Evil Dead (2013)

[the_ultimate_evil]

So that 'Evil Dead' reboot that's happening--because we can't do anything to stop it--has leaked a few plot details. The updated version of Sam Raimi's immortal 1981 classic will be directed by newcomer Fede Alvarez and written by Diablo Cody ('Juno,' 'Jennifer's Body') and will not center around our favorite boomstick-wielding demon fighter Ash; Bruce Campbell will apparently not be in the film at all. Instead, according to recent reports, the new film will structurally mirror the original with a group of kids heading to a cabin in the woods. But they are going to that cabin to help kick one of the girls of her drug habit. Ok. There will also be a subplot of one girl not only discovering the Book of the Dead, but being able to decipher and translate it as well.

Unless the ancient Kandarian culture worshiped hamburger phones, it doesn't make sense that one of Cody's teenage female characters would be able to just pick up and translate the Book of the Dead. I somewhat understand the decision to make one of the characters a recovering drug addict, because her behavior and possible hallucinations as she detoxes would make it difficult to tell whether the supernatural stuff is real or all in her head. Yeah, I understand it, but I don't like it. If we get to the end of the film just to find out that there were no demons and everyone is fine just so they can drive home happily coming up with precious dialogue, I'm going to chainsaw my own face. I don't hate remakes/reboots on principle and I try to remain optimistic on them no matter how much I love the original films, but news like this makes it difficult to avoid dread.

http://my.spill.com/profiles/blogs/the-evil-dead-reboot-plot-details-revealed

i couldn't find a thread about this, if there is one it can be merged

honestly i don't know what to think of this. the remake in general is an unneeded and stupid move but at least they are trying something different

but one the other hand that change miss's the whole point of the plot:huh:

[THANOSRULES]

what's the problem, just make the male lead an honest attempt to be an iconic leading man , yet not campbell and it could be ok.

I'd still rather them just do a new story.

[Clu]

once i read Diablo Cody i was.....no thanks.

bring on the smart ass girl with a drug habit who tells the new ash he is a dumb male.

[chaseter]

Nobody will go see this because of three reasons:

a) guys won't want to go see Diablo Cody trash
b) girls aren't going to go see a movie about ancient demons killing hipster teens
c) nerds/geeks/fans that have seen the original won't give a crap about a remake

This movie will be an epic bomb and maybe this will be the last time someone gives Diablo Cody a job.

[Spider-Who?]

If this is a new story with different characters, then it really isn't a remake. I'm fine with them making a new film set in the evil dead universe. No one can replace Bruce Campbell's Ash, so I think this is a smart move. As far as one of them being able to decipher the book, who knows, they could be a college student who is studying ancient languages. That's no more unbelievable then anything else in the story.

I wasn't cool with them remaking evil dead, but I'd it's a totally new story like this outline suggests, then I'm interested in seeing how it turns out.

[Ultra Lantern]

If this is a new story with different characters, then it really isn't a remake. I'm fine with them making a new film set in the evil dead universe. No one can replace Bruce Campbell's Ash, so I think this is a smart move. As far as one of them being able to decipher the book, who knows, they could be a college student who is studying ancient languages. That's no more unbelievable then anything else in the story.

I wasn't cool with them remaking evil dead, but I'd it's a totally new story like this outline suggests, then I'm interested in seeing how it turns out.


Hollywood put a twist on this remake.This might be very interesting as it gets made.I'll watch it.

[Spider-Who?]

Nobody will go see this because of three reasons:

a) guys won't want to go see Diablo Cody trash
b) girls aren't going to go see a movie about ancient demons killing hipster teens
c) nerds/geeks/fans that have seen the original won't give a crap about a remake

This movie will be an epic bomb and maybe this will be the last time someone gives Diablo Cody a job.

1. The general public doesnt give two ****s about writers. Pick any random person off the street and ask them who wrote Juno and they wouldnt have a clue.

2. Horror movies are a date night staple. By this logic alone, EVERY horror movie would bomb. Its pretty sexist of you to think girls dont like horror films. Half the people i know who are horror fanatics are female. And where are you getting this thing about hipsters?

3. Again, if this logic were true, then every remake would have failed.

You aren't on the bandwagon for this film. Cool. I don't blame you. I'm still iffy myself. But there's a difference between stating your opinion and pulling things out of your butt like its the gospel to justify your desire to see the film fail.

[Asgard]

Hmmm...not even an Ash cameo?

For shame.

I wonder if theyre going to go for really serious horror, or horror with a little bit of camp and humor. I havent seen Juno or Jennifer's body but I do know Juno is sort of a comedy so maybe Diablo will interject some humor into the remake.

[WildcatNC]

I think they should try it as a straight up horror movie. They are unlikely to catch lightening in a bottle with that "camp horror that works" feel again. Campbell and Raimi are who made that work. I don't have faith in these people to repeat that formula. Best to do a straight horror movie, which this story could be a good one.

[Asgard]

I agree with that.

[WildcatNC]

I agree with that.


It could be a really good Cthonic style horror/ancient evil story. With At the Mountains of Madness getting stalled there's nothing currently in that sub-genre unless you count the Thing prequel.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Hmmm, this actually sounds like a pretty interesting remake synopsis.

[Slushy]

If Bruce Campbell doesn't want to star then I totally agree with leaving the Ash character out. Had somebody else played Ash and actually did a kickass job, he would still get sh**ted on.

I love the Evil Dead trilogy, but the continuity errors are annoying and it would be nice if a remake trilogy fixed this.

Evil Dead 2 - It came off as a remake because of the right issues with the first film's footage. Ignore the first 10 minute and it works out though.

Army of Darkness - At the end of Evil Dead 2, Ash slays a Deadite and is held as a hero by the knights while he screams in despair, but at the beginning of Evil Dead 3, this doesn't happen and Ash is taken as prisoner instead. UGH!

[hammerhedd11]

I don't mind this being remade, especially as Raimi and Campbell are both behind it. And c'mon, Evil Dead is fun, but not particularly scary, and not very funny, at least intentionally. It wasn't until the sequels that they really embraced the campiness and made something really unique. I think a remake done well could be really terrifying.

[the_ultimate_evil]

i'm actually surprised no one is annoyed at the possibilty the demons may not be real but part of the coming of drugs plot

[THANOSRULES]

If this is a new story with different characters, then it really isn't a remake. I'm fine with them making a new film set in the evil dead universe. No one can replace Bruce Campbell's Ash, so I think this is a smart move. As far as one of them being able to decipher the book, who knows, they could be a college student who is studying ancient languages. That's no more unbelievable then anything else in the story.

I wasn't cool with them remaking evil dead, but I'd it's a totally new story like this outline suggests, then I'm interested in seeing how it turns out.

Yeah but what is Evil Dead without Ash?

You need to have a strong lead who can do what he essentially did, which is 1 in a million shot.

prediction...it will be a "chick" in a predictable hollywood twist.

[WildcatNC]

i'm actually surprised no one is annoyed at the possibilty the demons may not be real but part of the coming of drugs plot

I would be annoyed if I believed it for a second. I just don't think Raimi is that dumb.

Sounds like "Shrooms".

[HighFivingMF]

i'm actually surprised no one is annoyed at the possibilty the demons may not be real but part of the coming of drugs plot

Because that's not going to happen.

[Wolf Boy]

I think it's a good twist on the story and the last thing i want is yet another boring frame by frame copy of an original. At least they're attempting SOMETHING new. Whether or not it will work is another thing all together, but i'm actually looking forward to this. With a recovering drug addict, there's a lot of room for a great tense and creepy horror flick, and i like the gender role swap.

I doubt the drug plot will be a way to make the demons not real, if anything the drug plot will just make the junky girls experiences with demons that much more unbelievable by her friends when they go to the cabin. They could play around with that a lot.

[jaymes_e06]

Diablos actually a good writer Jennifers Body had a good horror atmospheric script it just wasn't translated that well to screen. That being said this film may be okay. I'm really glad they didn't try to reboot or remake this really just have a story within the same universe though.

[Specter313]

Ghost House and Mandate Pictures are going BIG with their casting for their forthcoming remake of Sam Raimi's Evil Dead, which begins lensing this March in New Zealand.

Bloody Disgusting has learned exclusively that Lily Collins (The Blind Side, Priest, Mirror Mirror) is in final negotiations to play "Mia" in FilmDistrict's reboot aiming for release on April 12, 2013.

*Update* Mia is the LEAD, and is the female version of Ashley J. Williams (Ash), once donned by Bruce Campbell in the original trilogy. To reveal more would ruin the movie.

In this version, the story centers on five friends (David, Natalie, Eric, Olivia, and Mia) holed up at a remote cabin where they discover a Book of the Dead with a demonic force unleashed possessing each until only one is left to fight for survival. As we also exclusively reported, there is a drug subplot.

As previously explained, David is a mechanic and is engaged to Natalie. Mia is the friend who is heading to the cabin to detox; Olivia is her best friend/nurse. Eric, presumably, is the kid who unleashes the demons.

After a recent overdose, Mia struggles with her new-found sobriety. She begins acting insane, so it comes as no surprise that nobody believes her crazy claims of coyote dogs and trees attacking her!

Fede Alvarez directs the redo of Sam Raimi's cult classic 1981 The Evil Dead from his own screenplay co-written with Rodo Sayagues. Revisions were done by Oscar-winning writer Diablo Cody.

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/27776

[def28]

Man I hope this is more then just a sell out horror flick. Most these remakes are flopping anyways. Who the **** is their audience on this one? 13 year olds who cant buy an R rated ticket and are unaware of the originals? Just cause its a new version doesnt mean the new generation wont be aware of the originals or what made them good. If they want a successful Evil Dead film then make it for the fans who have been begging for pt 4 for over a decade.

Yeah but what is Evil Dead without Ash?


Exactly, its not Evil Dead. The Franchise would not have been anywhere near the level it is with cult status/Merchandise/sold out midnight showings if it werent for Ash. Only problem with this film is that its called Evil Dead and doesnt Star Bruce Campbell. If they called it something else or at least had an Ash cameo in the Id be all for it.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Cool casting choice.

[HighFivingMF]

Ghost House and Mandate Pictures are going BIG with their casting for their forthcoming remake of Sam Raimi's Evil Dead, which begins lensing this March in New Zealand.

Bloody Disgusting has learned exclusively that Lily Collins (The Blind Side, Priest, Mirror Mirror) is in final negotiations to play "Mia" in FilmDistrict's reboot aiming for release on April 12, 2013.

*Update* Mia is the LEAD, and is the female version of Ashley J. Williams (Ash), once donned by Bruce Campbell in the original trilogy. To reveal more would ruin the movie.

In this version, the story centers on five friends (David, Natalie, Eric, Olivia, and Mia) holed up at a remote cabin where they discover a Book of the Dead with a demonic force unleashed possessing each until only one is left to fight for survival. As we also exclusively reported, there is a drug subplot.

As previously explained, David is a mechanic and is engaged to Natalie. Mia is the friend who is heading to the cabin to detox; Olivia is her best friend/nurse. Eric, presumably, is the kid who unleashes the demons.

After a recent overdose, Mia struggles with her new-found sobriety. She begins acting insane, so it comes as no surprise that nobody believes her crazy claims of coyote dogs and trees attacking her!

Fede Alvarez directs the redo of Sam Raimi's cult classic 1981 The Evil Dead from his own screenplay co-written with Rodo Sayagues. Revisions were done by Oscar-winning writer Diablo Cody.

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/27776

Wait... Was she the BIG casting choice?

[Figs]

To be honest, it's better if the character Ash isn't in this film. Bruce Campbell is Ash, he's easily just as tied to that character as Englund is to Krueger. Maybe even more since he doesn't have makeup covering his face in the films and is easily recognizable on the street.

I don't care what movies they remake anymore, but it's a smart move to keep the character Ash out of this one.

[<(o_o)>]

This will probably be a hard PG-13 anyways.

[cloverfan98]

To be honest, it's better if the character Ash isn't in this film. Bruce Campbell is Ash, he's easily just as tied to that character as Englund is to Krueger. Maybe even more since he doesn't have makeup covering his face in the films and is easily recognizable on the street.

