Directed by:
Sam RaimiScreenplay:
Sam RaimiCinematography:
Tim PhiloComposer:
Joseph LoDucaCast:
Bruce Campbell, Ellen Sandweiss, Richard DeManincor, Betsy Baker, Theresa Tilly, Ted Raimi, Scott Spiegel, Sam Raimi, Ivan Raimi, John Cameron (more)VOD (1)
Plots(1)
Story of five college-age friends who travel to a cabin in rural Tennessee where they stumble upon the Book of the Dead, an ancient tome bound in human flesh and inked in blood. After unwittingly awakening the unspeakable terror told of in the book, each of the friends is transformed into the evil dead, one by one, except for Ash (Bruce Campbell). So, Ash is left with no other way to survive than to dismember the living corpses of his sister, girlfriend, and two of his friends. (official distributor synopsis)
(more)Videos (1)
Reviews (13)
Since the remake is knocking on the door, I decided to watch the original 1981 film without being some kind of horror movie fan. And I have to say that this 30+ year old film does not do the genre any shame. Many of the scenes are nicely paced, the atmosphere is thick, and the visual effects are quite well done for the time (the rape in the woods was really scary). Otherwise, the make-up artists also did a great job and created more than one hideous face.
()
I get why this film has cult status, but for me it’s not worthy of a full score. The first half was great, but the second has several dull moments, the plot gets stuck somewhere and all I could do was wait for an ending that was clear. The final disintegration of the demons didn’t have any atmosphere due to the not very good special effects. It needs a remake, those special effects today don’t work as they should.
()
The first half is excellent. With a minimum of resources, Raimi manages to evoke an oppressive atmosphere of fear. The tree rape scene is something that is not easily forgotten. But the second half is terribly jumbled, as if Raimi didn't know what he wanted to do and was paying for his inexperience as a filmmaker. What I mean is that the scenes are poorly sequenced. In one scene there is a brutal death, and in the one that immediately follows, the characters look uninterested, as if not much had actually happened a few minutes before. I consider Evil Dead to be merely a good, not great, precursor to the flawless sequel.
()
On the one hand, it is perhaps too frantic and prolonged by several unnecessarily long scenes of destroying "friends", yet on the other hand, it is definitely imaginative, playful, solidly suspenseful atmospheric fun. I saw Evil Dead for the first time today, so I really can't go on and on about nostalgia, VHS tapes and whatnot. But even so, the film has a kind of special charm that is hard to describe. I'm curious about the sequel.
()
To etch such an innovative notch in the annals of horror at 21 requires quite a lot of filmmaking talent, and Raimi here proves with every minute that he has more than plenty of it. The perspective shots and the visual tricks with the foggy environment in the first half generate an atmosphere that is thick as oatmeal (and also delivers rape-by-tree and the book of the death), while the great make-up and an endless dose of inventive camera movements in the second half hold the entertainment value at the highest level, even though the script is stuck in one place. The watering of the light-bulbs and the window projecting blood are immortal moments with deserved cult status. A simple premise exploited to the fullest with a very unorthodox and delicate climax – modern ghost stories can’t hold a candle to this. 80%
()
Ads