Evil Dead (2013)

User Score
7.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 507 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 47 out of 507
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 29, 2013
    5
    Same story, but much more bloody and humorless. That's not to say it's a bad film, but despite it's name it's not an Evil Dead film either. Some scenes mimic Japanese horror flicks like The Ring and the excessive gore and violence is copied from the SAW legacy. But if you're gonna make a bleak and serious horror movie you have to go all the way -which the French have done very well theSame story, but much more bloody and humorless. That's not to say it's a bad film, but despite it's name it's not an Evil Dead film either. Some scenes mimic Japanese horror flicks like The Ring and the excessive gore and violence is copied from the SAW legacy. But if you're gonna make a bleak and serious horror movie you have to go all the way -which the French have done very well the last couple of years- but there it falls short. The young actors are just uncharismatic zombie fodder (you won't care if they live) who can't replace the memory of Bruce Campell (who got a nice cheque as the producer on this film sellout). The closest thing I've seen to Evil Dead is from Mr. Raimi himself: Drag Me to Hell. Better watch that if haven't seen it yet instead of this film. Expand
  2. Apr 9, 2013
    5
    For those who know the originals (I loved ED2), the story's pretty much the same. If you don't, it's still familiar: a group in a cabin unleashes an evil presence. Unlike the originals, this one is mostly dull. Many of the goriest killings are camouflaged with bad editing. The makeup efx on "Walking Dead" are better. Is anyone frightened by creepy eyes and twitching anymore? The pacingFor those who know the originals (I loved ED2), the story's pretty much the same. If you don't, it's still familiar: a group in a cabin unleashes an evil presence. Unlike the originals, this one is mostly dull. Many of the goriest killings are camouflaged with bad editing. The makeup efx on "Walking Dead" are better. Is anyone frightened by creepy eyes and twitching anymore? The pacing lacks momentum and the overbearing music just seems silly. There are a few fun moments and the cinematography is simply beautiful. By modern genre standards, this doesn't even hold up to the old standards. NOTE: Stick thru the credits for a groovy homage. Expand
  3. Apr 9, 2013
    5
    I can't, as a stand alone movie it wasn't bad but I'm upset that this was called Evil Dead, it had just enough references to be passed off as a remake but it lacked everything good about the original. The original didn't spend half the movie explaining the character's back story, it had humor and the scares were totally unexpected and over the top. That dramatic, over the top quality fromI can't, as a stand alone movie it wasn't bad but I'm upset that this was called Evil Dead, it had just enough references to be passed off as a remake but it lacked everything good about the original. The original didn't spend half the movie explaining the character's back story, it had humor and the scares were totally unexpected and over the top. That dramatic, over the top quality from the original movies is completely gone, even the possessed seem tired, they weren't nearly as intense as they should have been. I went into it expecting that sort of Drag Me to Hell/Cabin in the Woods feel where it's over the edge and exaggerating the horror cliches to the upmost as those were clearly inspired by the original. This was too dry and serious. How the hell are they gonna do Army of Darkness? Just... Please don't not bad on it's own but it feels like a slap in the face to fans of the original movies. Expand
  4. Jul 3, 2013
    4
    The cast was average, Lou Taylor Pucci (aka Eric) played his part very well and was the only good actor on the cast imo. The plot follows the original quite closely, of course it is a remake, and I have no problem with that. I love the gore scenes though, They were very well done. Both scary and enjoyable at the same time, That's what I liked most about them. However, The film's pacing wasThe cast was average, Lou Taylor Pucci (aka Eric) played his part very well and was the only good actor on the cast imo. The plot follows the original quite closely, of course it is a remake, and I have no problem with that. I love the gore scenes though, They were very well done. Both scary and enjoyable at the same time, That's what I liked most about them. However, The film's pacing was very off, It was either too slow paced (as it was in the beginning) or it was too fast (during the last 40 mins or so). It was sort of annoying to deal with.

