DVDfile.com forum for DVD, Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD - View Single Post

JayPea · 02-28-2002, 06:07 AM

I don't post messages that often (hell, I'm still a measely supporting actor), but when I do post messages, they're usually long, detailed novels of EPIC proportions (esp. when I'm writing about either Stanley Kubrick or this movie), so if you aren't interested in what I have to say, then STOP reading right here.........(I'm serious, check out the length of this freakin' post)...

You're still reading my words. OK then, you asked for it (I'm gonna give it to ya good). Considering the fact that I've defended this MUCH underrated and underappreciated horror cult classic on numerous occasions (people just don't understand), it looks like itz time to take the mic and spray my opinion all over this topic (1nce AGAIN). Just so that I don't have to repeat how I feel about this movie, here's an excerpt from another message that I posted a while back regarding my favourite film. And if you REALLY want to, you can read my message in itz entirety at the following link:

http://www.dvdfile.com/interactive/f...ML/004076.html (look for JayPea)

But if you REALLY don't want to click on the above link and scroll down to find my post, then here's the excerpt I was talking about, uncut, uncensored and commercial free (in between the ***):

**********************

"Originally titled "Book of the Dead", I can't recall how many times I've watched this horror "classic" (hey, I'm being a bit biased since I AM one of this movie's biggest supporters), but all I know is that every time I watch it, I'm truly captivated by what I see on the screen (the ONLY other movies that have that kind of effect on me are ALL of Stanley Kubrick's films...my fave director, BTW, but that's a whole 'nother topic). What I love about ED are the messed up yet masterfully utilized camera angles (dutches, ram-o-cam shots, slow dolly shots along the floor and from the ceiling, etc), the camp-quality acting (not the greatest dialogue, but funny when not trying to be funny), the sly references to the Three Stooges (near the end of the film, the idea of blood flowing from the walls, the electrical sockets, etc. was taken from the Three Stooges "A Plumbing We Will Go"...with water in place of blood, that is), the "stingers" that scare the crap outta me (primarily the hands of Deadite Cheryl busting through the door to strangle Ash...still gets me everytime I watch it), and of course, the over-the-top GORE! I mean, other then "Dawn of the Dead" (another horror classic) and maybe "From Dusk Til Dawn", I can't recall any other movie that has virtually no limit to the amount of on-screen gore that they're willing to show (OK, maybe there are a few that I'm missing...but regardless, this film is a blood bath!). Ex: The bodily dismemberment scene of Shelly by Scotty (is that not the most graphic horror sequence that you have ever seen on film? I think so). I mean, the viciousness of the scene, with the screaming, the blood flying on the wall and running down the camera, and the actual graphic shots of the axe chopping up Shelly's forearm and leg...crazy stuff. And the most amazing thing about this movie is that Raimi, Campbell and Tapert created this horror masterpiece on an almost absent budget (this movie helps to define low-budget, cult classic, campy horror).

I personally cannot comprehend as to why people prefer the 2 sequels (Evil Dead 2: Dead By Dawn and Army of Darkness) over the original (The Evil Dead). OK OK, maybe if you prefer comedy over horror, then I can kind of understand. But to say that the sequel was a better film than the original (although that was not explicitly stated in this topic thread, I have heard time and time again from fans of the series that Part 2 is the so-called best that the trilogy has to offer...pfff), is ludricrous. Cuz, personally, I wasn't impressed with Part 2 and Part 3's brand of highly comedic horror (more comedy than horror). "Dead by Dawn" was simply a higher budgeted remake of Part 1, with comedy replacing most of the gore (a TERRIBLE decision). And one of the main things that I liked about the first film is that itz main character, Ash (Bruce Campbell) was a shy, timid, likeable hero (an all around nice guy). In the sequels, he became a smart-ass, wise-crackin dick head. ED1's Ash was scared sh*tless (pardon my language), and relied more on instinct when fighting the deadites (a more realistic character). ED2 and ED3's Ass...I mean, Ash relied more on the first witty remark to come out of his mouth. Yeah, I know, without the new Ash, we wouldn't have video games like Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, Hail to the King and stuff like that (is that a good thing?), but I still prefer the old Ash, and Evil Dead Part 1, over the new Ash and the subsequent sequels."