I don't care what movies they remake anymore, but it's a smart move to keep the character Ash out of this one.

To some extent I do agree with you. If you can't have Bruce you shouldn't have Ash. However this remake is like making a Nightmare on Elm Street film without Freddy and I'm not talking about recasting, but on totally removing the character that the series is created on from this film. If they really felt they had a great original story for a horror film set in the woods then make it its on thing so it dosen;t have to worry about matching up to the original.

[Figs]

To some extent I do agree with you. If you can't have Bruce you shouldn't have Ash. However this remake is like making a Nightmare on Elm Street film without Freddy and I'm not talking about recasting, but on totally removing the character that the series is created on from this film. If they really felt they had a great original story for a horror film set in the woods then make it its on thing so it dosen;t have to worry about matching up to the original.

edit

misread your post.

[Evil Twin]

To some extent I do agree with you. If you can't have Bruce you shouldn't have Ash. However this remake is like making a Nightmare on Elm Street film without Freddy and I'm not talking about recasting, but on totally removing the character that the series is created on from this film. If they really felt they had a great original story for a horror film set in the woods then make it its on thing so it dosen;t have to worry about matching up to the original.

I think the difference is that Freddy is the premise of the Nightmare films, while Ash, as memorable as he is, is the protagonist. You set a movie with a cabin in the woods, the Necronomicon, and evil spirits and people are likely going to ask "why are you ripping off Evil Dead?". It's a no win situation. You might as well just call it part of the franchise at that point and be done with it.

[craigdbfan]

This entire thing sounds horrible and not just because it's a piss poor re imagining of a somewhat already silly movie but just because as a standalone film it still sounds godawful.

[Spider-ManHero12]

This will probably be a hard PG-13 anyways. I hope not.

[chelo248]

fedalvar (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar) Fede Alvarez
(Previous tweet goes for actresses too)
3 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar/status/154956775899148288)

fedalvar (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar) Fede Alvarez
Actor in ur twenties? Get urself on tape reading this: whysanity.net/monos/ryan5.ht… (http://t.co/P1GS8Cmk) Utube it and tweet it back to me. Blow my mind and we'll talk...
36 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar/status/154948381981155328)

fedalvar (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar) Fede Alvarez
Hey @ChainSaw_Master (https://twitter.com/#%21/ChainSaw_Master) and all of actors asking about how to get a chance to be in the #EvilDeadremake (https://twitter.com/#%21/search?q=%23EvilDeadremake), pay attention to my next tweet...
44 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar/status/154946335190171648)

fedalvar (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar) Fede Alvarez
“@Chelsevie (https://twitter.com/#%21/Chelsevie): lily collins as in Snow White? oh dear oh dear.” I've said once: "Heath Ledger as in "Casanova" playing The Joker? Oh dear...
57 minutes ago (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar/status/154943271980904448)

fedalvar (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar) Fede Alvarez
“@1nickeverhart (https://twitter.com/#%21/1nickeverhart): Is it true??? " Has The Evil Dead remake found its leading lady in Lily Collins? nblo.gs/sm0rX (http://t.co/8pPl6jtp)"” 50% official.
2 hours ago (https://twitter.com/#%21/fedalvar/status/154913178474643456)

[obin_gam]

as long as the tree-rape-scene is intact, i'm all for this!

[DarkSovereignty]

I want to see someone rape the TREE.

[Lasirius]

I have a feeling they're going to leave that part out. :csad:

Also, I don't know how I feel about the casting of Lilly Collins. I haven't seem much of her but that damn Mirror Mirror trailer left me a bad taste in my mouth, though she could be good in it.

[Specter313]

Well, that didn’t last long.

Word got out earlier this month that Mirror Mirror star Lily Collins would play the lead in the Evil Dead remake directed by Fede Alvarez and re-written by Diablo Cody. But, according to a tweet by Variety’s Jeff Sneider, Collins, who intended to play the main character Mia, has left the film “due to a scheduling issue.”

Sam Raimi’s original 1981 film set a group of friends in a cabin against a group of demons they accidentally unleashed. This new version takes the same basic concept, but changes up the characters, putting Mia in the lead alongside her brother David, his fiance Natalie and their friends Eric and Olivia. Tensions rise as Mia sees the demons, but her friends believe she is still on drugs.

The film is set to begin filming in March in New Zealand.

http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2012/01/25/lily-collins-exits-evil-dead/

[Lord]

I guess this means there will never be an Evil Dead 4, are they in least going to make more continuation comics?

[Punisher Rising]

This sounds like it'd be decent as it's own movie, but as something related to Evil Dead.

[Zanham]

With as iconic and as synonymous as Ash has become with The Evil Dead series, I don't think it can be bettered and if they can't top the three prior movies then why do it?:huh:

[Slushy]

If they called it something else or at least had an Ash cameo in the Id be all for it.

I can agree with this. It'd be cool if Bruce showed up at the end or something to give the remake some credibility.

[chaseter]

Oh god I had forgotten about this.

[corby]

First shot of a location they'll be using, the road to the cabin.

https://p.twimg.com/AkifnfnCIAArNwu.jpg:large

source: https://twitter.com/#!/fedalvar

[Mike_D202]

I wouldn't mind if this was like the new "21 Jump Street" (as in it's set years after the events of the original movies). That way it doesn't tree-rape the original.

[Punisher Rising]

I still think they need to drop The Evil Dead title and re-title it.

[Kar]

I don't care what anyone says. I think this is gonna be one of the best things ever and this is coming from a HUGE "Evil Dead" fan.

[Wesley Dodds]

Why is that?

[def28]

I still think they need to drop The Evil Dead title and re-title it.

Yup.

I don't care what anyone says. I think this is gonna be one of the best things ever and this is coming from a HUGE "Evil Dead" fan.

Who knows maybe it will, but what does this flick have going for it so far? Its missing the key ingredients for a good Evil Dead flick. Its not directed or written by Raimi and it doesnt have the lead who makes the series what it is. Those are not good signs.

[chaseter]

It's written by Diablo Cody and stars a female lead...Jennifer's Evil Dead Body.

[def28]

It's written by Diablo Cody and stars a female lead...Jennifer's Evil Dead Body.

Well they can always recreate the bedroom scene between Seyfried and Fox :awesome:

[Punisher Rising]

I don't care what anyone says. I think this is gonna be one of the best things ever and this is coming from a HUGE "Evil Dead" fan.


As I've said before, I think the plot sounds good enough for a completely unrelated movie, but it doesn't work as Evil Dead. An Evil Dead movie without Ash is like having an Indiana Jones movies without Indiana Jones, it just doesn't feel right.

[chelo248]

Jane Levy Is New Star Of ‘Evil Dead’ Remake (http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/jane-levy-is-new-star-of-evil-dead-remake/)

EXCLUSIVE: Jane Levy is in talks to play the lead in the remake of Evil Dead that Fede Alvarez will direct shortly. She replaces Lily Collins, who exited the film recently. Levy is the star of the ABC series Suburgatory, and stars in Fun Size, the Josh Schwartz-directed film for Paramount. In FilmDistrict’s remake of Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead, Levy’s plays Mia, a character that corresponds to Ash, who was played by Bruce Campbell in the original 1981 movie. Mia is one of five young people who head to the remote cabin where evil awaits. Recovering from a recent overdose, Mia is particularly vulnerable. Raimi, Campbell and Rob Tapert are producing with Ghost House Pictures. Fede Alvarez is directing and co-wrote the script with Rodo Sayagues. Diablo Cody (Juno, Young Adult) revised the latest draft. The movie is targeted to open April 12, 2013. Levy is repped by Gersh, Suskin Management and Robert Offer.
http://www.deadline.com/2012/02/jane-levy-is-new-star-of-evil-dead-remake/

[Roy Batty]

Jane Levy Lands Lead Role in Evil Dead Remake

Source:
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=86605#ixzz1lLtgSXa8

[obin_gam]

Great casting!

[Secret Fawful]

I'm okay with this if she turns out to be like the Jill to Ash's Leon.

[JustABill]

I think you are a confusing Resident Evil pairs there. Also it's already pretty much proven she herself is the Ash character for this one.

[Kar]

As I've said before, I think the plot sounds good enough for a completely unrelated movie, but it doesn't work as Evil Dead. An Evil Dead movie without Ash is like having an Indiana Jones movies without Indiana Jones, it just doesn't feel right.

Understandable, but as far as I'm concerned Ash didn't really become the star of the series until the second film. He was just the survivor. His character wasn't anything special until "Evil Dead 2" when it ended up just being him and a supporting cast. I'm always down for a new interpretation and as far as Raimi and Campbell's involved I don't see it going wrong. Just as long as the core plot stays the same (teens in a haunted cabin) and deliver the scares I'm content.

[Punisher Rising]

Ash was still the main character of the original movie, though. He evolved in Evil Dead II much like how Ripley did in Aliens from the original Alien movie, making the transition from a survivor to a warrior.

[Spider-ManHero12]

Good casting!

[Lord Blackbolt]

If this movie doesn't end with Campbell Ash showing up in the last 10 seconds of the movie and saving everyone...I'm probably not going to see this.

[Mike_D202]

Harry reviewed the script over at aintitcool.com.

He confirms the tree rape scene is in the remake in the talkback

[Punisher Rising]

Sounds like the movie is definitely aiming for a hard R rating, at least.

[def28]

Ash was still the main character of the original movie, though. He evolved in Evil Dead II much like how Ripley did in Aliens from the original Alien movie, making the transition from a survivor to a warrior.

Agreed. Well said. I see the argument being made from a few people and horror websites that Ash wasnt in the first one that much and he isnt the Ash we know until Evil Dead 2. Saying it like he was never even apart of Evil Dead 1 at all. However people wanna argue that, it doesnt take away from him being the main reason why people continue to watch these films everynight and the fact he is the lead in all three films. Im stoked they didnt recast Ash but an Evil Dead film without him will feel wrong.

[Punisher Rising]

Exactly. This movie to me feels like a disaster in the making, trying to pass itself off as Evil Dead without Ash :/

[Evil Twin]

I'm certainly going to miss seeing Bruce Campbell as Ash, but I also think that Ash's story ended with Army of Darkness. "Hail to the king, baby" is a great note to go out on and I don't know why you'd need to regress Ash's character arc, jump through hoops to get him to a cabin in the woods again, or want to basically repeat what we've seen already.

Especially in a horror franchise it's problematic to bring back the main character again and again. How worried are we supposed to feel about Ash?

The Alien franchise is an example for me of why moving on is a good idea. Aliens pretty much completes Ripley's story leaving them nowhere to really go. Even moreso, Cameron removed a lot of the mystery. I'm excited about Prometheus for the very reason that they seem to be aiming for new ground rather than bringing Sigourney Weaver back again.

Which is not to say that the new Evil Dead will be good. But, the title of the film is The Evil Dead not Ash. I'm willing to give them some leeway to see if something new can be brought to a series that ended a long time ago.

[chelo248]

i think i read in July or August (2011) in an interview with Federico Alvarez about a cameo of Bruce Campbell around the end of the movie... i don't know if is Ash or another character.

[jonathancrane]

Truth be told, I am looking forward to the film. Diablo Cody is a good screenwriter, and I appreciate how she, as well as the rest of the creative team, have tried to make it more of a horror film than a black comedy, as were the past two films. I think if they change the title of the film, it will mute some of the criticism. The franchise ethics of the fans against the film are very conservative, and that's why Evil Dead, along with a significant number of other horror franchises have grown stagnant. Reinvention is one of the vital components for a franchise to survive.
Now, I am not advocating going for a Halloween 6 route by any means, but I do welcome a new take on the franchise from a solid creative team. Will the film be as revolutionary as the first one? No, but as long as it strives to be good, I think it will fare decently with the general audiences, instead of a bunch of rabid forty year olds still living in their parents' basements.
Then again, there is the chance that I could be wrong, and that the film could turn out to be a waste of ninety minutes. The translation of Cody's material to the screen has been hit or miss: Jennifer's Body, for instance, was a terrific screenplay, but made into an awful film.

