Posesión infernal (Evil Dead) backdrop
Posesión infernal (Evil Dead) poster

POSESIÓN INFERNAL (EVIL DEAD)

Evil Dead

2013 US HMDB
abril 5, 2013

Cinco amigos se alojan en una cabaña de Tenessee para así poder ayudar a una de los jóvenes, que se encuentra en rehabilitación por drogas. Estar sin sus drogas convierte a la chica en una persona agresiva, lo que llevará a sus amigos a no darse cuenta de que en realidad esta poseída por demonios que fueron desatados al leer el Necromicon... Remake del clásico de Raimi.

Directores

Reparto

👍 👎 🔥 🧻 👑

Comentarios

Comentarios (0)

Equipo

Produccion: Peter Schlessel (Executive Producer)Bruce Campbell (Producer)Joseph Drake (Executive Producer)Nathan Kahane (Executive Producer)Sam Raimi (Producer)Robert Tapert (Producer)Sally Campbell (Producer)J.R. Young (Executive Producer)
Guion: Fede Álvarez (Screenplay)Rodo Sayagues (Screenplay)
Musica: Roque Baños (Original Music Composer)
Fotografia: Aaron Morton (Director of Photography)

RESEÑAS (1)

Roberto Giacomelli
Mia es llevada por sus amigos Olivia y Eric y su hermano David a la cabaña en la montaña donde pasaba las vacaciones de niña; los cuatro, acompañados también por la novia de David, tienen la intención de pasar un largo fin de semana en el bosque con el objetivo de ayudar a Mia a comenzar su camino para desintoxicarse. De hecho, la chica, después de haber arriesgado una sobredosis de heroína, ha decidido dejar la droga. Al explorar el sótano, los chicos encuentran una desagradable sorpresa: los sótanos de la casa están decorados con gatos muertos colgados del techo. En medio de ese horrible espectáculo, Eric encuentra un extraño libro envuelto en alambre de púas, el volumen parece muy antiguo y escrito en un idioma incomprensible, pero algunas partes han sido traducidas. Cuando el chico comienza a leer lo que está escrito, algo antiguo y muy malvado se despierta en el bosque y comienza a poseer uno a uno a los chicos, comenzando por Mia. El año pasado, muchos pensamos que Andrew Goddard con la magnífica "Esa casa en el bosque" había puesto una lápida al clásico cliché de los jóvenes atrapados en una casa y masacrados por una entidad de cualquier tipo. De hecho, es difícil pensar en algo nuevo o innovador después de ese caos de guión escrito en colaboración con el padre de "Buffy" Josh Whedon, pero el truco está en actuar una estrategia de pensamiento transversal muy sencilla. ¿Cómo decir algo aún interesante y mínimamente nuevo sobre un tema tan inflado? Simple, basta renunciar a la "verdadera" novedad y volver justo allí donde todo comenzó, a ese clásico que responde al título de "Evil Dead", "La Casa", para los espectadores italianos. Y así ha ocurrido, porque el remake, perdón, el reboot de "Evil Dead" es algo sorprendente, un delirio de violencia extrema que reelabora de manera inteligente y convincente el material base para hacer una película completamente nueva y, esta vez, realmente aterradora. La génesis de este remake se remonta al pasado lejano, en la intención del bueno de Sam Raimi de dar continuidad a su culto "El ejército de las tinieblas", algo que nunca logró debido a compromisos cada vez más costosos para el director y ideas poco claras sobre cómo continuar la historia. Y así, entre una promesa nunca cumplida a los fans y algún guiño en sus blockbusters, Raimi finalmente cedió a la locura de los remakes, confiando el reinicio de la saga al joven debutante uruguayo Fede Alvarez, quien impresionó al director de "Spider-Man" con un cortometraje sobre una invasión alienígena muy popular en YouTube, "Ataque de pánico". Raimi, por su parte, puso el dinero, produciendo para su Ghost House Pictures, junto con sus amigos y colegas Robert Tapert y Bruce Campbell, dando plena libertad creativa al cineasta y a su guionista Rodo Sayagues, quienes lograron un resultado sobresaliente. Como era justo para la verdadera utilidad de un remake, "La Casa" versión 2013 se distanciaba de la película de 1981 proporcionando un desarrollo a la historia que todos conocemos completamente inédito y realmente exitoso. Ya el intro es explicativo, ya que somos inmediatamente transportados al pasado, donde podemos tener un vistazo de la nefasta influencia que las presencias que deambulan alrededor de la cabaña tienen en los seres humanos. Después del breve y ya prometedor prólogo, conocemos a los personajes principales de la aventura, del mismo número pero diferentes en caracterización (y nombres) a los creados por Sam Raimi. Aquí