The Original Evil Dead & Video Nasties

[Nick Jones]

Hey Guys,
              I'm a final year film student at Kingston University, London. I'm doing a group essay and a presentation for my cult film class, the topic we all decided to do was the evil dead. As some of you well may know, The Evil Dead was among a list of videos nicknamed in the 1980s as "video nasties" by the UK press. What my group think though, is that The Evil Dead (as well as the rest of the series) has gone on to garner a much more diverse following than the typical "video nasty" horror flick. It has gone on to create a huge cult following and is often referred to in hollywood mainstream as well as the makers of it going on to greate success.

The question we are attempting to answer is "How do audiences of The Evil Dead differentiate the film from other video nasties"? So basically im just posting this to get some of your opinions. Are you a fan of low budget gory films such as video nasties? Do you only really watch Evil dead? Do you consider The Evil Dead to be different to the average "video nasties"? Those are but a few examples of what i would be interested in hearing from you, the intended audience.

Anyone unsure of what the video nasty is, look here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_nasties

Thanks in advance to anyone that replies.
Nick

[Ash Plissken]

For one instead of "video nasties" lets call em "Kick ass gore fiestas".
I am a fan of low budget anything if its good, when you say "Do you only really watch Evil dead?" do you mean like if we look more into it then just what we saw because if so  then yes, and The Evil Dead is the king of "Kick ass gore fiestas", and as Ash would say "Hail to the King" which is what I find myself doing on most of my free time.

[Nick Jones]

hehe do you generally watch these so called "kick ass gore fiestas"? or are The Evil Dead trilogy the only films you watch from that time period of banned "kick ass gore fiestas"?

[EvilDeadChainsaws]

I would say there is a difference between most of the simple low budget 70/80's gore-fests churned
out to make money in the drive-ins, and low budget horror films made by people who really wanted
to make films. As well as Evil Dead there are other films like Night Of The Living Dead & Bad Taste
(and to a lesser extent Zombie Nosh AKA Flesheater) that I would put into this same category. They
manage to jump past their low budget roots.

I'm sure you could find die hard fans who would argue the case of just about any film from Zombie
Flesh Eaters to SS Experiment Death Camp and the full range inbetween in the same way that people
on this board are fans of Evil Dead. Equally some people will watch Evil Dead as a simple gore-fest
much like anything other horror movie without appreciating it as a film.

[Ash Plissken]

hehe do you generally watch these so called "kick ass gore fiestas"? or are The Evil Dead trilogy the only films you watch from that time period of banned "kick ass gore fiestas"?

yes there so many recently I've really gotten into Feast, don't know if you've seen it if not you should try it out, but yeah they are really some of the best movies in my opinion anyways.   

[djsmokingjam]

EDC basically has it right - The Evil Dead has endured simply because, unlike the vast majority of video nasties, it doesn't suck.  Most of those films were the dire work of hacks looking for a buck, and would have been forgotten forever where it not for Mary Whitehouse et al unwittingly putting their "stamp of (dis)approval" on them.  Sam Raimi is a born filmmaker - this shines through in the first Evil Dead film.  Add to that the development of the franchise - most video nasties didn't have the opportunity to see their lead character develop into an iconic action hero over the course of the sequels.

Check out the interview with Stephen Woolley on the "Discovering Evil Dead" DVD featurette for a good firsthand account by a distributor on why The Evil Dead was so fresh, and the documentary "Ban The Sadist Videos" on Anchor Bay's Box Of The Banned boxset for a look at how it got so easily mucked in with the other video nasties when, truth be told, it's too good to be positioned as such.

[Nick Jones]

Thanks for your input guys. I'll have to check those documentaries out. I'd have to agree with you both about there being a vast quality difference between the evil dead and the quintessential video nasty. For one thing Raimi did in fact have a lot more raw talent. The sequels in my opinion changed public perception of the so called morally ambiguous first film. Any opinion on that?

[Names_Ash_Housewares]

The Evil Dead was unfortunate enough to be involved in the video nasties boom of the early 80's as the members who included it in that catagory had not even seen the movie.

Much the same happened with Monty Python's Life of Brian in the 70's, if they had even bothered to watch the movie they would have known it wasnt as bad as much of the press said it was.

[Nick Jones]

Mhmm, thats a valid point. Do you think it wasn't until maybe the sequels came out that the public and media started looking upon the original less harshly?

[Ash Plissken]

No, I think I heard that it was noticed before the sequels, but I could be wrong.

[djsmokingjam]

The Evil Dead was pronounced a classic by horror fans and (to a lesser extent) the public pretty much immediately upon its 1981 release.  I don't think it's a case of "the public and the media looking upon the original less harshly" as years went on - more the tabloids forgetting about its existence by the turn of the 90's, therefore not being the pain in the arse they once were.

[Ash Plissken]

If you have the dvd, or any of em, they talk about all this stuff.

[Nick Jones]

Yeah, i know its on the DVDs. Part of the project though is about getting general and fan opinion.

[Ash Plissken]

Oh well in that case say i said The Evil Dead is fuckin awesome!

[Deleted]

I'm a huuuge Evil Dead fan as well as a fan of "video nasties"(vn's). 

When I watch "vn's" I usually watch them to see what all the fuss was about.  I usually get a kind of rush while I'm watching it, followed by nausea and finally a regret of watching it.  Kind of a strange thing to put myself thru more than once but I've had a love for horror since I saw A Nightmare on Elm Street 2 at the age of 7 in 1987.
 
I usually only watch them once with the exception of a few like Dead and Buried, Last House on the Left, Funhouse and Andy Warhol's Frankenstein.

Most of the "vn's" which were considered the worst had scenes of real animal mutilation and/or rape scenes i.e. I Spit on Your Grave, Cannibal Holocaust, Last House on the Left and SS Experiment Camp. I think the tree rape scene in ED was a major reason why it was put on the list.  Some argue that it shouldn't have been on the list because it was a "fantasy" film involving the undead.  I don't beleive that's a good argument because many of the films which were on the list were like that.

I don't think there should have been a list in the first place as I am very anti-censorship.  I do believe there should have been some kind of rating system to keep the stuff out of the hands of children.

IMO the reason that ED endured and is a cult classic is a number of things.

1) It had a young, hungry filmaker who would stop at nothing to get his vision on film.  Terrorizing his cast until they were on the edge so that the terror would transfer onto film was genius.  Sam's camera work and the feel of the film was fresh, new and inventive.

2) The extreme conditions due to the low budget made it even harder, adding to the terror inflicted by Sam, further terrorizing the cast and crew.

3) That cast and crew, including another genius in Bruce Campbell, would put up with Sam's shit and put all they had into making the movie.  For the majority of the cast and crew it was their first experience making a movie and first timers always go that extra mile becasue they have something to prove.

4) Sam took influences from the greats of horror i.e. George Romero and Tobe Hooper as well as influences outside the realm of horror.

5) The sequels.  I think the sequels are a huge reason it's loved as much as it is.  ED is a classic movie no doubt but I think 2 classic sequels propelled the film to even greater status.

6) The time and love put into making the film.  If you give any great director 3 years to make a film which he wants to make, 99 times out of 100 you'll get a classic film.  Taking time and tinkering with things like sound effects and editing and putting serious effort into getting your vision across will do wonders.  I thank God that they knew they had an obligation to pay back all the investors therefore sticking it out and seeing the film thru.

Those are just a few of the reasons I believe the film has the staying power and cult status it has, unlike any of the other "vn's".

Hope that helps, Jonathan.