Drag Me to Hell!

[missmacabre]

Originally Posted by alkytrio666

I think I'm the only one here who isn't in love with this movie. I thought it was good, but only that; it was good with its humor, its scares, its gore, its story- but it didn't excel in any of those things, and consequently I was left with no lasting impressions.

Sure it didn't excel at any one of those things. It wasn't the funniest movie, or the most graphic, but it was a great mix of all of those things. When was the last time you saw a new movie come out that was gross, scary and funny? I find all the movies that have been coming out recently have failed at being even one of those things, so to watch a movie that was all of them and still good was definitely refreshing.

[alkytrio666]

Originally Posted by Despare

I'm curious as to what horror films you have been watching recently in the theaters. There have been some ok horror flicks in the past, oh, five years but with the exception of Grindhouse none have provided the thrill that Drag Me has. Bloody Valentine 3D, Halloween, Friday the 13th, Last House on the Left... some ok remakes in the bunch but they didn't even approach this film. Raimi combined horror and humor effortlessly once again and the anxiety he created in some scenes was beautiful. I loved it, I guess I could see somebody who needs gore to complete their horror experience being disappointed but the themes involved and execution of the story was anything but "lite". I love how a lot of members here said Evil Dead could have only gotten a PG-13 rating if it was released today but a lot of the same people complain about a horror flick with a PG-13 rating. You don't need to have a graphic film to be able to build tension and get scares, I'm glad Raimi sees that. I firmly believe that if he felt his film needed an R rating to be effective he would have pushed it further but it simply didn't need the push. There's still plenty of gross moments too :) .

Actually, if it sounded as if I thought the film was a poor comparison to recent horror, I would like to make it clear that's not the way I see it at all. I've lost a lot of my passion for the genre over the last few years, mostly due to the prohibition of the quality horror film. To say that Drag Me to Hell is the best horror movie of the last year, or even the last several years, would not be an outrageous thing to say; I'd agree with you. But considering the competition, that's not such a shining achievement. I saw Drag Me to Hell as mostly pastiche; it was as if Raimi was saying "remember when horror movies used to be like this? Remember when I made films like this?". The evidence lies in the dozen or so self-references to his own Evil Dead series. But what if I wanted something new? What if I wanted a solid, filling entry into the genre, like Halloween in the 70s, A Nightmare on Elm Street in the 80s, Silence of the Lambs in the 90s? Drag Me to Hell as a kind of simultaneous crowd-pleaser for newcomers and salute to genre fans is fun for a ride, but what is it really saying about the state of the horror film? That we can only reminisce about the good old days from behind the comfort of safe, studio commercial filmmaking? I don't necessarily care about a rating; what bothers me is the difference in quality. The Evil Dead was a non-stop terror ride which never apologized and stayed gritty and fresh. Drag Me to Hell had to, for example, have a shot of Justin Long answering an iPhone. With Sam Raimi at the helm, I was ready for the next step in the horror movement; instead, I got pastiche.

[fearnet]

Originally Posted by alkytrio666

The Evil Dead was a non-stop terror ride which never apologized and stayed gritty and fresh. Drag Me to Hell had to, for example, have a shot of Justin Long answering an iPhone. With Sam Raimi at the helm, I was ready for the next step in the horror movement; instead, I got pastiche.

Interesting point. While I loved DMTH, I see where you are coming from. Plus nothing is better than 'Evil Dead 2' right?

FEARnet.com is playing the classic movie online for free to celebrate Raimi's return to horror (whether you're happy about that is up to you). Either way, it's a fun movie to revisit if you haven't seen it in awhile.

Jack with FEARnet

[missmacabre]

Originally Posted by fearnet

Interesting point. While I loved DMTH, I see where you are coming from. Plus nothing is better than 'Evil Dead 2' right?

FEARnet.com is playing the classic movie online for free to celebrate Raimi's return to horror (whether you're happy about that is up to you). Either way, it's a fun movie to revisit if you haven't seen it in awhile.

Jack with FEARnet

nicely laid out site, man. I would like it even more if your videos were viewable from Canada.

[fortunato]

Originally Posted by alkytrio666

With Sam Raimi at the helm, I was ready for the next step in the horror movement; instead, I got pastiche.

I definitely understand what you're saying, but I think we should bear in mind:
The guy already revolutionized the genre once, he doesn't need to do it again.

[ferretchucker]

I just love the fact that it's a 15 so I can go and see it in the cinema!!!

Looking forward to it.

[missmacabre]

Originally Posted by ferretchucker

I just love the fact that it's a 15 so I can go and see it in the cinema!!!

Looking forward to it.

Tell me about it. I'm 21 but I'm short enough to get the evil eye when I buy a ticket to an R rated movie. Luckily I have a 6ft tall bf with a beard. Since I won't suggest you get a scruffy bf, you should grow a beard asap to avoid movie ticket awkwardness.

[zcarstheme]

I dug this a lot.

Some cracking sound design and a real funhouse feel to it, plus it takes its lead character in some fairly uncomfortable directions in a very un-Hollywood way; really rare to see a (vaguely) sympathetic lead acting the way this one does.

An ending that doesn't wuss out helped a lot too.

Four stars from me.

[ChronoGrl]

So for those of you who have seen it - Do you think that this movie should have been rated PG-13? I feel as though the levels of gore and the truly frightening scenes should have raised it to an R. Then again, it had no nudity or language, but I found its nudity or profanities that will raise the rating of a film and not actually the horrific content.

Thoughts?

[UngodlyWarlock]

Was it really that gory? I don't recall much blood at all, really....

Just a LOT of phlegm, drool, and snot. :D
It definitely didn't feel Rated R to me, but it also felt like it was really pushing the Pg-13 a bit.