Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

Let's Summon The Trailer For The New EVIL DEAD, Shall We?!?!

The Kidd here...

There certainly isn't any shortage of blood in the red-band trailer for EVIL DEAD (via IGN), which debuted at New York Comic Con a couple of weeks back. But, from the way the trailer is cut, it's still a bit difficult to really get a feel for what director Fede Alvarez has going on in his different take on Raimi's classic film. 

I'm kind of indifferent to what's going on here, and perhaps that rests with my lack of understanding for why a retelling of EVIL DEAD is necessary. However, I'm certainly not blown away by this first glimpse at the film... then again, there isn't anything here that has me ready to proclaim this remake as being the end of cinema as we know it. 

As a fan of EVIL DEAD, what do you think? 


-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:16 p.m. CST

    Looks like Bradley Whitford's mermans got fucked once again.

    by Nordling

    Who won this year? Maintenance, probably. I do dig this trailer quite a bit.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Bruce Campbell Cameo

    by dalybear

    Please make that happen

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:18 p.m. CST

    no thanks

    by CrazySlasher

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:18 p.m. CST

    This looks fucking good

    by ghoulstock

    I know the common reaction is to say "ANOTHER HORROR REMAKE??? UGGGh", but this trailer shows that the people behind this clearly give a shit and are trying to make something good, unlike, say, the nightmare on elm street or friday the 13th remakes.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:19 p.m. CST


    by The Marquis de Side 3

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Needs more Ash

    by KJD

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:23 p.m. CST

    Looks great!

    by DidntPullOutInTimeCop

    An after credits scene with Ash revealing this is a prequel or sequel would be sweet. Maybe just the 1973 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale driving towards the cabin...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Looks fucked up!.....

    by connor187

    in a good way!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:26 p.m. CST

    So there's both a female and male ASH...

    by doom master

    Girl cuts her arm off... Guy has the chainsaw and Ash's blue denim shirt. Sorry....Still not impressed. Somebody drag Campbell from Burn Notice and put his ass in this film please.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Hey 00:28, wrecked 88 Royale.

    by DidntPullOutInTimeCop

    Prob means nothing, but one can hope

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:26 p.m. CST

    I hate to say it...but it looks really good!!

    by Superponte

    Outstanding gore, tree rape intact. Me likes

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:27 p.m. CST

    Will it have the humor that made Raimi's original such a classic?

    by The Marquis de Side 3

    I feel (from this trailer) that the film is geared to the sexy teen CW crowd and torture porn fans. Again, first spontaneous impressions. to me, it's just pretty people being slaughtered in very graphic naturalistic disgusting ways. Those unfamiliar with the original films will walk away with the same impression. Raimi's original films were stylized. So it allowed for humor to come into play. And the gore was so over the top, it bordered on hilarious. But the film worked. It had charm and personality. Making the gore so graphic... I'm sure it's fine for another movie. But it's not "The Evil Dead'. I guess we have to see how the story and characters come out to play, but from this trailer, I don't get any sense of what this is about other than very graphic naturalistic violence against extras from "90210". Again, just another superficial remake out to cash in on our nostalgia. :o(

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:31 p.m. CST

    TreeRape does not exist in this dojo

    by Cobra--Kai

    A talkbacker who read the script says that the trees attack in a slightly rapey way but they do not rape. Repeat, the trees do not rape in this remake.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:33 p.m. CST

    @the marquis de side 3

    by LazyDolphin

    Humor? Have you ever seen the first Evil Dead? The sequel was humorous, but the first one was played extremely straight.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Tree Rape Time

    by Pipple

    Wasn't honestly interested until I saw that bit. I hope it's more explicit and graphic than the original, with some anal action this time... one can dream can't he...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Female Protagonist

    by MattDomville

    I'm glad folks have calmed down about it. A comic on the subject:

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:34 p.m. CST

    Evil Dead 4...

    by ZOMBRE

    With Sam Directing and Bruce acting. This is what the fans want. He played a great elderly Elvis in the brilliant Bubba Ho-Tep. Sam has dumptrucks full of money and has more than enough cash to avoid AOD's shortcomings. I'm looking forward to seeing this "remake" I adored Drag Me To Hell. It felt like it was a page from the Evil Dead universe. This new entry looks promising, even if it seems like some of the humor is gone, something essential to this unique horror series. Regardless, I want to see Ash ala Grand Torino or Unforgiven kicking deadite ass. With a twist of the Stooges of course and a heavy doses of horror.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Three things we all need from an EVIL DEAD movie (besides tree rape): 1 - white eyed possessed demons 2- marionette string jerking levitation 3 - maniacal evil cackling I DONT SEE THOSE THINGS IN THIS FUCKING TRAILER!!!!!!! REMAKE FAAAAAIIIIIIIILLL!!! AAARRRRHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Needs stop motion animation.

    by Bubba Gillman

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST

    Needs stop motion animation.

    by Bubba Gillman

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST


    by donkey_lasher

    It's the Big Budget Evil Dead that we used to scream for! I hope this takes itself seriously, as Ash just has no place in this. He's more a goofball than a badass deadite killer. Bring him back for a sequel a la Evil Dead 2 though. A self conscious humorous version would be greatkj

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:36 p.m. CST


    by iluvsyfy

    This site use to report news like this first, what's up with that.Get with it people (editors).

  • Alec Baldwin got ahold of the Nutrisystem just in time.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    Did anyone else see Evil Dead 2 before they saw part 1?

    by Samuel Fulmer

    I guess that's why I never really cared for the first one.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    That trailer is fantastic!

    by D o o d

    that's how you sell a movie!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Get Konishki out of retirement

    by Samuel Fulmer

    and get him in a three way sumo match with Val Kilmer and Bruce Campbell.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:39 p.m. CST

    the marquis de side 3

    by Captain Tragedy

    I found nothing humorous with the first one. It's an intense horror movie experience without an inkling of sunshiny funnies for me. There might have been tons of gore, but style did not really come into play until Evil Dead 2. The second blended both horror and humor quite nicely. Army of Darkness went all out comedy, imo. But to say that the original Evil Dead had humor is selling it short on the horror side. There was no Ash acting like a cartoon character in the first Evil Dead like he was in the last two movies. If there is a sequel to this remake, and come on there will be, then I expect that they may try to blend in a bit of slapstick. I liked this trailer btw. It kind of screamed Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, but damn, that's Evil fucking Dead right there.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:42 p.m. CST

    @cobra: #4 - "JOIN US"

    by obijuanmartinez

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:42 p.m. CST

    Whoa... is that blood?

    by daggor

    Nice punch-up, Juno Strippername.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    @samuel_fulmer ED2 First? Yep.

    by Scott Mendenko

    I was assigned to write a classic movie recap article on EVIL DEAD 2 once without having seen the first one in its entirety, though I had seen enough to know that they are similar in a lot of ways. However, I saw the first one as a result of recently re-reading Bruce Campbell's autobiography, If Chins Could Kill, and I was well prepared for what I was going to watch, and was able to appreciate it for what it is. Having that book as a sort of pre-commentary track is a wonderful recommendation.

  • Change of gender? Worked for The Hitcher remake so well.... I will say....licking the blade till the tongue splits did tighten my sphincter.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:44 p.m. CST

    Shame about the Ring style..

    by Righteous Brother

    Hair in front of face crawling type stuff, but who knows, could be a pip, could be a pip.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Fuck this ... I want a proper Army of Darkness sequel

    by Judge Briggs

    Why the fuck can't this get made?!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:51 p.m. CST

    It looks way better then what i was expecting

    by eric haislar

    I will go see it.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    looks like all the other shit...

    by JAMF

    saw, hostel, human centipede, serbian film yada yada yada.... who gives a fuck. ooh and dubstep fart noises to make the little kiddies wet. oooh cabin in the words makes this null and void. what a waste of time and money.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    It's the end of Cinema as we know it.

    by Smerdyakov

    Thank God!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:57 p.m. CST

    I like it.

    by UltimaRex

    But I don't know why. I'm not even sure I WANT to know why. I get the feeling that if I figured out why it will disappear...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 12:59 p.m. CST

    Looks like shit, cap'n

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    fuck remakes. -- Oversaturated high-contrast color -- teen cast -- ass-kicking 100-lb. female lead -- computer graphics -- remake of classic horror if you'll pay money for this, you're part of the problem

