Post by geneweigel on Jul 29, 2013 23:04:32 GMT -5
Overall this was pretty good. It seemed like it should have not been "Evil Dead" though because the comparison was unnecessary. The modernized "Necronomicon" (I don't believe it was mentioned as such) was like some psycho's comic book style magnum opus about what was happening to the artist Wilcox's sculptures in CALL OF CTHULHU (1928). At first, I kind of rejected it because it wasn't a "dustier tome" that quite a lot of these films do now a days with typical anachronistic bounding like recently the not-so-old book entries on the demon "Bugghuul" in SINISTER (2012) or some time ago the way dragon's history was handled in REIGN OF FIRE (2002). After the credits were rolling it sunk in that it wasn't supposed to be something old but something recent that looked a little old in the context that this is happening now. Which was refreshing because thats one of the chief pet peeves that I have about D&D using too much history all the time.
Overall this takes us down the same road as EVIL DEAD I & II violence wise but like I said it didn't have to because it was done so refreshing this begged to be a different film. I was hoping that this is a sequel but they havn't revealed it yet and the question is still lingering in my mind. So thats good.
Overall this takes us down the same road as EVIL DEAD I & II violence wise but like I said it didn't have to because it was done so refreshing this begged to be a different film. I was hoping that this is a sequel but they havn't revealed it yet and the question is still lingering in my mind. So thats good.
