Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022) #502

In the vein similar to that of “Halloween”, the new “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” follows the events after the first film while bypassing the existence of the other entries in the series. Knowing that, this film still doesn't make complete sense if you're trying to connect it narratively to the first film. So instead, go into this movie as if it is the first in a series, just one that reminds you of a movie of the same name. Doing this, "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is a taunt slasher that presents some memorable kills. Unlike the original, which hinted at the extreme violence but isn't shown, this one has it all on screen.

The film opens with a group of young entrepreneurs, Melody and her sister Lila, and Dante and his girlfriend Ruth, who have plans to auction off properties in the ghost town of Harlow, creating a vibrant and gentrified scene for other people their age. Things go astray when they find that one of the houses is still occupied by an old woman her silent, hulking "son". She is rushed to the hospital with her son, driven by the two officers who had come to evict her; Ruth, goes along after feeling guilty about the old woman. The others stay and welcome a bus load of investors, while Lila gets to know the local mechanic Richter. During their conversation, we learn that Lila is a traumatized survivor of a school shooting.

Things take a sudden turn for the worse when the old woman dies on the way to the hospital. Her son reacts violently, attacking the police officers, causing the ambulance to crash. Ruth is momentarily knocked out but awakes in time to see the man cutting off the old woman's face, only to overlay it over his own. Leatherface is back and angry! He quickly kills the driver and Ruth before heading home, where he finds a town full of fresh victims!

When Richter finds out that the old woman might actually still own her home, he takes the keys from Dante and Melody, telling them that he'll return them once they prove they own her house. The two are forced to search the house but run into Leatherface, who attacks Dante. He's distracted by Richter, whose death allows Melody time to escape. She runs to the bus, where the investors are staying dry during a storm. Leatherface enters the bus for one of the most memorable horror moments of 2022. With chainsaw in hand, Leatherface does what he does best, pure bloody chaos. Lila and Melody escape only to run into Sally, the sole survivor of the first film. She has revenge on the mind, but she isn't a Laurie Strode and gets killed before she gets to take Leatherface down for good. It's up to a gun wielding Lila, coming to terms with her fear of firearms, to go toe to toe with Leatherface. He's old, he's getting tired, right?

Favorite moment of the film is the final death. If you know, you know.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) #500

Watch the trailer here

For my 500th review, I've chosen one of my favorite horror movies of all time, 1978's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"! This movie is a true classic and represents what a real remake should be! It retains the thrilling scares and premise of the original movie while updating enough elements to have it feel modern. Both films are iconic and are enjoyed by horror fans of all ages. The sets are characters as much as the actors, and the special effects of the time are truly haunting. Yes, some of these aspects may seem dated when compared to films produced today, so remember that this film is 46 years old.

The film opens with a montage of transparent amoebalike organisms leaving their planet, somehow, and floating on the cosmic winds towards Earth. Some land and take root in San Francisco, becoming a pod with pink flowers. The next scene introduces our hero, Matthew Bennell, a health inspector for the San Franciso Health Department, giving a surprise visit at a French restaurant. I love this character because he is a government employee, but he isn't the typical cop or military type. Next, a lab tech from the Health Department, Elizabeth, finds one of the plants and brings it home to the house share with her boyfriend Geoffrey. The next morning, the plant is missing, and Geoffrey begins to act strangely. Concerned, Elizabeth turns to Matthew for help. He offers to introduce her to his psychiatrist friend David Kibner, but then the next day Matthew is approached by his dry cleaner, telling Matthew that his wife is acting like an imposter, the same way that Elizabeth was describing Geoffrey.

At a party, Matthew is able to introduce Elizabeth to Kibner, who is trying to calm a distressed woman who is also explaining that her husband isn't who he is. He tells the woman that she has nothing to worry about, the same advice he gives to Elizabeth. Feeling dismissed, Elizabeth leaves for home. Also at the party is Jack, played by Jeff Goldblum (Mr. Frost), another friend of Matthew, who personally has issues with Kibler's work. The film then follows Jack as he returns to the mud bath spa that he operates with his wife Nancy, played by Veronica Cartwright (Alien), and the clients that are passing their time at the spa. Jack becomes lethargic as Nancy finds an unfinished body double of her husband laying on one of the massage tables. They contact Matthew, who brings an unresponsive Elizabeth with him. The four realize that something of a large scope is taking place and that they are all in danger. 