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:01 p.m. CST

    The original Evil Dead was pretty humorous

    by NotEnoughBiehn

    maybe unintentionally, but I never took it serious for one moment. Possessed girls giggling and making cutesy faces is not my idea of intense horror. Neither is tree rape, which is a corny idea. I had a few good laughs at some of the horrible acting. And the oatmeal gore was silly. But at least that had style and personality, and Raimi was a man with a vision. I don't see that in this trailer. Looks modern horror spec.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:02 p.m. CST

    Demon fail

    by smatt584

    I know this is minor, but the one thing that always categorized the demons in evil dead from all other possession movies was the milky white contacts. The girl here looks like they borrowed her from the exorcist. How such an easy and iconic look was fucked up is well beyond me, but I call fail on a very basic level.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:03 p.m. CST

    i can't believe i'm actually going to type this...

    by ultragoregrind

    ...but that looked BAD ASS.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST

    Nice. But it needs more Angry Molesting Tree!

    by L.H.Puttgrass

    And possibly more 'tude.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:04 p.m. CST

    I'm amazed there are people here calling the original humorous

    by Lovecraftfan

    It was low budget which may have added some camp but it was an intense and grim horror film. Ash is just one of the chaarcters who exhibits none of the humor of the later films. Its in your face and bleak as hell.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:06 p.m. CST

    my biggest problem (besides no Ash) is the EYES SHOULD BE ALL WHITE

    by future help

    otherwise...looks good.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:08 p.m. CST

    Has that ugly 'shot on a sound stage' look

    by DonRivella

    The TCSM remake was the same. The pseudo-gritty, but actually aseptically sterile studio look takes away from the 'horror'. Other than that, looks OK.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:09 p.m. CST

    Lol @ Nordling.Thats exactly what I was thinking.Cabin in the woods reboot.

    by JohnWayneWasGay

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:10 p.m. CST

    Not enough "running around with a camera stuck on a board" shots.

    by openthepodbaydoorshal

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:12 p.m. CST

    I might see it.

    by Shaun1138

    I am 37 years old and a huge fan of the original three films. I was not happy when I heard they were going to do a remake, but I might give it a shot. I just wish Hollywood would stop recycling old titles.

  • You've been...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:15 p.m. CST

    shaun1138 and donrivella

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    shaun1138 HOW CAN YOU SAY you wish they'd stop making these, and THEN say you might see this?? Do you see the disconnect there? donrivella I agree 100% about that sterile-gritty "look," well said

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:15 p.m. CST

    @ lovecraftfilm,You obviously never watched it on acid.Its hilarious.

    by JohnWayneWasGay

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:16 p.m. CST

    @marquis de side 3

    by fauns_bass_1

    Well said sir... Bruce Campbell made the series anyway, if there is no Bruce it's not an Evil Dead movie.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:23 p.m. CST

    movie news.

    by moorE12

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:24 p.m. CST

    I normally don't like remakes, but this looks pretty good!

    by Steve Lamarre

    And, the Kidd indifferent? Gee.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:25 p.m. CST

    This needs more quotes

    by donkey_lasher

    Seriously People, what is going on? Anyway look at the girls eyes as she cuts up her tongue. HURRDUUURRRRRHUUR

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:29 p.m. CST

    At least peple can't complain about the "pussy PG-13" on this...

    by Nasty In The Pasty

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:30 p.m. CST

    Bleck Blargh Garble Glep Blurrrrp

    by Mephisto the Great

    My reaction. The original series (at least Evil Dead 2 & 3) was great for as much its style and humor as its content. Lose the style, you lose the film. Unnecessarily bleak violence and filled with castoffs from UPN. You didn't ask my opinion, but there it is. Blargh.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:33 p.m. CST

    Looks good, but Cabin In The Woods has ruined all cabin-based horror films

    by SupermanIsMyGod

    The whole first half of the trailer is straight out of the movie! They go into the basement, find a scary book, read evil words, monsters are unleashed. I was laughing the whole time thinking of Cabin quotes so I don't really know what to think anymore. I'm gonna see the movie, but that damn Joss Whedon has ruined every horror film set in a cabin, which is quite a few. It wouldn't be so bad if this trailer wasn't EXACTLY the cliche Cabin was poking fun at.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:33 p.m. CST

    mattdomeville fuck you. female lead = major fail fucker

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:35 p.m. CST


    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:36 p.m. CST

    Yawn, just more garbage.

    by nephilim138

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:44 p.m. CST

    Does every movie use the same cabin from Cabin in the Woods?

    by TheSecondQuest

    Kinda funny how often that same place shows up. Interior sometimes changes, but it's usually the same exterior. I think even Eureka used it, ha.

  • It's not an Evil Dead movie without some silly, twisted humour thrown in. Also, changing the magic words from Klaatu Narada Nikto? Fail. I would REALLY prefer a follow-up to Army of Darkness. I wanna see Bruce (or a suitable 20-something facsimile) fighting off deadites from inside the S-Mart.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Please forgive my typo. Of course, I meant Klaatu Barada Nikto.

    by Royston Lodge

    My kingdom for an edit button.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:54 p.m. CST

    Looks super bloody and gory. But that doesn't make a good movie.

    by BilboRing

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:54 p.m. CST

    Can't wait for the Ishtar remake

    by Danny

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:55 p.m. CST

    Shawn of the Dead was the TRUE successor to the Evil Dead trilogy.

    by Royston Lodge

    So say we all.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 1:56 p.m. CST


    by Scrawny_Beaver

    We've just seen a very short trailer. There's a strong possibility that there will be marionette strung, jerking, levitating,maniacally evilly cackling, fucked up Demon action in the final product... No all white pupils... shame, but I can live with that. Chill!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2 p.m. CST

    jane levy as the lead fuck you all. what a ruined movie

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:01 p.m. CST

    female lead = major fail

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:01 p.m. CST

    reward for anyone who can change this and make it right

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:03 p.m. CST

    its because she is a woman and cant handle a chainsaw. lame

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:04 p.m. CST

    So much for "ferociously original"...

    by BenBraddock

    Were he dead, Mr. King would be rolling in his grave...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:04 p.m. CST

    fuck off

    by simonnumbernine

    just ..fuck off

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Jesus Wept...

    by Scrawny_Beaver

    Get a grip!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:17 p.m. CST

    royston lodge

    by donkey_lasher

    Those magic words you mentioned weren't in the original. And they're a reference to a very old movie.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:19 p.m. CST

    Finally, a real sequel to 'The Evil Dead'!

    by buggerbugger

    Fuck those two pieces of shit comedy "sequels" riding on the then-popular mid-eighties comedy-horror bandwagon.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:20 p.m. CST

    The original is one of the worst films I have ever seen.

    by chuckmoose

    I cannot conceive of how that movie is considered a "classic" with 100% score on rotten tomatoes. Cannot conceive. And yes, I am old enough to have seen it in the theatre when I was in high school. I checked it out last year some time and could barely force myself to watch it. This trailer is pretty intense and looks like it could be gross, scary fun. That said, after having seen (and loved) Cabin in the Woods it is hard to take a retelling of this kind of story seriously. I hope they at least keep in mind that people may have a slightly different perspective on this genre now.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:21 p.m. CST

    looks fantastic!

    by Titus05

    totally wasn't expecting many cool scenes in that trailer...the girl licking the sharp blade at the end was awesome

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:24 p.m. CST

    Looks great. Also, I was tree raped and it aint fun. No, it taint..

    by MoistMuskyCamelToe

    Color me surprised, this is something I want to see. As previously mentioned by another poster, the razor-licking thing had me doing involuntary Kegels of terror. My prostate now has a six pack. And I have been tree raped (nice segue there, amiright?). I have these three fucking HUGE ponderosa pines in my front yard, and they hate my white ass. Every time I go out with Mr. Beavertooth to do some limbing, they manage to tear me to pieces. No shit, I had to get stitches last time we danced. Then they dump like ten thousand pounds of pine needles for me to clean up like the little pine tree bitch I am.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:27 p.m. CST

    On humor in first "EVIL DEAD"...