    That being said, I just didn't care for it as much as I hoped I would. I really don't know why but I just couldn't get into it like I did the original trilogy. It certainly wasn't a bad movie but it wasn't a good one either.
    Expand
  5. Apr 13, 2013
    6
    The remake of the 1981 classic horror film The Evil Dead has certainly been changed, some for the better, others for the worst. (Of course this movie is not even as close to as good as original.)
    The plot is clearly not the same, there's a lot more horrifying scenes (that are actually INSANELY graphic) that can really surprise you. After the film's premise it seems to constantly get into
    The remake of the 1981 classic horror film The Evil Dead has certainly been changed, some for the better, others for the worst. (Of course this movie is not even as close to as good as original.)
    The plot is clearly not the same, there's a lot more horrifying scenes (that are actually INSANELY graphic) that can really surprise you. After the film's premise it seems to constantly get into some crazy scenes non-stop that really gets you engaged. The problem is that in 2013, this film is nothing more than a cliche horror film, that's the nice thing about the changed and eery scenes to the plotline, that makes this remake seem like it took its own direction, not completley one stupid cash grab.
    Expand
  6. Apr 9, 2013
    5
    no were close to evil dead 1981 or evil dead 2 and army of darkness. i thought it was going to be better then that. the acting was pretty good. just very disapointed and so was my mom. me and my mom are big evil dead fans
  7. Apr 26, 2013
    6
    "Evil Dead" definitely does not set any landmarks, but it can be considered one of the good remakes, along with "Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)" and "The Hills Have Eyes". Having a very unheard of cast, "Evil Dead" is a remake of the cult classic. If you were a huge fan of the original, definitely check it out. If you had no interest in the original and don't have any for this, this film"Evil Dead" definitely does not set any landmarks, but it can be considered one of the good remakes, along with "Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)" and "The Hills Have Eyes". Having a very unheard of cast, "Evil Dead" is a remake of the cult classic. If you were a huge fan of the original, definitely check it out. If you had no interest in the original and don't have any for this, this film is definitely not for you. Expand
  8. Jul 17, 2013
    6
    I remember the effect that the first Evil Dead movies had on me. In its time, it set the bar high for other horror films. This is what i expected from Evil Dead (2013). I got the ticket for the movie, and could barely wait to get in to the theater, the first few minutes looked promising... unfortunately the new movie failed to deliver, or even live up to its predecessors, as i watched theI remember the effect that the first Evil Dead movies had on me. In its time, it set the bar high for other horror films. This is what i expected from Evil Dead (2013). I got the ticket for the movie, and could barely wait to get in to the theater, the first few minutes looked promising... unfortunately the new movie failed to deliver, or even live up to its predecessors, as i watched the rest of the movie. I'm saying this as a nostalgic fan of the Evil Dead trilogy. Then i thought maybe the scary factors isn't working because I'm feeling comforted by the viewers sitting next to me in the theater, so, i got it in blue ray disc and watched all by my self, and still it didn't have that scare or suspense effect on me. I think the scare tactics were typical, flat, cliche, and can't say i have seen any thing that the film makers have done to bring the viewers to the edge of their seats. Evil Dead (2013) could have done better, hopefully they will in the next Evil Dead movie. Expand
  9. Apr 7, 2013
    5
    I came into this movie expecting another wonderful performance from the acclaimed movie star Bruce Campbell. Fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised. Bruce always does a fine job but this one is his best performance, even beating out favorites like the first evil dead and army of darkness. 9/10 stars.
  10. Apr 9, 2013
    5
    This movie has provided a roller coaster of emotions for me in the sense that when I first heard about it was vehemently opposed to the idea. I don't understand how they can spend 20 years saying that no one would be interested in an Evil Dead 4 but somehow suddenly an Evil Dead remake would be a great idea. Then, I saw the trailer and found myself interested again. The look wasThis movie has provided a roller coaster of emotions for me in the sense that when I first heard about it was vehemently opposed to the idea. I don't understand how they can spend 20 years saying that no one would be interested in an Evil Dead 4 but somehow suddenly an Evil Dead remake would be a great idea. Then, I saw the trailer and found myself interested again. The look was interesting and there seemed to be a lot of cool effects. But let's move on to how I felt after actually seeing the movie...

