|
Does he figure it out during the running
time…?
Sure he does.
But it wasn't always like this. He was a
real failure…once.
As originally shot, Ash ends up screwing
up some simple math and sleeping through some
semblance of nuclear holocaust.
Universal Pictures HATED this ending, and
ordered Sam to shoot another - and so we see a
an S-Mart employee ![]() ready to accept his destiny
as a Deadite Killer - instead of a smart-ass
with one hand who doesn't know how to
count.
See - an actual character ARC! Way to go,
Sam!
Up there, a few seconds ago, I mentioned
that Universal Pictures hated the original
ending to 'Army of Darkness'.
In all fairness, they hated a lot more
than just the ending. Since this was a Sam Raimi
film, and they were Universal Studios, they had
to tear the thing apart for no real reason.
Maybe it was the frustration that came with not
being able to veto Bruce Campbell for the lead?
Maybe it was because they were using the third
film in a franchise to begin their franchise
knowing good and well that they turned down the
first film in the franchise back in 1983, and
the second film in the franchise back in 1985.
We may never know for certain, but for some
reason, much of the film was shredded prior to
its release. As a matter of fact - it would
appear that everyone in Hollywood took a turn in
the editing bay on this flick.
Six different versions of the film are
readily available:
The U.S. Theatrical/Home Video version
from Universal
The Sam Raimi "Director's Cut"
from Anchor Bay
The U.S. Television version
shown on USA Network and its subsidiaries
The
Japanese Theatrical/Home Video version entitled
'Capptain Supermarket'
The UK Theatrical/Home
Video version subtitled 'The Medieval
Dead'
The "European" version shown in Germany
and released with DeLaurentiis Entertainment
Group logos
Each of these versions is missing
something the other has incorporated. Each of
them has a different running time. Some of them
feature Raimi's original ending, some do not.
Some feature a completely re-edited version of
the final battle…
The changes and disparities have been
driving horror fiends nuts for years. Which
ending is the right ending? Which cut is the
preferred cut? Rabid Raimi fans have
argued over what is "canonical" and what
is not with more hostility than some Lucasfilm
fan-boys.
On that front, one thing is
certain.
The Evil Dead Holiday Special would be a
lot cooler than the Star Wars
version.
Once 'Army' cleared its Universal
hurdles, it had to take on something the Evil
Dead movies had never faced…
The M.P.A.A.
The first two films in the series went
out unrated. Sam knew that snagging an R rating
for either film would be impossible without
massive cuts (at one point, Evil Dead 2 was
submitted to the![]() M.P.A.A., and the cutting it took
to secure the film an R left it an utterly
destroyed seventy-one minutes long), and so
there was no real point.
Here, however - Sam was contractually
obligated to deliver a R-rated picture.
Universal was hoping that the film would receive
a kid-friendly PG-13.
When it didn't get the PG-13, based
pretty much on the fact that the vindictive
M.P.A.A. had missed Raimi and Friends the first
two times and wanted to nail them to a wall on
the third go-round. Universal pulled the film
from their release slate for a bit, in the hopes
that they could re-tool it and try
again.
But a legal battle between Army financier
Dino De and Universal Pictures honcho Tom
Pollock left their distribution deal in limbo
(DeLaurentiis Entertainment Group and Universal
Pictures had a partnership wherein they would
co-finance films; Universal would release them
stateside, and DeLaurentiis handled foreign
distro) over what Pollock felt was an agreement
his studio had with Dino regarding the rights to
a film eventually entitled Hannibal.
Until this matter was sorted out,
Universal would not release any of DEG's
output.
'Army of Darkness' sat on a shelf until
1993, when it was finally dumped, R-rated, into
theaters in the high-traffic month of
FEBRUARY.
It made its money back in the theaters,
kicked many an ass on video, and found a warm
place in some of the hearts of the cultish
fan-boys that worship at the altar of Bruce, but
it didn't exactly set the world on fire. The
trilogy had seemingly run its course.
To this day, however - amid a
merchandising onslaught that is pretty massive
for such a tiny movie - rumors persist that a
fourth film is on the horizon. Perhaps we've not
seen the end for Ash.
Did You
Know??
