen the original Evil Dead? Not Evil Dead 2, but the first one. Have you seen it? This review (and your reference to the original's supposed "humor") suggest otherwise.

By: Old School

Old School — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

So far this is the only negative review I have seen, every other has praised it and the majority have claimed "This is how to do a remake properly". This reviewer just seems butt hurt and sounds like he hasn't even seen the original.

By: Arch

Arch — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Comments seem to focus on the humor issue. Granted it's in the title of the review but, whether the original had humor or not, it doesn't seem to be the main concern here. To use the same internet vernacular: Did you guys read the review ?

I mean, I really want to give the movie a chance (despite the obnoxious promo and the "how did you get this job" comments), I just don't see the point in an extreme make-over for the torture porn audience, ignoring ED2 and 3 altogether. Problem is: even positive reviews seem to indicate that it's what this one is about.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Inside and Haute Tension were both excellent horror films. If Evil Dead is like those then count me in! The original Evil Dead was a rather serious horror movie and it was pretty disturbed. Sounds like the remake is spot on.

By: whatwhat

whatwhat — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

The original was not meant to be humorous whatsoever. Bruce Campbell himself even said the only funny moments were due to bad acting, bad effect, etc. It was meant to be a straight-up horror film.

By: Joshj

Joshj — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Saw it, agree. Horror ppl with boners over gore will love it though. Empty though.

By: Sam

Sam — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Shocker. This looked like crap from minute one.

By: tristan eldritch

tristan eldritch — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

If memory serves, wasn't the original Evil Dead nastier and much less humorous than the sequel though?

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

The first Evil Dead is mostly humorless, though with some great inventive camera work. Part 2, is a remake of one but with comedy. I'm pretty sure these guys targeted the first one.

By: a

Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

So it's basically Evil Dead sapped of personality.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Excellent review and commentary! I think they did lose sight on what made the originals great to begin with.

By: chris

chris — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

The original was not funny. It also got reviews like this and became a classic. Fuck off.

By: Ataeee

Ataeee — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

Is it anymore clear from this thread that horror fans are homophobe meatheads?

By: Bub

Bub — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

I haven't seen the movie yet, will do so in Amsterdam at the horror night next month, but i think the reviewer missed the point with saying the original has slapstick scenes.

He probably have never seen it since the original is 100% pure hard core horror without any (intentional) comedy bits whatsoever.

Again a reviewer who is clueless what this remake is about.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:35 +0000

"Featuring truly shocking levels of violence but none of the wit or fun of the original, the new "Evil Dead" is mostly a dud."

The wit or fun of the original? Are you sure you aren't thinking of Evil Dead 2? As far as I can remember, the original Evil Dead was straight up horror and gore. It wasn't until part 2 that Campbell turned it in to slapstick, and very well I might add.

By: spinkterbrain

spinkterbrain — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:34 +0000

I really liked the look, the special effects, location etc..Even thought the actors were good.
What was missing , and i think should have been essential were two things…
1. An almost complete lack of focus on 'THE BOOK'. The fundamental !
2.there was none of that classic & really spooky shivers down the spine haunted feeling. It was just visual horror & not much for the imagination.
Other than that, it did lack a full plot somehow. As if there were important chunks cut out.
Judging it solely on its own is silly because we all know what this movie is right !
Overall, i think this film will fade & die away but the original evil dead will remain a favorate…
…Nuff said.

By: MusicLV

MusicLV — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:34 +0000

This movie don't reach my target demand..I thought this was a amazing film, comedian in parts, awful in parts, anxious but at the end nothing in that!!

By: Brooke

Brooke — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:29:34 +0000

This movie is pure crap. Even without comparing it to the original its bad
Sloppy writing, a director who clearly has no clue how to build suspense. People trying to defend it had told me its a more realistic approach..hmmm how long does it take to bleed out from a severed limb thats left open. The acting is mediocre, it isn't really that gory which seems to be the main reason people like it.

Only reason to watch it is to say "yeah I've seen it" when someone brings it up in conversation