Is anybody else PUMPED for the new Evil Dead

[ObiWanFan4life]

I know i am. The red band trailer is gory as hell and the best part....It's entirely practical, NO CGI WHATSOEVER. The film also has the approval of Sam Raimi (the director or the first 3) Bruce Campell gave it a thumbs up and might make a cameo And the film seems to be getting rave reviews with a 76% on Rotten Tomatoes. Sounds like we have a winner on our hands.

[Lethal Lullaby]

I really want to see it! I love horror movie's and this one looks really creepy.

[Shreddhead]

No. I'm a diehard fan of the original trilogy and I was excited when i heard that the series was being "resurrected" (forgive the pun). But after finding out its a remake and after watching the preview and the comicon panel I really just don't care about it anymore. What I love about the series, especially the 2nd installment, is their ability to combine insanely over the top gore with well timed comedy and great one-liners. Plus Ash is a dick, and yet he's and endearing dick that you want to see succeed. This remake looks like its aiming at gross out gore with absolutely no humor. Hell, the preview makes it look like SAW in the woods... And where did you hear that there wasn't any cgi? that scene where female Ash splits here tongue open is not a practical effect.

However I will say this, during the comicon panel Bruce Campell asks the audience if they want an Evil Dead 4. The crowd goes wild and Bruce says its coming. Now that could have just been a spur of the moment BS line, but a movie picking up with Ash stranded in an apocalyptic future (the deleted ending to the 3rd movie that both Cambell and Raimi admit they preferred) is the Evil Dead movie that I'd pay to see.



I dont know if you can tell, but i find the majority of remakes to be very "Un-Groovy".

[ObiWanFan4life]

Originally Posted by Shreddhead

No. I'm a diehard fan of the original trilogy and I was excited when i heard that the series was being "resurrected" (forgive the pun). But after finding out its a remake and after watching the preview and the comicon panel I really just don't care about it anymore. What I love about the series, especially the 2nd installment, is their ability to combine insanely over the top gore with well timed comedy and great one-liners. Plus Ash is a dick, and yet he's and endearing dick that you want to see succeed. This remake looks like its aiming at gross out gore with absolutely no humor. Hell, the preview makes it look like SAW in the woods... And where did you hear that there wasn't any cgi? that scene where female Ash splits here tongue open is not a practical effect.

However I will say this, during the comicon panel Bruce Campell asks the audience if they want an Evil Dead 4. The crowd goes wild and Bruce says its coming. Now that could have just been a spur of the moment BS line, but a movie picking up with Ash stranded in an apocalyptic future (the deleted ending to the 3rd movie that both Cambell and Raimi admit they preferred) is the Evil Dead movie that I'd pay to see.

Ah well can't please everybody.

[JakeSully]

Sometimes a good horror remake is hard to find, there can be a a gem and sometimes there are a dozen misfires only to tarnish the legacy of the original.

So moviefone has made this unique article on how to do a good successful horror remake:
http://http://blog.moviefone.com/201...horror-remake/

Does anyone agree with the rules, worst culprits and best examples? i hope ED falls into one of these rules.

[Candy Kappa]

I am looking forward to another remake of the Evil Dead

[gobo]

Doubt I'll ever watch it. I despise straight horror, and ED1 was always the one installment in the trillogy that I can't stand. No Ash?? No thanks.

[AT-Man]

I like the trailer and no CGI you say? I bet it will be good.

[ObiWanFan4life]

Originally Posted by gobo

Doubt I'll ever watch it. I despise straight horror, and ED1 was always the one installment in the trillogy that I can't stand. No Ash?? No thanks.

Bruce Campell made the decision to not put Ash in the new movie. your Argument is INVALID.

[installerray]

not only have i been waiting for this for a long time and i cant wait to see it. and even better is that sam is making a part4 to the original series.

[Shreddhead]

Originally Posted by Turtles2k12

Bruce Campell made the decision to not put Ash in the new movie. your Argument is INVALID.

I thought Ash was being played by the female lead this time, so there is an Ash.

Originally Posted by installerray

not only have i been waiting for this for a long time and i cant wait to see it. and even better is that sam is making a part4 to the original series.

Has he actually confirmed this? All I've heard was the Comicon blurb.

[gobo]

Originally Posted by Turtles2k12

Bruce Campell made the decision to not put Ash in the new movie. your Argument is INVALID.

Gosh, I never thought of it that way. I suppose I oughtta go waste $8 on a ticket to a movie I expect to do nothing but disgust me. Thank you for the free investment advice.

Originally Posted by installerray

not only have i been waiting for this for a long time and i cant wait to see it. and even better is that sam is making a part4 to the original series.

If he wasn't being facetious, I'll be surprised. If he's serious, I'm so there.

[Andrew NDB]

It's a stealth sequel, not a remake. As as we've learned from this week's news, Bruce Campbell DOES have a cameo at the end.

[Leo656]

Looks pretty good. Remakes happen, I'm over it. It looks almost more like a "re-imagining" anyway. I'm a huge fan of the originals but I gave up the ghost on ever getting a real sequel forever and ever ago. Yeah, Evil Dead 4 or whatever would've been great, and Bruce would've made an awesome Superman, too. 'Cept now he's way too old and paunchy to make either role anything but a farce, funny for all the wrong reasons. Over it.

People need to get off the damn "remakes by definition are an abomination" bus already. There's no such thing as an original idea, only who got to patent it first. Hell, "The Wizard of Oz" was itself a "remake" of a crappy black n white flick tossed together years before Judy Garland even saw a rainbow, and both were obviously based (loosely) on the books. Deal with it, people. If something works, it's gonna be done a thousand times. Good for 'em. For every bad remake or even sequel, there's an even worse original idea that got made, too. So what's the difference? Stop spitting in the wind.

[Zulithe]

Seeing it this weekend, possibly today. Wouldn't miss this. The redband trailer definitely sold me. I grew up with the original trilogy. I'll never forget when a friend was like "omg you haven't seen army of darkness!?" and we spent the day watching all 3 :p This was when I was 14. Pretty excited for this.

[Shreddhead]

Soooo, anybody go and see it? Any thoughts?

[Brodie]

I didn't like it. Incredibly lackluster. Gore was decent, but the movie was just bland.

[BlisterStockboy]

Originally Posted by Brodie

I didn't like it. Incredibly lackluster. Gore was decent, but the movie was just bland.

The movie was awful. Nothing happened, and nothing was interesting. The acting was ridiculously terrible, as well as the dialogue. Just a stupid movie.

1/100.

[The Stryker]

Originally Posted by BlisterStockboy

The movie was awful. Nothing happened, and nothing was interesting. The acting was ridiculously terrible, as well as the dialogue. Just a stupid movie.

1/100.

So....an accurate remake of the first Evil Dead. Gotcha.

[ObiWanFan4life]

Originally Posted by The Stryker

So....an accurate remake of the first Evil Dead. Gotcha.

Saying this about the original removes any and all credibility you possibly had