    Overall, the movie was fine. There was actually a lot of stuff there for the old school fans like the music, the look of the cabin and some lines that were obviously pulled from the original movies to help it appeal to all of the fans who were pissed that there's no Ash character. (Yes, including me.) However, the dialogue was a big part of what made this one of those movies that was good enough for one viewing but that I will probably never see again. I have no problem with bad language but when ALL of your characters use nothing but the F-word and the S-word then it just makes them sound stupid. And all of the business with the main character (Mia) being a drug addict seemed tacked-on and pointless. I mean, it's fine but when they kept going back to it, it just got old. It was like, fight death horror, oh wait remember how you left our family when mom was sick? And on top of that, I found Mia to be just a really unlikable character. Partly the way she was written, partly the acting. But that's subjective.

    SPOILERS Okay, there was a point where I was actually really into this movie and it was where David (essentially the Ash character) was kicking Deadite ass. He does all the work of figuring out what needs to be done and taking out the Deadites one by one. Then... he buries Mia (which is one of the ways of saving her soul as opposed to only bodily dismemberment as in the originals) and then bringing her back to life so she can be the sole survivor. He even constructs a defibrillator out of tools in the shed which is very Ash. But yes, she comes back to life and even after being drenched in scolding hot water, she is TOTALLY FINE! Fine enough that she can destroy whatever the evil is after David did all the work.

    Look, I realize I'm an old-school fan here but I just don't see the point in excising the very thing that made the original awesome in the first place. The male hero of the series (Ash) is so uncommon in horror films. Name another horror film where the hero is a guy. Name another horror film where fans go to see the good guy (instead of Jason, Michael, Freddy)! And now, the remake has just made it into another Girl Survivor movie and not even a likable girl survivor at that. And the "extra scene" after the credits isn't even worth sticking around for. I should point out that it's FINE that the survivor is a girl. My point is that now the movie is just like every other horror film ever and who wants to see the same thing over and over? END SPOILERS.

    So, while I can't say this was a horrible film at all, I just think it took everything that made the original fun and different out and replaced it with every other horror film cliche that you've seen for 20 years.
    Expand
  11. Apr 12, 2013
    4
    I just read a user review marking this film as "the Exorcist for this generation" and I threw up a little in my mouth. This does not come close to any of the scares of that masterpiece. This remake had a little tension and a lot of gore. I will give them credit for trying to make us care for the kids involved (the whole drug addiction mommy issues) but I found myself wishing for BruceI just read a user review marking this film as "the Exorcist for this generation" and I threw up a little in my mouth. This does not come close to any of the scares of that masterpiece. This remake had a little tension and a lot of gore. I will give them credit for trying to make us care for the kids involved (the whole drug addiction mommy issues) but I found myself wishing for Bruce Campbell throughout the entire film because he was what made the original so entertaining to watch. None of the cast had a quarter of that man's charisma. The nods were cheeky and a bit clever, but again, only made me wish I was watching the original or its sequel. I cannot find fault in others enjoying this film it really is not a bad film, as far as horror films go. But I felt like it had more than a few opportunities to separate itself from the pack and provide genuine terror. Gore, to me, is uncomfortable, and should only enhance your fear not try to provide it. I have been scared by films before with genuine tension (Vacancy and Frailty immediately jump to my mind) but this completely lacked it. Whether or not you will enjoy this film entirely depends on what you deem to be fearful. Expand
  12. Apr 9, 2013
    5
    I was nervous when I heard the film was being remade but still curious, then I saw the trailer and realized it was going to be similar to contemporary horror films in terms of aesthetic. Still I went to see it anyways, the film is beautifully shot and in some instances is just a collection of still photographs, which I found great. The film score is also well done and the heroin addictionI was nervous when I heard the film was being remade but still curious, then I saw the trailer and realized it was going to be similar to contemporary horror films in terms of aesthetic. Still I went to see it anyways, the film is beautifully shot and in some instances is just a collection of still photographs, which I found great. The film score is also well done and the heroin addiction angle is great yet it still left me feeling unsatisfied because it went predominantly down the horror route and most of the camp and tropes of the original film were dispensed with. This is not to say that I am a purist but if the appearance of objects such as the chainsaw and shotgun were only going to really act as callbacks to the old film then it seemed somewhat pointless. Nevertheless a great technical film and good adaption of the original. Bring out more Spanish filmmakers. Expand
  13. Jul 21, 2013
    6
    Either it had to substitute Bruce Campbell's charisma with a character of its own or it had to develop the cast into people we could care about even a little. Failing both those options, it's good fun, but this is a well-crafted slasher flick that will be quickly forgotten.
  14. Apr 6, 2013
    6
    Really a big letdown it's not really scary lot of blood .i would say its was more gory than scary You know what don't waste your time and money on this reboot.Had real bad experience watching it .In the whole movie there was not an single moment that kept me engaged in the whole movie
  15. Aug 21, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. LAME and DISAPPOINTING. Even the book of the dead looked bland as I was open to a remake of Evil Dead, being that Evil Dead 2 was a remake of the original film and I just thought of all the potential in this film but I was so wrong. We have all these effects at our disposable and yet the Deadites just looked like rage zombies, when they could 've had varieties of demonesque creatures and theirs quite a few plot holes in place, if I found suspended dead cats in the basement I would've high tailed out of there. Oh and the final monster" was just the main characters face on a tit less body, I guess this is meant to be a physical representation of her inner demons but it failed at that. I'm glad I didn't go and see this crap.

