Can't remember which one I saw first.

I preferred the second one, finding it more competently made, although now I'm certain they've merged in my head and I longer know the difference.

I'm which you der, DBT. I'd go as far as to say ED2 revived my interest in Horror film.

Which film did you see first, Smegs?

I'm pretty sure I saw the first one first, but I'm not 100% sure anymore. It was 20 or so years ago.

Yes, thank you, Repoad!

I saw ED2 in the 90's. I consider it one the best films all-time (any genre, but specifically Horror), and one of my favs.

I've never seen ED2 a second time. For the most part, I've never had a major desire to. When I saw it, it had my strict attention ::big grin::. I'm confident I'd pass an ED2 exam. I remember it very well.

Now, you wouldn't be surprised to know I rarely re-watch films. In my opinion, watching a film the 'first time' is a once in a lifetime experience -- and I do mean more than just the obvious logic of that statement. Knowing what's going to happen next, in any film, especially Horror, is a big deal. I'm not against re-viewing, of course ::big grin::, I'd just rather enjoy people or a new film, life-is-short-better-things-to-do, and I know I generally can't re-experience that 1st-time positive experience re-watching a film.

I've seen The Evil Dead twice. The second time was because of all the praise it's gotten, as I wanted to see "what I may have missed". That doesn't mean I think it sucks. I enjoyed it.

Ironically, I don't seem to remember ED1 very well. Could it be ED1 is more rewatchable because it's harder to remember? ::wink:: I'm partly joking...

I don't give 'points' to films for re-watchability. Just my opinion -- I think films should be judged for first-viewing... but then, I don't rewatch films much, so I guess I'm not a connoisseur. ::big grin::

Hat tip to Repo before I begin my input. Without his generosity I wouldn't have Evil Dead in my VHS collection, therefore would not have watched it when I did and loved the shit out of it!

That said, the first was the one I saw first. And is also my favorite of the trilogy (series excluded since it's ongoing and I'm not caught up anyway). It is more memorable to me, and as a stand alone film it is a perfectly perfect horror movie. It has no rehashed bullshit 'previously on' clips before the movie that rewrite the story and confuse the audience who has seen the previous films. It's less silly and so keeps a wider range of audience with a more focused foe to fight, where as the sequels have dragons and shit? Although don't get me wrong, I love the skeleton army and effects of the third and second, I just find them at a more decent amount used in the first movie.

Considering Ash gets a motherfucking chainsaw arm in the second movie... this says a lot that I love the first more. AND CONSIDERING HE DOESN'T USE IT IN THE CLIMAX IN THE FINAL FIGHT OF THE THIRD MOVIE THAT ONE EASILY GETS KNOCKED OUT OF THE RUNNING.

Give a movie about 7 years and you'll be surprised at how much seems new again...even the "known" parts kind of only kick around your brain a little bit, and it's almost nice to have them reawakened.

For me (and yes, I saw it first) the first one may be more simplistic and cheaply made, though I found it much more enjoyable. Maybe it was the more claustrophobic setting, maybe the characters just seemed a little less over the top? Whatever it was, I've always come back to this as one of my favourite horror films.
Maybe it was that it was slightly less comedic?
Horror comedy has never been one of my favourite things, and while they both had it, it was far less present in the first one.
There's also the whole remake/sequel thing going on with the second that didn't really gel with me, kind of felt a touch like an invalidation of the original.
I also prefer the more basic makeup, and of course, the ending.
Oh, and I liked some of the deadite dialogue a little better.