• 62 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Edited by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio

For the guy that complained about it being too bloody and cheesy...Well, let's be fair here...the original looked beyond crappy and had cheesy blood I even remember seeing a hose tied to one of the actor's necks with fake red water/blood squirting out...can't get any worse then that lol.

concerning the old ED vs. the new one, honestly the new one looked far better...

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus: Well I suppose,I disagree with the notion that comedy and horror cannot go together.I think it is just plain daft to say that.I mean that is like saying Sci Fi,action,thriller fantasy etc cannot go with it.I mean a horror film doesn't have to be scary to be a horror.Evil Dead 2 isn't really scary but it has those things in it that make it a horror,things that have become synonymous with the genre.So to say that something isn't a horror just because it may not be scary just seems silly to me,or that it cant have comedy in it also seems silly.ED2 is a horror in the film itself with all the features like the gore,possession,demons,set in the middle of nowhere etc,but it has a comedic approach.And there are parts in there that did creep me out and even with all the comedy it still somehow felt eerie like a good horror does.

(Just had to get that off my chest)

Well, I don't disagree with having some comedy in a horror film so long as it works...or is appropriate being where I'm coming from. Like I was saying earlier, movies like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Halloween etc movies originally meant to be darker, serious IMO should have no comedy in it. I know sometimes depending on the director, producer etc they have some in it but I guess as myself being a hardcore "horror fan" I prefer just that, horror. Oh I agree, scary movies are just placed in horror category because it's appropriate. Horror films can be creepy, not bloody etc and still horror. I don't dispute that. Even Paranormal Activity, no blood, chopping heads off etc but it had no comedy in it...because it's goal is to scare, creep people out.

Of course whether or not the viewer gets scared or creeped out depends on the viewer. Like you and I said earlier, what scares one person may not scare another and vice versa...that goes for all horror movies. ED1 originally I admit, for the time creeped me out a little bit...the second and third film just made me laugh more then anything. In terms of the horror aspect I felt let down personally, that's one reason why I was really looking forward to this new film and overall I'm satisfied. I think those people complaining about "too much blood" obviously never saw the original movies as they were also bloody at times.

#52 Edited by The Stegman (26079 posts) - - Show Bio

One of the worst "horror" movies i've ever seen. It seemed like their main objective was to gross you out to death and scare you that way. I wasn't scared ONCE in this entire movie, just disgusted. Which began to piss me off at a certain point because I realized that this was what they were going for, be as disgusting as possible. All it was was blood, gore, and just plain unnecessary disgusting scenes. I'm sorry, but I have no respect for horror approached with this mentality. And the plot was extremely unbelievable.

Have you seen the other films?..they are all unbelievably gory that's kind of the point.

check out 5:10

#53 Edited by mrdecepticonleader (18737 posts) - - Show Bio

For the guy that complained about it being too bloody and cheesy...Well, let's be fair here...the original looked beyond crappy and had cheesy blood I even remember seeing a hose tied to one of the actor's necks with fake red water/blood squirting out...can't get any worse then that lol.

concerning the old ED vs. the new one, honestly the new one looked far better...

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus: Well I suppose,I disagree with the notion that comedy and horror cannot go together.I think it is just plain daft to say that.I mean that is like saying Sci Fi,action,thriller fantasy etc cannot go with it.I mean a horror film doesn't have to be scary to be a horror.Evil Dead 2 isn't really scary but it has those things in it that make it a horror,things that have become synonymous with the genre.So to say that something isn't a horror just because it may not be scary just seems silly to me,or that it cant have comedy in it also seems silly.ED2 is a horror in the film itself with all the features like the gore,possession,demons,set in the middle of nowhere etc,but it has a comedic approach.And there are parts in there that did creep me out and even with all the comedy it still somehow felt eerie like a good horror does.

(Just had to get that off my chest)

Well, I don't disagree with having some comedy in a horror film so long as it works...or is appropriate being where I'm coming from. Like I was saying earlier, movies like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Halloween etc movies originally meant to be darker, serious IMO should have no comedy in it. I know sometimes depending on the director, producer etc they have some in it but I guess as myself being a hardcore "horror fan" I prefer just that, horror. Oh I agree, scary movies are just placed in horror category because it's appropriate. Horror films can be creepy, not bloody etc and still horror. I don't dispute that. Even Paranormal Activity, no blood, chopping heads off etc but it had no comedy in it...because it's goal is to scare, creep people out.