[Lord]

The problem is that for years Fans believed Sam Raimi was going to make an Evil Dead 4, he even anounced it some times, but this will completelly close that door

[Punisher Rising]

I'm certainly going to miss seeing Bruce Campbell as Ash, but I also think that Ash's story ended with Army of Darkness. "Hail to the king, baby" is a great note to go out on and I don't know why you'd need to regress Ash's character arc, jump through hoops to get him to a cabin in the woods again, or want to basically repeat what we've seen already.


Well as I said before, the premise of this movie sounds fine for a stand-alone movie with no connections to Evil Dead at all. But to call it Evil Dead without it's star character is just awkward to me.

[def28]

Especially in a horror franchise it's problematic to bring back the main character again and again. How worried are we supposed to feel about Ash?


Not at all, Ash is good at one thing killing deadites. We were told Evil Dead 4 would happen. It didnt. I would have zero problem with Campbell coming back. The guy can still crack the one liners, and an old Ash running into a group of new kids who open the book, sounds entertaining to me.

To me its like Friday the 13th without Jason or NOES without Freddy. Except hes a hero, What sells from that franchise is Ash, what do you have without ash? Not Evil Dead imo.

Truth be told, I am looking forward to the film. Diablo Cody is a good screenwriter, and I appreciate how she, as well as the rest of the creative team, have tried to make it more of a horror film than a black comedy, as were the past two films. I think if they change the title of the film, it will mute some of the criticism. The franchise ethics of the fans against the film are very conservative, and that's why Evil Dead, along with a significant number of other horror franchises have grown stagnant. Reinvention is one of the vital components for a franchise to survive.


I think so too.

Remakes or reboots havnt been going to well for most horror flicks lately. I actually dug Fright Night but living out Peter Vincent would have been bs. Im actually starting to think they maybe should have recasted Ash if they never have any intention of Campbell being back. I would ***** even more for a bit but if this is supposed to be a new franchise I dont wanna see a a number of new Evil Dead sequels without Ash and the humor.

[Evil Twin]

Well as I said before, the premise of this movie sounds fine for a stand-alone movie with no connections to Evil Dead at all. But to call it Evil Dead without it's star character is just awkward to me.

It doesn't to me, because it has the exact same premise as Evil Dead 1 and 2.

I understand wanting to see more Ash, but I think everybody involved, including Bruce Campbell, have moved on.

[Evil Twin]

Not at all, Ash is good at one thing killing deadites. We were told Evil Dead 4 would happen. It didnt. I would have zero problem with Campbell coming back. The guy can still crack the one liners, and an old Ash running into a group of new kids who open the book, sounds entertaining to me.

To me its like Friday the 13th without Jason or NOES without Freddy. Except hes a hero, What sells from that franchise is Ash, what do you have without ash? Not Evil Dead imo.



Cabins in the wood, evil spirits/deadites, and the Necronomicon still remain. The whole premise is intact as originally conceived. Even Army of Darkness didn't get completely away from that.

I think they've got as much mileage out of Ash vs. Deadites as possible, once they returned him to present. I really think you needed Ash vs. Something Else or to throw a new cast of characters vs. the Deadites.

[def28]

Cabins in the wood, evil spirits/deadites, and the Necronomicon still remain. The whole premise is intact as originally conceived. Even Army of Darkness didn't get completely away from that.

I think they've got as much mileage out of Ash vs. Deadites as possible, once they returned him to present. I really think you needed Ash vs. Something Else or to throw a new cast of characters vs. the Deadites.

I disagree. But we will never know cause ED4 will never happen. Rather see an Evil Dead 4 then this remake for sure. Alot of horror movies nowadays have a Cabins in the wood back drop with something killing teenagers. Its not as original as it was. What other flicks dont have is a strong lead, Ash is too iconic to this series. Deadites arent what sell or why people keep watching.

[chelo248]

Last year interview with Fede Alvarez:

"With Rodolfo we suffer as anyone when they make a bad remake" said the director with respect to the criteria handled with Sayagués."We realize the mistakes that we should not make. As fans of the original we know when we are going to offend those who are also fans and when we will not annoy them, but we can not make a movie just for them "."Especially among fans nobody wants to see a celebrity in a remake like this," he explains."I rented the movie with a friend in the video store when i was thirteen years and was a serious mistake because we had a very bad time. What I said to Raimi is i want to make the movie I saw in that moment and gave me the more scared in my life. "

[Evil Twin]

I disagree. But we will never know cause ED4 will never happen. Rather see an Evil Dead 4 then this remake for sure. Alot of horror movies nowadays have a Cabins in the wood back drop with something killing teenagers. Its not as original as it was. What other flicks dont have is a strong lead, Ash is too iconic to this series. Deadites arent what sell or why people keep watching.

I agree that Ash is a big deal. But, I made peace that ED4 was never going to happen a long time ago. As well as Ash vs. Freddy & Jason. It's been 19 years since Army of Darkness, I think we can accept that the "franchise", which really never reached more than a cult phenomenom, is dead. There's been a whole generation that's never seen an Evil Dead movie in theaters.

Frankly, I think Raimi and Campbell have accepted that too. They've moved on, fans are still in the denial phase.

But you're never going to replace Bruce Campbell as Ash. That still leaves the basic premise. I have very little problem with a Raimi & Campbell approved Evil Dead movie that features Evil Deadites, a cabin in the woods, reportedly evil trees, and the Necronomicon calling itself Evil Dead. While I'd argue that Ash is iconic, I'd also argue that he isn't the only iconic thing about the Evil Dead movies. Just as Ripley isn't the only iconic thing about the Alien movies.

And, as far as horror franchises go, 19 years is a fairly respectful amount of time. A lot longer than the time between Batman & Robin and Batman Begins. A longer than the time between Halloween series. Or Friday the 13th. Or Nightmare on Elm Street.

[def28]

I hope its good, Im too much of an Evil Dead fan geek to have full faith in this flick. With Raimi not directing or writing and no campbell as lead or supporting role. Their gonna hae to prove it to me. This film has nothing going for it besides remaking another film from my childhood Id rather not see happen. Just having an idea thats been used before is not gonna sell me. Also imo Aliens are more iconic then deadites, and Prometheus is a prequel Directed by the originals creator. Of course that looks awesome.

[Punisher Rising]

It doesn't to me, because it has the exact same premise as Evil Dead 1 and 2.

I understand wanting to see more Ash, but I think everybody involved, including Bruce Campbell, have moved on.


But Ash is the face of Evil Dead. He's the main character, he's the star. It's just not right passing something off as Evil Dead without it's star character, it's akin to an Indiana Jones movie with a new lead in place of Indy, himself.

[Evil Twin]

But Ash is the face of Evil Dead. He's the main character, he's the star. It's just not right passing something off as Evil Dead without it's star character, it's akin to an Indiana Jones movie with a new lead in place of Indy, himself.

Last I checked the title of the series is The Evil Dead, not Ash vs. ....

I suppose it comes to what you think the essence of the series is. If you think it's a horror/comedy series starring Bruce Campbell, you'll get no argument from me except that I think we should just face facts and consider the franchise dead. Accept the first three films as the low budget gems they are.

OTOH, if you think that there's more that can be done in the Evil Dead universe, then I don't see the problem with reinventing it. I'd much rather try to capture the spirit, with some of the iconography, than try to force some 20-something into doing a Bruce Campbell impression. And, you can't convince me that people wouldn't be doing their best to claim that whatever the title was, it was an Evil Dead ripoff due to the cabin in the woods, Necronomicon, evil deadites, and evil trees that are promised. At least the connection is front and center in the title.

Honestly, I think people are getting needlessly possessive about the title. The Raimi/Campbell Evil Dead series has established its niche in film history. A rebooted Evil Dead series will either stand beside it or be quickly forgotten. No film, no matter the title, has erased the existence of another film. Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead didn't erase Romero's Dawn of the Dead and I don't see why this situation will confuse anyone either. The one's that would potentially be confused are the ones that are least likely to know of the original's existence to begin with.

And, frankly, Raimi owns the title, not the fans. If Raimi gives his blessing, we should give the filmmakers the benefit of the doubt and judge the finished product. If it stinks, it stinks. If it's good, then we have something other than a rehash of a film that doesn't need rehashing. I'd much rather have people try something different that they can put their own stamp on. Isn't the lack of originality what we always complain about with remakes anyways?

If nothing else, I see it as an opportunity to put the horror back into the series which by Army of Darkness had clearly taken a turn into comedy/action.

[Punisher Rising]

Alien is also the title of the Alien series, yet Ripley is it's lead character (at least in the stand-alone series).

As I've said before, I think the premise of this movie is actually interesting, I just think it's a mistake to label it Evil Dead. Making an ED-type movie with a similar premise set in the woods? I'm down for that. But titling it Evil Dead without it's star character? Doesn't sit well with me. I don't think anybody would be pleased if there was a movie with Terminator in it's title, only for it to have nothing to do with the actual Terminator storyline.

[Evil Twin]

Alien is also the title of the Alien series, yet Ripley is it's lead character (at least in the stand-alone series).

As I've said before, I think the premise of this movie is actually interesting, I just think it's a mistake to label it Evil Dead. Making an ED-type movie with a similar premise set in the woods? I'm down for that. But titling it Evil Dead without it's star character? Doesn't sit well with me. I don't think anybody would be pleased if there was a movie with Terminator in it's title, only for it to have nothing to do with the actual Terminator storyline.

I'd put forth that the post-Aliens stories not featuring Ripley in the comics were way more successful artistically than going back to the Ripley well.

But, again, everything reported was that this started life as an Evil Dead scenario and continued as it. There's no getting around the fact that everything we've heard says that it's not coincidentally similar to the first film, albeit not featuring Ash.

It's also worth noting, Evil Dead is a cult franchise not a huge multi-media franchise. There's a small cult that's really committed, and a bunch of people that will see it or not see depending if advertising/reviews are any good.

I agree that people want to see a Terminator in a Terminator film, although whether Schwarzenegger still needs to show up is an open question. That said, there's a chance that people would be ok with a Terminator film that didn't revolve around Sarah Connor and John Connor. Heck, it might even make the Terminators seem threatening again and have us worrying if the main characters are going to make it out of the film. There's something to be said for telling stories outside of the same old box.

In any event, I don't think you can remake Evil Dead precisely in the sense that Bruce Campbell is inseparable from Ash. So, any remake/reboot is guaranteed to be different. I'm willing to embrace the differences as I think that's the way the film is likely to succeed as something that can stand on its own, not as a pale imitation.

[Punisher Rising]

I don't know, to me it's like false advertising to name this Evil Dead when it doesn't have it's star character. How cheated would you feel to go see a movie that was titled Star Wars only for it not to have classic characters in it like Darth Vader, Luke, Han, etc. and the prequels don't count since they're prequels set before the original trilogy, it's just an example.

[def28]

OTOH, if you think that there's more that can be done in the Evil Dead universe, then I don't see the problem with reinventing it. I'd much rather try to capture the spirit, with some of the iconography, than try to force some 20-something into doing a Bruce Campbell impression. And, you can't convince me that people wouldn't be doing their best to claim that whatever the title was, it was an Evil Dead ripoff due to the cabin in the woods, Necronomicon, evil deadites, and evil trees that are promised. At least the connection is front and center in the title.

Alison Lohman in Drag me was pretty much a female version of Ash at the end of the film. If Raimi was making this or at least writing. I dont think I would have a problem wit a loose interpretation of Ash. Without Raimi probably not. There is no confidence or proof any of the cast or filmakers can handle this classic. Diablo Cody is the only thing it has, and alot of people arent happy with that.

Evil Dead 1 can wrk without an Ash character. Ill give you that. Hes still the lead in it and personally its not a movie I would like to see. Ash is Evil Dead as much as Kreuger is NOES an Jason Voorhees is Friday the 13th. Even there, Friday the 13th one has little to do with Jason, but then why would you see a remake with him? Because a guy with a hockey mask and a machete is what sells it. Just like a guy with a chainsaw for a hand is what sells Evil Dead.

