Evil Dead II

Reviews

• 

  John Chard

  Oct 18, 2015

  8
  The Flaming Groovy! Yes indeed, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell are back to shake some action with this remake of their own The Evil Dead (1981), only this time with more money and more overt humour. A quick prologue sets things up nicely, then BAM! Ash (Campbell) and his squeeze are in the cabin of doom and about to be part of a night of unholy demonic terror. It's a nightmare of the black comedy kind, where Raimi and Campbell invite us to a party and then gleefully pummel us into submission - and we sado-masochistically enjoy it! Ash has grown a pair of cojones and decides to fight back against the demonic forces, cue mucho action with chainsaw and shotgun. There's a quip on the tongue for our hero as well, even as he is battered from pillar to post to make the action work. Raimi isn't interested in extraneous scenes or exposition, he strips it bare as the pic hurtles along, all while he brings his technical skills with camera and sound design to the fore. The humour is often outrageous, dementedly so, while it's nice to find a group of film makers who don't feel the need to now throw blood and guts at the screen every other scene just to make a formulaic impact. Bonkers, chilling and devilishly funny. 8/10Read more

  The Flaming Groovy! Yes indeed, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell are back to shake some action with this remake of their own The Evil Dead (1981), only this time with more money and more overt humour. A quick prologue sets things up nicely, then BAM! Ash (Campbell) and his squeeze are in the cabin of doom and about to be part of a night of unholy demonic terror. It's a nightmare of the black comedy kind, where Raimi and Campbell invite us to a party and then gleefully pummel us into submission - and we sado-masochistically enjoy it! Ash has grown a pair of cojones and decides to fight back against the demonic forces, cue mucho action with chainsaw and shotgun. There's a quip on the tongue for our hero as well, even as he is battered from pillar to post to make the action work. Raimi isn't interested in extraneous scenes or exposition, he strips it bare as the pic hurtles along, all while he brings his technical skills with camera and sound design to the fore. The humour is often outrageous, dementedly so, while it's nice to find a group of film makers who don't feel the need to now throw blood and guts at the screen every other scene just to make a formulaic impact. Bonkers, chilling and devilishly funny. 8/10

• 

  Wuchak

  Feb 12, 2018

  6
  RELEASED IN 1987 and written & directed by Sam Raimi, “The Evil Dead” chronicles events when two Michigan State students (Bruce Campbell & Denise Bixler) travel to a remote cabin in western Tennessee for spring break wherein they discover a copy of the Book of the Dead and an audiotape whose incantations resurrect demons in the woods. The daughter of the archeologist who made the tape (Sarah Berry) also visits the cabin with her beau (Richard Domeier) and a couple of dubious locals (Dan Hicks & Kassie Wesley DePaiva). The first film was low-budget, cartoony and extreme, but it was serious horror. This sequel is also cartoony and extreme, but it’s decidedly comedy horror. It’s entertaining for what it is, but it’s hindered by a confusing opening “recap” that doesn’t match the previous film. Raimi stated that he didn’t have the rights to use material from the original movie so he did a 7-minute recap with only two people instead of five (with Denise Bixler taking over the role of Linda). But there are other inconsistencies: The Book of the Dead and audiotape is found in a room rather than the basement and Ash (Campbell) later “rediscovers” that the bridge is out, which he already knew via events in the first film. Once you get past the awkward and perplexing set-up, the movie settles into an entertaining over-the-top gory horror comedy, which is so creative it’s as if it was made by a lunatic. Bixler is a great replacement in the role of Linda, but her part is too brief and you only catch glimpses of her stunning beauty. It took me a while to warm up to Annie (Berry), but I eventually did and she’s a worthy secondary protagonist. There are several amusing and thrilling sequences, like the demonic hand scenes. THE FILM RUNS 1 hour & 24 minutes and was shot in Wadesboro and (studio) Wilmington, North Carolina, with supplementary work done in Detroit. ADDITIONAL WRITER: Scott Spiegel. GRADE: B-/C+Read more

