The Evil Dead

If you watch it alone, The Evil Dead seems like a depressing horror movie about a descent into madness beyond the boundaries of rational certainties. In the cinema, those levels are still there, but the entertainment value of the whole work stands out more, and that includes the unintentional elements, from the characters and their behaviour to the film’s low-budget roots, which are evident in the out-of-focus shots, among other things. At the same time, however, Raimi’s talent and creative brilliance become fully apparent on the big screen. The Evil Dead is an essential entry among the legends of enthusiastic amateurs who simply got together with some friends, picked up a camera and shot a genre milestone that opened the door to the wide world of professional productions. But the reason that thousands of others set out on the same path but only a few filmmakers actually succeed in graduating to the Hollywood big league consists in the level of talent. It’s not about Raimi picking up a camera, but everything that he does with it and how. With deflected angles and exalted gestures, poses and precise framing, he not only displays his disposition for almost comic-bookish expressive visuality, but also perfectly draws attention away from the limitations of the production environment and fascinates viewers in every respect through intense scenes. (01/11/2022)

The cult value, of course, prevails. If it hadn't become such a theme, there would be no reason to revisit this slasher, but history would have it otherwise. Today, however, the first film is like a bit of Deja vu, a strange sense of Ash having two hands, of not making fun of the Necronomicon yet, because this is the actual first encounter with evil. And, of course, Bruce is still a young innocent man here. It's interesting, but other parts of the Evil Dead phenomenon have more charm for me. (21/02/2019)

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. (04/01/2008)

When I saw this legend of B-movie horror films in 1990 for the first time, to this day a functional genre cult, I was perplexed. Now that I have repeated this experience, my doubts are still there. I consider Evil Dead to be an amateur film that fails fatefully in all the aspects that are important to me. Terrible acting performances, a nonexistent script, cheapness, the idiocy of the film characters - should I continue? Even that one star I'm giving it is not for any merits because the film is bad and is taken seriously to the extent that it is somewhat amusing in its twisted way. Nevertheless, Sam Raimi showed here (at least in his camera work) that he has filmmaking in his blood, and when he adds enough perspective (which he already demonstrated in the sequel of the same title) and gains some experience, he can shoot in a grand style. Overall impression: 10%. (08/07/2013)

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. (17/03/2013)