Ask What You Can Bring To the Evil Dead Remake

Film criticism is not about absolutes. Judging art is expressing an opinion, relating how you responded to something. How your neighbor responds to the same thing is a different kettle of fish, and doesn't make them right or wrong. Our responses are filtered by life experience, where we are at any given moment, and what's troubling us at that time. Because we're all on different simultaneous journeys, it makes sense that opinions are often at loggerheads.

I walked out of the EVIL DEAD remake feeling underwhelmed and surprisingly flat. Yes, the special effects were solid, and the film was clearly made with love and passion, but it was a slog for me. At the forty-five minute mark, I wanted it to finish so I could leave and feel the sun on my face. I didn't engage with it, I didn't bond with the characters, and their issues didn't capture my sympathy or empathy.  

For me, the original, which I admire a lot, was more kinetic under Sam Raimi's direction, and the orchestration of character types made for a much more enjoyable time. The special effects were less sophisticated than they are in this remake, but I actually found them more real, more immediate.

The writers in this remake take a few new turns by creating a character struggling with a drug problem, and they half succeed marrying drug rehabilitation with demonic possession for amusement, but it didn't make the film any more interesting to me than if they hadn't done it at all. Still, points for trying.

An 'Ash'/Bruce Campbell-type character is sorely missed here because he was the original's brightest spark, a one-man army who never took the silly premise too seriously. In this revival, there's nobody you could safely call a 'hero', although a 'Final Girl' does turn up (actually, emerge!) when everything's pretty much put to bed. So, does that make her a real 'Final Girl'? And come to think of it, what the hell is a 'Final Girl' even doing in EVIL DEAD?

The producers totally wimp out on recreating the famous Tree Rape scene from the original, content to splash blood and guts all over the place, but becoming coy when a little penetration by flora is underway, so screw them(!) The replaying of spooky incantations from the first film over the end credits simply reminded me how great the original was and how unnecessary this dash-for-cash is.

My opinion only, and I'm sticking to it. You'll stick to yours, I'm sure, and so you should. What's an opinion if you don't honor it with conviction?

And that leads me to this thought, which works for me: When you repaint the Mona Lisa, only the painters profit.

Over the years, my favorite horror films have remained pretty consistent.

Everything we love is flawed, is it not?, which is often why we love it in the first place.

Flaws give us an entry point, an opening that welcomes us with our own flaws.

What we love as much as the film itself is what we personally bring to it.

I couldn't bring much to the EVIL DEAD remake, but I always manage to bring plenty to these beauties:

Second Last House

My local moviehouse had more faith in the Last House on the Left remake than I did.

They opened it on two screens simultaneously in their complex and scheduled 10 sessions a day.

You can't accuse the distributor, Rogue (a division of Universal), of dumping the movie.


The '72 original is what it is. A hardcore, technically awful horror flick with a couple of killer performances -- David Hess, in particular. It broke taboos and showed enormous courage. It redrew the boundaries for screen violence. Its default documentary style worked in its favor, giving the film its power.

Its flaws are well known if you're a genre buff, so I won't repeat them here.

The 2009 Last House on the Left is best measured in an artistic context, not a political one.

Craven claimed the original was some sort of anti-Vietnam diatribe, but I never bought that.

Certainly its proximity to the Vietnam period was undeniable, but that it was making an anti-violence statement seems specious.

Dennis Illadis's Last House on the Left is not too bad at all. And in a weird kind of way, my awareness of the events of the first film increased my anxiety. I knew what lay ahead for the girls, and it kinda bothered me. It bothered me a lot, actually.

Which was the filmmaker's intention.

The set-up is tight and solidly directed. For a refreshing change, we get classic compositions that hold between blinks, and there is some economical character sketching at work.

There are one or two pleasant surprises, too, which I won't divulge, because they're surprises.

It was inevitable that Garrett Dillahunt's Krug would be compared to David Hess's, so it's no big shock that Hess's Krug trumps Dillahunt's. The more recent Chaos (2005), a mostly dreadful Last House rip-off, offered the excellent Kevin Gage ('Waingro' from Heat) in the Krug-meister role, and he inched close to Hess's mantle.

Unfortunately, he was let down by the crappiness of the film itself and the appalling writing. It's not that Dillahunt isn't good. He's just not as memorable as Hess, who was there first.

John Murphy's score is a major plus of this remake. Seesawing between string and synth, he creates a menacing, understated energy that adds important weight to the more troubling scenes.

The rape of Mari Collingwood, nicely played by Sara Paxton, is in real time and and is not visually graphic. It is very impactful, however, and adequately conveys the horror of human defilement. At the same time, Mari's friend Paige (the excellent Martha MacIsaac) is left to bleed to death after being brutally stabbed. This anxious sequence is directed with discipline and clarity.

The revenge of Mari's parents on the rapist killers is bloody and brutal, but it's also where the film faulters. When Mari's mother allows her daughter's rapist to enter a room where the battered girl is lying, I felt like the writers were milking tension from an illogical development. Most of the revenge stuff has been seen before, so don't expect a revelation . In the 70's, Last House was new and shocking; now it's a genre.

Despite several climactic misgivings, Last House on the Left - 2009 is a quietly harrowing treat.

The Los Angeles Times came at the film from a different angle:

Wes Craven's Last House on the Left has been a favorite of mine for a very long time.

The remake takes Craven's structure (which was taken from Bergman's The Virgin Spring, which was taken from...) and builds a worthy thriller around it that is mostly successful.

Many have complained that the remake lacks the original's nihilism. Yes, of course it does. It's a fucking studio picture for Chrissakes! I knew that going in, so I wasn't expecting shit. No studio ever produced something as grimy as the original Last House. And they never will. Deal with it.

The thing is, you don't go to church to bang a dirty whore, although you might get to look at one in nun's clothing.