    The movie was shot well and their were some cool ideas in place, but it was just an incoherent mess, the characters were to wooden to really have any emotional connection towards them. In the original film you do feel like you care for the characters and want them to pull through. If you find enjoyment in this, all the power to you but I don't recommend this at all.
    Expand
  16. Jun 2, 2013
    5
    There is a lot of gore here withe a story that allows me to at least recommend seeing it once if you like horror movies. Don't go in expecting to care about any of the characters cause you won't.
  17. Apr 6, 2013
    6
    I was really excited for this movie as the original scared the hell out of me as a teen. However, it just didn't deliver in the "scare factor". Like most new horror movies,it relied too much on gore and not enough on suspense.
    It is very well made,and has a few creepy moments,but most reaction will be from cringing at the various injury scenes.
    Overall i was let down,it was just "ok" in my book.
  18. Nov 4, 2013
    4
    I can understand why people like it, for sure it's just that from the trailers and the reviews i thought it was going to be an actual horror movie and not just a straight up gore fest. The practical effects are amazing but I still would've preferred more scares, and better characters.
  19. Oct 14, 2013
    5
    "Evil Dead" comes across as more of a gruesome homage, alienating itself from fans looking for the franchise's trademark of unrelenting gore and tongue-in-cheek humor. The latter-day version of "Evil Dead," directed by Fede Alvarez, keeps the main focus on the gruesome element alone. Full of old-school effects, without any assistance from CGI, Alvarez's franchise entry has little to none"Evil Dead" comes across as more of a gruesome homage, alienating itself from fans looking for the franchise's trademark of unrelenting gore and tongue-in-cheek humor. The latter-day version of "Evil Dead," directed by Fede Alvarez, keeps the main focus on the gruesome element alone. Full of old-school effects, without any assistance from CGI, Alvarez's franchise entry has little to none of Raimi's humor, but certainly delivers on the carnage and bloodshed.

    The heart of story remains intact: five college-age men and women head off to an isolated cabin in the woods. They are staging an intervention designed to get Mia (Jane Levy), who is no longer able to socially use heroin. Her four supporters are her estranged brother, David (Shiloh Fernandez), and his personality-devoid girlfriend, Natalie (Elizabeth Blackmore), registered nurse Olivia (Jessica Lucas), and Eric (Lou Taylor Pucci). In the cabin's dark, damp basement, they discover the Necronomicon, or better known as the book of the dead. Eric, in an act of overt horror movie stupidity, starts reading passages from the Necronomicon unknowingly unleashing the demons.

    In his first feature film, Uruguayan director and co-scriptwriter Fede Alvarez demonstrates his wild imagination, and displays his talent for delivering the squirm-inducing images of body mutilations and other numerous atrocities. A nail gun, an electric carving knife, and a chainsaw all have their moment in the spotlight as weapons. What this new entry lacks entirely, which is so prevalent in the other movies in the franchise, is the tongue-in-cheek humor that accompanies the over-the-top gore and violence.