There is no way ED2 and AOD would work without Ash. Zero. Those movies revolve around him.

[Evil Twin]

I've no argument for those who think it's unlikely to be good. I think there are perfectly legitimate grounds for skepticism.

That said, Raimi, Tapert, and Campbell are all reportedly on board as producers. Raimi seems to have had some input on the script. And there are a host of similarities with the first Evil Dead film from what we know. I don't know why we need to be more possessive about the series than the people that actually own the series and seem to be fine with passing the torch. If Raimi thinks he's giving a chance to some up and comers similar to the chance he got as a young director, then bless him.

And, who knows, Campbell is involved and we may even get an Ash cameo.

Yeah, I wish there were more films directed by Raimi with Bruce Campbell as Ash. But, it's been 19 years already and at this point I think it's obvious that both Raimi and Campbell have moved on to bigger, although not necessarily better, things.

And, bottom line, if the movie is good, complaints about the title are meaningless. If the movie is bad, it will be quickly forgotten and a footnote.

Heck, if the ED reboot becomes the Halloween III of the series it will have some defenders. The Thing, NOES, F13, and Halloween reboots didn't go anywhere and people specifically cite the feeling of been there, done that with several of them. Perhaps trying something different will do the trick. It's certainly more ambitious than a lazy rehash.

Who knows. There was a lot of skepticism about a Star Trek series without Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, and yet ST:TNG has plenty of fans. Admittedly that's the upside, but I think we shouldn't forget that an upside exists.

[def28]

That said, Raimi, Tapert, and Campbell are all reportedly on board as producers. Raimi seems to have had some input on the script. And there are a host of similarities with the first Evil Dead film from what we know. I don't know why we need to be more possessive about the series than the people that actually own the series and seem to be fine with passing the torch. If Raimi thinks he's giving a chance to some up and comers similar to the chance he got as a young director, then bless him.

Im worried this is just an easy paycheck for Raimi and producers. I would have liked to see more involvement from them. Hope Im wrong.

And, who knows, Campbell is involved and we may even get an Ash cameo.

Im really hoping for this.

[Punisher Rising]

Evil Dead 1 can wrk without an Ash character. Ill give you that. Hes still the lead in it and personally its not a movie I would like to see. Ash is Evil Dead as much as Kreuger is NOES an Jason Voorhees is Friday the 13th. Even there, Friday the 13th one has little to do with Jason, but then why would you see a remake with him? Because a guy with a hockey mask and a machete is what sells it. Just like a guy with a chainsaw for a hand is what sells Evil Dead.

There is no way ED2 and AOD would work without Ash. Zero. Those movies revolve around him.


Precisely. It's a mistake to title this Evil Dead and not have Ash in it.

[Evil Twin]

Im worried this is just an easy paycheck for Raimi and producers. I would have liked to see more involvement from them. Hope Im wrong.



How big of a paycheck could there really be from this anyways? At least without it being a big hit, which would imply that they did something right.

Considering how much money Raimi has made from his television and film work, I have a hard time believing that the film can offer more than relative peanuts to him.

[def28]

How big of a paycheck could there really be from this anyways? At least without it being a big hit, which would imply that they did something right.

Considering how much money Raimi has made from his television and film work, I have a hard time believing that the film can offer more than relative peanuts to him.

Just cause its a hit with making money doesnt mean it will be good or it was done right. Alot of these remakes make money simply cause of their name and previous fan base, I have a hard time believing this movie needs to be made at all.

[Evil Twin]

Just cause its a hit with making money doesnt mean it will be good or it was done right. Alot of these remakes make money simply cause of their name and previous fan base, I have a hard time believing this movie needs to be made at all.

Sure, I understand that bad movies make money all the time. As do bad remakes. But, in this case I ask, why would Sam Raimi have input in the script and attach himself as a producer if he didn't believe in the film in some way? Given the modest budget and his previous financial successes, "he's doing it for the money" seems presumptuous because there simply isn't much money for a director of his stature up front.

Which doesn't mean he's not off base. He very well could be. But, I don't think this is a case of Spielberg putting his name on the Transformers films. There are probably dozens of studio projects or tv projects that can offer Raimi a bigger paycheck if he's just looking for a paycheck.

[def28]

Sure, I understand that bad movies make money all the time. As do bad remakes. But, in this case I ask, why would Sam Raimi have input in the script and attach himself as a producer if he didn't believe in the film in some way? Given the modest budget and his previous financial successes, "he's doing it for the money" seems presumptuous because there simply isn't much money for a director of his stature up front.

Which doesn't mean he's not off base. He very well could be. But, I don't think this is a case of Spielberg putting his name on the Transformers films. There are probably dozens of studio projects or tv projects that can offer Raimi a bigger paycheck if he's just looking for a paycheck.

Raimi throws his name as producer on a bunch of horror flicks some which are pretty ******. I really dont know the extent of how much money would be earned for this film cause its not out yet, but producers do make quite a bit of cash. Theres no proof of anything right now, and no way of knowing till its out. Horror remakes dont have a good track record and just cause someones on as producer doesnt mean much to me. I see that happen alot with films. Its not a Raimi movie and Campbells not in it. Thats enough for me to go "lame, why should I go see this?" until proven otherwise. Plus there is nothing going for this film right now except for Diablo Cody. Could also be the studio just wants it. Evil Dead has a solid fan base. Studios have been trying to cash in on remakes of 80s horror flicks for the past 5 years pretty heavily, even though they all pretty much suck.

Bottom line wont know till its out.

[chelo248]

'Melrose Place' Actress Joining 'Evil Dead' Remake:
Jessica Lucas is in talks to star in the Fede Alvarez-directed film. (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/evil-dead-remake-jessica-lucas-melrose-place-297440)

[Jake Cassidy]

^ She's gorgeous.

[kickass]

Loved Jessica Lucas. A natural talent. She was great in Cloverfield.

[Kar]

The hell? http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/05/sam-raimi-files-lawsuit-to-prevent-release-of-evil-dead-4

[corby]

Wow, I don't think the writer for Complex did anything more than skim the article at The Hollywood Reporter:facepalm:

The THR article clearly states that there are two Evil Dead movies trying to get made. Sam Raimi's production company is producing the remake and Award Pictures is trying to make a sequel titled "Evil Dead 4: Consequences". Raimi is trying to stop them but Award claims he abandoned the trademark long ago and they are free to make their own sequel.

[Thundarr]

I'm personally against remakes in general, as most of them turn out to be utter crap. However, as Bruce Campbell is getting way too old to play Ash anymore, I can understand the need to do a remake. If it were up to me, I would recast Ash with a younger actor. My personal choice would be Nick Brendon (Xander from Buffy The Vampire Slayer).
However, I do see the POV of making an Evil Dead movie without a new Ash. In the first Evil Dead movie Ash was just the last to die. He didn't become the wisecracking monster fighter we all know and love until the second movie. So if they're remaking the first movie, the Ash character is very expendable.

As for whether or not this remake will be any good, I have my doubts. We might get lucky and get The Thing, but more than likely we'll get stuck with Rob Zombie's Halloween.

[Figs]

I'm personally against remakes in general, as most of them turn out to be utter crap. However, as Bruce Campbell is getting way too old to play Ash anymore, I can understand the need to do a remake. If it were up to me, I would recast Ash with a younger actor. My personal choice would be Nick Brendon (Xander from Buffy The Vampire Slayer).
However, I do see the POV of making an Evil Dead movie without a new Ash. In the first Evil Dead movie Ash was just the last to die. He didn't become the wisecracking monster fighter we all know and love until the second movie. So if they're remaking the first movie, the Ash character is very expendable.

As for whether or not this remake will be any good, I have my doubts. We might get lucky and get The Thing, but more than likely we'll get stuck with Rob Zombie's Halloween.

:up:

[Thundarr]

:up:


Glad you liked it. Nick Brendon is great in those comedy/action roles. He's well liked by fans of the horror/comedy genre. The character of Xander was very much like the character of Ash, especially in Seasons 5 - 7 of Buffy. And he kinda looks like a young Bruce Campbell. In my mind, the perfect choice.

[Mike_D202]

Yeah but his age is getting up there too, Bruce started the movies in his 20s.

[Thundarr]

Yeah but his age is getting up there too, Bruce started the movies in his 20s.

Nick's in his early 30's. And like they say, 30 is the new 20 (lol).

[Lord]

Wow, I don't think the writer for Complex did anything more than skim the article at The Hollywood Reporter:facepalm:

The THR article clearly states that there are two Evil Dead movies trying to get made. Sam Raimi's production company is producing the remake and Award Pictures is trying to make a sequel titled "Evil Dead 4: Consequences". Raimi is trying to stop them but Award claims he abandoned the trademark long ago and they are free to make their own sequel.
:pal:
I would like to see how that turn out, just to show how f****d up a franchise can become

[ThePowerCosmic]

http://cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads//2012/07/IMG_1912-e1341975771350-500x375.jpg?848685
http://cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads//2012/07/IMG_1911-e1341977660285-500x375.jpg?848685

[Rodrigo90]

No Bruce Campbell. No deal.

[Sawyer]

Hasn't it been said that he's going to be involved in this, in some capacity?

[Mike_D202]

I'm just looking at this as a continuation with different people.

[Gianakin_]

So is this being shot or..?

[Mike_D202]

So is this being shot or..?

Yea I believe they are currently filming and started last month sometime.

[Gianakin_]

So I'm the only one who missed the director and cast announcement, no?

The only thing I know is that Ash is a girl in this one? Is it a remake, reboot, sequel? Is Raimi involved at all?

[Mike_D202]

So I'm the only one who missed the director and cast announcement, no?

The only thing I know is that Ash is a girl in this one? Is it a remake, reboot, sequel? Is Raimi involved at all?

Raimi and Campbell are producing, its more of a reboot since none of the original characters return. Just a bunch of new kids find the book of the dead and get into trouble. Oh and the molesting trees are back.

[Gianakin_]

I see. Thanks!

[Nathan]

So I'm the only one who missed the director and cast announcement, no?

The only thing I know is that Ash is a girl in this one? Is it a remake, reboot, sequel? Is Raimi involved at all?

What? Ash is a girl?

http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/8756/lollipopchainsawashpreo.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/821/lollipopchainsawashpreo.jpg/)

[Gianakin_]

That's the last thing I had heard about this production. Don't know if it's true, of course.

[ThePowerCosmic]

The only thing I know is that Ash is a girl in this one?

WEtRoZ5FWNc

[Lord]

Kinda miss Sam Raimi as director and Campbell as Ash, would have liked to see more with them, even if it was a Freddy vs Jason vs Ash movie

[chelo248]

http://imageshack.us/a/img6/4073/ednycczps23de0999.png

[Wesley Dodds]

Is it my imagination or have they been making this movie for years?!

[GREEN =w= DAY]

what the hell, that looks like the girl from Exorcist

[chelo248]

The Evil Dead remake looks graphic, gruesome and absolutely wonderful

http://io9.com/5951535/the-evil-dead-remake-looks-graphic-gruesome-and-absolutely-wonderful

[Figs]

Apparently there is leaked footage out there. I heard from a few friends it actually looks pretty good. I'm a huge fan of the original so I'm not exactly excited at this point.

[Project862006]

holy crap just seen bootleg trailer in very watchable quality holy crap this looks amazing and extremely gory

considered me excited

[Figs]

holy crap just seen bootleg trailer in very watchable quality holy crap this looks amazing and extremely gory

considered me excited

It does look pretty cool but I'm hoping if I see it in the theaters I won't be too disappointed.

[Orb]

Can't wait for this movie!

[TheDreamMaster]

Damn, anyone PM me where to find the footage?

I'm skeptical of this still, but from the sounds of it it may end up being pretty good.

[def28]

Is this bootleg trailer from NYCC? I know theres been a few fan made ones.

Edit:NVM

[kickass]

Just watched the teaser. It does play more on the serious side and looks gritty and violent. But I can't help but think it looks too good for it's own good. That's a major problem with modern-day horror; style style style. Very little substance. This teaser looks, imo, just like any other cabin the woods flick nowadays.