Over the course of the following day, Matthew finds evidence of the replacement of the people he knows around town. When he tries to call his government contacts, he finds that they've been compromised as well. Matthew and Elizabeth come to realize that everyone is being replaced by a pod, and when one is near you, it takes your form while you sleep. That night, Matthew, Elizabeth, Jack, and Nancy try to elude mobs and authorities when they find out that they are some of the last humans left in the city. Kibler is leading the search for the humans, explaining that everything is so much easier after the change. One by one the group is split up, and despite his best efforts, Matthew is unable to keep Elizabeth from being replaced. Matthew is able to burn down a warehouse full of the pods, but his efforts may be in vain. Sometime later, a day or two, Nancy comes across Matthew, who she thinks is still pretending to be a pod-person. To her horror, he points and screams!

Matthew and Elizabeth pretending to be "replaced"

Salem's Lot (2024) #493

A movie stuck in the mire of the film industry, "Salem's Lot" has finally arrived after being shelved and forgotten by the powers that be, and now that it's here its receiving a lukewarm reception, from "it was ok" to "it's pure trash". Diehard fans of the book or the original made for tv film from 1979 have vocalized the most vitriol for this version, and while I adore the book, this movie would be fine if it didn't share the same title. It suffers from the well-intended missteps that "IT pt2" made by rewriting the ending for a modern audience. I still enjoyed the movie recommend at least giving "Salem's Lot" a chance so you can make your own conclusion.

The movie begins with the clever use of visual exposition explaining the arrival of Barlow and Straker, their purchase of the Marsten House and the opening of their antique shop, and the rumored history of the Marsten House, all displayed by various newspaper headlines and articles. This saves the movie a great deal of screen time and keeps the audience engaged during a normally tedious process. The movie's first scene opens within the antique shop with Straker giving instructions on the arrival and handling of the mysteriously heavy box that is to be delivered. Next we see two men making the delivering, being spooked the entire time.

The next day, we are introduced to Ben Mears, played by Lewis Pullman, staring up at the Marsten House, the source of inspiration for his next book. Ben is a successful writer who lived in Salem's Lot when he was younger. In the book the history of the house plays a larger role but here it is simply made out to be the creepy house on the hill. Ben goes into town to try and rent the house and learns that someone had just bought it and moved in over the last week. At the agency, Ben meets Susan, the relators assistant? Ben and Susan run into each other later at the local library, where Susan loudly announces that she will be going to the drive-in, alone. 

Mark Petrie, the new kid in school, is introduced in the classic showdown with the class bully, swiftly neutralizing the bully, showcasing his high intelligence for an 11-year-old. The fight is broken up by Matt Burke, the only teacher in school that seems to care. That night, Mark has two new friends visit his house, Ralphie and Danny. The two brothers walk home but are attacked by Staker, who kidnaps Ralphie as a sacrifice for his master, the vampire Barlow. At the Marsten House, we see Ralphie offered to Barlow, a Nosferatu looking vampire. A search is made by the town to find Ralphie, and it's indicated that Danny has no memory of the attack. Danny falls ill, and while dies while in the hospital, a victim of pernicious anemia. The night of Danny's funeral, the gravedigger Mike is bitten by Danny, beginning the slow but steady spread of vampirism throughout Salem's Lot.

It soon becomes apparent to Ben, Susan, Matt, Mark, and Dr. Cody that something is wrong in "the Lot" and seek help from Father Callahan. Bodies go missing, vampires are flying up to windows asking to be let in, and crosses glow brightly when in the presence of a vampire. The novel becomes purely inspiration for the second half of the film as characters are switched in certain events and the order of events are mixed around. Once again, if you haven't read the book, this is still an entertaining movie even if plays it a little loose on how active a vampire can be during the day. The big showdown takes place at the local drive-in, where Ben and Susan had their first date. It's an interesting idea that is full of action and close calls.

