It wasn't a bad movie, it was actually pretty fun and gory. It just had all of this hype that I couldn't see what was so amazing about it. It seemed a lot longer than it actually was, I swear it was like two and a half hours. Overall it was a fun movie but nothing I'd want to see again.

7/10 (B)

I saw this for the first time yesterday night and its a great movie, the first part was kinda boring and slow, but the rest when the zombies or whatever they are attacked, was pretty cool!

B+

Glad you liked it! I'm surprised not more people replied to this thread ...

The ultimate in terror

It's the early 80's, what do you expect? This is a scary scary film. And I think I know why films now a days can't hold a candle to films like Halloween and Evil Dead. And that is because a photo copy is never as good as the original. That is the bottom line. Directors don't care about a lot of the material that they are filming today, especially when it comes to horror films and that is because they don't write their own stories. They do someone elses work. But not Evil Dead. This was Raimi's baby from the outset. When films like the two mentioned were filmed they were filmed by two directors that were complete unknowns. They had no pressure to make a great film and they did it on an incredibly low budget. Halloween was made for $150,000 and Evil Dead for $50 000. So what that meant is that the directors could stick to their visions but they had to find innovative ways to do so. Their budgets didn't allow a heap of special effects so they had to rely on what they knew. And that was, how to create atmosphere using the camera. And Evil Dead is one of the best at doing that. There is one scene in this film that I will never forget and that is one of the early scenes where the cast arrives at the cabin. Here we see a long shot of the cabin and it has very eerie music playing. This shows the cabin as being menacing. It lets you know that there is evil in that cabin. And that we are in for a hell of a ride.

Sam Raimi made a masterpiece here that I believe stands the test of time. You can put this film up against any of today's so called horror films and I guarantee you this scares you more. Raimi cares about his movie and he does everything to make you feel the terror that the cabin people feel. We are scared and disgusted at what happens when one of the women goes outside alone at night and meets a tree that does unspeakable things. And when the book is first introduced.... that is horror movie history there. What a brilliant concept. A book that is evil. I have often wondered about such books. We hear about them all the time in movies about ancient Egypt and ancient times. But here we have a book that has weird incantations from another world and another language, and you just know that as soon as some idiot utters the words that they are not supposed to say, well they won't be around much longer.

The Evil Dead is a miracle. It was made on a rock bottom budget yet it is scarier than any Hollywood movie that is made for 20 million could ever hope to be. If you want to truly experience a frightening experience, rent this film, it knows what it wants to say. And it knows how to make you afraid. So be afraid. Be very afraid. You may never look at the forest the same again.

The best example of just how amazing a film can be even on an extremely low budget. One of the best horror films of all time that is still incredibly effective today. Raimi's direction is inspired throughout (I think he singlehandedly invented several camera shots with this one film), and Bruce Campbell simply IS Ash. Oft imitated buit never equaled.

A+

Well, was the tree rape scene meant to be horrible or laughable?

I remember watching this movie with my cousin about 5 years ago. She laughed at this scene. Why? Im not really sure.

The film did seem like it was pretty damn scary when it was made. This would have scared me into nightmares if I was younger and saw it in the 80's. Unfortunately, I didn't see it in it's prime, so I didn't get too much out of it.

The pencil through the ankle gives me the heebie jeebies.

C+

A


This is an instant horror classic and one of the ten best horror movies ever made. Raimi's direction is superb and despite the low budget he manages to create a horrifying and effective horror film. It is still one of the creepiest and scariest films I have ever seen. It does not have the humorous undertones of the second film and is far from the horror comedy that is the third flick. This is just your classic, gory, straight-out horror and it works very very well. Bruce Campbell is great.