[def28]

Its the recreating classic scenes that are hard for me to watch, ya got to do those better or else whats the point? A Chainsaw without Ash is just gonna feel like a let down. Although I suspect the tree scene will be more ****ed up then the original.

If the success of this film means a better chance of Ash returning Ill shell out a ****load of cash to support this film.

[Figs]

Its the recreating classic scenes that are hard for me to watch, ya got to do those better or else whats the point? A Chainsaw without Ash is just gonna feel like a let down. Although I suspect the tree scene will be more ****ed up then the original.

If the success of this film means a better chance of Ash returning Ill shell out a ****load of cash to support this film.

Isn't Ash in this the girl? That's what I read awhile back but not sure if she's just going to be an all new character as the lead.

I do like how they're combining some stuff from Evil Dead 2 like the possessed hand.

[kickass]

I take back what I said because what I saw wasn't even the real thing. I apologize for my previous comment.

But THIS........this. Wow, I am impressed. I know it's low quality but it looks beautifully terrifying. Holy ****. So many great old-school shots that look like they were filmed a long time ago. I am impressed. This film looks heavy. I hope they don't cut it down to appease the masses lol.

[def28]

Isn't Ash in this the girl? That's what I read awhile back but not sure if she's just going to be an all new character as the lead.

Yeah I think her names Mia. The aintitcool script review said shes a loose comparison to Ash. Guess shes a drug addict and her friends bring her there to get sober but she does wield a chainsaw at some point so yeah could be. Probably the same in the sense that they are booth the leads. In a few interviews Campbell really seemed like they want none of the actors to be compared to Ash so they dont have that burden of responsibility.
I do like how they're combining some stuff from Evil Dead 2 like the possessed hand

Yeah, Im surprised they are actually going into ED2 territory. Hope they get that right, that scenes brilliant.

[redhawk23]

Its the recreating classic scenes that are hard for me to watch, ya got to do those better or else whats the point? A Chainsaw without Ash is just gonna feel like a let down. Although I suspect the tree scene will be more ****ed up then the original.

If the success of this film means a better chance of Ash returning Ill shell out a ****load of cash to support this film.


People forget that Ash wasn't so prominently featured in the first one. Yeah he was ultimately the last one standing but its not like the whole premise rested in on his shoulders.

[redhawk23]

If you take the first letter of each of the characters names its spells out DEMON

[def28]

People forget that Ash wasn't so prominently featured in the first one. Yeah he was ultimately the last one standing but its not like the whole premise rested in on his shoulders.

They are mixing scenes with ED2 as well. Yeah ED1 doesnt ride on his character as much but the franchise has lasted so long because of him.

Recreating any classic scene with Ash and a chainsaw will be compared.

[Thundarr]

This is a little off topic. But have any of you seen this?

rmGU0sFIB4Y&list=PL2D99C16A0DB214B0&feature=mh_lolz

[redhawk23]

They are mixing scenes with ED2 as well. Yeah ED1 doesnt ride on his character as much but the franchise has lasted so long because of him.

Recreating any classic scene with Ash and a chainsaw will be compared.

Yeah there will be a comparison between the films, its about people facing demons in a cabin. From what I've seen though, this looks legitimately bonkers on its own.

[Lone]

There's one guy in the trailer wearing a blue shirt that seemed pretty Ash-y to me.

There's a scene where it looks like he's chainsawing the **** out of somebody that reminds me of Ash.

[obin_gam]

the trailer was ****ing fantastic!" intensive real horror galore!

[the_ultimate_evil]

seen he trailer it looks better than expected but still not buying it. i know the original was gory but this just screams quick how can we just make everything extreme.

its still to early to tell but i'm still leaning on the side of meh

[Solidus]

And that is what the original did for its time was pushing it to the extreme. I love the Evil Dead trilogy and I'm excited for this. Looks like the tree rape is back looks disturbing and intense like the original.

[def28]

Its all gore money shots and man it really feels like that has been absent in horror for along time. Wish it was released this month, getting tired of Paranormal Activity every year.

Hopefully they arent shoving all the awesome gory scenes into the trailer. Then again guess they have to win over the fanbase somehow.
Yeah there will be a comparison between the films, its about people facing demons in a cabin. From what I've seen though, this looks legitimately bonkers on its own.
I dont know, Im still up in the air with it. I like lots of gore so thats a win for me haha. Still has a been there done that feel. Besides the gore and loud trailer music theres nothing going for it yet except that I can point out scenes in the others. Really hope it does kicks ass on its own, and isnt just trying to impersonate Raimi's directing moves and scenes the whole time.

[chaseter]

Just because it's gory, that doesn't mean it will be good. People went ape **** over Saw stuff. I forgot this movie was even happening. Still zero percent excited for Cody's involvement.

[the_ultimate_evil]

And that is what the original did for its time was pushing it to the extreme. I love the Evil Dead trilogy and I'm excited for this. Looks like the tree rape is back looks disturbing and intense like the original.

truthfully as gory as the original was it never really shocked me, and i saw it when i was around 6 just at the hight of the whole video nasties, i guess the hype was overblown

i can see where you guys are coming from and it looks like it been an extremely well put together production, but a lot of the shots just seems to be a case of what will make people sickthe razor+tongue quick shove it into a scene.

[def28]

They really need to push the gore creatively and just make it ****ed up and scary. It needs the gore, if it wasnt there people would be talking even more crap. Its the only thing people are stoked about for now.

ED1 never scared/shocked me growing up either. Its one of my fav horror flicks but it wasnt until I saw ED2 and AOD that I became obsessed with it cause of the mix of humor and gore. Theres some weird **** in those films you cant see anywhere else. Im kinda disappointed everything has to be ultra serious and no camp nowadays, and really cant believe its gonna be absent in this franchise as well now. Thats what made it the cult series it is. Everyone seems to talk **** on campy humor in horror and just want their flicks to be realistic/gritty. Even though that kinda takes away from what alot of these older films brought. Cabin In The Woods owned for that reason.Hope this all works out and turns out to be a legit scary film, thats not just another franchise trying to reboot for some cash.

[Rodrigo90]

Has anybody ever noticed something?

Whenever a mass murderer's home is raided, the first Evil Dead is ALWAYS mentioned by the media as part of the killer's DVD collection lol

The original Evil Dead is a great movie for what it was and what it managed to create.

But I'm not sure I'd see this remake for 3 reasons.

No Bruce Campbell
No comedy
And I'm SICK of female protagonists in every horror movie. It's become a cliche now.

But just to see how it holds up against the original, I will.

[jonathancrane]

The trailer added to my excitement of the film. If I had to explain why I am excited, it is:

1. It is an Evil Dead film.
2. Diablo Cody wrote it
2a) Diablo Cody wrote an Evil Dead film.
which is awesome on many levels. It is akin to Mark Gatiss writing a Halloween film.
3. They have purged or have minimalized the slapstick (I consider the original Evil Dead to be separate from ED2 and AOD, even though they have the same characters and similar plot.) ED was a horror film, inspired by the ones in the drive-in at the time, while ED2 was channeling the Three Stooges through a horror film.
4. Return of classic American horror: the slasher icons and classic monsters have been in suspended animation, and lately it has been possession and/or found footage films.
5. Ambiguity. I love the idea of how in the first act the supernatural activity is treated with ambiguity - such as how the claims of seeing said phenomena from the recovering addict are dismissed.

[Rodrigo90]

I hope a sequel gets treated like the Evil Dead Regeneration game. Where Ash was institutionalized for murdering his friends by the police. That was realistic...and it's from a game lol

[Solidus]

For those excited and...detracted by the fact that Diablo Cody had writing credits, many need to remember she did not write the whole thing. She really just re-wrote most of the dialouge. Which is fine, she has a quick tounge, with the dark humor Evil Dead needs. Many forget that Sam is still involved with this film. So there is that.

And Rodrigo I had no idea you've seen the film....no comedy? You have no idea on that, and with Sam and Bruce being producers on this, I'm sure there will be. They know what's at stake with this film.

And Bruce himself said they don't need to re-tread, and create another Ash, there should only be one, lets go onto new characters.

[chaseter]

The trailer added to my excitement of the film. If I had to explain why I am excited, it is:

1. It is an Evil Dead film.
2. Diablo Cody wrote it
2a) Diablo Cody wrote an Evil Dead film.
which is awesome on many levels. It is akin to Mark Gatiss writing a Halloween film.
3. They have purged or have minimalized the slapstick (I consider the original Evil Dead to be separate from ED2 and AOD, even though they have the same characters and similar plot.) ED was a horror film, inspired by the ones in the drive-in at the time, while ED2 was channeling the Three Stooges through a horror film.
4. Return of classic American horror: the slasher icons and classic monsters have been in suspended animation, and lately it has been possession and/or found footage films.
5. Ambiguity. I love the idea of how in the first act the supernatural activity is treated with ambiguity - such as how the claims of seeing said phenomena from the recovering addict are dismissed.
Diablo Cody wrote a horror movie not too long ago...it sucked.

[Rodrigo90]

True, I've jumped the gun.

But the original had hardly any comedy. It was more serious. So will this be just the same and then some?

And an Evil Dead without Ash? I'll just have to wait and see what happens.

[Mike_D202]

There's one guy in the trailer wearing a blue shirt that seemed pretty Ash-y to me.

There's a scene where it looks like he's chainsawing the **** out of somebody that reminds me of Ash.

Yeah, I'm thinking he's the "real" ash-character and the chick is a red herring. Just like the original, the Ash character wasn't the main central point. I think this is Mia's brother who takes her out to the cabin to detox.

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/evildead1_zps5c0b294c.jpg

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/evildead2_zpsecf3fece.jpg

[Rodrigo90]

Good observation there, Mike.

In the original, you would have thought either Cheryl (Ash's sister) or Scotty was the main character for most of the duration as the focus was on them individually. That was good writing imo.

[redhawk23]

Has anybody ever noticed something?

Whenever a mass murderer's home is raided, the first Evil Dead is ALWAYS mentioned by the media as part of the killer's DVD collection lol

The original Evil Dead is a great movie for what it was and what it managed to create.

But I'm not sure I'd see this remake for 3 reasons.

No Bruce Campbell
No comedy
And I'm SICK of female protagonists in every horror movie. It's become a cliche now.

But just to see how it holds up against the original, I will.


In a complete reversal of every other genre...

Also the mods don't look kindly upon bootleg material so heads up.

[Rodrigo90]

We need some animal as the main protagonist now ;)

[redhawk23]

In an interview with io9 Alvarez, the director is claiming that there is no cgi in the film. That at least bodes well I think. CGI blood is the almost always terrible also as I thought that shot of the chick cutting off her hand is with an electric knife not a chain saw.

[def28]

In an interview with io9 Alvarez, the director is claiming that there is no cgi in the film. That at least bodes well I think.

Yeah thats awesome. Sick of seeing CGI blood. Especially in Gore fests. Wish more flicks would take note.

[Wesley Dodds]

I just watched the trailer and I dont think it looked anything special. Same old platinum Dunes-y remake crap.

As for the 'no CGI' claims, unless I'm greatly mistaken, the final shot begs to differ...

[moviedoors]

I was skeptical of this. I never thought it was gonna be awful, but after Cabin in the Woods, it seemed redundant.

Never mind. Sign me up for that ****.

[Rodrigo90]

I just dug out the old Hail To The King VG for the PS1. Groovy ;)

[craigdbfan]

Just saw the teaser trailer.

Looks entirely unnecessary and lost every bit of charm from the original. They just turned it into a run of the mill torture porn flick.

[Rodrigo90]

Because they think that's what made the original so compelling. Just the violence.

If there is comedy in this thing, I don't see how I can possibly laugh at it, when I'll be cringing for the most part.

As much as I like and respect the original, I honestly can't enjoy it 100% because of the excessive disturbing violence. I ain't that sick in the head lol

But from what I've seen and heard with this? Will I enjoy it at all?

[CapedCrusader14]

I wasn't always the biggest fan of the first Evil Dead. I preferred the sequels much more.