Of course whether or not the viewer gets scared or creeped out depends on the viewer. Like you and I said earlier, what scares one person may not scare another and vice versa...that goes for all horror movies. ED1 originally I admit, for the time creeped me out a little bit...the second and third film just made me laugh more then anything. In terms of the horror aspect I felt let down personally, that's one reason why I was really looking forward to this new film and overall I'm satisfied. I think those people complaining about "too much blood" obviously never saw the original movies as they were also bloody at times.

Well I prefer Evil Dead as more comedic like ED2 and AOD.I mean as a big horror fan myself I like all sorts of horror and yeah of course there are parts of the genre that I don't like.Paranormal Activity bored me to near death so out of Evil Dead 2 and that id go with ED2 any day.

#54 Posted by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio

@vaeternus said:

For the guy that complained about it being too bloody and cheesy...Well, let's be fair here...the original looked beyond crappy and had cheesy blood I even remember seeing a hose tied to one of the actor's necks with fake red water/blood squirting out...can't get any worse then that lol.

concerning the old ED vs. the new one, honestly the new one looked far better...

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus: Well I suppose,I disagree with the notion that comedy and horror cannot go together.I think it is just plain daft to say that.I mean that is like saying Sci Fi,action,thriller fantasy etc cannot go with it.I mean a horror film doesn't have to be scary to be a horror.Evil Dead 2 isn't really scary but it has those things in it that make it a horror,things that have become synonymous with the genre.So to say that something isn't a horror just because it may not be scary just seems silly to me,or that it cant have comedy in it also seems silly.ED2 is a horror in the film itself with all the features like the gore,possession,demons,set in the middle of nowhere etc,but it has a comedic approach.And there are parts in there that did creep me out and even with all the comedy it still somehow felt eerie like a good horror does.

(Just had to get that off my chest)

Well, I don't disagree with having some comedy in a horror film so long as it works...or is appropriate being where I'm coming from. Like I was saying earlier, movies like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Halloween etc movies originally meant to be darker, serious IMO should have no comedy in it. I know sometimes depending on the director, producer etc they have some in it but I guess as myself being a hardcore "horror fan" I prefer just that, horror. Oh I agree, scary movies are just placed in horror category because it's appropriate. Horror films can be creepy, not bloody etc and still horror. I don't dispute that. Even Paranormal Activity, no blood, chopping heads off etc but it had no comedy in it...because it's goal is to scare, creep people out.

Of course whether or not the viewer gets scared or creeped out depends on the viewer. Like you and I said earlier, what scares one person may not scare another and vice versa...that goes for all horror movies. ED1 originally I admit, for the time creeped me out a little bit...the second and third film just made me laugh more then anything. In terms of the horror aspect I felt let down personally, that's one reason why I was really looking forward to this new film and overall I'm satisfied. I think those people complaining about "too much blood" obviously never saw the original movies as they were also bloody at times.

Well I prefer Evil Dead as more comedic like ED2 and AOD.I mean as a big horror fan myself I like all sorts of horror and yeah of course there are parts of the genre that I don't like.Paranormal Activity bored me to near death so out of Evil Dead 2 and that id go with ED2 any day.

Yeah, PA definitely isn't the most action oriented horror film but more for the "creepy what the hell was that" kind of horror where as ED is more about demonic possession making people do things that make you go "WTF" and has gore, then you have slasher types like Halloween, Jason etc. I think Chucky is a mix between slasher and creepy(a lot of people fear dolls)

I don't mind the ED2 and AOD for the tongue and cheek kind of humor with horror mixed, but personally prefer more ED and ED 2013 for my preference of the series :)

But yeah for PA, after the first one they all seemed the same to me. I really enjoyed Halloween 1 by Zombie, I know some people hated it or the second one especially(which I agree to me with the white pony thing kind of didn't make sense) but I did like the first remake.

#55 Posted by Rabidwolfdog (259 posts) - - Show Bio

I saw it wasn't let down by the reviews of hearing it wasn't super scary, but was very much bloody, making it worth seeing.

#56 Edited by mrdecepticonleader (18737 posts) - - Show Bio

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus said:

For the guy that complained about it being too bloody and cheesy...Well, let's be fair here...the original looked beyond crappy and had cheesy blood I even remember seeing a hose tied to one of the actor's necks with fake red water/blood squirting out...can't get any worse then that lol.

concerning the old ED vs. the new one, honestly the new one looked far better...