    In the three decades since Raimi made "Evil Dead," many have copied, adapted, or borrowed from his low-budget playbook. It's extremely challenging to pull off something original, amusing, and truly horrifying all at once. That is exactly what made last year's "Cabin in the Woods" (2012) such a clever, entertaining watch, and a terrific addition to the genre. Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, who directed and co-starred in the original horror classic, have production credits in this component, yet ultimately disappointing remake. Take away the name of "Evil Dead," and you're left with a movie that features your typical brainless characters who exist simply for elimination through horrific methods.
    Expand
  20. Sep 23, 2013
    5
    To be honest, I had expected so much more from this movie. Unforetunately it really is nothing special. Just another generic gory horror movie.

    Narrative more or less follows the original. Improving some parts making the movie feel a little more grounded at times and a little more real. Unfortunately this is what is wrong with it. The original was also flawed but it at least had it's
    To be honest, I had expected so much more from this movie. Unforetunately it really is nothing special. Just another generic gory horror movie.

    Narrative more or less follows the original. Improving some parts making the movie feel a little more grounded at times and a little more real. Unfortunately this is what is wrong with it. The original was also flawed but it at least had it's charm and almost goofy, yet horrifying, tone. The Evil Dead remake is just focusing on the horrifying and turning it up to ridiculously high levels. The characters this time round are so underdeveloped that you really do not care at all about them. They might as well have MEAT stamped on their foreheads.Jane Levy is perhaps the only character that did get my attention and I really do love the twist involving her close to the end, nice little nod to the original and also giving it its own interpretation.

    As a horror, it does have its share of scares and creepy moments. Gore fanatics will love this movie. There is ALLOT of blood and gore. The practical effects just make everything so much more sickening. Nice to see some old school FX at work.

    Overall:
    If anything, this movie's biggest fail has got to be the name it has to live up to. It doesn't. It tries too hard to stay loyal to the source material, but takes away so much that made the original what it was. It's a good attempt, but I don't think you can make an Evil Dead movie without Bruce Campbell.

    Also: The gore did get a little too needlessly excessive closer to the end. In the original, it was a little goofy. In this one, it feels like gore-fore-the-sake-of-gore.
    Expand
  21. Aug 31, 2013
    5
    It's mediocre. I have to say that the classic one is better than this one. There were some parts that gore shouldn't be. My favourite genre is horror, but this one is not good. It's not bad too though.
  22. Aug 11, 2013
    5
    This was not that scary to me. It was a good waste of an hour and a half, but the movie was just OK, not great. Everything that happened could have been avoided just by using common sense. Overall, this was OK, but it was most certainly not the best horror movie that I have ever seen.
  23. Aug 29, 2013
    6
    Anyone who says this is nothing like the original is wrong. The original was a gore film and so is this one. For some reason tho I do like this movie, it has that extra edge to it compared to the 1980's version. Worth a watch
  24. Dec 8, 2013
    6
    A far too serious remake of a genius film. The main characters are not likeable and it isn't until towards the end where the film really becomes enjoyable.
  25. Mar 12, 2014
    5
    Good movie to pass the time. It is scary in some aspects but the high inclusion of blood and masochist situations gives the movie a lack of approach to suspense and therefore, the aspects that people want to see in a real horror movie, but at last, it is entertaining and funny in certain way, regardless it is a thriller/horror film.
  26. Dec 24, 2013
    6
    Evil Dead is, above all else, a disappointment, a disappointment in that it fails to capture what made the original Evil Dead great, the originals charm is gone, and has been replaced with many of the trappings of horror films today: lame writing, and (possibly the scariest thing of the entire film) horrifically bland acting. The original at least had the excuse that it had absolutely noEvil Dead is, above all else, a disappointment, a disappointment in that it fails to capture what made the original Evil Dead great, the originals charm is gone, and has been replaced with many of the trappings of horror films today: lame writing, and (possibly the scariest thing of the entire film) horrifically bland acting. The original at least had the excuse that it had absolutely no budget and no true star power, so of course it's going to be a little underwhelming, yet this is a movie with a bigger budget and somehow it's more poorly written and not well acted. However, I'm still not giving this a low score, why, because it still has good stuff in it. The gore is back full force and there is cringe worthy fun in how over the top extreme it is. Even if four of the main cast are horribly bland, Jane Levy is actually pretty good in the film, sensitive yet also a bad ass action star, hopefully, in sequels they will just keep her and the actors will improve. Finally, that last thing that keeps me from flat out panning this film is that despite the lame writing, the story is actually not that bad, in fact it has a climax that is a huge blast of fun and blood, so yeah, do I hate it, no, but I will say, this is, perhaps, the biggest disappointment of this year Expand
  27. Feb 14, 2014
    5
    The remake of the Evil dead series by Sam Raimi does live up to it's reputation from the first film which is gruesome and bloody, but does forget the humor-- One of the things that made the very film popular in the first place.
  28. Apr 8, 2014
    4
    “Evil Dead” oder “Die Rache der Klofrau”
    Komm grad aus dem Kino. Haben zu viert (vier Cineasten, muss ich dazu sagen) das Remake vom indizierten Skandal-Kult-Horror-Film “Evil Dead”, deutsch: “Tanz der Teufel”, angeschaut.
    Wobei “angeschaut” nicht das richtige Wort ist, denn so wirklich viel auf die Leinwand schauen konnte ich nicht. Aber dazu später. (Spoileralarm) Die Handlung
    “Evil Dead” oder “Die Rache der Klofrau”
    Komm grad aus dem Kino. Haben zu viert (vier Cineasten, muss ich dazu sagen) das Remake vom indizierten Skandal-Kult-Horror-Film “Evil Dead”, deutsch: “Tanz der Teufel”, angeschaut.