**********************

Wow, I'll admit that was a mouthful...but here's s'more for y'all (updated commentary style).

"You are definitely in a minority position. The second was much more fun, and the first really isn't that scary. Although my 15 year old sister and cousin thought it was a little, I didn't find it scary at all. II is much funnier, and is just all around better."

True, SolidSnakeASS, I agree (BTW, Metal Gear Solid 1 & 2 kick some serious ass). Marq, myself and anyone else who feels that The Evil Dead is a better film than ED2 is definitely in a minority position. And...is that supposed to be a bad thing? Hell, I'd rather be an individual going against the grain in a minority position, than be another follower amongst the millions (and millions!) of ED2 supporters that can't seem to recognize the sheer brilliance that is The Evil Dead (booya). I'm sure we all agree that being favoured by the masses doesn't always mean top quality, just ask any Hollywood blockbuster flick (and the Evil Dead/ED2 debate is no exception). But with all biased opinions aside (ha), you can't deny that the Evil Dead (PART 1) definitely ranks up there with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Exorcist and Dawn of the Dead as one of the great "old school" cult classic horror flicks (for me, old school is the 70s and 80s). And on a side note, although I LOVED The Blair Witch Project (another topic of debate, I'm sure), The Evil Dead was one of the first, if not the first original "lost in the woods with the unknown" type of horror movie (although, it was a stinger-filled gore-fest rather than a paranoid, psychological scare). And Raimi himself stated that he borrowed from movies like TCM, Night of the Living Dead and The Exorcist for inspiration for The Evil Dead (hence the dope rawness, dark paranoid atmosphere and overall low budget feel and look...terrific stuff!).

In addition, the style in this film is incredible (esp. for a low budget feature) and even artistic (as I have illustrated in my above excerpt). I personally can't wait to one day see "Within the Woods" and watch the "style over substance" technique work for a film with even LESS of a budget than The Evil Dead (I've heard nothing but good things about this much sought after Evil Dead warm up). The humour in The Evil Dead is DEFINITELY much better when itz not meant to be funny (less forced, no doubt is how I like humour in horror movies), hence the lovable campiness that I could not go without. Str8 up, Part 2 and Part 3 got goofy (they're not horror movies, as far as I'm concerned) and I found the forced humour in the sequels to be just plain stupid (slapstick humour in a horror movie? Sorry, it doesn't work for me). And like I said above, in the sequels, Ash turns into a one-liner driven, chauvinistic Ash-hole. What's wrong with that, you say? I don't know. I guess he's just not the kind of person that I would enjoy hanging around with (but Bruce Campbell, the person, is no doubt THE MAN, and the coolest human being alive). Bottom line, Ash becomes less likeable as the series goes on, thus, the less I care about him as a character (kill him off, see if I care). And to those of you who are saying "Oh come on, JayPea. Have a sense of humour, man!". Well, I do have one, and I don't find post-Evil Dead Part 1 Ash funny or charming at all (however, I don't blame him for turning into a prick, considering what he went through in the first film). BTW, I know this has been said a million times on this board, but Bruce Campbell's audio commentary track on the Elite Special Collector's Edition and the upcoming Book of the Dead Edition of The Evil Dead is by far the best commentary track I have ever heard, itz just oozing with Campbell coolness and hilarious charm (the Elite edition of The Evil Dead was my first DVD ever and itz also my most cherished...OK, enuff with the sappiness).