    by The Marquis de Side 3

    I found it funny in parts, albeit it was not in large amounts like the sequels (Raimi himself is a "THREE STOOGES" fan, and admits to adding some heavy slapstick in "EVIL DEAD 2"). The first film was very smart and subtle. Black humor, I guess, is a good way to describe it. And it was only in small doses. Perhaps you can't help but laugh because you're so scared, you react with nervous laughs. Yes, these demons are scary. But they're also theatrical demons. The theatricality of the evil spirits is what both intensifies the horror, and allows for some black humor in there as well. I've never laughed during films like "ALIEN or "HALLOWEEN" because there was this coldness and indifference in the monster threatening the protagonists. It was a different type of dread you felt in those movies. There was an absence of personality -- nothing to relate to when the monster has no eyes, no expression. Very scary! In "EVIL DEAD", yes, the danger is terrifying, but then because there's a certain personality to the danger, you could find yourself both terrified and, sometimes, laughing (as a self defense mechanism perhaps?). "Personality" is the key word here... the film is scary, but it has enough charms and zeal to its horror that bring you back again and again. That's partly why it's a cult hit. And yes, it is SCARY AS HELL! As gross and horrifying and intense as the first film was, it never descended into torture or superficiality like much of contemporary horror. Raimi's gory ultra-violence is stylized. It's believable, it's frightening, but as an audience member, you can distance yourself from it MUCH more than, say, the type of violence depicted in "HOSTEL" or "SAW". Interesting to note that Siskel and Ebert describe the 1981 "EVIL DEAD" as a splatter film. But it isn't heartless or cruel. It's a fun horror movie. It's sophisticated and suspenseful, but is never mindless horror. So yes, there's humor (depending on your definition of it) in the first film of "EVIL DEAD". It's not prevalent like the sequels, which take the humor to a much farther degree. But it's there. And what it gives the film is personality. And personality is something that's often overlooked in remakes. I have my reservations for this new "EVIL DEAD" because all I see from this trailer are gross out scenes. I wasn't scared. There's nothing there that says "peculiar... let's check it out". It looks a lot like stuff we've seen in other trailers and films of the last 12 years. I'll give this new film a chance. I hope it's really good, that it brings something new, that it stays true to its roots, and that it's not "EVIL DEAD" just on the surface (or name).

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:29 p.m. CST

    By the way, is it true that Sam Raimi regrets the "tree rape scene"?

    by The Marquis de Side 3

    I've heard he sometimes wished he never put that scene in the film due to the negative reactions from the public. Not sure if that's still the case or if it was ever accurately reported.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:30 p.m. CST

    yes he does. its in his biography and on imdb

    by Creative

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:31 p.m. CST

    I'm drawing a line in the sand, DO NOT READ THE LATIN!

    by rev_skarekroe

    I'm going to imagine this takes place the year before Cabin In The Woods and in this version the kids pick Angry Molesting Tree.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Am I the only one...

    by veebeeyes

    who thinks that the original Evil Dead wasn't very good? "Classic" or not, I honestly thought it was sort of crappy, so I have no problem with remaking it. As far as the trailer looks like Evil Dead with better production values. I'm really pretty indifferent.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:32 p.m. CST

    Hey chuckmoose

    by MoistMuskyCamelToe

    You are absolutely right. The original isn't especially good as a movie. But it did bring a great mix of old ideas (Three Stooges slapstick) and new visual approaches (vas-o-cam, ground level point-of-view chase shots, snap focus, etc.) to the movies. So the first Evil Dead gets a pass because of the production history and sheer effort involved to get the film done and seen. Read a bit about it online or in Campbell's book. I also suspect that most people saw Army of Darkness first. I did, and it's what made me want to watch the first two (in the desperate hope that they'd be as good).

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:34 p.m. CST

    Magic Words?

    by labcreature

    The 'magic words' are only used in Army of Darkness. The rest are demon incantations. They're different!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:42 p.m. CST

    Didn't like this when it leaked last week, but guess what....

    by kindofabigdeal

    I still don't care for it. My Care-O-Meter registers Very Limp. Oh yeah, and F Diablo!!!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 2:59 p.m. CST

    This movie looks absolutely fucking crazy.

    by Yelsaeb

    Is that a good thing? We'll just have to wait and see.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:01 p.m. CST

    What's the fucking point?

    by lead_sharp

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:01 p.m. CST

    Evil Dead wasn't humorous 'cause it was scary,

    by NotEnoughBiehn

    which I didn't think it was. It was because of the possessed chick in clown make up making goo-goo ga-ga sounds. And DeManincor's cheese acting and facial expressions. And oatmeal and yogurt gore. Night of the Living Dead was low budget, and Evil Dead comes nowhere near the nightmare of that film when it came out. But that's okay, different things work for different people. I remember being a child and crying when Marc Singer tore the human face off of one of the invaders in V, and revealed a terrifying (to me at the time) reptilian visage. But I go back and look at it and it's pretty quaint. And I didn't see ED until I was in my 20s, and after ED2.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Anybody who describes this as "A Major Fail!"

    by Jason Adkins

    By using the term "Major Fail" your opinion is Automatically not valid. Because you are moron. That being said, "This is Probably going to be a piece of shit."

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Cabin in the Woods 2?

    by tailhook

    Thats all I thought while watching it play. It was practically beat for beat. Its like watching an Airport style disaster movie and having everything that happened in Airplane! be used. They couldn't find some way to distinguish it and not be so blatant about highlighting the formula?

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:10 p.m. CST

    No. Thanks, torture movie. Goldentribe's got it.

    by popculturesymphony

    I have no problem with remakes, but this just looks like a style-less gore-fest. I have yet to see one of these 80s horror remakes (excepting Fright Night) with any of the fun or inventiveness of the originals.

  • I actually started the trailer thinking "don't do the gong, don't do the gong....." and then GONG!!! Other than that I don't know how I feel about this trailer. Evil Dead is important because of it's very specific style and place in time. I don't know what a remake, even a good one's artistic purpose is... but I'm sure it will make some bank so there is that.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:19 p.m. CST


    by BlueLando

    Oh, and sod off with the 'humour lack' comments. The first Evil Dead had goofy acting, but it wasn't particularly amusing. It was violent and incredibly fucked up. Like this looks!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:19 p.m. CST

    How many people bitching about the female lead...

    by ames prather

    ...had the same thing to say about Starbuck on the remake of BSG? Seriously. If they're going for a more modern take on the story (i.e. they have a budget and better gore) then why the hell not? The original really tried to be a serious horror movie but was limited by the budget and equipment available to the crew at the time. And if Sam Raimey is involved with this, whose to say this isn't the tone he wanted with the original? ??Pseudo?? Out.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:20 p.m. CST

    For all the people saying it..

    by George

    ...looks the same as all the other stuff coming out. Let me remind you that there is no child crab walking across the screen while mommy (or daddy) screams in terror followed by a quick flash of a stupid looking demonic face in the background. About time someone did something else. Count me in!

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:22 p.m. CST

    A Nightmare on Elm Street

    by Meathook

    Somebody please explain to me the hatred for the Nightmare on Elm Street remake. I grew up loving the originally series, constantly waiting for the new one and hold up slashers to them, especially the first one. I am very disappointed Robert Englund didn't come back, but other than that the sequel was very good and in many waste better than the original. The original ending was pretty shit too. If you like the original I can't see not liking the remake.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:24 p.m. CST

    Gad, this looks tedious.... The Puppet-Masters!

    by animatronicmojo

    No, the original ED was not funny, but it was Corny as Hell. <BR> ED2 was awesome, hilarious and Camp. <BR> So, in review... <BR> ED = CORN <BR> ED2 = CAMP <BR> ED3 = HIGH CAMP <BR> ED (the cash cow rebooty) = SHITE! <BR>(well, maybe not, but you let me know, because I will not be seeing this unless I hear, resoundingly, that it is a masterpiece). <BR> So, yes, when are we going to see... <BR>1. What happens after Ash overslept by three centuries in ED4? <BR>2. Those Giant Evil Gods in CITW2?

  • Commentary for Evil Dead 1 Raimi revealed that Tapert was the one that thought of the "tree rape" because it would have more impact on an audience. But my favorite story was how they came to use Ash's infamous pick-up line in Army of Darkness. Raimi and Campbell were trying to figure out what Ash would say to seduce Sheila and Sam heard Tapert giggling before he came over and said "he-he-he have him say, 'Give me some sugar baby' he-he-he...". The way I'm telling you this doesn't do the story justice but I couldn't stop laughing.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:34 p.m. CST

    The Necessity of Retelling Stories

    by JumpinJehosaphat

    Imagine you're camping. Someone decides to tell a ghost story. It's one you've heard. Do you stop them and say, "That retelling isn't necessary. The only real version was told when I was nine by the camp councilor"? The joy is in the telling of it. How does this guy deliver this now-familar tale? There are a handful of stories one could ever say have been necessary -- and I'm talking in the sum total of humanity here. Most of Shakespeare's tales are unnecessary. We like to see reinterpretations. We like to hear familiar stories. Well, humans do. Fanboys don't. They feel it "rapes their childhood" or some such nonsense.