    Wobei “angeschaut” nicht das richtige Wort ist, denn so wirklich viel auf die Leinwand schauen konnte ich nicht. Aber dazu später.

    (Spoileralarm)

    Die Handlung ist kurz erklärt, wenn nicht schon durch die Medien derzeit hinlänglich bekannt:
    Junge Erwachsene (klar, 2 Frauen, 2 Kerle) fahren in den Wald, um einer der beiden Mädels in einer ziemlich **** Holzhütte übers Wochenende auf die Schnelle einen “kalten Entzug” aufzudrücken.
    Mit dabei der Bruder von Frau Junkie, ein Jesus-Freak (sieht jedenfalls so aus, die Rolle ist im Übrigen absolut unterentwickelt), die Freundin vom Bruder von Frau Junkie (die im gesamten Film, wenn überhaupt, 3 ganze Sätze spricht), und - natürlich - eine Krankenschwester, die sich zutraut, ohne ärztliche Aufsicht mal eben in einer dreckigen Holzhütte (Stichwort: beruhigendes Ambiente…) ihrer Freundin die Heroinsucht auszutreiben.
    Kurz und gut: beste Voraussetzungen für eineinhalb Stunden Blut, Kettensägen, Nägel in Kopp, Messer in die Fresse… uuuund, was fehlt? Ach ja: Zombies.
    OK, bei “Evil Dead” gibt es keine Zombies, sondern dämonische Heimsuchungen mit gelben Augen, verzerrter Stimme, viel Fäkalsprache und sonstigem beim “Exorzisten” entliehenen Dingenszeugs.
    Die Zombies tauchen natürlich nicht einfach so auf, weit gefehlt!
    Durch einen blöden … ääähm … Zufall finden die vier im Keller des Hauses tote Katzen, viele Fliegen und das Buuuuhuuuuch, welches zu dem Zeitpunkt keine große Überraschung mehr ist, da es im Mini-Vorspann schon längt eingeführt wurde und dem Zuschauer ab Minute 3 klar sein sollte, was die nächsten 88 Minuten passieren wird.
    … Denkste.
    Denn was in den restlichen Filmstreifen oder HD-Speicher-Chip-Dateneinheiten passiert, übersteigt laut Presse und Machern alles bis dahin Dagewesene im Horror-Genre.
    Gähn.