To be honest with you guys, The Evil Dead isn't that scary to me anymore (when I first saw it about 6 years ago, I thought it was scary). It is still one of the best at creating that paranoid, creep-up-on-ya, lookin-over-your-shoulder type atmosphere with the wonderful music and sound effects (most notably, sounds of wind sampled from "The Third Man" as well as music from "Carnival of Souls"). Is The Evil Dead creepy? For realz. Campy? Oh yeah! Entertaining and exciting? You bet your bottom dollar. Over the top? NO DOUBT. The controversial gore (and tree raping scenes) in the ED Trilogy peaked with The Evil Dead, and got watered down with each subsequent sequel. And the enjoyably scary gore of The Evil Dead is virtually unmatched in modern day horror (I am excluding the Faces of Death, Guinea Pig and Men Behind the Sun flicks from this discussion, cuz those are examples of pure disgusting, tasteless, shock cinema that are anything but enjoyable and entertaining, IMO). Anyways, ED2 had better effects (which was expected, due to the higher budget), but the over the top gore was GONE, in exchange for forced goofy humour (and Part 3 was a str8 up comedy). Although ED2 and ED3 work somewhat well as comedies (I never said they totally sucked), I just don't think the comedic horror hybrid is at all superior to the pure genius of Part 1 (I love my horror, served str8 up with no chaser). Also, I love unrated controversy (tasteful in terms of horror standards, mind you, whatever that means), and the sequels simply didn't have any (none).

Some of you may call me a crazed fanatic for writing this essay on my STRONG opinions regarding this movie (and you're absolutely right), but for some reason I feel obligated to spit out such rants when I'm reading comment after comment on how ED2 is supposedly a better movie than my favourite film of all time: The Evil Dead (I mean, you'd do the same in my position, right? Ha). So do I think The Evil Dead is a much better movie than ED2? Take a wild guess. As for those of you who don't agree with me, I probably won't come close to convincing you otherwise (stick with your guns, right?), and I'm definitely not going to budge on my opinion (so we agree to disagree). *sigh* I guess I'll be defending this classic for the rest of my life (I'm game).

L8z y'all,

JayPea

P.S. If you got the time, money, and sh*t to give, peep "The Evil Dead Companion" written by film critic Bill Warren. The book is about the Evil Dead Trilogy, but more so on the The Evil Dead. Mr. Warren seems to share alot of my opinions as to why the first Evil Dead is better than the sequels. But of course, those opinions don't matter if you don't share the same sentiments.

P.P.S. Ash Tuesday is almost here!!! (ie. Tuesday, March 5, 2002 aka the release date of The Evil Dead: Book of the Dead Edition! YAY! OK, bye-bye (as if you read all of this...thank you).