[craigdbfan]

Yeah Army of Darkness is way better.

[Lone]

Yeah, I'm thinking he's the "real" ash-character and the chick is a red herring. Just like the original, the Ash character wasn't the main central point. I think this is Mia's brother who takes her out to the cabin to detox.

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/evildead1_zps5c0b294c.jpg

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n28/MikeD202/evildead2_zpsecf3fece.jpg

Yeah, Mike. That's what I thought as well. Ash didn't really become the main character until ED2 and AOD if my childhood memory serves me correctly.

[def28]

The comparison is def there. No denying that. I think that characters a gonner though. I think they will actually reverse into thinking hes the lead. They have really pushed that they are not trying to recreate Ash in any way and seemed pretty dead serious about it. From all the script reviews it def seems Mia is the lead to the reviewers. The aintitcool review also said it wasnt exactly a full reboot and could possibly just be looked at as a new group who lands on the book. Always the possibility that things have changed.

[Rodrigo90]

So is Mia going to attach the electric knife to her arm, instead of the chainsaw like Ash? lol

And I think the best was EDII. It had the perfect blend of horror and humor.

[def28]

So is Mia going to attach the electric knife to her arm, instead of the chainsaw like Ash? lol

And I think the best was EDII. It had the perfect blend of horror and humor.

Agreed on ED2. I think Mia is having a hallucination. Since shes trying to get sober, they probably play around with whats in her head and whats not. Everyones gonna think shes crazy or tripping cause of withdrawls then **** will hit the fan. Actually it could give the audience a good reason for her friends not believing her when weird things start happening. Things probably start off only happening to her.

[Rodrigo90]

That's pretty cool storytelling.

Like how they all ignore Cheryl in the original and think she was attacked by an animal instead of the trees. Which is understandable.

But they believe when they see the bridge lol

But they'll probably play a little longer with that in this one.

[def28]

Yeah, I think the same will happen here judging from that screen shot above. Her brother probably tries to get her out cause they think shes tripping too much and then sees they are trapped.

[Rodrigo90]

I wonder if we the audience suspect that she's been imagining the whole event?

And I wish Hennrieta was in this movie, played by Ted Raimi :D

[def28]

I wonder if we the audience suspect that she's been imagining the whole event?

And I wish Hennrieta was in this movie, played by Ted Raimi :D

I was just watching a Hennrieta clip haha. Hilarious.

I think about half way through we will know its real or shell be possessed as a result. I dont think they will do a cop out like is it all in her head thing, thats probably more a tool to deceive her friends into whats really going on. Who knows though. Actually was thinking Mia could be the one in the cellar I suppose if it gets to her first. I suspect everyone will get possessed at some point.

[Evil Twin]

I like that the footage reminded people that there was more to Evil Dead's iconography than Ash. And that it can be given a modern spin.

And, with Diablo Cody writing dialogue, I do think there will be some wit and humor.

Still, I think there's a difference between the craftmanship of updating some memorable images using modern technology and techniques and actually crafting a good movie. I'm open-minded enough to not dismiss it out of hand, and the latest footage helps, but a minutes of sizzle reel footage is all this is.

[redhawk23]

I like that the footage reminded people that there was more to Evil Dead's iconography than Ash. And that it can be given a modern spin.

And, with Diablo Cody writing dialogue, I do think there will be some wit and humor.

Still, I think there's a difference between the craftmanship of updating some memorable images using modern technology and techniques and actually crafting a good movie. I'm open-minded enough to not dismiss it out of hand, and the latest footage helps, but a minutes of sizzle reel footage is all this is.

Actually judging from some of the interviews I've seen with Alvarez, I'm not entirely sure all of the shots from the trailer are actually in the movie. Alvarez apparently really hated the shots where he felt compelled to ape the way things were shot in the original films. Some were cut, some were refilmed in other ways.

It seems that he's not really into the idea of remakes himself but as he says when you'r approached by Raimi to make a film for him, you don't say no.

[Rodrigo90]

I was just watching a Hennrieta clip haha. Hilarious.

I think about half way through we will know its real or shell be possessed as a result. I dont think they will do a cop out like is it all in her head thing, thats probably more a tool to deceive her friends into whats really going on. Who knows though. Actually was thinking Mia could be the one in the cellar I suppose if it gets to her first. I suspect everyone will get possessed at some point.

¨Swallow this¨ :awesome:

It could be her. Is it Mia who cuts off her hand?

All of it with her being the main character could be a red herring. It was with the original. No one would have imagined Ash being the real protagonist. As the focus was on Cheryl, then Scotty.

[def28]

All of it with her being the main character could be a red herring. It was with the original. No one would have imagined Ash being the real protagonist. As the focus was on Cheryl, then Scotty.

I think she will be the first possessed, so that way the audience expects her brother to be the hero. Then she will be get rid of it somehow by the end, could be she cuts off her hand but I dont think they will do that. Really think that will be part of her halucination when the Cabins messing with her, making her go crazy. But yeah I believe thats Mia doing that to herself. Too many reports with Mia being the lead, not just from crew but sites. Doesnt mean she wont get ****ed up or survive though.

[Rodrigo90]

Yeah. Because Cheryl was seeing and hearing strange things before being attacked by the trees, and everybody was concerned about her. So they'll play with that in this.

They could incorporate that element of Ash being possessed in ED2, and make us think that her being possessed will mark the end of her being the main character. That could be the red herring, to fool the audience.

But is it Mia that cuts her cheek and tongue, or the other female character?

[def28]

.
But is it Mia that cuts her cheek and tongue, or the other female character?

After looking at it again. Mia is the one splitting the tongue, in the cellar, and with the tree. Its another girl cutting her arm.


They could incorporate that element of Ash being possessed in ED2, and make us think that her being possessed will mark the end of her being the main character. That could be the red herring, to fool the audience.

Im pretty sure thats what will happen. Noone will think shell come back from that, and her brother will still be intact. He will be the obvious choice to survive for the audience not Mia since shes more then likely the first to be turned.

[Rodrigo90]

It's going to suck though if we come to know and love Mia's brother, our new Ash, and he ends up dying, and her being a deadite throughout is the one that survives.

Would that work? But of course, she might be possessed for a limited time, unlike Cheryl from the original.

[def28]

Yeah I think its a twist on Cheryl. She def goes deadite. Just speculating, but from the reports that shes the hero and there is no real Ash character makes me think she will be there in the end. Could be wrong though, cause that guy clearly does look like Ash.

[batman strikes]

Unless the script was changed significantly I highly doubt Mia's brother is the new Ash.

[Rodrigo90]

The two of them could survive?

[batman strikes]

The two of them could survive?

Maybe, I'm just going off on what I know about the film. I guess we will have to wait and see.

[def28]

Im doubting there will even be one Survivor. Two might make the film feel generous haha.

[TheDreamMaster]

Im doubting there will even be one Survivor. Two might make the film feel generous haha.
I'm bettign we'll get an ending like the original. I always assumed Ash died in the original, which is why we got the psuedo-remake opening of EDII where we see Ash become a deadite and then revert to his human form. I don't really even consider Evil Dead II a sequel, it basically ignores the first film in favor of said opening and then becoem sits own thing. Ash certainly is a different character than he is in the original film.

In oither words, I would bet one person lives, only to be attacked by the camera/ghost/fog at the end of the film.

[Doctor Jones]

So I heard this is pretty humorless?

Sounds like why I like these films in the first place.

[Solidus]

So I heard this is pretty humorless?

Sounds like why I like these films in the first place.

Don't know where you heard that. But the original one was as well. Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness is where the humor was put in.

With Diablo Cody helping write the script, I have a feeling though there will be the dark humor.

[Rodrigo90]

I'm bettign we'll get an ending like the original. I always assumed Ash died in the original, which is why we got the psuedo-remake opening of EDII where we see Ash become a deadite and then revert to his human form. I don't really even consider Evil Dead II a sequel, it basically ignores the first film in favor of said opening and then becoem sits own thing. Ash certainly is a different character than he is in the original film.

In oither words, I would bet one person lives, only to be attacked by the camera/ghost/fog at the end of the film.

You mean Sam Raimi on his bike? :D

It's actually supposed to be ¨The Evil¨, the entity that causes people to become infected/possessed by the Deadites that reside within it.

[def28]

I'm bettign we'll get an ending like the original. I always assumed Ash died in the original, which is why we got the psuedo-remake opening of EDII where we see Ash become a deadite and then revert to his human form. I don't really even consider Evil Dead II a sequel, it basically ignores the first film in favor of said opening and then becoem sits own thing. Ash certainly is a different character than he is in the original film.

In oither words, I would bet one person lives, only to be attacked by the camera/ghost/fog at the end of the film.

Yeah probably. Id rather they just show everyone dead then going the last scare route. Not sure but I think it was actually confirmed that Ash died in ED1.

[Rodrigo90]

Didn't Raimi and Tapert say it was because of property issues that they had to reshoot EDII, and the original intent WAS to do everything exactly the same from the first?

[Balthus Dire]

Well, I'm still in love with the originals, and I've thought this remake was a god awful idea ever since it was only in the "talking about it" stage, but the new trailer for it blew my face off.

I don't want to get my hopes up, but that trailer looked completely awesome to me. And, not having a lame Ash redo was defintely the smart way to go. I can't wait for a hi res version of that trailer.

Also, to those complaining about the lack of humor, you need to go back and watch the original. It's supposed to be a serious, scary movie. The weird, campy humor (which I also love, btw) didn't come in until Evil Dead 2, so if this remake is darker it actually is more in line with what the original was supposed to be in the first place.

[CapedCrusader14]

Finally got to see it. Looks alright. I'd probably check it out.

[def28]

Didn't Raimi and Tapert say it was because of property issues that they had to reshoot EDII, and the original intent WAS to do everything exactly the same from the first?

Not too sure, gotta go back to those audio commentaries. All the original actors were supposed to be in ED2 but were cut for saving cash. I believe Raimi originally wanted to throw Ash back in time in pt 2 while making the ED1 though.

[Rodrigo90]

Yes, they were cut for the cash. But I think the goal was to get that footage from ED1, but they had issues and instead of reshooting it with the actors, they cut them instead to save the budget money.

And according to Tapert in the commentary, Lucy Lawless hated the tree rape scene :hehe:

[chelo248]

EVIL DEAD Red Band Tease
The Evil Dead red band teaser trailer launches EXCLUSIVELY on IGN.com tomorrow. Until then...
http://www.facebook.com/evildead

[Balthus Dire]

"Where's your art film now, baby??"


This instantly shot up to the top of my must see list as of seeing the trailer yesterday. Can't wait for the hi-res one tomorrow.

[grout]

Evil Dead would have not made it had it not been for Bruce.. He fit the movie like a glove,,, I cant see it without Ash.. I mean Ash is Evil Dead, that was the majority of appeal IMO.

Groovy

[def28]

The one thing thats kinda cool without Ash, is that all these new characters are screwed. They would have a chance with Ash. Without him they are all ****ed.

[Cagefighterkip]

EVIL DEAD Red Band Tease
The Evil Dead red band teaser trailer launches EXCLUSIVELY on IGN.com tomorrow. Until then...
http://www.facebook.com/evildead

Can't wait <3<3<3

[chelo248]

The Evil Dead (2013) - Red Band Trailer on IGN.com now !!!!!!

[def28]

Sweet!!! After seeing this clean I think the bootleg kind of added to the old school nostalgic factor in a way haha. Was hoping they would throw a lil bit of new footage besides the NYCC stuff, oh well. Still looks cool. It is all loud Bay Transformer trailer sounds and gore throw back shots. Hard to not dig it as a trailer. Love the shot of Ashs car.

Also Director confirmed zero CGI used in the film.
http://spinoff.comicbookresources.com/2012/10/23/nycc-evil-deads-fede-alvarez-on-his-bloody-serious-remake/

What kind of effects did you use to make all this gore happen?