nos enteramos inmediatamente del nuevo hilo conductor que une a los protagonistas, lugares y motivos de su presencia: nada de un fin de semana despreocupado entre amigos, sino un intento de desintoxicar a uno de ellos de la adicción a la heroína. Y ya desde este elemento son evidentes las intenciones de Alvarez, firme en la idea de abordar la película con seriedad dramática en lugar de ironía casi surrealista como hizo Raimi (especialmente con las secuelas). El paralelismo entre posesión demoníaca y abstinencia de drogas no es algo nuevo, ya que recientemente Eduardo Sanchez también lo intentó con resultados no muy exaltantes con "Lovely Molly", comenzando por el deseo de insinuar la duda de que la historia sea realmente sobrenatural o que todo forme parte del delirio de la drogadicta. Pero Alvarez juega con esta duda solo en el plano intradiegético, revelando correctamente al espectador la intervención demoníaca desde los primeros minutos. El demonio de las drogas es, por lo tanto, solo una subtracción, un paralelismo que vive entre líneas, abandonando luego la historia a un delirio splatter de esos que no se ven en la gran pantalla con demasiada frecuencia. Cerca de la idea de violencia extrema característica de cierto cine francés posterior a 2000, Alvarez ya va muy pesado con la truculencia, mostrándola de manera realista y al mismo tiempo extremadamente exagerada. Los cuerpos de los jóvenes protagonistas son martirizados de la peor manera, con amputaciones, desgarros y actos de autolesión realmente impresionantes, y todo se muestra siempre en extremo detalle, a veces casi molesto en su insistente ostentación (la aguja de la jeringa debajo del ojo y el brazo colgando del resto del cuerpo solo por un trozo de carne son dos ejemplos explícitos). La estética de la violencia y la violación de los cuerpos humanos alcanzan en el reboot de "La casa" niveles altísimos, acentuados también por el realismo de los efectos especiales que limitan afortunadamente la gráfica por computadora a pequeños "ajustes", dejando lo más importante al maquillaje, prótesis y mucho líquido rojo. Como se decía, después de los rituales necesarios que vinculan esta película al esquema original, "La casa" 2013 toma un camino autónomo, tanto en el desarrollo de la matanza como en el desarrollo de los personajes, siempre y cuando algunos elementos tópicos de la película original —como la escena del entierro, el colgante y el uso de la motosierra— hayan permanecido e integrados en la historia evitando el simple homenaje. Agradable también la gestión de los personajes, afortunadamente lejos de los típicos estereotipos de horror para adolescentes y comprometidos a mantener un tono de seriedad constante en línea con la historia. Obviamente, en su mayoría se trata de carne de cañón, pero dotada de esa dignidad que nos permite encariñarnos con ellos, y especialmente en el caso de Mia, interpretada por una excelente Jane Levy, también tenemos un personaje bien definido y complejo, especialmente por los desarrollos metafóricos que la llevan a desafiar literalmente su propio demonio. Entre todos los remakes y reboots que han caído en los últimos diez años, "La casa" es uno de los más exitosos, capaz de reelaborar con conocimiento de causa un clásico del pasado y logrando decir algo nuevo sobre una historia que a lo largo de los años ha sido contada muchas, demasiadas veces. Además, Fede Alvarez sabe construir la tensión y "La casa" tiene momentos de miedo realmente efectivos, capaces de mantener literalmente al espectador pegado a la butaca. No huyan de la sala al final de la película, después de los créditos hay una sorpresita para todos los fans de la trilogía anterior. Añadan media calabaza.
👍 👎 🔥 🧻 👑

Comentarios

Comentarios (0)

Dónde Ver

Alquilar

Apple TV Apple TV
Amazon Video Amazon Video
Rakuten TV Rakuten TV
Google Play Movies Google Play Movies
Timvision Timvision

Comprar

Apple TV Apple TV
Amazon Video Amazon Video
Rakuten TV Rakuten TV
Google Play Movies Google Play Movies
Timvision Timvision

RESEÑAS DE LA COMUNIDAD (6)

VolcanoAl

Has all the props we remember him the original.Some new information about the book(necronomicon).Yet the sacastic amounts of blood wasn't funny.The only funny line was"Why does my face hurt?".I hope that Evil Dead2 will bring back the jokes & overacting that the second original did.Bruce Campbell one liner of "Groovy" we hope is a precursor to the next movie!I hope that we see it to "Army of darkness"!!!