02-28-2002, 06:07 AM	#13 (permalink)
JayPea Actor Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The capital of Canada (take a wild guess).	I don't post messages that often (hell, I'm still a measely supporting actor), but when I do post messages, they're usually long, detailed novels of EPIC proportions (esp. when I'm writing about either Stanley Kubrick or this movie), so if you aren't interested in what I have to say, then STOP reading right here.........(I'm serious, check out the length of this freakin' post)... You're still reading my words. OK then, you asked for it (I'm gonna give it to ya good). Considering the fact that I've defended this MUCH underrated and underappreciated horror cult classic on numerous occasions (people just don't understand), it looks like itz time to take the mic and spray my opinion all over this topic (1nce AGAIN). Just so that I don't have to repeat how I feel about this movie, here's an excerpt from another message that I posted a while back regarding my favourite film. And if you REALLY want to, you can read my message in itz entirety at the following link: http://www.dvdfile.com/interactive/f...ML/004076.html (look for JayPea) But if you REALLY don't want to click on the above link and scroll down to find my post, then here's the excerpt I was talking about, uncut, uncensored and commercial free (in between the *): ******************** "Originally titled "Book of the Dead", I can't recall how many times I've watched this horror "classic" (hey, I'm being a bit biased since I AM one of this movie's biggest supporters), but all I know is that every time I watch it, I'm truly captivated by what I see on the screen (the ONLY other movies that have that kind of effect on me are ALL of Stanley Kubrick's films...my fave director, BTW, but that's a whole 'nother topic). What I love about ED are the messed up yet masterfully utilized camera angles (dutches, ram-o-cam shots, slow dolly shots along the floor and from the ceiling, etc), the camp-quality acting (not the greatest dialogue, but funny when not trying to be funny), the sly references to the Three Stooges (near the end of the film, the idea of blood flowing from the walls, the electrical sockets, etc. was taken from the Three Stooges "A Plumbing We Will Go"...with water in place of blood, that is), the "stingers" that scare the crap outta me (primarily the hands of Deadite Cheryl busting through the door to strangle Ash...still gets me everytime I watch it), and of course, the over-the-top GORE! I mean, other then "Dawn of the Dead" (another horror classic) and maybe "From Dusk Til Dawn", I can't recall any other movie that has virtually no limit to the amount of on-screen gore that they're willing to show (OK, maybe there are a few that I'm missing...but regardless, this film is a blood bath!). Ex: The bodily dismemberment scene of Shelly by Scotty (is that not the most graphic horror sequence that you have ever seen on film? I think so). I mean, the viciousness of the scene, with the screaming, the blood flying on the wall and running down the camera, and the actual graphic shots of the axe chopping up Shelly's forearm and leg...crazy stuff. And the most amazing thing about this movie is that Raimi, Campbell and Tapert created this horror masterpiece on an almost absent budget (this movie helps to define low-budget, cult classic, campy horror). I personally cannot comprehend as to why people prefer the 2 sequels (Evil Dead 2: Dead By Dawn and Army of Darkness) over the original (The Evil Dead). OK OK, maybe if you prefer comedy over horror, then I can kind of understand. But to say that the sequel was a better film than the original (although that was not explicitly stated in this topic thread, I have heard time and time again from fans of the series that Part 2 is the so-called best that the trilogy has to offer...pfff), is ludricrous. Cuz, personally, I wasn't impressed with Part 2 and Part 3's brand of highly comedic horror (more comedy than horror). "Dead by Dawn" was simply a higher budgeted remake of Part 1, with comedy replacing most of the gore (a TERRIBLE decision). And one of the main things that I liked about the first film is that itz main character, Ash (Bruce Campbell) was a shy, timid, likeable hero (an all around nice guy). In the sequels, he became a smart-ass, wise-crackin dick head. ED1's Ash was scared shtless (pardon my language), and relied more on instinct when fighting the deadites (a more realistic character). ED2 and ED3's Ass...I mean, Ash relied more on the first witty remark to come out of his mouth. Yeah, I know, without the new Ash, we wouldn't have video games like Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, Hail to the King and stuff like that (is that a good thing?), but I still prefer the old Ash, and Evil Dead Part 1, over the new Ash and the subsequent sequels." ********************* Wow, I'll admit that was a mouthful...but here's s'more for y'all (updated commentary style). "You are definitely in a minority position. The second was much more fun, and the first really isn't that scary. Although my 15 year old sister and cousin thought it was a little, I didn't find it scary at all. II is much funnier, and is just all around better." True, SolidSnakeASS, I agree (BTW, Metal Gear Solid 1 & 2 kick some serious ass). Marq, myself and anyone else who feels that The Evil Dead is a better film than ED2 is definitely in a minority position. And...is that supposed to be a bad thing? Hell, I'd rather be an individual going against the grain in a minority position, than be another follower amongst the millions (and millions!) of ED2 supporters that can't seem to recognize the sheer brilliance that is The Evil Dead (booya). I'm sure we all agree that being favoured by the masses doesn't always mean top