We didn’t do any CGI, so there’s no CGI in the movie. Everything you’ll see is real. This was a very long shoot – 70 days of shooting. That’s the reason why everybody goes to CGI, because it’s cheaper, faster. But I hate that – most people hate that, particularly in a movie like this one. So we searched a lot of magic tricks and illusions, like with disappearing arms, all those kind of things. We really pushed the boundaries trying to create those illusions. There’s also a particularly bloody ending. The last scene is just – we wanted it to be the bloodiest scene ever. And I think it is!

[747]

I think the Evil Dead films are kinda cool, without being a huge fan.

I don't see the point of this remake at all though, are the fans even excited?
Just looks like the original except without all the charm and finesse.

[grout]

I think the Evil Dead films are kinda cool, without being a huge fan.

I don't see the point of this remake at all though, are the fans even excited?
Just looks like the original except without all the charm and finesse.

Yeah i see what your saying...but evil dead is of massive cult status.. they could probably do whatever and make a buck off it.

[Marvolo]

That was some disgusting ****. I like Raimi and i enjoy the evil dead films for what they are...fun. This doesnt look like fun it looks like more torture porn.

[HighFivingMF]

*Dusts off hands* Yep. I'm out.

[obin_gam]

saw the red band trailer just, and have only one word to say to it...

oh come on, you know it ;)

[O'Haire]

Trailer did nothing for me. Probably just skip this one.

[War Party]

Definitely like what I'm seeing. The tone of the original seems to be there and it just looks so wonderfully gory!

[obin_gam]

That was some disgusting ****. I like Raimi and i enjoy the evil dead films for what they are...fun. This doesnt look like fun it looks like more torture porn.
have you seen the original? it was straight up horror with minimum amount of "fun". dead by dawn and army of darkness were fun yes, but the original? lol

[War Party]

have you seen the original? it was straight up horror with minimum amount of "fun". dead by dawn and army of darkness were fun yes, but the original? lol

Are people forgetting that the first one exists? I mean what's going on here?!

[Kar]

That was some disgusting ****. I like Raimi and i enjoy the evil dead films for what they are...fun. This doesnt look like fun it looks like more torture porn.

I take it you never saw the original.

I ****ing love the trailer. Its everything I hoped for and as a huge "Evil Dead" fan (and Jane Levy fan) I'm beyond excited! Everything is there. The car, boomstick, chainsaw, blood....everything. I have no complaints. And I think if anyone has any they're just hating. But that's me.

Bring it on!

[Whiskey Tango]

Looks to be full on nightmare mode. Yikes!

[obin_gam]

Are people forgetting that the first one exists? I mean what's going on here?!
Yeah I'm kinda baffled why people seems so surprised at the seriousness of this film :huh: The first Evil Dead is one of the most hardcore straight up horror flicks made, it's dark bloody and violent and it's great because of that.

My own favourite is the second one, but you cant really compare any one in the series to any one. I see them as this:
The Evil Dead: Horror
Evil Dead II: Horror Comedy
Army of Darkness: Dark Adventure Comedy

[Pac-Master]

Liked the trailer. Hopefully, this is good (unlike most horror remakes).

[Whiskey Tango]

Are people forgetting that the first one exists? I mean what's going on here?!

Either yes, or they haven't seen it at all. This is drawing a lot of "wtf this doesn't look funny" comments on other boards I frequent. :doh:

[Marvolo]

I take it you never saw the original.

I ****ing love the trailer. Its everything I hoped for and as a huge "Evil Dead" fan (and Jane Levy fan) I'm beyond excited! Everything is there. The car, boomstick, chainsaw, blood....everything. I have no complaints. And I think if anyone has any they're just hating. But that's me.

Bring it on!

Yes i saw the original. I like the original. Its cheap, homemade, goofy schlock with fake blood and cheap makeup. It has a certain charm about it. Its got tongue planted firmly in cheek like all of Raimi's horror films. This is sick on a whole other level and isnt even in the same vein as the original.

The original was a film that overcame its limitations and went on to become a cult classic. Its story wasnt innovative, it was goofy, and it had a rape tree lol. But damn you had to love it for trying to do so much with so little.

What is this trying to do besides be generic tortoure porn movie 1001? Cause thats all i see.

[redhawk23]

That was some disgusting ****. I like Raimi and i enjoy the evil dead films for what they are...fun. This doesnt look like fun it looks like more torture porn.


I know you've already tried to clarify what you're talking about here but Evil Dead 1 is purely disgusting. It has pipes of blood and fluids squirting through the walls. It has a woman apparently raped by a tree. It is squarely a disgusting film.

Its some how ruined for you because now they can more realistically pull of slicing a tongue in half?

[Balthus Dire]

Yeah...the original is not goofy whatsoever. If anything, the implied goofiness would come from the special effects, but that was budgetary reasons and not intended to be goofy looking. It's a straight up serious horror movie.


This looks amazing.

[Marvolo]

I know you've already tried to clarify what you're talking about here but Evil Dead 1 is purely disgusting. It has pipes of blood and fluids squirting through the walls. It has a woman apparently raped by a tree. It is squarely a disgusting film.

Its some how ruined for you because now they can more realistically pull of slicing a tongue in half?

Fake as hell looking fluids and playdo on screen. Thats what the original has. I realize the original was a product of limitations but thats what i like about it. Thats what gives it that charm. Its nothing great. In fact its pretty stupid. But im endeared to it because Raimi was able to make something out of so little and succeeded with it. This remake just puts all the original had on screen but in a far less endearing way. Gone is the movie that did a lot with a little. Here is the generic gore fest torture porn.

Rarely am i not on board with remakes but this remake just exposes how generic the whole story of the original evil dead is. I prefer the charm of the original. This just looks like everything else on the torture porn shelf. Some malevolent force acts on the teens and whoops look now little janie is slicing at her body. Oh the unoriginal horror.

[redhawk23]

^ I'm just saying that evil dead was never much more than that to begin with.

What's the budget on this new film anyway?

[Marvolo]

^ I'm just saying that evil dead was never much more than that to begin with.

Yep and this remake just makes that all the more obvious.

[redhawk23]

Well then why all the bemoaning?

[Oberon sexton]

*Sean Connery Henry Jones voice* "THEN WHAT ARE YOU COMPLAINING ABOUT?!"
:hehe:

[Marvolo]

Cause moreso than eve i think a remake was pointless. But then again for me personally the only redeeming factor i find in evil dead 1 is its 'a lot with a little' approach.

That being said, il watch the trailer again let it settle and come back to it and try to get a different view of it. Right now i think its generic and pointless but that might change. From what ive heard about the script there is some stuff i like so who knows i may like the film. We'll see. I may have been too quick to judge.

[Spider-Who?]

Yes, in 2012, ED1 is kind of goofy, but ED1 was incredibly gory for it's time. The only difference (that I can see so far) between the two is that the production values are better here. I don't think it's fair to damn a remake because of the inevitable difference in production quality of movies 30 years apart.

[Tanin]

This movie is looking awesome so far.
I'm going to enjoy the hell out of this film for being a good horror film.

[Kar]

So....basically you don't like how this movie is taking advantage of a bigger budget? I'm not understanding.

You keep mentioning the first movie being humorous and charming...I think we were watching two different ED1 but I take it that that's just how you viewed it which is cool. This movie looks like the same plot and situations with just new characters and I'm fine with that. I was honestly expecting something looking like "Cabin In the Woods" and I'm SO glad I was wrong. This movie is clearly going to capitalize on the gore from the first one. And you're mentioning torture porn. I think you're just saying that because of how the movie LOOKS as opposed to what you saw. Everything that they showed in the trailer is basically a replica of the first one. I don't get how it charming in ED1 for a girl to get raped by a tree but here its torture porn.

[terry78]

Well, they ain't skimping on the splatter, that much is clear. I will see it though just to see what this guy does with the material.

[THANOSRULES]

So....basically you don't like how this movie is taking advantage of a bigger budget? I'm not understanding.

You keep mentioning the first movie being humorous and charming...I think we were watching two different ED1 but I take it that that's just how you viewed it which is cool. This movie looks like the same plot and situations with just new characters and I'm fine with that. I was honestly expecting something looking like "Cabin In the Woods" and I'm SO glad I was wrong. This movie is clearly going to capitalize on the gore from the first one. And you're mentioning torture porn. I think you're just saying that because of how the movie LOOKS as opposed to what you saw. Everything that they showed in the trailer is basically a replica of the first one. I don't get how it charming in ED1 for a girl to get raped by a tree but here its torture porn.

A LOT of people have not seen the first one ..In fact the second movie is debatable as a simple re-make with more Raimi humor...(IE a more completed vision)

EVIL DEAD I was an insignificant film..it would have largely been forgotten save for its famed "tree scene" and the subsequent Evil Dead 2 popularity and the controversy with that. I'll get flamed for this but you go ask 100 horror fans what they think of EDI and of the 10 percent that have even seen it will mostly agree ED2 is the defining film.

EVIL DEAD 2 was what made Raimi and made this into a "franchise" potential..so this reboot looks like , yeah it may be true to the tone of the original..but its not true to what made the Evil Dead work. (and it's honestly never worked as a huge box office seller)

SO you all can get over yourselves and how EDI is some sort of hidden gem...it's a pretty bad flick.

PS and it IS hypocritical to damn a remake within the ED films when the best movie came from a remake of the prior film.

[Legion]

This looks awesome!! Can't wait!!

[jonathancrane]

Yeah I'm kinda baffled why people seems so surprised at the seriousness of this film :huh: The first Evil Dead is one of the most hardcore straight up horror flicks made, it's dark bloody and violent and it's great because of that.

My own favourite is the second one, but you cant really compare any one in the series to any one. I see them as this:
The Evil Dead: Horror
Evil Dead II: Horror Comedy
Army of Darkness: Dark Adventure Comedy

This.

And I am excited about the film.

[Whiskey Tango]

SO you all can get over yourselves

OR they can continue to have their own opinions. And express them.

Amazingly, not everyone prefers the campy sequels over the first one.

[Marvolo]

A LOT of people have not seen the first one ..In fact the second movie is debatable as a simple re-make with more Raimi humor...(IE a more completed vision)

EVIL DEAD I was an insignificant film..it would have largely been forgotten save for its famed "tree scene" and the subsequent Evil Dead 2 popularity and the controversy with that. I'll get flamed for this but you go ask 100 horror fans what they think of EDI and of the 10 percent that have even seen it will mostly agree ED2 is the defining film.

EVIL DEAD 2 was what made Raimi and made this into a "franchise" potential..so this reboot looks like , yeah it may be true to the tone of the original..but its not true to what made the Evil Dead work. (and it's honestly never worked as a huge box office seller)

SO you all can get over yourselves and how EDI is some sort of hidden gem...it's a pretty bad flick.

PS and it IS hypocritical to damn a remake within the ED films when the best movie came from a remake of the prior film.

Well im not damning it for being a remake. Moreso im saying the charm that the original has is it being able to do a lot with a small budget. Beyond that the film is pretty much **** and full of cliches and trite dumb ideas. Im just wondering why eveyone is falling over themselves for a remake.

This looks to be true to ED1, and like it will include all the dumb ideas and trite and worn out cliches the horror genre is already flooded with. That isnt a winning formula. It doesnt look like it includes any of Raimi's sensibilities or the things that made him popular. This is why im not yet sold on this film.

[terry78]

I'm curious, but I wasn't clamoring for it. There are a few films out there where they just don't need to be remade. I get Raimi and Campbell gave their blessing, but still. I do like Jane Levy, though.

[def28]

What's the budget on this new film anyway?

I think its between 10-15 mill. From the interviews it sounds like they worked really hard to find new practical ways to make the effects and gore work. Instead of just adding cgi later.

[Spider-Who?]

Well im not damning it for being a remake. Moreso im saying the charm that the original has is it being able to do a lot with a small budget. Beyond that the film is pretty much **** and full of cliches and trite dumb ideas. Im just wondering why eveyone is falling over themselves for a remake.


So for argument's sake would your opinion change if you were to learn that the remake's budget was small - and therefore the crew were "able to do a lot with a small budget"? Not trying to be snippy, just attempting to understand where you're coming from.

It doesnt look like it includes any of Raimi's sensibilities or the things that made him popular.

