Horror Remakes: The Good, The Bad, and The Evil Dead.
When would you say was the best time to be alive? Until recently I’d have probably said right now, but I don’t really need to explain what’s been happening that might have changed my mind.
There is however another flaw to living in the grand old year of 2020.
That flaw is the lack of original ideas. If you can think of it, it has probably already been done. We are living in the age of the remake. This isn’t necessarily a terrible thing. A remake (or reboot depending on how you define it) can breathe new life into an old idea or franchise. It can also however, be an absolute waste of time. Somebody needs to explain to Disney that doing an old film as “live action” doesn’t make it better. Seriously.
Since the turn of the 21st century every horror icon has been fed into the remake machine. It’s not surprising. A boom within the genre was followed by a lull in the 90s. We entered an attempt at resurgence with the “meta” horror film, but by the time we reached the 2000s even that had begun to grow stale. Then with 2001 came 9/11, and the western world didn’t want anymore new horrors. (Post 9/11 horror is something I will absolutely explore one day.) The familiar and nostalgia were a better option, new ideas were halted, and we entered the remake era. This of course is not exclusively the shape of horror cinema, but it is extremely prominent. With that in mind I’d like to talk about 3 films in particular. One is good, one bad, and the other is The Evil Dead.
The Good: Child’s Play
I can imagine upon seeing I called Child’s Play a good remake, a few of you scoffed. Like most horror classics, many people hold the original so sacred, anything else is ridiculous when compared. I do believe this is a good film though. Not a perfect film, not a revolutionary film, it is … good.
This film is telling you from the very beginning that this is a Child’s Play for a whole new era. We are greeted with a warehouse in Vietnam, an employee is fired for insufficient work. In response this employee disables all safety protocols on the “Buddi” (The new name for “Good Guy”) doll he is manufacturing, before committing suicide. So why the complete change of origin for our tiny serial killer? I think that this was the right move, as it plays more into the fears of now, as the original’s played into the fears of then. The 1980s were filled with fear of the “Satanic Panic”. The devil and occultism were a real threat, walking the streets of America. The serial killer was still a prominent figure within the USA, with some caught and giving great details of their crimes, and others still free to commit even more. So Chucky being the spirit of a serial killer placed into the doll through a spell? An absolutely perfect embodiment of the fears of the time.
In 2020 however, both of these things are a much quieter threat. This is because of the age of the machine. We are tracked, traced, and uploaded within seconds, the serial killer has a much harder time. The satanist is seen as less of a danger, and more of an aesthetic for TikTok. Our life within technology walks a fine line. We are both more advanced than we have ever been, and more unsure of our humanity. This remake taps into our technological fears perfectly. The “Buddi” doll is designed to connect to all other devices in your home, it can even call you a self driven taxi. Provided all your products come from the same company that is. Our world is one where Alexas are given first amendment rights, and AI creates its own language to speak without its creators understanding. A doll with no safety protocols and a thirst for blood, really isn’t that outlandish.
I really believe that this film does a good job. It honours the original Child’s Play. It is fun, brutal, and ridiculous. The creators haven’t fallen over the same hurdle as a lot of remakes, by which I mean they haven’t just done a shot for shot redo, but y’know added extra CGI. That makes it new, right? (I’m STILL looking at you Disney.) It makes a comment on the horrors of the 21st Century, both within technology, and within the class system. It is the poorer family that are left with the killer doll, the faulty product, as it is all that is available to them. The richer family are simply able to return “Buddi” with no repercussions. The makers of this film are clever, and it shines through in this remake. You can really enjoy it as a stand alone, and I think they’d be wise not to make anymore. If you’re tempted, I urge you to give this film a chance.
The Bad: Nightmare on Elm Street
In 2010 a nightmare was born, and for all the wrong reasons. I do not think this film is bad purely because it is a remake. In fact I’d hardly say it has much in common with the original at all, which you’d think would be a positive, but if you have seen this film you understand why it isn’t.
The creators of this film were obviously attempting to cash in on the new love of dark and realistic remakes following the Dark Knight’s success. In fact the creators have admitted to watching the Batman film countless times during production. (Which honestly is a little hilarious.) At first glance it appears gritty and morbid, something I truly believe could have worked. Over the years Freddy became something of a comical character, (I’ll get you my pretty and your little soul too!) so to bring a darker side to him could’ve been a welcome change that heightened the horror of the world.
Then, I watched it.
This film is an example of everything you shouldn’t do when you remake a film. I do not believe there is any aspect that can save it. The actors could all be replaced by balls of wool, and they’d probably give a more emotive performance. The narrative has been expanded to tell us more about Freddy’s backstory, but the confirmation of his sexual assaults on children is skirted around in such an indelicate way, it would have been far better to leave the story be. There is even a good chunk of the film in which our main characters think that Freddy was innocent, and killed unjustly. These are not things an Elm Street audience wants, or needs. A backstory can be interesting, but when your character is a depraved child molester/killer, you do not care how they got there. As Jake Peralta once said “cool motive, still murder”.