Salem's Lot was Stephen King's second published book, inspired by the horror comics of his youth. The book is full of secondary characters, fully fleshed out, who help showcase the steady spread of Barlow's curse and influence in the small town. Their presence is not necessary but does add greatly to the overall appeal and love of the book. This film already feels rushed and the inclusion of these characters was just not possible. Had they been included and the run time increased or presented as a mini-series rather than a movie, the end product may have been more in line with the book, looking past the obvious new ending of course. 

 

The Wicker Man (2006) #466

The 2006 remake of “The Wicker Man” is an example of what not to do when making a movie but the end result still ends up as a cult classic. “The Wicker Man” has a painfully awful script, bizarre costumes, and stars an unhinged Nicholas Cage as police officer Edward Malus.The film also has the dubious honor of having won the Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Remake. 

The first 15 minutes of the movie are the worst, in my opinion; so much do that I almost turned it off. The dialogue is so terrible throughout the film, but the beginning is by far the hardest part to get through. Once Edward gets on the island, the dialogue and story improve slightly, thank god. The acting is also a bit cringe worthy, but ultimately it is the narrative of the story that pushes everything forward and keeps the whole film from becoming a complete dumpster fire. 

This remake shares inspiration from both the novel “The Ritual” by David Pinner and the original film. Edward is personally motivated to solve his missing persons case, unlike Sergeant Howie who was just following up on an assigned case. This simple change makes the viewer more invested in the character’s journey in this instance; it gives the story deeper emotional stakes. The leader of the island, Summerisle, is a woman in the remake and the majority of the population is female; this is an important detail for the remake’s narrative.

Edward Malus is a police officer who is suffering PTSD after a deadly accident that he witnessed. He is finally coded out from his apartment when he learns that his ex-fiancée needs his help to find her missing daughter. He travels to a remote island in the Pacific Northwest in search of the young girl and his ex. The island is shrouded in mystery and he is unable to get a straight answer from anyone. When Edward begins to piece together what’s going on, it may already be too late.

Pet Sematary (2019) #465

 

"Pet Sematary" is a classic Stephen King kind of story and it only makes sense that there would be a new version of movie for horror fans. In my opinion, the 2019 version is an improvement over the original 1989 film. It has an impressive cast that includes Jason Clarke, Amy Seimetz ("The Sacrament"), and John Lithgow. It has received mixed reviews from critics and viewers alike, but I still recommend this to any who enjoy a good horror movie; a film to watch alone in the dark and get lost in.

The first thing you notice is how beautiful this film is. The colors pop and the scenes are crystal clear. Then there are the haunting children in the processional to the pet sematary, a purely haunting scene that draws the viewer in. All of the special effects and make up are such an improvement over the original, as well as some of the narrative choices that have been made. They very from the novel but not in a distracting fashion. In fact, the changes that were made make the story overall more effective and gives the narrative a fresh new feeling. 

The story in "Pet Sematary" is it largest struggle because the narrative is to busy going in different directions to keep everything focused. The story itself in this case doesn't need to be fancy, it should be kept simple and straight forward. The three main adult characters all see their own personal ghost. Louis sees a patient who had couldn't save, Rachel sees her sister, and Jud sees his wife. I can understand why they are there but I feel it adds just too much to the overall story. 

Louis Creed has moved his family from Boston to Ludlow, Maine, a sleepy little town when compared to the bustling metropolis. While exploring the large plot of land that they now own, his wife Rachel and daughter Ellie witness a procession of children on their way to the pet sematary. Louis learns more about the secrets about the cemetery from his neighbor Jud when he takes Louis to bury Ellie's cat Church after he was killed by a truck on Halloween. Church comes back but he is different, more feral and viscous. After attacking his young son Gage, Louis takes Church out to the woods after he fails to euthanize him. Later, Ellie is killed by a truck when she runs out to the street after seeing her cat after a few weeks. Overcome with grief, Louis decides to bury his daughter in the pet sematary but soon comes to regret that decision.... 

