A loan officer who evicts an old woman from her home finds herself the recipient of a supernatural curse. Desperate, she turns to a seer to try and save her soul, while evil forces work to push her to a breaking point.
Five twenty-something friends become holed up in a remote cabin. When they discover a Book of the Dead, they unwittingly summon up dormant demons living in the nearby woods, which possess the youngsters in succession until only one is left intact to fight for survival.Written by
Sony Pictures Entertainment
The film primarily used practical special effects, much like the original film. However, CGI was used to add fire, & remove wires and equipment used for the effects. Many fans of the series feared that since this was a remake, it would resort to CGI rather than practical effects, and this caused some people to avoid the film. Since that is not the case, many fans are thankful for the choice the filmmakers had made. See more »
After Mia crashes the car into the pond, the car has its footwells full of water. The doors are above the water line and at such an angle that it could not flood as shown. The car's depth in the pond is also inconsistent with the area immediately around the car; Mia exits the car and into the water at a depth near her waist. See more »
There are two ways to watch the 2013 version of Evil Dead. If you weren't watching horror in the eighties then you'll probably view this as a competent little horror flick. The acting is decent, as are the special effects. There are a few bits that make you jump and other scenes are reasonably creepy. Therefore, you may conclude that, if you were looking for a decent horror film, then you have found one.
Then there's the other way of looking at it. If, like me, you were a fan of Bruce Campbell's shenanigans in the eighties, as he depicted the wise-cracking 'Ash' who was in the original trilogy, then you may be thinking why did you bother watching this? I knew the remake had no humour. I was prepared for that. I can enjoy an outright horror film without the 'tongue-in-cheekness' of the original. However, the central characters are pretty damn unlikeable. Without the humour, they're a miserable bunch who you won't really care much about - they're just a collection of stereotypes, i.e. the blonde, the brunette, the jock, the geek and the other one - 'Mia' - who is a teenager trying to get herself off drugs (and failing) and therefore hardly someone we can identify with (hopefully). The opening drags as we're supposed to 'get to know' the characters. It felt like this part occupied the first half of the film. I checked the timer and it had only been on for 23 minutes (it felt like 45). Never a good sign.
So, the film plays out pretty much the same as the original. All the aspects are there - the bucketloads of blood, the tree, the thing we never see that runs through the wood and the trapdoor under the cabin. Therefore, if we've seen it before in the original, there's little point in us watching it again. Yes, the film has a more 'polished' feel, but there's nothing new here. They tried to stick to the original by keeping to the plot, which just leaves those who've already watched the original finding little new with what's been done to the new version.
If you've never seen the original and you like horror, you'll probably like this. However, I just felt that 'no Ask = no point.' Another great classic plundered and failed. If you want to watch a half decent remake of a horror classic, only the 2004 version of Dawn of the Dead comes close.
19 of 27 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this