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus: Well I suppose,I disagree with the notion that comedy and horror cannot go together.I think it is just plain daft to say that.I mean that is like saying Sci Fi,action,thriller fantasy etc cannot go with it.I mean a horror film doesn't have to be scary to be a horror.Evil Dead 2 isn't really scary but it has those things in it that make it a horror,things that have become synonymous with the genre.So to say that something isn't a horror just because it may not be scary just seems silly to me,or that it cant have comedy in it also seems silly.ED2 is a horror in the film itself with all the features like the gore,possession,demons,set in the middle of nowhere etc,but it has a comedic approach.And there are parts in there that did creep me out and even with all the comedy it still somehow felt eerie like a good horror does.

(Just had to get that off my chest)

Well, I don't disagree with having some comedy in a horror film so long as it works...or is appropriate being where I'm coming from. Like I was saying earlier, movies like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Halloween etc movies originally meant to be darker, serious IMO should have no comedy in it. I know sometimes depending on the director, producer etc they have some in it but I guess as myself being a hardcore "horror fan" I prefer just that, horror. Oh I agree, scary movies are just placed in horror category because it's appropriate. Horror films can be creepy, not bloody etc and still horror. I don't dispute that. Even Paranormal Activity, no blood, chopping heads off etc but it had no comedy in it...because it's goal is to scare, creep people out.

Of course whether or not the viewer gets scared or creeped out depends on the viewer. Like you and I said earlier, what scares one person may not scare another and vice versa...that goes for all horror movies. ED1 originally I admit, for the time creeped me out a little bit...the second and third film just made me laugh more then anything. In terms of the horror aspect I felt let down personally, that's one reason why I was really looking forward to this new film and overall I'm satisfied. I think those people complaining about "too much blood" obviously never saw the original movies as they were also bloody at times.

Well I prefer Evil Dead as more comedic like ED2 and AOD.I mean as a big horror fan myself I like all sorts of horror and yeah of course there are parts of the genre that I don't like.Paranormal Activity bored me to near death so out of Evil Dead 2 and that id go with ED2 any day.

Yeah, PA definitely isn't the most action oriented horror film but more for the "creepy what the hell was that" kind of horror where as ED is more about demonic possession making people do things that make you go "WTF" and has gore, then you have slasher types like Halloween, Jason etc. I think Chucky is a mix between slasher and creepy(a lot of people fear dolls)

I don't mind the ED2 and AOD for the tongue and cheek kind of humor with horror mixed, but personally prefer more ED and ED 2013 for my preference of the series :)

But yeah for PA, after the first one they all seemed the same to me. I really enjoyed Halloween 1 by Zombie, I know some people hated it or the second one especially(which I agree to me with the white pony thing kind of didn't make sense) but I did like the first remake.

Fair enough.I know some people like the first Evil Dead the best because it was more serious.

#57 Edited by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio

@vaeternus said:

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus said:

For the guy that complained about it being too bloody and cheesy...Well, let's be fair here...the original looked beyond crappy and had cheesy blood I even remember seeing a hose tied to one of the actor's necks with fake red water/blood squirting out...can't get any worse then that lol.

concerning the old ED vs. the new one, honestly the new one looked far better...

@mrdecepticonleader said:

@vaeternus: Well I suppose,I disagree with the notion that comedy and horror cannot go together.I think it is just plain daft to say that.I mean that is like saying Sci Fi,action,thriller fantasy etc cannot go with it.I mean a horror film doesn't have to be scary to be a horror.Evil Dead 2 isn't really scary but it has those things in it that make it a horror,things that have become synonymous with the genre.So to say that something isn't a horror just because it may not be scary just seems silly to me,or that it cant have comedy in it also seems silly.ED2 is a horror in the film itself with all the features like the gore,possession,demons,set in the middle of nowhere etc,but it has a comedic approach.And there are parts in there that did creep me out and even with all the comedy it still somehow felt eerie like a good horror does.

(Just had to get that off my chest)

Well, I don't disagree with having some comedy in a horror film so long as it works...or is appropriate being where I'm coming from. Like I was saying earlier, movies like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Halloween etc movies originally meant to be darker, serious IMO should have no comedy in it. I know sometimes depending on the director, producer etc they have some in it but I guess as myself being a hardcore "horror fan" I prefer just that, horror. Oh I agree, scary movies are just placed in horror category because it's appropriate. Horror films can be creepy, not bloody etc and still horror. I don't dispute that. Even Paranormal Activity, no blood, chopping heads off etc but it had no comedy in it...because it's goal is to scare, creep people out.