LastCaress1972

David and Mia are brother and sister. As children, they vacationed in the family cabin, far out in the woods. As they got older, David took off, leaving Mia caring for their sick and ultimately dying mother. When mum threw a seven, Mia went downhill, and hit the class "A"'s. She hit the drugs so hard in fact that she even technically died at one point, only to be brought back from the brink in a quite portentous bit of backstory. Well, enough's enough. David's back, and he, his girlfriend Natalie, and a couple more close mates of theirs, Eric and Olivia, intend to take her up to the old family cabin in the woods and force her to go cold turkey for a weekend. That'll learn her.

What's the deal with these cabins in American films and shows and whatnot? They always seem to be miles away from any recognisable civilisation. Do the owners own the land, and just decide to build a log cabin? How does one just take ownership of a patch of forest out in the middle of nowhere? I mean, they're never in a larger holiday park environment that's regularly patrolled and maintained. They're never one of a dozen by a beautiful lake, with neighbours here and there. No, they're always out in the deep wild nothing. It's like holidaying in a shed. Who'd do that? Also, the property is ripe for other people to just break in and use the place for their own nefarious ends: Free holiday? Crystal meth flop-house? Sex dungeon? A serial murderer's kill-room?

Kandarian demon incantations, resurrections and exorcisms?

Unluckily for our merry bunch of interventionists, that's exactly what's been going on down in the cellar of their cabin. Mia - hypersensitive as a result of her withdrawal - and the dog they've brought along can smell... well, a bad smell in the house. Upon investigation they find the cellar door, and through the cellar into another door they find a room full of skinned dead cats and similar small animals, all hanging off the ceiling by meat hooks. There's something else: A package wrapped in black bags, further enclosed in barbed wire. Someone obviously didn't want this package opened. Well, curiosity seems to have killed a bunch of cats already, and now it's going to have a crack at these guys. They open the package and, of course, it's The Book of The Dead. The tape player from the 1981 original is gone but in this version, fragments of the Kandarian script have been translated and written in English. And when they're read out, all hell breaks loose in soul-swallowingly familiar fashion. One by one, we will take you.

I liked this film, but it's a frustrating beast, for sure. On the one hand, it's as gory as f*ck, the sound design is superb, the movie is strewn with nods to both The Evil Dead (1981) and Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn (1987) without those nods seeming too hokey and the actors, whilst not especially outstanding, are at least as effective as the original cast (Bruce Campbell excepted, of course. There is no adequate substitution for him here and, in fairness to the new film, how could there be?). On the other hand... look: The "intervention" plotline was a great reason for the group going up into an isolated place, and it continued as a great device for when Mia started seeing and experiencing crazy Evil Deaddery (the woods-raping-the-girl scene from the Raimi original? It's back, baby! Sort-of); they put it down to her withdrawal. At best, she's lying so's they can all go home and she can get munted. At worst, she's bugging out. Except that, very early on in the proceedings, following Mia's insistence that there was a smell in the house, the boys, David and Eric (David, Eric, Mia, Olivia, Natalie. Cool, no? No.) discover the cat-swinging signs of foul witchcraft in the cellar (which we the viewers are privy to in the very first scene btw, before we even meet our protagonists), meaning they no longer have to put the weirdness down to Mia having a cold turkey episode. Just leave the premises, call it in at the nearest cop-shop, job done. So why don't they do this?

Because the characters in Evil Dead are prone to making some of the most pinheaded decisions I've seen in a horror film in maybe twenty years. And horror as you all know is a genre beset with characters who make pinheaded decisions, right? Well, the Evil Dead quintet make the average bunch of Camp Crystal Lake dirty-weekenders look like astro-physicists. I don't want to give away specific set-pieces but these characters seemed to have opportunity after opportunity to get away from what was happening to them. Their dunderheaded refusal to do anything but stumble towards their own demise caused me to lose any and all sympathy for them, and when you stop caring, the tension disappears down the plughole. While we were watching the movie, my missus said at one point: "Yeah, but if they did that (ie the right thing), there wouldn't be a film, would there?" But, in this day and age (and with the superior budget and skills availed to these remakes), I'm not prepared to buy that. There needs to be more. And in this case, the "intervention" plotline at the very beginning of the movie seemed to kick things off on the right note. It was the last decision by the characters that made any logical sense. The end fell apart too, but don't virtually all horrors unravel in the final fifteen? It certainly seems that way.

Still, I liked it, as I said. Didn't love it as I really hoped that I would, but I liked it. I suppose. In a way. Anyone not into horror will not come anywhere near anyway, but lovers of all things gruesome will find Evil Dead an entertaining waste of a nice and crisp ninety minutes. You'll see not even a modicum of common sense on display, but then that's not why you came, is it?

