The Evil Dead

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%. (07/08/2013)

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. (01/03/2008)

Crazy affair, changing from atmospheric horror to slasher to splatter finale, holds together only thanks to occasional crazy idea. Raimi delivers fresh ideas but lacks balance. Campbell has charisma, but others around him only fulfill the role of background. As for the suspense, the best for me was probably laughing Linda between the doors, the thought of which still makes me laugh and scared at the same time. But the highlight remains the last visit to the basement before Raimi unleashes his gallery of disgust. The atmosphere there is palpable. In the final evaluation, it is a weaker horror, where the viewer can fully enjoy grabbing different limbs and later their separation. And even though I enjoy being scared of what I can't see, it's disappointing when I don't find out anything at all. (03/22/2006)

To etch such an innovative notch in the annals of horror at 21 requires quite a lot of filmmaking talent, and Raimi here proves with every minute that he has more than plenty of it. The perspective shots and the visual tricks with the foggy environment in the first half generate an atmosphere that is thick as oatmeal (and also delivers rape-by-tree and the book of the death), while the great make-up and an endless dose of inventive camera movements in the second half hold the entertainment value at the highest level, even though the script is stuck in one place. The watering of the light-bulbs and the window projecting blood are immortal moments with deserved cult status. A simple premise exploited to the fullest with a very unorthodox and delicate climax – modern ghost stories can’t hold a candle to this. 80% (01/16/2019)

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. (03/16/2013)