  • ...once the action starts the feeling of redundancy recedes, but it is replaced with the same hackneyed feeling you get from every other horror remake of late. Upping the gruesomeness doesn't bug me, but I wish there weren't so many fortune cookies leading back to the originals, because this will crumble in comparison. Also, I hope the electronic music in this trailer is not in line with the films score. Could be a lot worse though. Looks like it could be a "grueling experience in terror," if not the ultimate.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:37 p.m. CST


    by Wacky Packages

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:39 p.m. CST


    by Wacky Packages

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:41 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    Thank for showing at least a modicum of intelligence in your response. That's probably the most intelligent thin I have read on this site, and that includes the tripe I contribute.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:43 p.m. CST

    This movie tree raped my childhood's asshole.

    by UltraTron

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:45 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    You are a fucking retard and should never post anywhere ever again. What the fuck is your schtick of commenting solely in the subject, in all caps, and ended by FACT!! supposed to convey? Your comments add absolutely nothing to anything whatsoever. Your response has no justification whatsoever. I'm going to have I assume it's once again only because remakes are shit a everything I saw when I was a kid was the greatest thing ever that nothing can ever top. Life mus suck for you.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:50 p.m. CST

    Anyone who says that blows are retards!

    by Andy

    Seriously!! That looked awesome. More horror and gore in a two min trailer than in most full length movies. My right leg is already in line at the cinema!! Bring it on. Lol.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 3:58 p.m. CST

    And none of you did anything to sto

    by UltraTron

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:07 p.m. CST

    But hey, the kids u'll love it right?

    by Bradly Durant

  • first trailers never have the finished humor in them.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Oh a bunch of teenager actors I don't care about getting tortured...

    by invincible88

    Sign me the fuck up...not.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:09 p.m. CST

    The remake rape train has no brakes.

    by Bradly Durant

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:12 p.m. CST

    Hey, killer_instinct

    by Raggles Wimpole

    Before you start ripping on a movie that you haven't even seen, much less hasn't even been released yet, why don't you try learning the language in which the film is shot? Before you condemn a film, please learn grammar & how to fucking spell. Jesus Christ. Oh, and if you really want to see a true "fuck you" to horror fans, try watching PG-13 shit like "The Covenant," "Stay Alive,"Skin Walkers," or the atrociously awful remakes of "The Fog" & "Prom Night." If you had any sense at all of what makes true horror, then you'd be able to tell that the people behind this remake - who were hand-picked, by the way, by the people who created the original film - are at least attempting to make something scary. I don't mean to feed a troll or whatever, but you sir are an idiot & have made it obvious that you have no idea what the hell you're talking about.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:16 p.m. CST


    by Raggles Wimpole

    I for one agree with you on the NOES remake. Glad to see someone on here is not a total fucking shitbrain.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    What it about the first one that was so great that this trailer doesn't have? There was no story and there wasn't any good acting. The special effects and cinematography were new for the time, and some of the brutality was new, but that was it. I haven't watched it in a while but I don't remember it being all that great. The next two were excellent but mostly because of Bruce Campbell, and the fact that part 2 was pretty much a spoof on the failed attempt at a good horror movie the first time around. While none of that makes for a good reason to remake it, I'm just happy we're getting some gory movies. Now you're going to say that making a gory movie is not a good reason for a remake and I am aiming too low and that 'Hollywood' should only maeve original-good movies, that's insinuating that there was ever a time that 'Hollywood' only made original-good movies. That's bullshit. All ages of movies can be compared to Saturday Night Live. Most of them suck, most repeat themselves over and over only a small percentage are good, and they are usually better in memory than they were originally. There have always been many many repeat of movies throughout history the same way there were repeats of any form of storytelling throughout history. The difference is in the past the same movies were made with different character names and different titles. Now they are just calling it what it is, a remake with the same names and characters. (And remakes have occurred throughout history too. Hitchcock even remade some of his own movies. (that may have only happened once, but my point is made.))

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:22 p.m. CST

    By the way, THIS LOOKS AMAZING

    by Raggles Wimpole

    I'm sure this has been said before, but this is not a remake of Evil Dead 2, which in itself was a sort-of remake of The Evil Dead. There is no way ED2 can be remade.

  • .... worryingly glossy.Like those platinum dunes horror remakes that go for the same grimey 70s/80s look that the originals had but end up looking like the glossy generously budgeted hollywood studio products that they are. Im not counting this film out completely though- i unexpectedly enjoyed horror reboots like 2010s the crazies and 2003's dawn of the dead in the past, so who knows, i might be pleasantly suprised with 2013 evil dead.......maybe......

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:24 p.m. CST

    I aint watching the robocop remake though.

    by Father

    Robocop taking on the taliban? Fuckouttaherewitdatshit.........

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:25 p.m. CST


    by Lou_Sassel420


  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:25 p.m. CST

    by Meathook

    Jackthekipper is a douchebag. How is anybody going to read this of it's not completely in the subject line. Oh no. Creepythinman, help me.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:31 p.m. CST

    Who else thinks killer_instinct is a plant???

    by where_are_quints_hobbit_set_reports

    He's trying hard to make all critics of this remake seem like misogynistic idiots. Hey killer_instinct, fuck you AND this remake

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:37 p.m. CST

    The original is overrated

    by Kakii

    Dont get me wrong I love ED 2 and 3, but I was never really impressed with the first one as a horror movie. Ok years later I appreciated the work and camera techniques etc, but the ED was banned in the UK and had a huge reputation of being this utter scary gorefest. i was about 8 or 9 years old when I saw it and I loved horror and had seen all the stuff branded as video nasties, stuff that was banned etc, after watching it I just really didnt understand the fuss as most of the demons, especially the end one looked like they were straight from Clash of the Titans. So this remake I dont mind especially since SR & BC are behind it, also food for thought is, maybe these guys have the right as ED 2 was probably the original "reboot" movie, oh yeah the trailer is good too.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:46 p.m. CST

    killer instinct i couldnt agree with you more.

    by HatedPerson

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:47 p.m. CST

    fuck fede alvarez and hia ruining ways

    by HatedPerson

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:47 p.m. CST

    so sad to.see this destroyed

    by HatedPerson

  • Like Phantasm 2, it lacks the one thing that the original had and that was CHARM! Luckily both Evil Dead 2 and Phantasm 2 were made by the same people that did the first flicks. Now, I adore Evil Dead 2 and Phantasm 2 more than the originals but they don't have quite the same spark. But this new Evil Dead piece of shit is like every other fucking remake of the last decade; a cynical cash-grab financed by cocksuckers who aren't looking to do something FRESH with the concept (like the best remakes do ala Body Snatchers 78, Thing 82, Fly 96, Blob 88, NOTLD 90) but to simply re-brand and re-market a known commodity towards todays audience made up from a generation of fucking cretins who couldn't sit through the original Evil Dead if their lives depended on it. There's NOTHING new here apart from fancy make-up and CGI while it looks like every MTV music video style load of fucking trash that has came out since Chainsaw 2003. The ONLY good remakes since then were The Hills Have Eyes and Piranha which were both made by Alexandre Aja who clearly understands that you have to take the basic premise and elaborate on it while retaining that which made those movies special. But what you don't do is slap a new paintjob on it and sell it like a lump of fucking dogshit topped with whipped cream and that is what this new Evil Dead is.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 4:56 p.m. CST

    meathook, just read your post about Elm Street Remake...

    by Bradly Durant

    Oh and I'm putting this in the "proper" comment section especially for you. Anyway, shit, that post dude. You made me lol. Hard. I didn't know you were trolling all along. Keep up the good work and don't worry I won't rat you out ;)

  • Are you looking forward to this remake? Can't really tell.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:08 p.m. CST

    I don't know...