Then we get to Freddy himself. I’m going to rock the boat a little bit here, and say that I do not mind the new look. Wes Craven’s original vision for Freddy was closer to the 2010 version, and I think it brings a realism to the character’s look that the 1984 lacked. He looks like a man that was burned horribly, and with this film aiming for a more realistic Elm Street world, it does kind of work. Although I did find myself missing Robert Englund, something I never thought I’d say. Other than the look, Freddy really falls short. His character is not imposing or threatening at all, the kills are sub par, and despite the attempt at a darker remake he still makes bad puns. Here’s a couple shiners:
“he-he I was only trying to pet him” (said after killing a dog)
“how’s this for a wet dream?” (said after Nancy falls into a pool of blood)
At least with Robert Englund when the puns came out, the films were progressing in a way that they matched in a more organic way. The 2010 remake has a scene in which our characters find photos of themselves as children being assaulted, and mere minutes after this the Freddy pun train has pulled into the station. It does not work.
This film is poorly acted, with questionable CGI, and indelicate character/narrative choices. It has truly failed as a remake and does not bring anything new that could justify it’s creation. Despite this it is one of the higher grossing films of the Nightmare franchise, truly presenting the remake as a cash cow, and nothing else.
The Evil Dead
The Evil Dead is a shining star in a sky full of space junk. Released in 2013, it is a stunning re-imagining of Sam Rami’s iconic 1981 film. It succeeds in most of the places that Elm Street fails, and creates a new Evil Dead world, one that is filled with intense gore and horror. Rami’s film will always be the superior and this remake has its flaws, but ultimately it is the mould that anybody keen to breathe new life into an old story should use.
The remake is not supposed to give you the exact same story you’ve seen before. (I’m looking at you 1998 Psycho) It has the opportunity, and most of the time the advanced technology and larger budget to explore new avenues and expand the story. I wouldn’t say the 2010 Evil Dead adds too much to the story itself, rather it gives you the other side of the film that could’ve been. Rami’s Evil Dead series showed a more comedic, almost slapstick version of events, especially as we moved further down the franchise. Fede Álvarez however gives us the much more macabre version of the narrative. I am not saying that the original is not a horror. I think they both stand beautifully within the genre, just in different ways. Sam Rami’s style is so distinctive, that I think trying an alternative mood for the remake was a good strategy.
What stands out most in this film is the merciless gore. Álvarez has triumphed where a lot of modern filmmakers fail, in that The Evil Dead is prominently practical effects, not CGI. My firm belief is that 90% of the time, CGI is a horror films worst enemy. Within most sub-genres of horror, what makes it successful is the realism. It effects you because you can relate and empathise. When your film is filled with CGI blood and creatures it is easy to become removed, yes you’re entertained but it can lose any other emotional reaction. This film does the exact opposite. You feel every bit of pain the characters do. The practical effects are stunning and extremely realistic. This is paired beautifully with unapologetic filming choices. Where other horrors may cut away or simply imply what is happening to a person, The Evil Dead shows you it all. You see the needle pulled from the eye, the arm ripped from under a car. You share these moments in real time, and you feel every single second.
If I had to critique anything in this film, it would be the dialogue. It is sloppy at times and despite the realism in other areas, some of the line choices are so far removed from the way people actually speak and interact with one another. This could be because the native language of the director and writer is not English. Of course I can forgive this, but it does make most scenes outside of the horror/gore a little harder to get through. Besides this small blip Álvarez does a fantastic job of bringing The Evil Dead into the world of 21st Century horror. You can tell he truly respects the source material, and has placed homages to Rami’s creation throughout his work. This does not lead to a feeling of exclusiveness either. Instead those die hard fans can revill in the call backs, and those experiencing Evil Dead for the first time do not feel like they’re constantly missing something.
I would be extremely interested to see what Álvarez would do with the rest of the franchise. By the time we reach Army of Darkness the comedic element is in the driving seat, and we have even started time travelling. To see a continuation of the 2013 remake and how it ties into The Evil Dead world would be fascinating, but I think this is a dream that will never be realised.
Looking across this small landscape there is such a wide variety in the ways a remake can be done. I suppose what I want you to gain from this article is a positive mindset about them. To remake something does not tarnish the original, it does not ruin your childhood. Every story you are ever told and every film you ever watch has been said and done before a thousand times over. Respect the remake, embrace what it can bring to the story you love. Yes there will be money grabs and bad ideas, but to reject remakes as a whole, is to deny a story a chance at a whole new life.
Opinions are mine, images are not.