One of Raimi's defining traits is his camera work. I saw a lot of his trademark camera work in the trailer, not to mention many re-imaginings of standout scenes and images that are what made the originals what they were. I see Raimi-inspired stuff throughout the trailer. Even still, we saw 1/100th of the movie. There's no way you can say there isn't any of Raimi's sensibilities in the movie when the movie as a whole hasn't been seen (and the fact that there IS evidence in the trailer).

I think that the problem is that the populace is split in two about Raimi. He's either the goofy/campy guy who made horror comedies and Spider-Man, or he's the guy who made the gory horror flicks. But in reality RAIMI doesn't matter here. This is a completely different director. I think it's ludicrous to expect the same EXACT film 30 years later.

[redhawk23]

As for the camera shots, while the trailer includes a few very Rami like shots, the director has stated how he refilmed several parts to try and bring more of his own style as he hated just aping the original film.

[Marvolo]

Guys im sorry but ill have to rejoin this conversation later. Im at work and its hard to multitask and articulate what it is im trying to say here. For fear of saying the wrong thing or my ideas being misconstrued im gonna come back later when i have more time to discuss and think about this.

[Spider-Who?]

EVIL DEAD I was an insignificant film..it would have largely been forgotten save for its famed "tree scene" and the subsequent Evil Dead 2 popularity and the controversy with that.

Evil Dead...insignificant? I think its safe to say that financially it could be considered that because it was a small, extremely low budget film with a limited release. And it was so gory that many countries BANNED the film from release in their countries. I'd hardly call a film treated like that insignificant. Evil Dead was also the film that put Raimi on the map. Without Evil Dead 1, there would be no others. There'd be no Raimi.

I'll get flamed for this but you go ask 100 horror fans what they think of EDI and of the 10 percent that have even seen it will mostly agree ED2 is the defining film.

You do realize that saying "go ask 100 people and they'll agree with me" is a waste of time to type and doesn't prove anything, right? Especially when I can counter that and give you examples that suggest ED1 is the preferred film.

Rotten Tomatoes list EVIL DEAD in second place in their Top 100 Horror films. EVIL DEAD 2 is #17.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/top_100_horror_movies/?category=10

Here, EVIL DEAD is listed as #9 out of 100. EVIL DEAD 2 isn't even on the list.
http://www.best-horror-movies.com/100-best-horror-films

You could argue that ED2 made more money, but any film with a larger screening (and less banning) will. Really doesn't equate to quality.

yeah it may be true to the tone of the original..but its not true to what made the Evil Dead work.

What? Have you ever even seen Evil Dead? What made Evil Dead work WAS it's horror and gore. What made Evil Dead 2 work was the combination of gore and comedy. What made AoD work was it's flat out ridiculousness. Each movie has it's own themes and style. You can't lay a blanket statement like that (without even saying what you think made it work), because each film is entirely different from the last.

SO you all can get over yourselves and how EDI is some sort of hidden gem...it's a pretty bad flick.


That's funny. I didn't realize people having differing opinions equates to superiority complexes. I don't think anyone would argue that the movies aren't bad flicks in some extent or another. That's one thing they all have in common. But there's certainly a difference between an enjoyable bad film and a baaaaad film.

[Tanin]

While The Evil Dead was intended to be and was a gore fest it ended up being quite campy in the long run. I do not know if this is because of bad acting or just a very low production but that it just the way it is now. Some people love it for the excessive horror and others because of how campy trying to be serious with such low effects ended up being.

I am just happy Sam Raimi is going to get the version of Evil Dead he seems to have intended but did not have the budget for.

[THANOSRULES]

Evil Dead...insignificant? I think its safe to say that financially it could be considered that because it was a small, extremely low budget film with a limited release. And it was so gory that many countries BANNED the film from release in their countries. I'd hardly call a film treated like that insignificant. Evil Dead was also the film that put Raimi on the map. Without Evil Dead 1, there would be no others. There'd be no Raimi.



You do realize that saying "go ask 100 people and they'll agree with me" is a waste of time to type and doesn't prove anything, right? Especially when I can counter that and give you examples that suggest ED1 is the preferred film.

Rotten Tomatoes list EVIL DEAD in second place in their Top 100 Horror films. EVIL DEAD 2 is #17.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/top_100_horror_movies/?category=10

Here, EVIL DEAD is listed as #9 out of 100. EVIL DEAD 2 isn't even on the list.
http://www.best-horror-movies.com/100-best-horror-films

You could argue that ED2 made more money, but any film with a larger screening (and less banning) will. Really doesn't equate to quality.



What? Have you ever even seen Evil Dead? What made Evil Dead work WAS it's horror and gore. What made Evil Dead 2 work was the combination of gore and comedy. What made AoD work was it's flat out ridiculousness. Each movie has it's own themes and style. You can't lay a blanket statement like that (without even saying what you think made it work), because each film is entirely different from the last.



That's funny. I didn't realize people having differing opinions equates to superiority complexes. I don't think anyone would argue that the movies aren't bad flicks in some extent or another. That's one thing they all have in common. But there's certainly a difference between an enjoyable bad film and a baaaaad film.

Well you came up with some decent counter points here...

First the "lists"
-That RT list is utter BS..it's calculated strictly off the tomatometer ratings of critics and the older films seem to get some different scoring scale..which favors them heavily. King Kong is # 2 on the list.

I understand ED is thought of by many Film critics (even beyond the horror genre) as some sort of triumph of 8mm eqse film and it has some sort of profound significance to "film"...maybe it does as some sort of evolution to Raimi's style but he hadnt hit his stride yet.

Most of that IMO came after the fact..in hindsight after Raimi's real success, which was really not mainstreamed until AoD. So yeah, it gets overblown, there is a lot to respect about it..even I'll admit that, but Film buffs..the kind of people that make ridiculous lists like the RT one, tend to over rate it. Most real live people tend to think ED2 is better, cept here i guess. SO some of "what made ED1 work" is after the fact overrated respect for a film that was some form of break through...although i dont feel it's that good.

ED2 was a also low budget flick. It wasnt like Raimi made zillions and earned world fame by ED1 that Hollywood gave him some monster budget. It was a cult film and largely insignificant as well. In general though it was an indicator of Raimi's style..his stamp and the feel of his film.

If ED1 was a satisfactory vision for Raimi..he wouldn't have re-made it, and used the same actor and even footage from ED1. ED2 Was the REAL version.

I'm only bringing up the "superioity complex" because you guys are ganging up on views like Marvelo like he's waay off base..which he's not.

Evil Dead 2 was the better film..and for those reasons of added humor, satire and ridiculousness mixed with the gore and violence. Perfect and genre re-defining..

ED1 was just gore and violence on a budget with a few neat Raimi esque shaky shots..nothing really transcending a genre. But some hollywood folks thougth he had some talent so they let him make a flick with more thought to it (ED2).

And lastly while I do think it is hypocritical to fear a reboot here based ont he fact ED2 was a reboot of ED1..I do understand the apprehension, as reboots in hollywood have been such a mixed bag.

EDIT: and so when I call ED1 "insignificant" I am referring to my thought that it was low budget mainly stock of some of the films of that time and NOT GENRE REDEFINING. It was only really "significant" in the fact it was Raimi's 1st, the budget, and the happy ending of where Raimi went. So IMO the movie IS ACTUALLY significant, but not because of what it is..more what it represents to movie makers.

[Balthus Dire]

I like how your bizarre argument is entirely based on your own personal opinions masquerading as facts.

[THANOSRULES]

I like how your bizarre argument is entirely based on your own personal opinions masquerading as facts.

Everything is subjective here and I dont think the notion that ED2 as a much better, significant, and genre defining than ED1 is that ridiculous.

and it's not based on just my opinion , it's based on my experiences asking people and listening to people..which is certainly subjective also but not what I perceive to be my personal opinions.

[Balthus Dire]

Not saying your opinion itself is ridiculous, but the way you are engaging with others as though your opinion is the "right" opinion is pretty ridiculous.

[Whiskey Tango]

One thing to remember is that this is also a red band trailer so we're seeing a larger than usual amount of gore squeezed into a two minute video.

[redhawk23]

Well you came up with some decent counter points here...

First the "lists"
-That RT list is utter BS..it's calculated strictly off the tomatometer ratings of critics and the older films seem to get some different scoring scale..which favors them heavily. King Kong is # 2 on the list.

I understand ED is thought of by many Film critics (even beyond the horror genre) as some sort of triumph of 8mm eqse film and it has some sort of profound significance to "film"...maybe it does as some sort of evolution to Raimi's style but he hadnt hit his stride yet.

Most of that IMO came after the fact..in hindsight after Raimi's real success, which was really not mainstreamed until AoD. So yeah, it gets overblown, there is a lot to respect about it..even I'll admit that, but Film buffs..the kind of people that make ridiculous lists like the RT one, tend to over rate it. Most real live people tend to think ED2 is better, cept here i guess. SO some of "what made ED1 work" is after the fact overrated respect for a film that was some form of break through...although i dont feel it's that good.

ED2 was a also low budget flick. It wasnt like Raimi made zillions and earned world fame by ED1 that Hollywood gave him some monster budget. It was a cult film and largely insignificant as well. In general though it was an indicator of Raimi's style..his stamp and the feel of his film.

If ED1 was a satisfactory vision for Raimi..he wouldn't have re-made it, and used the same actor and even footage from ED1. ED2 Was the REAL version.

I'm only bringing up the "superioity complex" because you guys are ganging up on views like Marvelo like he's waay off base..which he's not.

Evil Dead 2 was the better film..and for those reasons of added humor, satire and ridiculousness mixed with the gore and violence. Perfect and genre re-defining..

ED1 was just gore and violence on a budget with a few neat Raimi esque shaky shots..nothing really transcending a genre. But some hollywood folks thougth he had some talent so they let him make a flick with more thought to it (ED2).

And lastly while I do think it is hypocritical to fear a reboot here based ont he fact ED2 was a reboot of ED1..I do understand the apprehension, as reboots in hollywood have been such a mixed bag.

EDIT: and so when I call ED1 "insignificant" I am referring to my thought that it was low budget mainly stock of some of the films of that time and NOT GENRE REDEFINING. It was only really "significant" in the fact it was Raimi's 1st, the budget, and the happy ending of where Raimi went. So IMO the movie IS ACTUALLY significant, but not because of what it is..more what it represents to movie makers.

As far as RT's access to reviews for ED1 and ED2, there wouldn't bee that much of a difference.

[mongoose-mania]

I'm terribly apprehensive right now. I just finished re-watching the entire trilogy today, and this... really did nothing for me. I'll wait till I see it to make a final judgement. After all, I thought the Cabin in the Woods looked like crap from its trailer, and I loved that film.

[THANOSRULES]

As far as RT's access to reviews for ED1 and ED2, there wouldn't bee that much of a difference.

I havnt quite figured out how they do the scores for older movies..especially ones that were not heavily reviewed.

[Lasirius]

I'm sold. Trailer was crazy, can't wait for this.

[bullets]

It looks like they got most of it right. Hopefully this leads to Ash coming back.

[Mike_D202]

The way this was described, it's a new story with new characters. So my conception is that Ash is running around somewhere while these new people play with the book.

[bullets]

The way this was described, it's a new story with new characters. So my conception is that Ash is running around somewhere while these new people play with the book.


That works for me. I don't expect Ash to show up but perhaps this could lead into that.

[SuperBatman]

At 1st I was like I really can't believe they are remaking this it doesn't need a remake. I then saw the trailer and you know it sold me. True it won't have Bruce Cambell in it which will be a shame but I really want to give this a chance.

[Cagefighterkip]

Hopefully it's good.
It looks like it could be but I'm apprehensive to say the least.

[Doctor Jones]

I kind of forgot the first was more horror like. I prefer the sequels and being that I'm not a huge fan if the first, if this can be good and be what perhaps Raimi had envisioned then cool. We gotta understand that the trademark things like Ash and the chainsaw were just apart if the first film. Take away the following of Ash/Campbell and the sequels right now and just look at it through the lens of when it first came out.