‘Drag Me to Hell’ – Raimi warmed over

I agree completely. And I LOVE Sam Raimi. I HATED this film. Why?

I was expecting to be scared and the tonally, he went too far with the slapstick and the over the top gags for the film to retain a serious hold on me. The ending made me angry. It’s a clever twist, but Lohman was too likeable for that fate. Too many repetitive “music fades in, creaking, hoarse breathing” gags. He literally repeated himself like ten times. The CGI was weak in spots, VERY weak. I would have liked to see more HELL in a movie called drag me to hell. The closest part of the film to get me PUMPED was the shadow of the Lamia goat demon rising up the stairs, he should have showed it…

LETDOWN.

I think you get locked out of the cool-kid clubhouse for saying anything bad about a Raimi horror movie.

Oh come on, the movie was fantastic. There is no way you can go to a PG 13 movie and expect to get scared out of your mind Ben so you were out of wack in this case. I went with one friend who was a veteran horror movie watcher and one friend who doesnt watch any. The veteran spent the entire time laughing, and the rookie was scared like none other so i really think it offers something to everyone. Its got its frightening parts and it has its comical parts. Honestly i don’t remember the last time i actually was laughing while scared out of my mind like that. And the reason why he let innocent little Alison go like that in the end despite not really deserving to be drug to hell is to strike fear into the people watching. People all like to think that they’re innocent and all going to heaven and to see someone who really only made one mistake get so brutally punished for it is shocking for these people. And she did have her moments of weakness where her sin got the better of her. The cat scene, her trying to pass off the button, all her comments toward the gypsy when fighting with her. Honestly i can’t figure out how anyone can have that big of a problem with this movie, you go to a PG13 movie to have fun and get scared and that’s what Raimi did, so quit whining.

Sorry for the spoiler, delete it, if you wish.

Don’t listen to the naysayers, including this critic, who must’ve been either half-baked or not baked enough during his screening.

Just like the Abercrombie-wearing couple that walked out (shortly after Lohman takes a mouthful of maggot vomit) of the theater when I went, this reviewer was obviously not “in” on the joke.

This is, shot-for-shot, classic Raimi. Go to it after watching Evil Dead 2, and you won’t be disappointed.

I don’t know what Ivan Reitman’s name is being brought up. He had nothing to do with this film. It was a Sam and Ivan Raimi written film.

I really wanted to like this film. But I came out of it feeling ’so what?’. I agree to some extent it’s a horror film and depth of character isn’t something one needs in it, but we’re talking about Sam Raimi. He’s done a wonderful job with the Spiderman flicks, and there has been plenty of character development in those films. So why should he be allowed to take a step back and churn out something that feels like it took a couple of weeks to make?

After watching this film, and thinking back to the Evil Dead flicks, I’ve come to the conclusion as to why those earlier films worked for me, and what was missing from this film – Bruce Campbell. Had someone like Kevin Bacon been the lead in the first Evil Dead film, would Raimi be considered a cult director right now? I doubt it. Bruce Campbell was able to pull off all kinds of acting styles, and he basically carried the movies. That’s why Ash is remembered more than any other character in those films, not just because Campbell was given the lead roles.

Lohman isn’t Bruce Campbell by a long shot. The movie doesn’t feel like a horror comedy. It feels like a serious horror film with some comedic elements thrown in, in a self-parody of the Sam Raimi style.

I won’t nitpick the moments that don’t make sense, like the gypsy woman finding a huge concrete block to smash the car window. Why was she parked in an underground garage anyway? I thought her bank was a one story branch with a parking lot? It didn’t make sense. I’ll just stop there….

I really don’t feel like these sort of “fun-horror” flicks need to be reviewed. In most cases the director of the movie wants to defy all movie logic and even wants to blatantly exploit it.

Personally, I love these types of movies for the reasons that many “critics” would hate them for. I love laughing at scenes and situations that don’t make any sense, fans of this genre hunt for mistakes because they know the director in most cases purposely made them. It’s like noticing that the two cops in “Scarecrow” (Cheap B-Line horror film that is awful(ly fun)) have guns in their belts with orange toy tips on them.