quality, just ask any Hollywood blockbuster flick (and the Evil Dead/ED2 debate is no exception). But with all biased opinions aside (ha), you can't deny that the Evil Dead (PART 1) definitely ranks up there with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Exorcist and Dawn of the Dead as one of the great "old school" cult classic horror flicks (for me, old school is the 70s and 80s). And on a side note, although I LOVED The Blair Witch Project (another topic of debate, I'm sure), The Evil Dead was one of the first, if not the first original "lost in the woods with the unknown" type of horror movie (although, it was a stinger-filled gore-fest rather than a paranoid, psychological scare). And Raimi himself stated that he borrowed from movies like TCM, Night of the Living Dead and The Exorcist for inspiration for The Evil Dead (hence the dope rawness, dark paranoid atmosphere and overall low budget feel and look...terrific stuff!). In addition, the style in this film is incredible (esp. for a low budget feature) and even artistic (as I have illustrated in my above excerpt). I personally can't wait to one day see "Within the Woods" and watch the "style over substance" technique work for a film with even LESS of a budget than The Evil Dead (I've heard nothing but good things about this much sought after Evil Dead warm up). The humour in The Evil Dead is DEFINITELY much better when itz not meant to be funny (less forced, no doubt is how I like humour in horror movies), hence the lovable campiness that I could not go without. Str8 up, Part 2 and Part 3 got goofy (they're not horror movies, as far as I'm concerned) and I found the forced humour in the sequels to be just plain stupid (slapstick humour in a horror movie? Sorry, it doesn't work for me). And like I said above, in the sequels, Ash turns into a one-liner driven, chauvinistic Ash-hole. What's wrong with that, you say? I don't know. I guess he's just not the kind of person that I would enjoy hanging around with (but Bruce Campbell, the person, is no doubt THE MAN, and the coolest human being alive). Bottom line, Ash becomes less likeable as the series goes on, thus, the less I care about him as a character (kill him off, see if I care). And to those of you who are saying "Oh come on, JayPea. Have a sense of humour, man!". Well, I do have one, and I don't find post-Evil Dead Part 1 Ash funny or charming at all (however, I don't blame him for turning into a prick, considering what he went through in the first film). BTW, I know this has been said a million times on this board, but Bruce Campbell's audio commentary track on the Elite Special Collector's Edition and the upcoming Book of the Dead Edition of The Evil Dead is by far the best commentary track I have ever heard, itz just oozing with Campbell coolness and hilarious charm (the Elite edition of The Evil Dead was my first DVD ever and itz also my most cherished...OK, enuff with the sappiness). To be honest with you guys, The Evil Dead isn't that scary to me anymore (when I first saw it about 6 years ago, I thought it was scary). It is still one of the best at creating that paranoid, creep-up-on-ya, lookin-over-your-shoulder type atmosphere with the wonderful music and sound effects (most notably, sounds of wind sampled from "The Third Man" as well as music from "Carnival of Souls"). Is The Evil Dead creepy? For realz. Campy? Oh yeah! Entertaining and exciting? You bet your bottom dollar. Over the top? NO DOUBT. The controversial gore (and tree raping scenes) in the ED Trilogy peaked with The Evil Dead, and got watered down with each subsequent sequel. And the enjoyably scary gore of The Evil Dead is virtually unmatched in modern day horror (I am excluding the Faces of Death, Guinea Pig and Men Behind the Sun flicks from this discussion, cuz those are examples of pure disgusting, tasteless, shock cinema that are anything but enjoyable and entertaining, IMO). Anyways, ED2 had better effects (which was expected, due to the higher budget), but the over the top gore was GONE, in exchange for forced goofy humour (and Part 3 was a str8 up comedy). Although ED2 and ED3 work somewhat well as comedies (I never said they totally sucked), I just don't think the comedic horror hybrid is at all superior to the pure genius of Part 1 (I love my horror, served str8 up with no chaser). Also, I love unrated controversy (tasteful in terms of horror standards, mind you, whatever that means), and the sequels simply didn't have any (none). Some of you may call me a crazed fanatic for writing this essay on my STRONG opinions regarding this movie (and you're absolutely right), but for some reason I feel obligated to spit out such rants when I'm reading comment after comment on how ED2 is supposedly a better movie than my favourite film of all time: The Evil Dead (I mean, you'd do the same in my position, right? Ha). So do I think The Evil Dead is a much better movie than ED2? Take a wild guess. As for those of you who don't agree with me, I probably won't come close to convincing you otherwise (stick with your guns, right?), and I'm definitely not going to budge on my opinion (so we agree to disagree). sigh I guess I'll be defending this classic for the rest of my life (I'm game). L8z y'all, JayPea P.S. If you got the time, money, and sh*t to give, peep "The Evil Dead Companion" written by film critic Bill Warren. The book is about the Evil Dead Trilogy, but more so on the The Evil Dead. Mr. Warren seems to share alot of my opinions as to why the first Evil Dead is better than the sequels. But of course, those opinions don't matter if you don't share the same sentiments. P.P.S. Ash Tuesday is almost here!!! (ie. Tuesday, March 5, 2002 aka the release date of The Evil Dead: Book of the Dead Edition! YAY! OK, bye-bye (as if you read all of this...thank you).