Hercules: The Legendary
Journeys was born when a Universal exec told
Raimi he should "Do the Army of Darkness
version" of the hero of Greek
mythology.
HAVE BIM, WILL
TRAVEL
Raimi's next assignment came from a
fairly unlikely place…
 Sharon Stone.
Stone was setting up a pet-project
western at Sony, and she was presented with a
list of studio-sanctioned directors to choose
from.
Legend has it that she told the studio
that if Sam Raimi could not direct the film, she
was not interested in making it.
Stone was at a point in her career where
she could do just about anything. At the same
time, the box office glow her 'Basic
Instinct'-bared crotch gave off was most
certainly on the wane.
I remember not wanting to see the film
based solely on the fact that she was in it. And
I was not alone.
In the end, she delivers a very game,
thoroughly one-note, and really amazing
performance. To be completely honest, I can't
see any other woman in Tinseltown trying and
succeeding at being so hard. I think of women
who've tried to be tough - Bridget
Fonda…Jennifer Garner…Michelle Yeoh - and it's
easy to see that they succeed to varying degrees
because their looks deceive you. They don't look
like they could harm anyone - so when they do,
it's an exciting surprise.
In 'The Quick and the Dead', Sharon Stone
looks like she could easily beat the shit outta'
anyone in the dusty little town. She's the Man
With No Name With Boobies. Only Pam Grier has
come off as more completely threatening
onscreen.
It's weird. A woman no one wants to see
delivers her best performance in a movie that
could never have been made with anyone else in
the role.
The supporting cast is truly one of the
most unbelievable ever commited to a project.
Gene Hackman is basically sending-up his
performance as Little Bill in 'Unforgiven', but
he takes the safety off and really cuts loose.
No scenery is safe.
Leonardo DeCaprio is here
- before he was "Leo" - playing a role that
seems made for him - so much so that I think his
life will eventually mirror his character's arc.
He does a marvelous job of being a smart-assed
young stud. People back then thought that was an
unconventional bit of casting…
And in his
first stateside role…Russell Crowe.
Hanzo was the beginning and the end as
far as I'm concerned (ever see 'Romper
Stomper'?), but I must admit it was fun to see
him on the big screen here as a tortured
preacher with a past.
Lance Henrikson, Gary Sinese, Keith
David, Pat Hingle, and a whole host of familiar
faces color every frame of the film, and it's a
real blast to watch so many talented folks
working at having such demented fun.
And "demented" is the operative word.
Raimi's West is a masterwork of bizarro design.
A creepish, dying place cobbled together using
equal parts Sergios Leone and Carbucci with just
a bit of Tim Burton for flavor. The players in
this tournament are defined by their colorful
costumes and quirky origins. They don't look
like gunfighters - they look like Wild West
hero/villain archetypes as rendered by Manga
artists for use as characters in a Namco
fighting game for your Playstation game
console.
Sam tosses it all in a blender and hits
puree - and bodies hit the dusty dirt in
uncommonly witty ways. Perforated hombres flip,
flop and fly. The camera chases and dodges
bullets, and sends us careening into Sharon
Stone's twisted mind to tell us what it was that
made a little girl grow up so Goddamned
mean.
And for the most part, it works. Sam
succeeds in tweaking genre conventions to forge
a fun night at the movies.
Did You Know??
Sharon Stone felt he was too old to be
pared with her on film, so Raimi's choice of
LIAM NEESON in the role of The Preacher was
vetoed in favor of Crowe.
A SIMPLE FILM
Who can know for certain if it was
intentional or not…?
Actually, it was pretty intentional. Sam
was very vocal about his motivations for taking
on the film adaptation of Scott Smith's
bestselling novel, 'A Simple Plan'.
He needed to prove to Hollywood - and
maybe to himself - that he could direct a
character-driven film. He needed to prove that
he could elicit performances of alternating
graceand intensity from his leads, and he needed
to illustrate that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, he
could tell a story behind the camera - not
necessarily with it.
And he did. He took the camera off of its
two-by-four Sam-O-cam rig and turned it on his
actors - and showed every detractor he's ever
had that nuanced dramatic tension could also be
his arena. Raimi crafts a morality play and a
tense drama that fills us with equal parts dread
and sadness.
READ
PAGE 4--->
| 