    by phifty2 looks like a bunch of shit I've seen before. I guess if the story's good, we'll see.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:10 p.m. CST

    feminazis are ruining the world

    by HatedPerson

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:17 p.m. CST

    Not Evil enough....

    by Martin

    I would have kept the white eyes. They don't look evil, they just look dirty, or zombie-like. Nothing can create the ultimate experience of the original because like The Exorcist, it was never seen before. It had such a relentless intensity and it was so scary, that you felt that the tape WAS evil and that watching it was just wrong. I was 9 years old at the time, already seen a lot of horror movies already, but it took me 3 times to actually finish it

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:20 p.m. CST

    Bruce Campbell will not be in it

    by James

    To everyone talking about how it was supposed to be funny, you're wrong. It was not originally supposed to be funny. The second was after they realized the bad acting and so forth helped play into it. That is even what Campbell and Raimi had said at comic con. Also Bruce was highly involved in the making of this as was Raimi. They found a director they thought could make it what they wanted the first Evil Dead to be like and went with him. They helped the director along the way. This movie looks great and even Bruce, himself, said that this will be an amazing movie, that will still hold true to the new one. He said they would not have released it otherwise. So please know your Evil Dead history before you continue making terrible remarks on an amazing film, and also amazing trilogy of films. The humor came in after they realized that the cult following was watching because of humor that wasn't supposed to exist and yet did with such a low budget film, which is why Evil Dead 2 ended up the way it was. Also Bruce talked about HATING torture porn, and that this will not be a torture porn film at all! So please do your homework people before being the snobs that most of you commenter's are on this great website! Also Bruce announced there will be no cameo by himself, as he thought that it would take away from the movie.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:32 p.m. CST

    That last shot in the trailer makes me cringe each time I watch this.

    by DementedCaver

    This actually looks more promising that I thought it would....although I had really low expectations.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Looks scary...

    by fanboy71

    But No Ash = No Cash! Maybe I'll rent it though.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:44 p.m. CST

    looks like shit female lead sucks. worst idea ever

    by len

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:51 p.m. CST

    No Tree Rape = fail

    by Turd_Is_Floating_Underneath_The_Gravy

    So the trees just 'attack' in this one, do they? So much for being 'hardcore'. Not that I need to see trees raping women, particularly (a concept so ridiculous it could hardly be offensive to all but the most stalwart feminists), but the filmmakers unwillingness to go all the way in certain areas does hint at a real neutering of the material and a sop to post-80's political correctness. All the razor sliced tongues in the world won't make up for that. I remember Raimi complaining about the tree rape in the first Evil Dead in retrospect, and how he regretted it and would never put such a thing in a movie again. I'm guessing that's what's happened here, although they've tried to bait-and-switch people with the trailer. That's what happens when you get old: you become weak and over sensitive, neither of which are desirable qualities when making a horror movie. And if the filmmakers think that it's sexist or offensive to women to depict them being raped by trees, then have one of the male protagonists 'raped' as well: straight up the sphincter with one of the branches! I'm all for equality.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 5:59 p.m. CST

    ash from evil dead

    by len

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:02 p.m. CST

    This looks awesome

    by waslah

    Seriously. This looks really fucking good. Anybody saying this looks terrible, or being "underwhelmed" or any of that is just stubbornly clinging to the wrongheaded "all remakes suck!" mindset. If that were true we wouldn't have John Carpenter's The Thing, Or 1978's The Invasion of The Body Snatchers, or 2002's The Ring, or any number of fantastic remakes that have come over the years. Just because the majority of them suck doesn't mean you immediately have to write everything off with the pretentious "oh, a remake, how unoriginal" attitude. How about, oh, I don't know...acknowledging when something looks like it has real potential instead of sticking to the standard fanboy mindset for a change?

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:05 p.m. CST

    @ didntpulloutintimecop

    by waslah

    Spoilers coming folks Actually if the script is to be believed, and things were filmed the way they were written, it kind of could be called a prequel.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:14 p.m. CST

    This film looks like it takes itself too seriously

    by _SnakePlissken_

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:17 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    Thanks for the posting in the correct areas. I appreciate it. I apologize for the douchebag comment, I was too affected by Creepythinman's total douchebaggery failing to put together a thought out comment instead of spewing shit from his mouth. As for NOES remake, no I am not a troll, I truly liked the remake, and in some ways more than the original, and I have always and still love the original. My comments about Hollywood and remakes are just a statement of fact as I believe them to be, not a justification and not an excuse not to make good movies. Mostly it bugs me when people say that Hollywood used to make good movies implying they never made mostly shit when they have always made mostly shit. Also, please intelligently explain to me why the NOES remake is total shit, I truly do not understand and disagree. A thought-out opinion would be nice.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:18 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    Thank you for a 'well' thought out opinion instead of just spewing diarrhea out your mouth. I still think you are a douche though.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:36 p.m. CST

    Three things about the movie.

    by Michael_Jacksons_Ghost

    One: Ash, as in Bruce Campbell, appears in the last scene. Mark my word. Two: The events from the original took place in the remakes universe, which makes the new movie Evil Dead 4. Three: The red chainsaw prop in the remake still has the Ash modification on the end of it.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 6:39 p.m. CST

    Fuck all of you haters...

    by vettebro

    Sorry, I just needed to say that once on this site. As far as the trailer goes, I dig what I saw. I don't want a fucking remake that is exactly like the original. I don't want puppet demons and such. I want improved FX, gore and story. That trailer looked promising. Fuck all you haters. : )

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:30 p.m. CST

    mart_mtl, Thank you

    by mr.underwater

    It had such a relentless intensity and it was so scary, that you felt that the tape WAS evil and that watching it was just wrong.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:31 p.m. CST

    Fucking quotes

    by mr.underwater

    I was attempting to describe my way too young viewing of the OG Evil Dead, and you summed it up perfectly

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:33 p.m. CST

    Looks Brutal

    by vondamage

    I might like this.....

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:44 p.m. CST


    by maxjohnson1971

    I'm with you on that. Fuck the haters on this one. I'm as big a fan of the original trilogy as anyone, and I'm digging what I see so far. A lot of the problems with the remakes we are getting (hence them sucking) is that the creators behind them don't have the balls to go back to what we loved about the originals. They want to change TOO much. What did I love about the original The Evil Dead? The crazy camera work, the gritty feel of it, the over the top gore and violence (pencil in the ankle still makes me cringe to this day) and just about everything else. Yeah, it had some limitations placed on it because of the budget, but so what? The fucking movie worked. This new version looks like they retained much of that and I'm all in. I was worried this would turn out to be a watered down, PG-13, pussy fest, but damn if it doesn't look like they went balls to the wall on this thing. Hell, I hope they have to tone it down a bit to get an R! That'd be great news to me.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:49 p.m. CST

    Having said all of that...

    by maxjohnson1971

    When the trailer hits theaters and the cell phone punching idiots that talk in the theaters all the time see this, they are gonna wonder what "From the creators of the original classic" they are gonna all wonder what that means. BECAUSE THE AVERAGE IDIOT HAS NEVER SEEN THE ORIGINAL!! Not enough splosions and dumbed down humor in it for them to know any better anyway. Perhaps this will urge some folks to seek out the originals and get a new fan base growing. Maybe get that ED4 we are all being patient for. And maybe not.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 7:59 p.m. CST

    Tree rape you say?

    by lv_426

    Try these on for size.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 8:55 p.m. CST

    dis totaly rulez

    by qwsdqwedq sdbcjhdwiuvdh

    totlay rulez ass and shit ! cant w8 2 c it yo

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 9:42 p.m. CST

    Those folks saying humor vs. horror in the first "EVIL DEAD"...

    by The Marquis de Side 3

    People have been commenting on there being dark humor in the original "EVIL DEAD" and others saying there's none, that it's humorless and violent and that's it. I think there's simply the difference between what you experience as dark humor and what you experience as pure horror. One scene I enjoy is the "We're gonna get you" taunting by the two possessed girls, like two bullies in the schoolyard harassing Ash. Yeah, I see dark humor in that. It's not something slapsticky like "EVIL DEAD 2". Humor doesn't always mean laughter. But that's just me, I find that scene scary, but also pick up on the dark humor behind it. I don't laugh, but I know it's there. Other people appreciate and have other things to say about the film, different from what others say, and that's great too. You don't undercut the power of a film by finding other qualities to it other than those of the genre to which it corresponds. "EVIL DEAD" is not a one-note film. Love it or hate it, it has a lot to give -- there are no diminishing returns (well, except to haters, but then haters gonna hate anyway). Otherwise, it wouldn't be the cult hit that it's been. So some can argue that some dark humor is there. And others can argue that it's a serious hard core horror movie, that it's not there at all. But isn't that type of discussion an example of the film's success? As low budget as it was, there's a lot in the film that lots of people enjoy. Despite the budget limitations, this film still packs more punch than most horror films being produced today (which are usually one note).

