Guelph Film Society

"The extreme nature of the gore isn't beside the point - it is the point. Raimi goes so far over the top in presenting these displays that they take on a campy, almost humorous appearance. It's impossible to take all this blood seriously. So, instead of being sickened, we're strangely amused - and this is all intentional." James Bernardinelli (ReelViews)

"Then the carnage comes, and when it does, it delivers on all promises and more, with a parade of gushing wounds, demonic howls, and oceans of gore which approach the line of good taste, toe it, then gleefully dance across." Zack Handlen (The A.V. Club)

***

"Effective scares, respectful nods to its inspiration and a few new twists make the question of whether this new Evil Dead succeeds in matching its inspiration superfluous. This is one remake that succeeds on its own blood-soaked terms." Ian Buckwalter (NPR)

"Alvarez triumphs because he made one crucial decision: Avoid digital animation and use only practical in-camera special effects. He uses every trick from classic Hollywood and invents a few of his own." Tirdad Derakhshani (Philadelphia Inquirer)

***

Shelly: Why does she keep making those horrible noises?

Ash: I don't know!

Shelly: Look at her eyes. Look at her eyes! For God's sake, what happened to her eyes?

///

???: I will feast on your soul!

Mia: Feast on this, motherfucker.

***

[Steve]

ahoy folks. and now for something completely different. welcome to Classics + Remakes month! we'll be exploring some cult/indie classics that changed the face of horror cinema. i thought it would be interesting to contrast horror classics with their remake counterparts, especially films that made significant or noticeable changes to their original incarnations.

first up is the classic campy, low-budget horror debut THE EVIL DEAD by the acclaimed American writer/director Sam Raimi. a combination of supernatural horror, possession, gorno/splatter, and cabin-in-the-woods subgenres, THE EVIL DEAD is considered by some to be one of the earliest comedy-horror films. Raimi, however, has gone back and forth on the intentionality of the comedic elements with this initial entry, often changing his mind publicly about the film's intended genre.

a group of five twenty-something university students head out to a cabin in the woods for a little weekend getaway. as they approach the cabin, one bad omen after another presents itself, which they shrug off as merely momentary setbacks. little do they know, they're about to awaken some serious evil via the Naturom Demonto, aka the Book of the Dead.

filled with cheap practical effects, spooky demonic possessions, some truly inventive camera work, co-edited by then unknown Joel Coen of the soon-to-be-well-known The Coen Brothers, and the birth of one of horror cinema's most memorable heroes, THE EVIL DEAD delivers on all fronts, even if it's a little cheesy and campy at times (err, most of the time).

***

EVIL DEAD, however, is an entirely different beast. the premise is essentially the same, but the overall tone and presentation are significantly altered. with a much higher budget and three decades of sensibility shifts, EVIL DEAD is the darker, more metal version that Raimi always intended to make.

much like Raimi himself, Uruguayan writer/director Fede Alvarez also made his debut with an EVIL DEAD film. this updated remake was produced by Raimi and THE EVIL DEAD star Bruce Campbell, who both gave their blessings to Alvarez's vision and we're on set overseeing the production.

with some minor and major character changes, a timely allegory added in that plays out surprisingly tastefully, and possibly the highest amount of fake blood ever used on-screen (an estimated 70,000 gallons/ 260,000 litres!), EVIL DEAD lives up to its name and then some.

***

we'll continue Classics + Remakes month with THE FLY (1958) by Kurt Neumann + THE FLY (1986) by David Cronenberg on October 25, and conclude with RINGU (1998) by Hideo Nakata + THE RING (2002) by Gore Verbinski on November 1.

hopefully you'll JOIN US for our first Groovy discussion on Sunday, October 18 at 10am at the Red Brick Cafe.

"The film [1958] is both fun and frightening, and can also be viewed (however modest its intentions) as a commercialized techno-version of Franz Kafka's allegory Metamorphosis." TV Guide Magazine

"Believe it or not, The Fly happens to be one of the better, more restrained entries of the "shock" school. As produced and directed by the late Kurt Neumann, with an earnest little cast headed by Al Hedison, Patricia Owens and Vincent Price, this is a quiet, uncluttered and even unpretentious picture, building up almost unbearable tension by simple suggestion." Howard Thompson (The New York Times)

***

"This picture is disgusting." Mick LaSalle (San Fransico Chronicle)

"What makes The Fly such a stunning piece of obsessive filmmaking is the way Cronenberg deftly allows us to identify with his monstrous creation." Patrick Goldstein (Los Angeles Times)

***

Andre Delambre: Help me!!

///

Veronica Quaife: Be afraid. Be very afraid.

[Steve]

ahoy folks, welcome to part two of our Classics + Remakes month. this week we'll move away from the supernatural realms of THE EVIL DEAD/EVIL DEAD and examine the (slightly) more grounded worlds of science-gone-so-horribly-wrong-it-turned-me-into-a-dang-fly.

both films are Shelleyan allegories for the simultaneous wonders and dangers of playing God, much like the infamous tale of Dr. Frankenstein and his (not-so) beloved The Creature. not that i know from personal experience, but i imagine that creating a revolutionary new technology comes with an immense sense of euphoria, like you've cracked the code so to speak. THE FLYs are great examples of the naivety that sometimes accompanies our great inventors when they allow their immediate curiosity to overtake their more methodical, rational minds. such is being human, i suppose.

THE FLYs delve into the Body Horror subgenre, especially the Cronenberg remake. when Body Horror is done well, it usually has something insightful to say about the human condition, rather than showcasing gore merely for shock value or simply to sell movie tickets. i think it's fairly common to forget sometimes just how dependent we are upon our functioning bodies, so much so that we can easily take our health for granted, until ultimately our bodies mutate against our wishes or something external confronts our mortal limitations, and we're left realizing just how fragile this thing called life really is. much like with The Creature in the aforementioned Frankenstein, both THE FLY directors Kurt Neumann and David Cronenberg explore a sense of empathy toward our protagonists as they come to terms with their radically altered humanity.

THE FLYs also examine the insecurities of men + fragile masculinity, which i always find intriguing in cinema since many films tend to glorify patriarchal endeavours, rather than question them. i wouldn't argue that either film is a great example of feminist filmmaking, but both protagonists are really their own worst enemies, which, for better or worse, is fun for the audience to say "i told you so." (we see the love interests in both films, Helene Delambre played by Patricia Owens in 1958 and Geena Davis as Veronica Quaife in 1986, act as the rational outsider, heeding warning to our maddened protagonists just before they dangerously "dive deep into the plasma pool.")

***

join us Sunday, October 25 at 10am at the Red Brick Cafe for our second discussion of Classics + Remakes month!