I don’t claim to be a critic, but I am a movie fan and frankly this movie is easy to be a fan of. We will never again be able to see movies like Evil Dead or Dead Alive because nowadays movies generally need to have a monster budget to be widely seen (The days of the Blair Witch Project are long gone) and in order to get a budget it has to be main-stream kosher. I’m sure people will be lining up to give examples on how I’m wrong, but movies just don’t take risks anymore. So unfortunate, but this is about as close to a different risk-taker that you’ll see.

Thank you evilash.

But I wanted to add one more thing. As to the ending, don’t we all love the few gems of horror movies where the pure innocent little “survival girl” (see: “Behind The Mask” BRILLIANT!) gets horrifically and slowly killed?

I mean don’t we all cheer when the make fun flicks like Freddy Vs. Jason, not because we want to be scared, but because we keep asking ourselves “That kill was so much fun! Now how can the next one outdo it?”

I hate to keep referencing other Horror movies I like, but the ending of “Hatchet” was able to be seen from thirty-three miles away, I think everyone in the room I was in called it, but that didn’t make us love it less. Sometimes you gotta put down the microscope and JUST HAVE FUN at a movie. Who needs complex characters and situations? Not every movie is trying to win Oscars, not every movie is “Shawshank Redemption.” So as I said, put down the notepad and the little pencil and have fun at the movies again.

Hey! Firstly, it IS good that this forum is free to comment on! I agree with what people have said above, that this film is reminiscent of Raimi’s previous works, yet I believe that it nowhere near compares with ED. Although I also agree that this film can be enjoyed for its “fun” value, I still stand by my opinion, as a die-hard movie fan, that we should not have to be forced into positivitely rating a film because it was fun. Maybe it is due to the amount of hype and misleading advertisement that people do this, but I will not simply claim this was a good film because it made me laugh. Often, many of the scenes that people claim to be intentional humour on the director’s part were really guilty of making us laugh, unintentionally, through the dire acting and special effects (entirely for the wrong reason, then!). As soon as the film started though, I did get a sense of an “old-school” horror movie through the soundtrack and opening credits, yet found that this film did nothing to give credit and justice to Raimi’s obvious talent. To begin with, people can say that character development is not essential in a horror movie, but how can that be if we are meant to become emotionally and personally attached to a plot enough that we actually FEEL what they feel and experience the scares we’re supposed to? Besides from the poor casting choice of Lohman as the lead character, making me want to find her in hollywood and give her a REAL cursed button that would damn her to the bowels of the underworld, all the while, smiling in relief that I would never have to see her in a sequel, the acting in this film was truly terrible. My whole life I’ve never been able to think of a better way to cry and laugh so chronically at the same time, but hey… problem solved. The asian guy… poor. The main lady… waste of space. The boyfriend… the only decent actor in the film. the old lady…. OH MY GOD. Seriously. I mean, I wouldn’t have minded if all the advertisements stated: FIVE STARS FOR THIS HORROR/COMEDY!!!, but they didn’t. It was more like… BEST HORROR IN DECADES!!! Right… Well, I can genuinely name over 20 horror movies in the last decade alone that crap all over this pointless pile of monkey turd. Anyway, having realised I went from innocent neutrality to extremely judgemental bastard, I’ll get back to the old woman… Honestly, as soon as the old lady was introduced, I was thinking, “Well, this isn’t a cliche at all”. I also was thinking, “Well, this is too scary for my liking” and something along the lines of “wouldn’t mind a bit of her”. Then, after rubbing the bruise I received from my girlfriend for my unending English sarcasm, I had to bring attention to one minor detail that annoyed the snot right out of me: This lady was cursed to hell by some gypsy, all because the bank couldn’t offer her another loan? Well (and call me evil), I was left thinking, “Well, why didn’t you get off your ass and get a job instead of sponging off tax payers’ money all your life?”. And judging by the state of the young woman who lived at the house with her, she obviously was in the same jobless situation. No compassion there, then. So all for that, we suddenly come across demon goats and the most annoying antagonist in the history of film. Everytime the old woman cropped up from the dead felt like a filler for a huge gap in plot where they could probably tell the audience were raping each other for fun out of their boredom. By her fourth or fifth appearance, even my girlfriend was saying, “My days, this woman needs to die already”. And I completely have to agree with an earlier comment on how the acting went from good to appaling (and just to add, I’ve never seen a single film in my life that’s ever done that, so… um… congrats?) and I soon got so tired of seeing her annoying face presenting the same reaction for every emotion. And just to correct, the worst line wasn’t “I’m scared”, it was actually at the end when the latin woman requests something of Lohman (I’m not sure what, I’d lost interest by then), and she replies, in the most placid and uncaring tone ever heard in a life-0r-death situation, “I’ll try”… somewhat representative of your attitude towards acting, eh darlin’? So yeah, truly a facepalm moment. Special effects were really laughable for the budget Raimi is working with today (not to mention in comparison to the standard of modern movies), and in particular, the bit where the guy gets possessed and starts dancing… I seriously laughed so much on the inside, my face looked deadly serious. My girlfriend actually asked if it was possible to get our money back for a film we didn’t like. And if a film forces that kind of desperation out of you, you know what to expect. I can, however, be honest in saying that there were many jumps and “Eeeeurgh” moments in the film that will leave the standard cinema-goer jumping and twitching like a retarded owl, but that’s me being generous because I never truly get scared by any film. I swear the director actually had a secret desire for Lohman that he knew would never come to fruition, as every “Eeeeurgh” moment seems to include something being violently hosed into her mouth. You see the same things all the way through the film and will sit there finding the hands on your watch more interesting, until the “climax”. And finally, before I ramble on so much that I make curse me, the main area of disappointment comes straight from what the title and advertisements implied… that this lady with a perfect life is going to hell. So, you may love this film, you may totally disagree with everything I’ve just said and want to spew badger’s intestines into my throat for my insolence, but please really be honest with yourself and admit that you went to the cinema hoping to get a glimpse of hell and what it had in store for her? Or even SOME type of demon, for feck’s sake? Terrible plotline, awful acting, nothing yet everything you would expect, but still worth seeing if you want a laugh. If you want to jump and laugh with friends and not sit through the stereotypical hollywood tripe that the horror genre is disgraced with so very often. But if you’re like me, you’ll be astounded with the one film that will actually have you going back to see it again, giving up your hard-earned money solely because it was so damn terrible. To actually pay again to laugh. To laugh at something that was hyped up so much and received so many 5-star ratings for sod all, had so much potential due to the accomplished horror-movie maker behind it and even gave you a novelty button before the showing to get you really misleadingly excited about something that should have been a blockbuster, an epic journey through hell and high water for a good actress we could feel something for, instead of being a film that is as attractive as an arse. Bless you if you’ve actually read this. I just really hated it.