  RELEASED IN 1987 and written & directed by Sam Raimi, “The Evil Dead” chronicles events when two Michigan State students (Bruce Campbell & Denise Bixler) travel to a remote cabin in western Tennessee for spring break wherein they discover a copy of the Book of the Dead and an audiotape whose incantations resurrect demons in the woods. The daughter of the archeologist who made the tape (Sarah Berry) also visits the cabin with her beau (Richard Domeier) and a couple of dubious locals (Dan Hicks & Kassie Wesley DePaiva). The first film was low-budget, cartoony and extreme, but it was serious horror. This sequel is also cartoony and extreme, but it’s decidedly comedy horror. It’s entertaining for what it is, but it’s hindered by a confusing opening “recap” that doesn’t match the previous film. Raimi stated that he didn’t have the rights to use material from the original movie so he did a 7-minute recap with only two people instead of five (with Denise Bixler taking over the role of Linda). But there are other inconsistencies: The Book of the Dead and audiotape is found in a room rather than the basement and Ash (Campbell) later “rediscovers” that the bridge is out, which he already knew via events in the first film. Once you get past the awkward and perplexing set-up, the movie settles into an entertaining over-the-top gory horror comedy, which is so creative it’s as if it was made by a lunatic. Bixler is a great replacement in the role of Linda, but her part is too brief and you only catch glimpses of her stunning beauty. It took me a while to warm up to Annie (Berry), but I eventually did and she’s a worthy secondary protagonist. There are several amusing and thrilling sequences, like the demonic hand scenes. THE FILM RUNS 1 hour & 24 minutes and was shot in Wadesboro and (studio) Wilmington, North Carolina, with supplementary work done in Detroit. ADDITIONAL WRITER: Scott Spiegel. GRADE: B-/C+

• T

  tmdb40011370

  Nov 26, 2019

  9
  Not really much of a fan of slasher/gore films, but friends suggested I give this a try purely because the film does not try to take itself too seriously, and despite the fact there is lots of gore here, none of it looked particularly realistic and only adds to the extremely black humour of the whole affair. But what attracted me to this film was the charisma of the lead actor Ash, played by Bruce Campbell. He is not a great actor by any stretch, but he does have a rather boyish charm that moves the film along, even if the script is as creaky as the rocking chair in his cabin! Definitely made on a shoestring budget, and the sfx (no cgi here!) are not all that great, but it doesn't matter because you're just there for the ride; and to be fair there are some very good fx splashed around throughout, and the first person camera-eye of the Evil Spirit in the Wood, is also well done. Groovy!Read more

  Not really much of a fan of slasher/gore films, but friends suggested I give this a try purely because the film does not try to take itself too seriously, and despite the fact there is lots of gore here, none of it looked particularly realistic and only adds to the extremely black humour of the whole affair. But what attracted me to this film was the charisma of the lead actor Ash, played by Bruce Campbell. He is not a great actor by any stretch, but he does have a rather boyish charm that moves the film along, even if the script is as creaky as the rocking chair in his cabin! Definitely made on a shoestring budget, and the sfx (no cgi here!) are not all that great, but it doesn't matter because you're just there for the ride; and to be fair there are some very good fx splashed around throughout, and the first person camera-eye of the Evil Spirit in the Wood, is also well done. Groovy!

• 

  Nathan

  May 16, 2023

  8
  The Evil Dead II takes everything fans loved from the original and ramps it up to one thousand, but is that such a good thing? The direction from Raimi is very present once again with fantastically creative shots and quick zooms that are such a staple of his. The story is way more fleshed out here, with interesting flash backs that give the original an entirely new perspective. The special effects are better than the original, and we get to see a lot more of what the evil entity is. But with all the positives this movie has, it is just missing something that I cannot put my finger on. The original felt so genuine, and I think the low budget helped increase the tension and horror of the possessions. Here the tone is a little campier and I just don't resonant with it as much as the original. It is still a great film, and one of the better horror films of the 80s, but I do not hold it as high as most unfortunately. Score: 81% ✅ Verdict: GreatRead more