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 9:54 p.m. CST

    Oh yay. More green and brown fake digital grittiness.

    by Cassius_Crackhead

    Fuck this. Seriously.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 10:38 p.m. CST

    Evil Dead 2 is one of my all time favorites

    by FuckinAmateurMan

    But it's a slapstick remake of the original. Watching all three movies has no kind of chronology to it, or rational mythology to it, at all. So let's all take a breath before we start flipping shit over the sanctity of the original trilogy, if we can even call it that. I wanted Evil Dead 4 WAY more than this, 15 years ago. Evil Dead 4 today however, would be more sad than Indy dusting off the fedora again. If this is blessed by The Chin and Raimi, it's good enough for me. And all that cash in/ sell out bullshit is ridiculous. It's a cult series completely ignored by mainstream audiences, being remade by existing millionaires. Seems like a shitty business plan if you wanted to rake in easy money, especially when the key people on this don't need it.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 11:10 p.m. CST

    I do like the gore, we need more creative gore.

    by Randy

    The 80's kicked ass with it's effects and gore. Remember from beyond? I mean holy shit.

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 11:13 p.m. CST

    Dead by yawn.

    by adeceasedfan

  • God what has the world come to...

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 11:47 p.m. CST

    What is this...

    by Sinistaine

    ...Actor man says like somebody put a piece of unidentifiable pie in front of him that he kind of wants to eat if the answer pleases him, but he's pretty bored with this scene, so he can take it or leave it. In this trailer, however, actor man saves that reaction for a basement full of DOZENS OF HANGED CATS. Stupid. Bad, bad, acting, and in no world can an electric knife cut through human bone. Thanks for the shock factor, but this will be tripe.

  • I think this looks good.

  • ...there are also no actual spooky moments in the trailer, like "we are going to get you, we are going to get you" and when they were playing from a deck of cards and she suddenly turns. It's all very well and good turning up the gore, but that's old hat most shitty horror ups the anti on gore, it's real spookiness that counts in horror films, not just gore. The original was gory and spooky in equal amounts

  • Oct. 24, 2012, 11:53 p.m. CST

    Listen up you primitive screw heads!

    by roy

    I grew up loving the Evil Dead Trilogy. I was dying for years, nah, decades for an Evil Dead 4/Army of Darkness movie. I was pissed when I found out they were rebooting the series. And even more pissed when I found out there was no Ash. But this isn't some Hollywood cash grab. Sam and Bruce are behind this. Its a vehicle to allow an new young film maker to make his mark and just go fucking crazy in the a low budget horror film. And lets be honest, Bruce is too old and fat to be running around with the chainsaw. Since he can't do it, how do you recast him? Johnny Knoxville? I don't think so. And what Ash would the new actor play? He is not the same character in the first movie as he is in the other two. The end shot alone in this trailer with the chick cutting her tongue in half is by far one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen. This has my support. -This is my boomstick

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:09 a.m. CST

    'Tis Blasphemy

    by The Bear

    Simple as that.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:19 a.m. CST

    Ok, the good name of Evil Dead has now been tainted.

    by Clio

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:22 a.m. CST

    To "badass femail lead:fail" comments

    by gutshot

    Tell that to terminator, aliens, most joss weadon, less classicly to the descent, battlestar gallactica? and others. Just because it has a girl, doesn't mean at all that it will be bad. Also the cast in ED1 were pretty young too, and also they were all nobody's. So I'm not sure you can say fuck this on those grounds either. I really want to see the chainsaw hand, but as it looks like they are going for the first one, I'm sure Ill be disappointed there. But the evil getting into his hand, and making it go bad was from the second one. Sam ramie did write this didn't he? So there is hope it won't blow. I'm interested.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:36 a.m. CST

    Evil Dead in name only

    by AllPowerfulWizardOfOz

    They can maintain all of the story elements they want in this remake from the original but that does not make this an Evil Dead movie. Bruce Campbell was what made Evil Dead a cult classic. Sure the original movie was serious in tone and changed in Evil Dead 2 to slapstick but it was that 2nd movie that people latched onto that made brought it to cult status I get what they are trying to do by going back to the original formula but why? Money. That's it. Fuck this remake.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:39 a.m. CST

    Re: The Trouble With EVIL DEAD

    by ArmageddonProductions

    Here's the main problem that most of you are having with an EVIL DEAD remake: you all seem to be mistaking the original EVIL DEAD for EVIL DEAD II: DEAD BY DAWN, which was itself technically a remake of the original EVIL DEAD. The original EVIL DEAD was terrible. There, I said it. In fact, the only reason ninety percent of us are even aware that there WAS a movie called "EVIL DEAD" was a 1982 TV Guide review (in an article regarding cutting edge horror movies) by none other than Stephen King. The movie wound up costing $350,000 and was shot on crappy 16mm (on a budget they could have easily shot 35mm on) mostly due to the fact that everyone involved had no fucking idea what they were doing. And it's fucking TERRIBLE. You guys keep bringing up the "humor" in the original EVIL DEAD -- there wasn't any!!! There was barely a script, and that was likely a blessing, since the cast was just God-awful. It had two things going for it: mind-boggling amounts (for the time) of gore and Raimi's burgeoning camera tricks. The movie you guys are all remembering (especially in regards to your ongoing comments about the humor, the chainsaw, Bruce Campbell's penultimate portrayal of "Ash") is, in fact, EVIL DEAD II. Don't get me wrong, this remake will likely blow donkey dicks, but to treat it like a HALLOWEEN remake is just ridiculous. Hell, Raimi's Super-8 college shorts were better than the original EVIL DEAD. And despite having a 3 million and 15 million dollar budget, respectively, EVIL DEAD II and ARMY OF DARKNESS were insanely sloppy movies and we should all be thankful they didn't just run the series into the ground with a fourth film. Raimi didn't really hit his stride until he sold out and started making studio flicks (and ditched Rob Tapert as his producer), but let's not kid ourselves, there's no sacred ground being trod upon here.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:48 a.m. CST


    by D.Vader

  • Ehhh, forget it.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:53 a.m. CST

    looks good

    by IndianaPeach


  • Oct. 25, 2012, 1:52 a.m. CST

    A few things......

    by sam jacksons wig

    1) The trailer has done a very good job setting the tone of the thing, and I personally believe that the demons making the humans mutilate themselves is a very nice touch- ie, no respect for the human form. 2) As a huge fan of the original Evil Dead trilogy, I am actually not offended by the idea of this remake. I am even glad there is no Ash in Bruce Campbell form. Reason? Appeal to the teen crowd, make a few bucks and greenlight ED4, so I suggest fanboys stop fucking whimpering like little girls and support this whether they want to or not. 3) One thing that WILL piss me off deeply is a cheap ending- we have heard that the central female is a recovering drug addict, and if it is all taking place in her mind after she is at the cabin to rehab I will throw a chainsaw at Raimi's head. 4) Diablo Cody. Teenspeak. Up her own arse. Please keep it to a fucking minimum. 5) A return to serious form after the slapstick of 2 and 3. Yes please!! 6) Hopefully they haven't blown their wad on the trailer and have alot more left to show us.

  • .. it is going for a new audience while the name tie in will hopefully generate some interest with the older crowd. Indeed, branding it Evil Dead after we have had Cabin in the Woods is what will no doubt generate that much needed cash.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 2 a.m. CST

    fuckinamateurman -

    by sam jacksons wig

    "I wanted Evil Dead 4 WAY more than this, 15 years ago. Evil Dead 4 today however, would be more sad than Indy dusting off the fedora again." What a great point, and well said!! I wouldn't mind another ED with Campbell as lead, but your analagy is pretty spot on!