Martyrs (2016) #424

"Marytrs" is the 2016 American remake of the 2008 extreme French film of the same name. As the trend with most remakes, the new version is rarely as good as the original. This film is both too much like the original and yet strays horribly astray when it tries to be different. The first half of the film feels like a shot for shot redo that scales back the intensity while the second half fails to deliver any scares and the story feels weak; the choice to write a new third act is commendable only if the new material actually adds to the established narrative because what takes place feels uncreative.

Besides having questionable story choices, the elements that makes the original do scary are either reduced or removed altogether. Why remake a tame version of a movie that is considered to be one of the more extreme films of the past ten years? It's a confounding move that doesn't do well for the film.

Lucie is a young girl who is being held captive and being systematically tortured in a rundown industrial building. She manages to escape but her captor is unable to be found. She is placed in an orphanage where she becomes close friends with Anna, a girl who's her age. Even though she physically heals, she is still tormented by a monster that only she can see. Ten years later, the two friends find Lucie's abusers but end up discovering something far more terrifying.

House of Wax (2005) #420

"House of Wax" is more than your standard, run of the mill slasher film. It's slick, stylish, and feels like it has a decent budget. Although it shares the name of the 1953 Vincent Price film, this movie is not a remake; the only real similarity between the the two films is that the antagonist wears a mask made from wax to hide their disformity. 

"House of Wax" may not be well remember due to the fact that it came out in 2005, a time when more grisly films like "Hostel" and the "Saw" franchise were drawing the bulk of attention in the world of horror. "House of Wax" did cast Hilton Paris, who was constantly in the spotlight at the time, as one if the young adults who falls victim to a gruesome death. If this helped or hampered the film at the time I really don't know, but watching the film now, she fits in perfectly with the rest of the cast. 

Overall, "House of Wax" is a fun popcorn thriller to watch on Netflix if you feel like a horror movie.

Poltergeist (2015) #419

Spoiler free review!   Oooohhh, Aaaahhh!


Sigh, another original, amazing horror "classic" has been remade, re-imagined, recycled, and repackaged; none other than 1982's "Poltergeist". Many fans and die hard horror fanatics were angered and called foul when this new project was announced and for good reason, the original is perfect as it is. In the quest to honor and enjoy creating a new version, as well as cashing in on a well known title, a new generation of film makers took it upon themselves to try anyway. Produced by horror heavyweights Sam Raimi and Robert Tapert, their new film fails to live up to the hype and expectations that were naturally and unfortunately made.

BUT....what if the original was never made? Would this film be any good? Yes, not great but it actually is enjoyable. Has many of the same beats that the original has, although some are used in different ways or times. I really liked some of the visual effects that are in the 2015 version, with the hands on the TV set being one of my favorite moments in the film (see picture below). The story is essentially the same, the family make-up is the same (you actually get to see the older sister do things!), and the different take on the psychic expert is acceptable. All of this makes the new "Poltergeist" worth watching.

BUT....this is a remake and comparisons will be made. The main issue for me is the lack of soul, complete pun intended, that the new film has compared to the original. I think Sam Rockwell is a talented actor but his concerned father figure roll felt empty and shallow compared to Craig T. Nelson's work. Craig was a father torn apart, desperate, and possessed to get his daughter back; Sam was like "meh", especially during the scene with the tree. Then there is the daughter who is taken to the other side, Carol Anne and Madison. Carol Anne comes across as more innocent while Madison feels more helpless. Both girls did great, don't get me wrong, but the original wins over again. I've already mentioned older sister so let's talk about the middle child, the son. Both versions are spot on, in my opinion. The new son, Griffin, plays a very different character than the portrayed in the 1982 original and I think it fits perfectly. At first I was a little concerned but the end result was great.