Just saw Drag Me To Hell this evening and was disappointed. I was really, REALLY looking forward to seeing this, too. I loved Evil Dead, Darkman, Spiderman, The Quick and the Dead and A Simple Plan (which I didn’t even know Raimi directed until after having read this review).

I agree with this review– what has characterized Raimi’s style for me, especially in the above-mentioned movies, has always been his pitch-perfect sense of tone and seamless pacing. I felt both were off-kilter in Hell. I was bored during several stretches of dead air in this movie– the ultimately pointless pawnshop scene immediately springs to mind. Likewise a lot of the humor was too sad and dark to be funny (killing the kitten) while a lot of the horror was too silly to be scary.

In all fairness to the movie, my expectations probably colored my reaction to it. I don’t have a television so I hadn’t seen any of the trailers for it. None of my friends or co-workers had seen it, so no word of mouth, and I’m not one to read reviews before I see a movie. What I did see was the amazing poster for the film. The title, Drag Me To Hell (possibly the gnarliest movie title since I Spit On Your Grave) told me that this was not a film to be missed.

But both title and poster art also conjured up images in my mind of other very graphic, over-the-top seventies classics like the Exorcist, the Last House on the Left or anything by Dario Argento from that decade. I was expecting something gritty with a retro vibe that took itself mostly seriously. This is exactly the opposite of what Hell delivers.

As for the inside jokes and artful sloppiness (I’m assuming the telegraphed ending is part of this aesthetic), am I alone in dismissing this as just soooo 2000? The way Hell was done, all this just comes off like an ironic T-shirt. You know? Because it’s like, SUPPOSED to be dumb . . . get it?

Thanks for the review and the easy-access comment section.

Cheers,
Bambi

I’m glad to see it doing well. I particularly liked the dark cinematography. I found a good discussion of the movie at pandalous. It’s here: http://www.pandalous.com/nodes/drag_me_to_hell