Of course whether or not the viewer gets scared or creeped out depends on the viewer. Like you and I said earlier, what scares one person may not scare another and vice versa...that goes for all horror movies. ED1 originally I admit, for the time creeped me out a little bit...the second and third film just made me laugh more then anything. In terms of the horror aspect I felt let down personally, that's one reason why I was really looking forward to this new film and overall I'm satisfied. I think those people complaining about "too much blood" obviously never saw the original movies as they were also bloody at times.

Well I prefer Evil Dead as more comedic like ED2 and AOD.I mean as a big horror fan myself I like all sorts of horror and yeah of course there are parts of the genre that I don't like.Paranormal Activity bored me to near death so out of Evil Dead 2 and that id go with ED2 any day.

Yeah, PA definitely isn't the most action oriented horror film but more for the "creepy what the hell was that" kind of horror where as ED is more about demonic possession making people do things that make you go "WTF" and has gore, then you have slasher types like Halloween, Jason etc. I think Chucky is a mix between slasher and creepy(a lot of people fear dolls)

I don't mind the ED2 and AOD for the tongue and cheek kind of humor with horror mixed, but personally prefer more ED and ED 2013 for my preference of the series :)

But yeah for PA, after the first one they all seemed the same to me. I really enjoyed Halloween 1 by Zombie, I know some people hated it or the second one especially(which I agree to me with the white pony thing kind of didn't make sense) but I did like the first remake.

Fair enough.I know some people like the first Evil Dead the best because it was more serious.

Yep. I'm definitely among that group lol. Who knows, perhaps the sequel(since they said they're making another one to this one) will have more comedy in it.

#58 Posted by mrdecepticonleader (18737 posts) - - Show Bio

@vaeternus: Maybe but Id think it would make more sense to keep it in tone with being more serious.

#59 Edited by FalconPuuunch (942 posts) - - Show Bio

@nerdork said:

@falconpuuunch: I agree, it was a good remake. But, as you said, it has nothing on the original. The very obviously fake blood and sinew, the poorly made props, the bad sound editing, the rediculous costumes, the cheesy dialogue; are all things that cannot be remade on purpose. Sam and Ivan Raimi tried to make an epic horror film, on a very low budget and early writing experience, and got Evil Dead, which is why it is so amazing. You can tell how much effort they put into that movie; they gave it their all If they tried to make The Evil Dead as terribly-awesome as the originial, it would have come just off as a poorly made film.

"Raimi famously enjoyed "torturing" his actors.[22][23] He believed that to capture pain and anger in his actors, he had to abuse them a little at times, lamenting "if everyone was in extreme pain and misery, that would translate into a horror."[22] Producer Robert Tapert agreed with Raimi, commenting that he "enjoyed when an actor bleeds."[22] While shooting a scene with Campbell running down a hill, Campbell tripped and injured his leg.[24] Raimi enjoyed poking Campbell's injury with a stick he found in the woods. Because of the copious amounts of blood in the film, the crew produced gallons of fake blood with karo syrup.[17][24] Campbell took hours to remove the substance, which was sticky, from himself.[24] Several of the actors had inadvertently been stabbed or thrown into objects during production.[22][24]

On the last few days on set, the conditions had become so poor that the crew began burning furniture to stay warm. Since only exterior shots needed to be filmed at that point, they burned nearly every piece of furniture left.[25] Several actors went days without showering, and because of the freezing cold conditions, several of them caught colds and other illnesses. Campbell later described the filming process as nearly "twelve weeks of mirthless exercise in agony", though he mused that he did manage to have fun while on set.[24] On January 23, 1980, filming was finished and almost every single crew member left the set to return home, with Campbell staying with Raimi.[25] While looking over the footage that had been shot, Raimi discovered that a few pick-ups were required to fill in missing shots. Four days of re-shoots were then done to complete the film.[26] The final moment involved Campbell having "monster-guts" splattered on him in the basement.[26]"

I agree. This is also why The Evil Dead will always be The "good" Evil Dead in my opinion.

#60 Posted by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio

Maybe ^ there was a newer interview with Jane and the director, he said he's going to continue this newer story so chances are it'll remain serious which I'm fine with.

#61 Edited by etragedy (793 posts) - - Show Bio
#62 Posted by Vaeternus (9410 posts) - - Show Bio