I'm torn on this one. On the one hand, it's truly scary, very disturbing and unsettling, quite well-directed, and incredibly influential. But I just can't overlook the terrible acting (outside of Bruce Campbell), cheesy dialogue, stupid characters, and slavish adherence to silly genre conventions. I mean, could the girl do something other than run into the haunted woods? It did scare me quite a bit, though, the first horror film to do so since The Descent. The scene where Ash's girlfriend is laughing maniacally - brrr. Gives me shivers just thinking about it. I think if it had taken a little more time getting set up (it feels really rushed at the beginning), had some decent actors, and a better script, I would have really liked it, as the direction and visuals are top-notch for such a low-budget film. So it's just okay for me.

It's supposed to be like that though. I'm sure there is another and much clearer way to put this but since it's early in the morning this is all I got - the film takes itself seriously in not being serious, but still manages to be scary. I think if you had good actors here outside of Campbell, the film wouldn't have been as good because it would've been a much darker film. A lot of the overacting provides the film's laughs and I think that was intentional. Although, I'm still thinking about the girl in the woods. How did she get so far away from the cabin so quickly?

Anyways, I liked it. I liked it for what I described above. It's serious, but light. I mean, are we supposed to take a tree raping a girl seriously? Same for the actions everyone takes and what they do. Right at the beginning, with the bridge. They just keep on going as it pretty much collapses.

As for the serious stuff though, it's an effective horror film. It's geuinely scary. That saying, there is something off that I can't quite put my finger on. I think the special effects are somewhat okay - for 1981 and considering the budget they had, but all of the effects don't quite hold up (Especially at the end with the zombies deteriotaring). The closing shot of the film though is very effective.

Right now I'm at a B+, but that will probably go up upon repeat viewings. Now if I can just get my hands on Part II. Hopefully it'll become available soon as part of that Netflix online viewing thing.

Hmm, I don't really buy that. I think it has more to do with the low budget it had. I can see how the second one is deliberately being light, but not this one. I would have preferred it to be darker, actually; if the whole movie had been like that bit where Ash's possessed girlfriend is laughing maniacally, I probably would have loved it.

I thought it was scary as hell, especially the final 30 minutes.

Man, this shit was creepy. Once the Evil Dead themselves show up, egads... It got to me. Especially that laugh. It's also really digusting. The "death" of the ED's at the end... it just goes farther and farther into grossness, but it's pretty brilliant.

I think jmart's right on the money in this thread, it seems serious, but it's not really. For example the end credits, they're like a creepy carnival ride's. The Dead are having fun with Ash, making him go looney. The acting and writing does its job, it's the right setting for the movie.

Raimi's direction is pretty top notch and gets the right effect from most of the deaths.

Horror is one genre I'm lacking on, but this is one of the best I've seen. It pretty much kicks ass, actually.

4.5/5

Shack, you should definitely see the other two films as well.

A beautiful love story between a tree and his woman.

A-

Just watched this for the first time since the first time that I saw it and my opinion is still pretty much the same. It feels really long, which is surprising since it's not even an hour and a half and it's not particularly scary but it's good enough. Hopefully the remake improves on it.

7/10

I've only seen this once back in like 2003. I wasn't crazy about it at the time. It was really cheesy. But I plan on checking it out again sometime soon. It was better than the sequel, which I thought sucked. Didn't even bother with Army of Darkness.

It's a good horror film, but I prefer the second one.

The second was way too silly for my taste. Though maybe I'd enjoy it more now.

I remember the third being TERRIBLE.

The third is brilliant. So funny.

I honestly preferred the off-Broadway musical to any of the movies. Talk about great fun!

Didn't even know about that.

It was seriously brilliant. Wonderfully hysterical and campy. One of the most entertaining nights I've ever had at the theater. I also enjoyed sitting in the "splatter zone" where you are given ponchos and are completely covered with blood. Of course cool people opt to wear white t-shirts and jeans for the memories.

This is and always is very dark horror movie despite a lot of it has not dated well. The direction was Raimi is great which is what makes this movie effective. The tree scenes and the finale with the girlfriend are done really well I wish someone can make as effective reboot of this without sacrificing horror elements.

B+