In conclusion, if you can, watch the 2015 version before ever seeing the 1982 one. If this proves impossible, give yourself some time between viewings. Enjoy!

Poltergeist Trailer

Carrie (2013)

The 2013 version of “Carrie” is a well-made remake that is able to modernize the film while keeping the heart of the story. This version doesn’t feel outdated (but it might be in 30 years, who knows?) and keeps its scenes brief and to the point. It also follows the novel a bit more than the original movie does which helps to flesh out the characters thoroughly. The visual effects are believable and effective for the most part; the only part that I found a little hokey was the scene in the restroom and the floating pieces of glass. While Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie made had the perfect dysfunctional abused/abuser relationship, Chloe Grace Mortez and Julianne Moore had compelling chemistry as well. The remake did have a stronger supporting cast, a cast that could actually act and looked to be near the ages of the characters that they were portraying, the characters Chris, Sue, and her boyfriend Tommy were the most improved upon in comparison to the 1976 version.

Favorite remade scene – The chaos of the prom scene is more vicious and intense as well as believable.

The girls mocking and teases Carrie

Carrie and Mother praying after the prom

Carrie at the prom

Carrie walking home,

Maniac (2012)

“Maniac” is a “stalker/slasher” film about a serial killer who scalps his victims and staples his trophies to the headpiece of his mannequins. Starring Elijah Wood in a very different role than we are used to, this was a remake of a movie from 1980. The movie is film from the perspective of the killer, Frank, using the P.O.V technique. We rarely see Frank except for moments when he sees his own reflection or at brief moments that are used for artistic purposes. Because you are watching the film through the eyes of the killer, the viewer isn’t able to experience the horrible events from a distance and in a different context. The film was produced and the script was co-written and Alexandre Aja, who was also the producer and writer for the excessively violent French film “Haute Tension”. This was a very difficult movie to watch and I found very few moments entertaining. I will admit that the best scene in the film is at the end when Frank is killed by his inner demons, and oddly enough, the perspective is from his victims looking down at him as they tear his face apart.

We Are What We Are (2013)

“We Are What We Are” is American remake of the Mexican film of the same name. This is a great remake where there are enough moments and parts of the original storyline in while having plenty changes to make this film unique and enjoyable. The first and foremost change between the two films is the fact that the gender of the family members is swapped, so where the father died in the original, the mother dies in the remake. This is a clever change that I’ve never seen before and it works out beautifully. The second most noticeable change is where the two stories take place; in the original the family lives in a poor section of Mexico City and in the remake, the family lives out in a rural town with a declining population. With those two factors in place and various cultural differences, the two movies are able to follow a similar story about a family of cannibals and how they try to carry one with their lifestyle after the family loses their “bread winner”. The remake earns bonus points because it addresses why the family has resorted to cannibalism, whereas the original never did.

The Parkers are a polite but reclusive clan who suddenly lose their matriarch, leaving behind her husband Frank, daughters Iris and Rose, and young son Rory. The timing couldn’t be worse for the clan because an important family ritual is only days away. Iris, as the oldest daughter, is now responsible for performing the ritual. Rose, on the other hand, is disgusted by the family’s history and wants nothing to do with it. The annual ritual turns out to be murder and consumption of a person that they’ve kidnapped and locked away in a cave like cellar under Frank’s work shed. The town’s doctor, Doc Barrow, becomes suspicious when he finds a bone in the creek one day. Having lost his own daughter after she mysteriously disappeared and the town’s high missing persons rate, Doc Barrow and Deputy Anders begin to follow the clues that lead back to the Parkers.  How the family reacts and responds is both thrilling and unsettling.

Favorite moment – The first act moves along nicely while the second act slows down a bit too much. I love the intensity and suspense that drives the third act to its thrilling conclusion. 

Rose...

