Evil Dead Remake was so messed up it got a NC-17 rating

[RL_GMA]

So wait they went the Saw, Hostel shock route? Man **** this. I hope this isnt the case.

The original one was a cheesier movie, but it also had a NC-17 rating and went through edits due to the gore before Raimi got the greenlight. I think this is going to make Hostel and Saw look like Disney Land, especially considering Raimi himself is Executive producing the movie.

[squealpiggy]

This movie looks to be very much on par with hostel. The bulk of this movie looks to be remade on the premise of scenes filled with torture(self induced) and excessive gore, revolving around the original storyline of evil dead.

The original was pretty gory.

And to my psyche comment, hollywood is becoming pretty amazing/lifelike with their special effects. While you consciously see things on the screen and know its just a movie, your psyche doesnt see it like that. Its see he actual act happening, in lifelike form. Might as well watch a real person cutting their tongue, face or other crazy **** like that. This is a huge difference from 70's horror flicks.

A lot of the 60s and 70s horror flicks involved actual killing and mutilation of animals. You don't get that today.

All special effects artists are going to produce effects that are as realistic as they can with the technology and budget available to them.

And whats with all the remakes, especially horror remakes? Most of them turn out cheesy, this doesnt look cheesy, but still, runniny out of creative juices?

They can trade on the name, it makes marketing a lot easier. Plus if a studio holds the rights they don't have to pay the creator.

The original one was a cheesier movie, but it also had a NC-17 rating and went through edits due to the gore before Raimi got the greenlight.

The original was made in 1981 and had a budget of $90,000. It doesn't look cheesy by design, it looks cheesy due to constraints on budget and technology. The remake has a budget of $15 million.

EDIT -- Used an inflation calculator. $90,000 in 1981 is about $220,000 today.

I think this is going to make Hostel and Saw look like Disney Land, especially considering Raimi himself is Executive producing the movie.

What I don't like about Hostel and the likes has nothing to do with the effects or gore or depictions of suffering. It's the contrived nature of the story. The plot is a thinly veiled attempt to shoehorn torture scenes into a film.

The first Saw was interesting, it had an interesting setup, a good plot, a surprising twist and an antagonist with novel reasons for committing atrocities. The subsequent Saw films were garbage because the characters are contemptible. After an hour of Saw II I wanted them all to die. Privately. I had absolutely no empathy with any of the characters and the story was toss.

Anyway Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi are both in on this project.

[res]

Real Shyt. Honestly I don't even bother watching new Horror movies anymore.




B) They replace genuine thrills and terror with excessive gore. It's not really horror anymore it's just gross-out films passed off ass horror.


I probably won't see it. I'm not a big fan of buckets of blood and guts. I don't mind it in moderation, but there needs to be genuine thrills and suspense mixed in, otherwise, it's a waste of time.

Also, I don't know about anybody else, but I like to see some good acting in horror movies. Most horror movies nowadays are filled with no name performers who couldn't act their way out of a wet paper bag. Which also going back to point B, is a reason why there are no thrills or suspense or genuine terror because they aren't talented enough as actors to be believable.

Yeah, seriously. You can't replace the absence of real creative soul and the trademark creepiness of the classical Horror movie by just throwing buckets of blood everywhere.

[res]

Not that I am necessarily against all remakes (although I'm against most of them) but whenever you are dealing with a remake there is always the risk that there is very little real heart behind it and that it's primarily a money grabbing project. a remake often indicates a studios unwiliingness to take a risk on something original and unfamiliar and a desire to rely upon something familiar because it tends to be a more financially reliable product. When that's the case, there won't be much heart put into it.

[squealpiggy]

Yeah, seriously. You can't replace the absence of real creative soul and the trademark creepiness of the classical Horror movie by just throwing buckets of blood everywhere.

Have you seen The Evil Dead!?

Not that I am necessarily against all remakes (although I'm against most of them) but whenever you are dealing with a remake there is always the risk that there is very little real heart behind it and that it's primarily a money grabbing project. a remake often indicates a studios unwiliingness to take a risk on something original and unfamiliar and a desire to rely upon something familiar because it tends to be a more financially reliable product. When that's the case, there won't be much heart put into it.

Well it has been written and produced by Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi. It's not some cheap studio-led remake.

[Prawn Jovi]

Well it has been written and produced by Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi. It's not some cheap studio-led remake.

This alone makes it worth the time, regardless of how I feel after the movie.

[The Noose]

Im passing on this ****. If you want to watch a real horror movie watch Lords of Salem. Rob Zombies new movie April 26th.

I gave up on Rob Zombie films after he shat all over Halloween. Never bothered watching the sequel.


As far as remakes, im not a fan, and this Evil Dead doesnt interest me. I liked the original, but never was big on gore. And remakes of this kind seem pointless. Its been done. I love the old low budget films. glossing it all up has no appeal to me. CGI has no appeal to me. And im not a Sam Raimi fan.

[res]

Have you seen The Evil Dead!?

Yes I had it on VHS. a movie having real creative soul doesn't mean that it has to be a 4 star Horror movie, it means that it's original and effective.

I also wasn't just talking about Evil dead but the general trend in Horror movie remakes.

Well it has been written and produced by Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi. It's not some cheap studio-led remake.

If it was a studio lead remake the last thing it would be is cheap (money wise) . I don't think movies and other creative products are simply about the people involved, they're also about the moment . Note that when Raimi did it the first time he was attempting something original, now he is being called in as a hired hack to rehash something he did 30 years ago to help fill Hollywood's creative void.

[Sweet Pea 50]

I'm going to watch it.

The trailer alone reminds of things I have to watch underneath my bed for.

You ever have that nightmare where you are sleeping in bed, and your door slowly swings open?

Squuuuueeeek.

You're not just looking at your hall way anymore. At the end of said mile long hall way, just a pair of red eye's.

You can't run, fight back, nothing.

And it is coming for you....

[Xyei]

Here is another trailer. I might check this out. I'm not big on horror films but this might be worth a watch.