SXSW 2013 Second Opinion: ‘Evil Dead’
At last year’s South by Southwest, the Joss Whedon/Drew Goddard instant horror classic Cabin in the Woods played the Paramount theater to a packed and rapturous audience. It was a movie about that audience. A movie that pulled back the curtain, revealed the tricks, and asked, “Why are we here?”.
It feels a bit strange then to be back a year later in the same theater with the same audience and watching a ‘cabin in the woods’ horror movie. Evil Dead, disregarding its pedigree, is a movie that would have been concocted by the string pullers in Cabin. It is a movie whose only purpose is to indulge its audience. It succeeds and was greeted with the same enthusiastic approval, but it still struck me as odd and got me thinking about the nature of fandom and what exactly a horror movie is supposed to be these days.
If you have no interest in my personal ramblings on the subject, I’ll get the review proper out of the way here so you can go about your lives. If you’re on a site like this, you already know about Evil Dead or, at the very least, the concept of a ‘cabin in the woods’ horror flick. Some kids go out to a secluded cabin, usually for the purposes of drinking and fucking, they encounter some evil shit, someone does something stupid, everyone dies. This is that movie, except this time their reasoning is an undercooked DIY rehab plan for an addict friend instead of the usual partying.
Evil Dead wastes very little time with exposition or character development and jumps right into the mayhem, and it is indeed mayhem. This is an over the top fun gore fest the likes of which we haven’t seen in decades. If you’re only interested in seeing blood splatter in inventive ways, there is no way you’ll leave disappointed. Apparently, the initial rating of the film was NC-17, and it’s easy to see why. What we saw was the R rated cut but let me assure you it does not feel compromised. I can’t imagine what they were forced to cut given what they were allowed to keep in. It’s fun and refreshing, which is slightly troublesome.
It’s also incredibly slick looking. Director Fede Alvarez takes plenty of cues from Sam Raimi and injects the film with plenty of energy without quite going full cartoon. It’s an admiral job of keeping the kinetic fun house vibe of the original series while also having the sheen of a studio flick with a budget. It’s worth noting that practical effects prevail here, with CG used fairly sparingly.
The actors all do a serviceable job of screaming and spewing viscera, but lead actress, and potential franchise star, Jane Levy is the only one allowed to really shine. No one is really given enough meat to chew on, metaphorically speaking. There’s plenty of literal meat. Levy is the only one with a real central conflict, as an addict trying to kick the habit and mend a broken relationship with her brother, but it’s just an excuse to get to the bloodshed. It’s not important and therefore doesn’t pay off in a satisfactory way.
It’s a lowest common denominator movie, but I liked it. I actually liked it a lot, and thats my problem. Is this good enough? I recognize it as an empty piece of fan service but I was entertained, so why try harder? Why care about theme and characterization when empty indulgence brings down the house?
You may be saying to yourself, ‘Well, it’s not like the original Evil Dead was anything different.’ You would be partly correct. Raimi’s classic barely had a skeleton of a plot and no concern for character. The only reason it’s protagonist became an icon is due to the idiosyncrasies and charm of Bruce Campbell. But the thing people forget about that first film is how god damn INSPIRING it is.
The Evil Dead, like many no budget horror films of the time, succeeds solely on the blood, sweat, tears, and imagination of a small group of people. There wasn’t endless studio money, there weren’t experienced cast or crew. It was just some kids with a dream. You can watch it and be amazed at their ingenuity and resourcefulness and think ‘Maybe I could do that’. Horror and exploitation cinema was really “indie” before that was a buzz word. Before Clerks and Slackers, there was The Evil Dead.
It’s no coincidence that many of our visionary directors got their start in low budget horror. It’s the perfect playground. You can do whatever you want. Find a voice. And you can do it cheap and without the burden of expectation.
No one is going to walk away from this new iteration with that inspiration. You can’t do what this movie does without the resources. It loses some magic as a result. It’s a product instead of a labor of love.
But horror movie audiences have been all too eager to praise the product for years. It’s hard to think of a less discerning crowd. It seems just about any horror movie gets love just by existing. It doesn’t have to be good, it just has to cater. I’ve definitely fallen victim to this myself. Oh its got practical effects and a cameo from Tom Savini? Give it all the stars. Hell, I had a framed picture of Bruce Campbell displayed as if it was a family photo in my college apartment.
This blind adulation was on full display during Friday night’s screening, and I found it quite sad. There was no way the audience wasn’t going to love it, it caters as hard as it can. A shot of a chainsaw or a recognizable line of dialog insures that it will be beloved. I can’t help but feel we should require more. That we should force filmmakers to try harder. That we should desire horror to be about something other than shameless pandering.
Until that day, though, we have Evil Dead.
For another opinion, check out Jonathan’s review here!