Rose and Iris

Dinner time for Rose, Frank, and Iris

Frankenstein (1994)

How appropriate or fair is it to compare a remake of a classic horror movie when the original film itself strayed from the novel? Such is the case when trying to compare the two best known versions of "Frankenstein". On one hand you have the timeless Universal classic that have us the image of a crazed mob with torches and pitchforks, and then on the other hand you have creator and creation chasing each other across the globe bent on destroying the other. These are two very different images but they both work extremely well. 

While this film is closer in nature to the novel, there are still several differences between the two pieces. The most glaring difference that the movie adds is the reanimation of Elizabeth and her subsequent suicide. The other details are small enough to be overlooked as many details are lost, ignored, or adjusted whenever a book is transformed into a movie.

The one thing I can't figure out is why so many people hate this movie. Why? Some say its because its too melodramatic but so is the book! Others took offense that Robert De Niro's role as the Creature, with most critics stunned as to why an actor who only does "mobster parts" cast in a period horror movie? (This is a question that I've read many times"). I like the film and enjoyed it immensely. Maybe it's because I was 18 when I first saw it and didn't know any better...or maybe I liked it because it is a good film. Yes, yes it is.

The Omen (2006)

It’s quite possible that “The Omen” was chosen to be remade just so it could be released on June 6^th 2006, or 666. It’s a fine enough of a film but it is practically an exact replica of the original film. But it has a cast of actors that grew up with it and had parts that they were probably excited to play and the movie made a decent amount in the box office so there really isn’t any harm. The biggest surprise in the movie was the casting of Mia Farrow as Mrs. Baylock, the nanny who knows exactly who Damien is and what he is capable of; it was exciting to see Mia and a role that was the exact opposite of her more famous role in “Rosemary’s Baby”. The only poor casting choice was the child who played Damien. He didn’t come across as detached in an evil spooky way like the child in the original film did. Even when he knocked his mother off the chair and over the railing, his expression was as creepy.

I do want to give kudos to this film for resisting the “need” to fill the movie with unnecessary special effects or CGI enhancements. The movie has a strong enough storyline to keep things interesting as it is.

Trying to have a creepy stare in 2006

All happy that he knocked his mommy to the floor in 1976

Friday the 13th (2009)

“Friday the 13^th” was meant to be a reboot of the series and not a remake of the original film. This allowed them to take elements from the first four films and apply them in a single movie. The writers and director wanted to reexamine, update, and adjust various aspects of Jason’s mythos which left me thinking that their efforts were both cool and pretty lame at the same time. The film opens up with the events that occur at the very ending of the original “Friday the 13^th” with the showdown between a counselor and Jason’s mom; she’s still beheaded and Jason is still a witness to the gruesome act. The movie moves forward in time to when Jason is grown and begins killing people while wearing a cloth mask like the one he had in “Friday the 13^th part 2”. Jason finds a hockey masks and puts in on and some teenagers find the head of Jason’s mom, just like the events in “Friday the 13^th part 3”. Finally, a guy shows up looking for his missing sister (Friday the 13^th part 4”) and a lot more people get killed before they realize what’s going on. These were cool nods to the first few films in the series when the movies were still building a mythos and keeping to a serious horror movie vibe.

The only thing I really didn’t like about this film was seeing where Jason lived; a creepy, wet, room/tunnels of torture. The fact that he had an area to lock somebody up is not like his character at all and it really bothered me. The only time we saw a house where Jason might have lived in the original movies was a tiny hut that was set up as a shrine to his mother. That was cool and this was not. It feels like it’s too similar to all of the other hideaways that deranged movie killers have. It’s just a part of the story that I wish they had skipped.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)

The original “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” was such a unique movie that it’s difficult to imagine any other version. But low and behold a remake was made in 2003, a version that takes a few of the original ideas and adds plenty of new ones to flesh out the story. I will admit that I enjoyed watching the 2003 version for what it is; a reboot of the series because as a remake, it simply pales in comparison and is in no way anywhere near as frightening or chaotic as the original. It’s still a strong movie if it was an original itself so its’ cruel to try and compare the two films too much.