    Jo, es ist blutig.
    Jo, es ist oft eklig.
    Jo, es ist krank.
    Aber es geht in keiner Sekunde unter die Haut. Jedenfalls nicht mir als Zuschauer. Den Protagonisten geht so ziemlich alles unter die Haut: Nadeln, Glasscherben, Nägel, Messer, Äste (Stichwort: Vergewaltigung)… und natürlich die rostige, oben schon erwähnte und oft bewährte Kettensäge.

    (Apropos ”unter die Haut”: Das Thema Sex spielt Gott sei Dank trotz des jugendlichen Personals keine Rolle. Das hebt den Film zwar nicht weit aus seiner schlammigen Versenkung heraus, ist aber immerhin eine Erwähnung wert.)

    Was allerdings im Original 1981 unter die Haut ging, waren die Beziehungen der Protagonisten zueinander. Die Effekte waren damals - nach heutigen Standards - verflucht grottig (Stichwort: Knetmasse), aber man konnte nachvollziehen, warum die einzelnen “Überlebenden” sich weigerten, ihre Freunde mit der Nagelfeile die Kehle durchzuschneiden. Weil da Verbindungen, echte Freundschaften …. Werte und Moral … im Spiel waren.

    2013 gibt es auch Freundschaften, nur sind die schon von Anfang an kaputt. Es gibt Familienbande, die allerdings nicht nur kaputt, sondern auch absolut bescheuert inszeniert sind (Stichwort: Mutter).
    Und es gibt ein Finale, das die Bezeichnung nicht annähernd verdient und das Original-Ende von 1981 auf einen goldenen Sockel hievt.

    Wer sich auch einen goldenen Sockel kaufen können sollte, ist die Klofrau vom CineMaxx hier in Muc.
    Denn was die Leute während des Films aufs Klo gerannt sind, war phänomenal.
    Teilweise hatte ich das Gefühl, der Film bestünde nur aus Schwarzblenden, weil dauernd ein unförmiger Körper aus irgendeiner Reihe vor uns sich durchs Bild schob und mir die Sicht auf die Leinwand beraubte. Kaum hatte er das Ende der Sitzreihe erreicht, gabs die nächste Schwarzblende, denn es kam ja schon der Vorgänger von seiner Klofrau-Belästigung zurück.

    Leute, bitte zieht Euch Windeln an oder sauft weniger Cola, wenn Ihr ins Kino geht!! Was ist denn mit Euch bloß los?!
    Ihr lieben Leser meint, ich übertreibe. Fragt @playdead2010, der neben mir saß. Er wird Euch bestätigen, dass der heimliche Star des Abends die Klofrau gewesen sein muss.

    Und, liebe Pissoir- und Schüsselbesucher… wenn Ihr die nicht anständig belohnt habt… dann droht sie Euch…

    DIE RACHE DER KLOFRAU

    DAS wird ein blutiges Kino-Spektakel, auf das ich mich schon jetzt freue.
    Und ich werde in der ersten Reihe sitzen, mit einem fetten Eimer Popcorn, 3l Cola, einem eingeschalteten Handy, viel Gesprächsbedarf.