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 2:13 a.m. CST


    by BlueLando

    I've watched every ANOES flick, and yes I do think the remake is terrible. For two reasons. 1) When the kid with the blog dies, his video is uploaded online. How? We see his death. So that means someone else uploaded the video. If they did, why? And even if we say 'oh, who cares' then we have to work within the confines of a universe where people on social networking sites and social networking sites themselves don't moderate deaths? It's ridiculous. I mean, he had to have people who read the blog... and yet this ridiculous plot hole is shrugged off by the film. Terrible. 2) Freddy making wisecracks. The reason the first worked was because Freddy toyed with his victims, but to lull them into unease. It wasn't 'joke for the sake of joke.' In the remake, he's throwing out one-liners like Robert did in the later films. He even makes a wet dream joke, ya know? It's not JEH's fault, as he's great... but his non-stop quips irk. Look, it's not the worst ANOES film. By far. But that doesn't mean it's good. The only good ANOES films are 1 and 3, with a case being made for the postmodern one.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 2:29 a.m. CST

    meathook- sorry mate, but NOES remake was very bad...

    by sam jacksons wig

    for instance, the photo box said 1995, and she was 5 apparently back then, and it's 2010, she's supposedly still in high school......? Eh????

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 3:38 a.m. CST

    Ash to Ash, Dusty to Dusty... Ash no more. I mean, Ashley

    by albert comin

    So, when will you guys start calling this remake as "Nu Evulz Ded"? I understand your apreentions, a few years ago i would had them too, but lately we have seen that so much of the most interesting emerging talents are coming from the horror genre, so fingers crossed. I mean, who knows? Campbel and Raimi are very hands down on this remake (so it seems), and i doubt they would want to deliberatly piss on their own legacy and the very thing that they owe their careers.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 3:39 a.m. CST

    Michael Bay says "chill!"

    by albert comin

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 5:40 a.m. CST

    It's truer to the original than the comedy sequels.

    by Gary Makin

    This remake might actually be worth it.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 6:17 a.m. CST

    There is no need for a remake...

    by Darkness

    The original (even though i prefer "Evil Dead 2") is a film that presented the creative exploits of one, Sam Riami, and revisting a movie such as this is pretty much just adding it to a glossary of overbearing - look how much realistic gore we can fit into a horror flick - schlock, that will soon, no doubt, be confined to the vaults of forgettable remakes - joining the likes of: "A Nightmare On Elm Street", "The Last House On The Left" et al. How about some innovative horror to carry us through the next decade, instead on relying on what's come before.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 6:40 a.m. CST

    looks good, but Cabin in the Woods...

    by chronicallydepressedlemming

    makes this film seem completely pointless and I'm unable to take it seriously.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 7:31 a.m. CST

    who says this looks like the original?

    by rocco ferraro

    There is nothing that i can see that looks like the original, besides hints here and there to suggest the original. chainsaw,yes,cutting hand off,yes,kids going to cabin,yes, bridge falls apart, on and so forth. there might be hints here and there, but this truly isnt EVIL DEAD. But I do feel from the trailer that this looks like a good gore movie. But not EVIL DEAD. Thanks for being true fans.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 7:45 a.m. CST

    The last red band trailer I saw was for Adventureland....

    by Dolmes

    ....lesson learnt.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 8 a.m. CST

    Could be good

    by Robert

    While I loved the original , the effects haven't stood the test of time, the new fans might love this , rather than laugh at some of the originals effects, like my 'kids' did...

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 8:03 a.m. CST


    by Bradly Durant

    I'm not into trading insults either, I'll leave that to lesser minds. I appreciate the apology though. I will have to agree to disagree however on the merits of Hollywood remakes as my stance is there are too many great unfilmed original screenplays out there and too many starving screen writers who spend their entire lives in the wilderness, whilst lazy executives take the easy option time and time again to put out a tried and tested property for the next generation. I'm not saying that ALL remakes are bad, and yes Hollywood has ALWAYS gone down this road since the earliest days of cinema, and this will always be the case. To my mind it basically boils down business decision rather than an artistic and creative one. As you may have guessed I am something of a fan of the original Dead movies and would have much rather the money been spent on a 4 installment than a reboot, hence my reluctance to the project. To this end I reserve my right a film geek to rant or rave about movies. This is why I come here, as do you and everyone else. In regards to merits of the remake of Elm Street, I have no desire to go there, other than to add I was not impressed. You clearly were so that is that. And this is the great thing of movies, subjectivity, beauty will always be in the eye of the beholder. And as much as I have ranted about the Evil Dead remake and probably will continue to do so, if it actually exceeds my expectations I will the first to say so. Peace.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 8:58 a.m. CST

    I'm not sure what this is, but I know what it looks like.

    by Madcapper

    It looks like a generic new age horror film, based on an old school FUNNY horror film classic. Blah.

  • Same dull palette of filthy grey-greens, same cast of interchangeable, equally unlikeable shallow teens (the cheerleaders that used to be stabbed and beheaded in older horror films: I never felt that the male audiences ENJOYED their torture and mutilation the way that I feel they do now: there's a real appetite and focus on HURTING women in these modern films and I really don't like it), plus the throbbing head-achey S&M soundtrack and poor pacing. Oh and The cabin in the Woods WAS the cabin from Evil Dead: a direct copy so stop complaining and yes, as far as wit, charm, a combination of the macabre and the witty and real understanding of the old raini vibe is concerned: cabin in the Woods nailed the lid down on these turgid, witless, pornos. There's no GLEE (not the stupid TV show - actualy joi de vivre, or joi du mort) in these things: the old Deadites were DELIGHTED to be swallowing your soul: they giggled and chuckled like an army of Linda Blairs as they gnawed off your arm, stabbed you with broken pencils and threatened to swallow your soul. they were having a ball.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 9:42 a.m. CST

    gore for the sake of gore = fail

    by JamesT

    That's why Carpenter's Halloween is a masterpiece.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 9:52 a.m. CST


    by Meathook

    Sam - continuity problems are a poor excuse to call the movie bad. I'm not saying this thing should win any awards, and even the best movies ever made have continuity problems. Blulando - As above, the blog comment is just just nitpicking. The original NOES was not a great movie of you are going by those standards. Hell, what was the deal with that ending? As the cops are cleaning up the Depp's bloodbath, Nancy is screaming bloody murder out the window across the street and nobody cares? Huh?? As for the wisecracks. I haven't seen the remake in a while but don't remember the wisecracks to be nearly as bad as you say. They were nothing compared to every sequel after the original. I felt these wisecracks were more to fuck with Nancy than anything else, like with the wet dream comment. The movie played up the fact that Freddy was a child molester more than he was a child killer, which was more of Cravens original intent and what the bed symbolism was always about. At the time he felt he couldn't make it obvious in the original movie. True the sequel had problems going between him Being a molester and him being a killer that doesn't make sense, i'll give you that. Jack - I don't work in the industry so I can't say whether or not there are actually all that many good scripts just waiting to be made, but if there are, then yes it is a shame that movies are a business that wants to make as much money as possible. Thanks for the response elsewhere, I appreciate some reasonable retorts along with the venting. On NOES remake, this was far from a classic but infinitely better than any of the sequels except 3 and New Nightmare (which again all of which I love) and it was a good jumping off point that should have started a new series that could have been a good series. I can agreed that it's far from great, and that there are things not to like, but I haven't heard anything to claim that it's pure shit. On that note, on to venting. Paranormal Activity is the downfall of society and anybody who disagrees is a fucking fucktard who should choke on their own shit.

  • Who's laughing now, brother!

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:24 a.m. CST

    Cabin in the Woods has rendered this moot

    by Kytas

    Does the horror genre have anything left?

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Meathook- Paranormal Activity

    by FuckinAmateurMan

    The first film in the series cost $15,000, and grossed $193 M The series eries as a whole cost $13 M to produce, brought in $576 M Why is this relevant? Because regardless of what we'd all like to think, this industry is just that- an industry. Studios go to what's making money. We get the watch the product of what has the highest margin. This is the reality of the film industry, and we have to deal with that first. So we're stuck with product for the sake of product, what do we as an audience get out of it? The Paranormal series has scares that are obviously effective to a modern audience, because they keep showing up. More importantly, the series inspires indy filmmakers on a shoestring budget to be creative and work within the confines of that budget. It's not a remake, retread, or reboot- it's a successful unique universe, which is something we all bitch about there not being nearly enough of these days. If this makes me a fucking fucktard, who should choke on their own shit..... Okay bud. You win?