  The Evil Dead II takes everything fans loved from the original and ramps it up to one thousand, but is that such a good thing? The direction from Raimi is very present once again with fantastically creative shots and quick zooms that are such a staple of his. The story is way more fleshed out here, with interesting flash backs that give the original an entirely new perspective. The special effects are better than the original, and we get to see a lot more of what the evil entity is. But with all the positives this movie has, it is just missing something that I cannot put my finger on. The original felt so genuine, and I think the low budget helped increase the tension and horror of the possessions. Here the tone is a little campier and I just don't resonant with it as much as the original. It is still a great film, and one of the better horror films of the 80s, but I do not hold it as high as most unfortunately. Score: 81% ✅ Verdict: Great

• 

  Filipe Manuel Neto

  Apr 4, 2024

  2
  **I don't understand the hype.** When watching this film, I got the serious impression that “Army of Darkness” ended up being a kind of sequel or spin-off to this work, considering the themes involved and the persistence of the main actor, Bruce Campbell. Both films have similarities, and it's hard not to think about it. Sam Raimi is one of those directors who have made a name for himself in horror cinema, but I can't help but think that this is one of his poorest works. “Evil Dead” is dark, it's bizarre, it's full of gore and scenes that make you want to throw up your popcorn, but it's not the kind of film I would watch again. With a miserably low budget and a lot of creativity, the director manages to disgust us more than to scare us, and there is little in this film that can really instill fear or dramatic tension. In fact, there are scenes that dangerously border on comedy. Bruce Campbell does what he can, and what he does is enough to guarantee protagonism due to the absolute lack of a capable and competent cast. The actor is not completely devoid of ability or talent, but he seems to have limited himself to this, and similar films. It goes without saying that the rest of the cast doesn't even deserve a mention in this review, as they are absolute amateurs or people who made mistakes in their profession. And of course the Necronomicon, a book created by the fantasy imagination of H. P. Lovecraft, has a relevant role in the plot and is absolutely fearsome. In the midst of this funny disaster, what saves this film a little is the way Raimi takes the opportunity to study cheap visual and special effects, and the results he can get from them. Buckets of paint, raspberry juice, bizarre synthetic makeup similar to carnival faces, we have almost everything.Read more

  **I don't understand the hype.** When watching this film, I got the serious impression that “Army of Darkness” ended up being a kind of sequel or spin-off to this work, considering the themes involved and the persistence of the main actor, Bruce Campbell. Both films have similarities, and it's hard not to think about it. Sam Raimi is one of those directors who have made a name for himself in horror cinema, but I can't help but think that this is one of his poorest works. “Evil Dead” is dark, it's bizarre, it's full of gore and scenes that make you want to throw up your popcorn, but it's not the kind of film I would watch again. With a miserably low budget and a lot of creativity, the director manages to disgust us more than to scare us, and there is little in this film that can really instill fear or dramatic tension. In fact, there are scenes that dangerously border on comedy. Bruce Campbell does what he can, and what he does is enough to guarantee protagonism due to the absolute lack of a capable and competent cast. The actor is not completely devoid of ability or talent, but he seems to have limited himself to this, and similar films. It goes without saying that the rest of the cast doesn't even deserve a mention in this review, as they are absolute amateurs or people who made mistakes in their profession. And of course the Necronomicon, a book created by the fantasy imagination of H. P. Lovecraft, has a relevant role in the plot and is absolutely fearsome. In the midst of this funny disaster, what saves this film a little is the way Raimi takes the opportunity to study cheap visual and special effects, and the results he can get from them. Buckets of paint, raspberry juice, bizarre synthetic makeup similar to carnival faces, we have almost everything.

• 

  s_for_short

  Aug 4, 2026

  9
  So this one made me laugh. That's a breather compared to the pure terror of the first one. While you can argue that this movie is better than the first because of its higher production value and grander effects, I think they're too vastly different to even compare. I highly recommend you give this movie a watch, even if you didn't like the first movie.Read more

  So this one made me laugh. That's a breather compared to the pure terror of the first one. While you can argue that this movie is better than the first because of its higher production value and grander effects, I think they're too vastly different to even compare. I highly recommend you give this movie a watch, even if you didn't like the first movie.