Topic: Evil Dead (2013)

[Inccubus]

It was ok. However, as a fan of the original, the entire thing was made worth it right after the credits... Groovie.

OK. SO let me get this straight. They remade Evil Dead, only with a bunch of largely pussy-ass characters. Now, they're making a sequel... BUT... Sam Raimi, the original creator of Evil Dead is making a 4th movie for his original continuity that is going to be Army of Darkness 2... BUT then they want to do a 7th movie that has both Ash from the original continuity and Mia from the remakes... So that means that this new movie and the next one aren't remakes at all. Basically the same exact thing happening to two different people in nearly identical places is a bit of a stretch.

Given all these plans I hope that means the next "remake" has more of that good ol' Evil Dead charm.

[GuyStarwind]

I was really excited to watch it but my brother said it was just ok. Now my brother is one of those guys who thinks every movie is good. So, if he thinks it's only just ok it must not be very good. I still may watch it.

[Abnormal Freak]

I was really excited to watch it but my brother said it was just ok. Now my brother is one of those guys who thinks every movie is good. So, if he thinks it's only just ok it must not be very good. I still may watch it.

Well, if he thinks any horror remake from the past decade is better than Evil Dead...he's just plain wrong.

I like the remake a lot. How they'll explain it coinciding with the originals, I dunno, but it'll probably be some kind of alternate reality kind of thing.

Best part of the remake's all the effects. It's lacking the dread and atmosphere that the very first movie has, but it's good in its own right.

[darkmanx_429]

I'm waiting for the uncut version of the dvd to come out. Hollywood is not going to double dip me!

[Abnormal Freak]

Unless Campbell's bullshitting, it sounds like the R-rated version is the movie all involved wanted to release, so an uncut version would essentially be a non-director's cut.

[Ratty]

Unless Campbell's bullshitting, it sounds like the R-rated version is the movie all involved wanted to release, so an uncut version would essentially be a non-director's cut.

One should always keep in mind that Campbell and the Raimis have a long history of (affectionately?) trolling their fans.

[Inccubus]

I like the remake a lot. How they'll explain it coinciding with the originals, I dunno, but it'll probably be some kind of alternate reality kind of thing.

Best part of the remake's all the effects. It's lacking the dread and atmosphere that the very first movie has, but it's good in its own right.

Cambell said in an interview that he see's no problem with it on account of the "remake" has a completely different set of characters. And I tend to agree.
Furthermore, I actually liked the movie better thinking of it in terms of a new chapter rather than a remake which it technically can't be since it shares no characters with the original at all and Ash makes a small cameo after the credits end. Plus the first film was pretty much retconed in the second.

[Abnormal Freak]

It's a remake in the sense that it recreates so many scenes, albeit slightly altered. And are we to believe there are two Necronomicons, or did these kids happen upon the same one in a different cabin somewhere?

I think making it as simple as "some other kids in the same world happened upon nigh-exact circumstances and situations" is pretty fecking lame.

[chainsawmidget]

It's a remake in the sense that it recreates so many scenes, albeit slightly altered.

The same can be said of many sequels. 

And are we to believe there are two Necronomicons, or did these kids happen upon the same one in a different cabin somewhere?

Either explanation could work.  If somebody is making a book and the book is extremely important, somebody else down the line just might want their own copy of it. 

I think making it as simple as "some other kids in the same world happened upon nigh-exact circumstances and situations" is pretty fecking lame.

Only if it's a coincidence.  If they just happen to stumble into the same scenario, it's kinda lame but there's also the possibility that somehow the book is drawing people to it for it's own reasons.  Maybe the Cabin itself isn't even always in the same place.  It could be like some demonic presence that inserts itself into some existing building and twists it.

[Abnormal Freak]

That just sounds all sorts of lame to me and I won't accept it if the official storyline winds up that way. What makes the original so chilling is you have this group of kids going out to a cabin for a fun weekend, a cabin which an archaeologist resided in while translating passages from a book he unearthed which awakened dark spirits. It's such a mundane scene made horrific by demon possession.

Somehow that mundane location becomes a part of the Necronomicon's ploy? A necessary element? It doesn't work for me.

[Inccubus]

Remember that the story of the original Evil Dead was retconed in Evil Dead 2.
The new evil dead has a similar plot and setting, but with very different circumstances and takes place way later. The way I see it is that after Ash and the Evil is drawn into the past the Necronomicon is found by someone and eventually falls into the hands of those wierd people at the beginning of the new movie.
So basically, yes pretty much the same general thing happens to Mia as did to Ash only a little different. That's what they're gonna have to go with in order for a convergence of the two characters to make any sense at all.
On the other hand, non of the original Evil Dead movies are known for consistency between narratives. Hell, they're barely even all of the same sub-genre.

[Lelygax]

Hmm... Trailer please? I love Evil Dead, you guys know that as I stated months ago xD