    Und einer Windel.
    Expand
  29. May 11, 2014
    6
    Remake of the cult horror film of the 80s directed by Sam Raimi, "The House " by Fede Alvarez , against all odds is a decent horror film that offers an ' excellent and essential component splatter.
    At the technical level is almost perfect . The direction , although it was entrusted to a novice , it is discreet and overflowing with good ideas , the photograph appears almost bloody , and
    Remake of the cult horror film of the 80s directed by Sam Raimi, "The House " by Fede Alvarez , against all odds is a decent horror film that offers an ' excellent and essential component splatter.
    At the technical level is almost perfect . The direction , although it was entrusted to a novice , it is discreet and overflowing with good ideas , the photograph appears almost bloody , and the script manages to convince thanks to its simplicity and the desire to not take itself too seriously . Flaw , however, in the staging that can not be grim and dark like the original, this also because of the little picturesque scenery . It must be said , too, that despite the past thirty years from the original, this remake fails minimally to strike the same terror , and especially to recreate that dark feature of the whole trilogy, Raimi , who took part in the production and implementation of the remake with Bruce Campbell. Surely the touch of Raimi it can be seen in the fabulous splatter scenes , but the staging is definitely not the result of his creativity.
    In conclusion, surely "The House " by Fede Alvarez taken as a single film can only be a good product, but it absolutely does not stand comparison with the 1981 original , directed by a director but not a genius ....
    Expand
  30. Nov 22, 2014
    5
    One of the worst movies I've ever seen in the theatre. This remake has nothing on the original. It loaded with a bit two much gore. I did like the upgrade in the special effects to make everything look a little bit scarier. This adaptation didn't develop enough individuality. It relied too much on the original film for inspiration. There are some movies that just shouldn't be remade. TheOne of the worst movies I've ever seen in the theatre. This remake has nothing on the original. It loaded with a bit two much gore. I did like the upgrade in the special effects to make everything look a little bit scarier. This adaptation didn't develop enough individuality. It relied too much on the original film for inspiration. There are some movies that just shouldn't be remade. The Evil Dead is one of them. Expand
  31. Oct 12, 2014
    6
    Not as great as the original movies, but keeps the essence, and if in the future Fede Alvarez and Sam Raimi decide to make a sequel I hope some improvements with a little black comedy, some better sequences and visuals. (60 - 100)
  32. Dec 11, 2014
    4
    Summary: It fails to provide enough black humor and scares. 44/100 [C-]

    Five twenty-something friends become holed up in a remote cabin. When they discover a Book of the Dead, they unwittingly summon up dormant demons living in the nearby woods, which possess the youngsters in succession until only one is left intact to fight for survival. Evil Dead is directed by Federico Álvarez, he's
    Summary: It fails to provide enough black humor and scares. 44/100 [C-]

    Five twenty-something friends become holed up in a remote cabin. When they discover a Book of the Dead, they unwittingly summon up dormant demons living in the nearby woods, which possess the youngsters in succession until only one is left intact to fight for survival. Evil Dead is directed by Federico Álvarez, he's an Uruguayan director. It also boasts a well known cast like Jane Levy and Shiloh Fernandez. Moving on, I actually liked the first hour of the film but my main problem is the over-the-top final act. It was too gory and exaggerated. Although its first hour is very entertaining and quite scary, the last 30 minutes are a truly bloody mess.

    The opening scene is truly terrifying and extremely violent. I also like that the film does not use too much CGI, the special effects are practical and everything looks realistic. It definitely boasts some bloody and violent moments that fans of the original will enjoy, but another problem with Evil Dead (2013) is that it wasn't genuine enough, it's a shame that the movie relies on gore and forgets about its own narrative coherence. It's excessively gory, especially in its final act, it was too much. Also, most of the scariest scenes are in the trailer! However, it's still worth watching if you're a horror fan. As I said, I enjoyed the first hour, the rest of the movie was pretty messy.

    It seems like it wants to copy the unique black humor from the old ones. Moving on, there's a scene after credits that you will probably enjoy, especially if you're a fan of the Evil Dead saga. I recommend it if you're a huge fan of gory horror movies and I also recommend it if you're fan of the franchise, but you shouldn't have very high expectations. I do not recommend it if you're not fan of the horror genre or if you expect interesting characters. In conclusion, this movie is just gory and nothing more, the characters are not engrossing enough and some of the black humor just doesn't work. It's awkwardly unfunny, there isn't a balance between the horror and the comedy. [C-]
    Expand
Metascore
57

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 38
  2. Negative: 3 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Nigel Floyd
    Apr 29, 2013
    60
    Despite much old-school splatter, it’s seldom frightening and oddly unfunny.
  2. Reviewed by: Peter Bradshaw
    Apr 19, 2013
    60
    It is nowhere near as creepy as the recent indie horror "V/H/S," but it is a full-bloodedly grisly and macabre film that zaps over a few scares.
  3. Reviewed by: Matt Glasby
    Apr 15, 2013
    60
    Closer to Eli Roth than Sam Raimi, this brutal retread combines J-horror atmospherics with torture-porn kills. It’s more evisceration than invention but at least has the courage of its bloody-minded convictions.