John Chard

John Chard

8 /10

Dead Evil!

In truth this was always going to struggle to appease many of the horror hordes, Sam Raimi's original film held up as some sort of religious artifact that should never be tempered with - this even though it was considerably trumped by the sequel (erm: remake). Is it fair to say that even before it was released there were those hating it? It certainly seemed that way.

Can you judge this piece of horror film making on its own terms? Are there a new breed of horror film fans out there whom haven't seen Raimi's trilogy and therefore can go into it and get the tar shocked out of them? I hope so because this is a rip-snorter of a remake. Full of jumps, guts, gore, and genuine moments of terror, with Fede Alvarez and his team adding some fresh touches to Raimi's original nightmare.

It is what it is, a horror remake of an old favourite that ramps up the horror and uses the tools available to splinter the ears - turn the stomach - and fray the nerves. It's illogical, daft even at times, but this is one of the better horror remakes of recent times, a real pant soiler. Bravo you undead muthas. 8/10

Kamurai

Kamurai

7 /10

Really good watch, would watch again, and can recommend.

Look, I'd watch pretty much anything with Jane Levy, and she's awesome in this, far better than any two other actors in the movie.

It feels like someone with some sense look at the original movie and identified some much needed upgrades. Just having a dramatic reason for these characters to gather at this cabin immediately makes the story a bit more palatable than the original. There are also several sequences towards the end of the movie that diverge from the original that makes this version vastly superior.

The other big difference is that the special effects has come a long way in the 30 years between the two movies. The do an excellent job of keeping the pacing of the first movie and matching the effects to the original, but just better.

Similar to the original, the majority of this movie is gore effects, but they add just enough explanation and narrative to keep decent motivation in place.

This is a rare example of how to "upgrade" a movie, changing it, but keeping the spirit of the movie.

Nathan

Nathan

7 /10

Evil Dead is one of the most brutal and disgusting films I have ever seen. I applaud the unique direction to take the franchise, which has previously embraced camp, into a super realistic and vicious horror film. The effects and gore are the best of the franchise, having a nearly 20-year gap between the previous entry. Some of the scenes go down as all-time greats in horror that have been cemented in my mind ever since. The bread cutter scene is just disgusting and done so well, I absolutely loved all of the blood that was used in these scenes. The story is not as fleshed out as the first or second film, but it does take unique directions that I can appreciate it. The use of a recovering drug addict was done really well and was an interesting motive to keep the cast at the cabin. The weakened state she was in made her the perfect victim to be the first possessed, which worked really well. The dialogue and acting were quite atrocious. Other than Jane Levy, everyone else was quite bad. The lines were corny and delivered in a somewhat awkward fashion. This made the twenty-minute rising action of the film to be quite lackluster, but luckily once the action gets going, there is plenty of things to distract you from it. Overall, this movie's visuals and horror carry the film to its rating. It unfortunately does not live up to the hype I once had for it as a 15-year-old boy, but it is still one of the better remakes in cinema history.

Score: 73% 👍 Verdict: Good

Filipe Manuel Neto

Filipe Manuel Neto

2 /10

A decent enough, but forgettable remake.

Directed by Fede Alvarez, an illustrious stranger to me, the film is a remake of the original, from the 80s, directed by Sam Raimi. I didn't like the original film, I found it excessively dated, even in the effects used (which are, without exaggeration, the strong point of the film itself), but I recognize that Raimi is a creative and skillful director who knew how to explore the material well , do a lot with very little, and give us a decent film. This film, in turn, does not bring anything new or original, but manages to improve the original film's major flaw: the virtual absence of a script.

In fact, in this film, there is at least an attempt to create a story around what is happening and to make the whole story more than an excuse for the scenes where the living dead try to eat people. On the other hand, the simple fact that this film serves us with a slightly different story from the original film means we don't feel comfortable guessing what we're going to see next. There is a certain unpredictability that sounds good and feels good. On the other hand, the film cannot match its predecessor in terms of the impact of its effects and its importance to popular culture. It's a remake that has its merits, but will quickly be forgotten.

As for the cast, there is little to say. I don't know them, but I can say that I feel satisfied with their efforts. It's what you'd expect in a film of this type. A negative note about the film: if veterans considered the original film violent and full of gore, this film blows up every scale. It's a bloodbath that brings respect to Lucifer himself, and it made me mentally thank myself for having decided to see him before eating anything.

Reseñas proporcionadas por TMDB