|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Aug 20, 2021 3:40:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Aug 20, 2021 3:51:27 GMT
I picked the original. As for the 2013 version:  |
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Aug 20, 2021 5:01:05 GMT
The original
|
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Aug 20, 2021 6:41:22 GMT
1981
|
|
|
|
Post by jcush on Aug 20, 2021 7:31:45 GMT
1981 - 8/10
2013 - 5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Aug 20, 2021 9:49:18 GMT
1981
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 20, 2021 10:50:51 GMT
I'm surprised the remake doesn't have a single vote considering it's one of the better horror remakes, but the original is better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolverine10005 on Aug 20, 2021 13:46:59 GMT
"The Evil Dead" (1981) is simply the most frightening and scariest movie in history. The best, the pinnacle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Aug 21, 2021 1:38:55 GMT
The 2013 remake was the generic factory made version of a work of art.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 21, 2021 1:40:46 GMT
1981 - 7.5/10
2013 - 5/10
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 21, 2021 1:45:00 GMT
The remake was the generic factory made version of a work of art. Evil Dead is basically the not fun version of The Evil Dead and is missing the essential part of The Evil Dead - Bruce Campbell as Ash. Even in the first Evil Dead he is a big part of the personality of the movie and why it works as well as it does. Sam Raimi's first 2 movies there are basically lightening in a bottle. The remake could have been better if it just didn't resort to all of the cliches of the genre and got more creative with the visuals and story-telling. The blood rain finale is the only unique aspect of the movie imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 21, 2021 1:51:46 GMT
That is some blatant false advertising. 
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Aug 21, 2021 1:53:21 GMT
The remake was the generic factory made version of a work of art. Evil Dead is basically the not fun version of The Evil Dead and is missing the essential part of The Evil Dead - Bruce Campbell as Ash. Even in the first Evil Dead he is a big part of the personality of the movie and why it works as well as it does. Sam Raimi's first 2 movies there are basically lightening in a bottle. The remake could have been better if it just didn't resort to all of the cliches of the genre and got more creative with the visuals and story-telling. The blood rain finale is the only unique aspect of the movie imo. I thought the 2013 film was pretty decent, but it's always seemed needless to me given that Evil Dead II effectively was a remake already, despite its title.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Aug 21, 2021 1:56:58 GMT
That is some blatant false advertising. 
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 21, 2021 2:09:20 GMT
Evil Dead is basically the not fun version of The Evil Dead and is missing the essential part of The Evil Dead - Bruce Campbell as Ash. Even in the first Evil Dead he is a big part of the personality of the movie and why it works as well as it does. Sam Raimi's first 2 movies there are basically lightening in a bottle. The remake could have been better if it just didn't resort to all of the cliches of the genre and got more creative with the visuals and story-telling. The blood rain finale is the only unique aspect of the movie imo. I thought the 2013 film was pretty decent, but it's always seemed needless to me given that Evil Dead II effectively was a remake already, despite its title. Evil Dead 2 is not basically a remake imo and Evil Dead 2013 is maddeningly mediocre. It doesn't even have the decency to be flat-out bad. This is a movie that I describe as a movie that just exists. It sits there and it just exists. It does nothing else. Evil Dead 2 is a re-quel as Bruce Campbell has pointed out. It is half a remake and half a sequel.
|
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Aug 21, 2021 2:11:36 GMT
I thought the 2013 film was pretty decent, but it's always seemed needless to me given that Evil Dead II effectively was a remake already, despite its title. It sits there and it just exists. It does nothing else. I've felt that away about myself sometimes. 
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 21, 2021 2:13:21 GMT
It sits there and it just exists. It does nothing else. I've felt that away about myself sometimes. Me too, so why do I want to watch a movie that reminds me of that? I think that is why that type of movie frustrates me the most.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Aug 21, 2021 9:13:35 GMT
1981 film. It's a gem. The soundtrack, cinematography, sound effects, visual effects, atmosphere and Bruce Campbell manic performance makes it a delight from start to finish.
The 2013 movie is just a super gory rethread. There's no charismatic lead and it lacks the subtle campiness and old school charm of its illustrious forebear.
|
|
|
|
Post by movielover on May 10, 2023 5:38:01 GMT
1981
|
|