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:45 a.m. CST

    All of that said...

    by FuckinAmateurMan

    I'm not a huge fan of the movies, but appreciate them for what they are. Mostly though I appreciate how movies like them are altering the landscape of Hollywood for the better. We bitch about an awful movie like Transformers having no substance but costing hundreds of millions of dollars, but we also bitch about a movie that is all substance and hardly any over the top effects. We can argue all day about whether the substance is effective, but you sound like an idiot when you immediately reduce the whole series to the downfall of society.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:53 a.m. CST

    looks gross

    by dreamsoffire

    I am not sure it could scare me much more than the first one. time will tell

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:55 a.m. CST


    by 2for2true

    ...and by that I mean, GIVE US BRUCE "BOOMSTICK" CAMPBELL, you screwheads.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:56 a.m. CST


    by Casey Holland

    We all have them and god bless you fuckers for sharing them. I will probably see this at some point in my life I imagine but hey, shit happens.

  • Fucking unnecessary remakes.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:09 p.m. CST

    Sam, come back to the DocBacks

    by HornOrSilk

    Your presence is missing

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Evil Dead IV

    by HornOrSilk

    Depending upon how it is done, it could be done well, or bad. If it is done as a parody of Indy IV, Die Hard XXX, Rambo XIII, it could be quite significant. How would it be a parody? Follow the analogy and start off with an old, warn out Ash. Then have the Evil Dead come back. He thinks he still has it in him. He doesn't. Make it all about that. Make it about the end of Ash. Make it all about how Ash is too old, and the Evil Dead win.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST


    by doom master

    Sounds fair. Evil Dead just doesn't really cut it.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 1:15 p.m. CST

    It amazes me

    by waslah

    That no matter what a remake looks like people can find a way to hate on it online juts because it's a remake. They ignore The Fly, or The Thing, or The Ring, or any number of remakes they undoubtedly love and shit on remakes just because the majority of them are bad. Doesn't matter if the film looks awesome, there's a problem with it. Oh it's PG-13 well screw this pussified bullshit, the original was way more ballsy and intense! Rated R? This looks unnecessarily violent and gory, the original movie had way more atmosphere not just gore for the sake of gore! Well known cast? Fuck this WB cast bullshit, the original was great because of it's cast of unknowns. Unknown cast? Who are these hacks, they couldn't act their way out of a paper bag. The original was great because it had great actors! Looks really different from the original film? Why even bother calling this a _____ movie, it looks nothing like it! Looks too similar? This shit is stupid, just a shot for shot remake of the original done way worse! The list of these inconsistencies goes on and on. Bunch of hypocritical, entitled, pissy little fanboys being too precious with their franchises. I shudder to think what would be said if the Hammer Horror films of years gone by were coming out now instead of when they did. People would be pissing and moaning that nobody could do Dracula like Bela Lugosi.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 1:20 p.m. CST

    I like it. Different tone to original Evil Dead but..

    by Avon

    I like it. Now if there's an element of humour/ tongue in cheek in there like there should be this could be interesting.

  • I agree. I thought the Let The Right One In remake was pretty good. The new Dredd was great. I think there's a few. Um. Yep!

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 1:36 p.m. CST

    This fails so hard

    by PorkChopXpress

    So you take Evil Dead, strip it all of its campy charm and charisma (and Bruce), fill it with no-name "young and beautifuls" and churn out another average horror flick. Go, Hollywood, Go! Never needed to be remade, it was already a classic.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 2:09 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    I was making a point with that rant at the end. Jackthekipper made a comment about this being a place to vent so I used the end of my comment as a chance to vent, that's all. I fully understand why the producers continue to make Paranormal Activity movies as I mentioned in an earlier post, it's akin to reality TV shows. I just don't think there is anything at all original about anything past the first one, and the first one was more of a concept than anything else. I don't think there is the slightest amount of substance to any of the movies, so I don't know what you mean by that. The first was ok, I can see it causing some fear or scares when you are sitting in bed at night and hear some strange noise throughout the house. The second was the exact same movie but god awfully boring at the same time. How long can you watch a dog barking or a barracuda coming out of a pool. There was no substance whatsoever. The third was ok and at least watchable due to the kids and the coven at the end, but again almost the exact same movie with little to no substance. I just don't get it. But then again I have my own problems because I prefer the gore over subtlety or build up with 0 suspense or payoff. If these movies were coming out alongside Saws or this Evil Dead or an original gory movie, regardless of how good it is, I'd be much much happier. As someone said earlier I am part of the cause of shit constantly being made because I'd be the first to pay I see Saw 10, but I just don't see the merits of Paranormal Activity over and over again. And I know I went back and forth on this bashing one piece of shit and liking another piece of shit, but I'm writing this in two pieces. I think my biggest message is that I hate all of you fucking assholes on here that state nothing but 'this is going fucking suck, fuckity fuck fuck fuck , the world is going to end, fuck you all, how could you like that piece of shit you brainless retard, but then giving absolutely nothing to the conversation. If this all pisses you assholes off so much, go do something else. I'm just happy I got a bit of real comments from some people on this site. Now I'm off to watch some shitty remake that hopefully will cause someone's head to explode leaving one less fuckwit on this earth.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 3:09 p.m. CST

    @ avon

    by waslah

    You don't like Cronenberg's Fly or John Carpenter's The Thing? Wow're like the first person I've ever met who doesn't like either of those movies. haha.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 8:24 p.m. CST


    by Meathook

    You have my approval.

  • Oct. 25, 2012, 10:01 p.m. CST

    meathook- I appreciate the well thought out response

    by FuckinAmateurMan

  • Oct. 26, 2012, 1:07 p.m. CST

    @waslah -- Re:Haters In General

    by micturatingbenjamin

    I dislike Kidd interviews, reviews, and it galls me that they gave a movie I'm interested in to him to toss up the preview for, because now I have to read another arch and contrarian movie prick paragraph where he says 'I'm not sure why anyone would bother -- etc. etc.' Rather than just playing 'King of Cartoons' and running the fucking clip. So, skimming over what he said, I'd like to offer a perspective of someone who was an adult when the Internet became a widespread phenomenon: Many people now on this site have no fucking clue what it was like before we had instant access to previews, news, and specific rumors concerning genre film. They don't know that for a long fucking time, all you got was the teaser before a movie that MIGHT be related to it, depending on if the projectionist or theater manager decided to make an artistic choice rather than JUST a rating-appropriate choice. Starlog and Fangoria -- they were awesome -- for information regarding new flicks possibly coming out, and getting some behind the scenes access once the film was a week away from release. So, you have to understand, now people have access to the rumor of a film's creation BEFORE it's even greenlit. They have the ability to bitch on a granular scale, and have no clue, or don't care that it wasn't always that way, and feel entitled to spread their uninformed and often extreme opinion. These internet opinions are usually filled with vitriol, half-assed metaphor and simile -- a la the best of Seanbaby's reviews of video games -- or anyone on for that matter. Couple that with the 'Macarena Effect'...that now, since things can go viral, trends can run their course like the fucking flu rather than the Hanta virus that the Macarena got to be. The Macarena Effect -- It's impossible to remember how you felt the first time you heard the Macarena, because NOT looking like an asshole or idiot is MORE important to you than remembering that the song was popular for a reason. So, those two things -- wanting to be 'funny' on the internet with their bullshit opinions and NOT wanting to look like an asshole for liking something that turns out to be the Macarena -- no one's willing to give anything a fucking shot. Fuck the haters. This looks like a new Evil Dead. I've seen Evil Dead, and Evil Dead 2 (also the same movie as Evil Dead, but more wacky!) and Army of Darkness -- but this looks like -- Evil Dead v1.5 -- hopefully starting a new series of evil cabin in the woods flicks. Cabin in the Woods actually makes this FAR better for me in terms of meta movie. Because now I can watch it on both levels. Cash grab? Yeah, so? It's fucking show business. Buy your ticket, sit your ass down and watch. Or don't, but try not to shit all over yourself while trying to shit all over the movie before it's even out. The tongue cutting scene looks pretty badass. And possession stuff in this looks fairly damned cool. They actually add Mythos stuff to this (Necronomicon, etc.) and it will likely be a fun damned horror flick. Hey, Macarena.

  • Oct. 27, 2012, 6:04 a.m. CST

    The macarena effect

    by Casey Holland

    Was that the one with ashton kutcher?