Let’s break down some of the differences -

1.       The reason why they are in the middle of Nowhere, Texas.

In the original, siblings Sally and Franklin are checking out their grandfather’s gravesite because there has been a rash of grave robbing and other acts of vandalism at the cemetery. While they are in the area, Franklin convinces the group of friends (2 girls and 3 guys) to stop by his dad’s run down childhood home, which happens to be right next door to where Leatherface and his demented family live.

In the new version, the number of friends and their genders are the same but the names are different and no one is bound to a wheel chair. The group is coming back from Mexico after sneaking a piñata full of pot across the border to sell at a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert in Dallas.

2.       The hitchhiker.

In the original, the group picks up a weird looking guy who begins telling them about his family and their work in the slaughter houses before pulling out a knife and cutting himself. The group kicks him out and he retaliates by smearing blood over their van. He ends up being Leatherfaces brother.

In the new version, the group picks up a girl who begins freaking out when they drive in the direction of the house where Leatherface lives. She pulls out a gun and kills herself in the back seat.

3.       R. Lee Ermey. He’s not in the original and he makes the remake awesome!

These three points are enough to distinguish the two films because before R. Lee Ermey is introduced, the story takes a different path from the original. There is more expansion in the remake but just enough to keep it interesting and not overly explained.

Evil Dead (2013)

It’s truly a rare occasion when a horror film is remade and is equal to the original and the 2013 version of “Evil Dead” is such a film! This is a movie in which I will not blink twice and have any issue with people saying that they loved the newer version more than the original. The original was made by a group of college aged friends who only knew the basics of film making at the time, barely had a budget, and had to come back several times to the cabin in Tennessee to finish the filming the movie, and yet it’s a classic that has inspired a legion of other film makers and has a massive fan base. The new “Evil Dead” had a small but modest budget, had a cast with some real credentials, and a story concept that was as good as gold, which turned out to be a great film and is easily one of the best movies I’ve seen all year. This project is an example of people who love the movie so much that they get together and present the basics of the story in their own way. It doesn’t hurt that Sam Raimi, Bruce Campbell, and Robert Tapert gave their blessings as well as served as the producers. Director and co-writer Fede Alvarez saw the project as happening 30 or so years after the original events took place but by avoiding any attempt to point that out (besides the car!), this movie plays out as a remake and not as a sequel of sorts. There are too many coincidences between the two films not to be a remake, but enough differences that this is truly its own film.

There are several similarities in the two films that you have to look closely to notice.

1.       The most obvious is that the cabin looks the same, at least from the front. In the original, we never got to see the cabin clearly from any other angle. The car that Ash and his friend used to get to the cabin is parked and rusting in the back behind the cabin.

2.       There are two couples and a sister of one of the guys.

3.       All of the characters in the remake become possessed in the same order as their counterparts in the original, beginning with the sister who is attacked by the tree/forest.

4.       David, Ash’s counterpart, is dressed in the same colors and has the same hair color and frame.

5.       A character in both films cuts off their hand after it shows signs of possession. This is one of the two elements from “Evil Dead 2” to be used in this film.

6.       A great and powerful entity is summoned and is vanquished by a lone survivor. This is the second element borrowed from “Evil Dead 2”.

7.       The Naturom Demoto is found in the basement.

There are differences as well, which make up the rest of the film and don’t need to be listed. It’s best to watch the film and see what they’ve changed.

SPOLIER!                              SPOLIER!                              SPOLIER!

What I REALLY didn’t like about the film was a moment during the prolonged showdown. When Mia becomes pinned to the ground by the jeep, she finds the strength to rip her arm apart and run away. What?? Is she a lizard? No! How the hell can anyone do that?? It’s not like her arm was that badly damaged from the jeep falling on it at any time before that. And I feel that it completely takes away from the act of self-mutilation of when Natalie cuts her hand off in the kitchen.

Mia, the "Cheryl" counterpart

 Natalie, the "Linda" counterpart

 David, the "Ash" counterpart

1981 demon

 2013 demon

Ash, Linda, and Cheryl,  1981

David and his friends, 2013