Sunday Review: Drag Me to Hell

Susan:
When Geoff and I were selecting the movie for this week, he told me he had made plans to see Drag Me to Hell, Sam Raimi’s new horror flick.  “Oh good!” I told him. “We haven’t done a horror film yet.”  After seeing the movie, I still don’t know that I would venture to say we’ve done a “horror” film, since Drag Me to Hell, like the Evil Dead films before it, is full of moments that startle you but leave you laughing.  A comedic horror piece, this film will entertain those with a nostalgic appreciation of Raimi’s blood-n-guts sensibility, but it certainly didn’t make the pack of 14-year-olds sitting next to me very happy.  (“The gayest movie I’ve ever seen,” quoth one.)

Plot synopsis (which probably isn’t necessary):  Christine Brown (Allison Lohman) is a post-fat farm-girl-turned-loan-officer dating Clay Dalton (Justin Long), a first-year professor of psychology from a wealthy family.  In an effort to win a promotion, she denies a gypsy woman a loan extension (man, do not MESS WITH GYPSIES!  Everyone knows that!), and the gypsy woman curses her by stealing her coat button and chanting some incantation over it. (Is gypsy a racial slur?  Should I be calling her a Roma?)  She seeks the assistance of a psychic, who explains that she is being chased by a goat-spirit and that after three days the goat-spirit will take her soul to hell.  Her only choice is to try to exorcise the spirit or to give the accursed button away.  However, if she gives the button to someone, THEIR soul will burn in hell for all eternity, which is a lot of guilt for a good-hearted girl like Christine to deal with.  Lots of gross/gory things ensue, most of which read like Evil Dead in CGI, and in the end, everyone gets what’s coming to them.

While I can appreciate the appeal of the Evil Dead films, I think the funny-scary over-the-topness of the low-budget originals doesn’t translate well to this sort of high budget studio affair.  The movie was entertaining and had its laugh-out-loud moments, but I missed that rubber-and-ketchup aesthetic found in the earlier films.  What did you think, Geoff?

Geoff:
Man, I can see what you’re saying about missing the low-budget look, but I still had a hell of a lot of fun with this movie.  So many laugh-out-loud moments!  My favorite scene vacilates between the gypsy trying to bite Christine in the car without her teeth and Justin Long almost hitting the old man who repeatedly shouts “You’ll burn in hell!  You’ll burn in HELL!!!”  Something about that old man turned me into the guy in the theatre who’s still laughing long after the scene has ended.  People were staring.  I had to apologize out loud.  Sure, certain jokes were a bit over the top (Anna, a friend I saw it with, leaned over at one point and said “everything keeps going in her mouth!”), but I enjoyed the movie anyway.

I think it’s a pity your 14-year-old viewing mates couldn’t appreciate what the film was trying to do.  I can understand not loving it, but I have a feeling those 14-year-olds went in hopes of seeing yet another colorlessly shot, Asian-import-style horror film with a name like “The Sign,” or “Eyes.”  Am I the only one who’s tired of those?  I found it refreshing to see a horror film that wanted to have some fun with itself, that wanted to legitimately entertain, that actually fleshed out its characters instead of just leaving them as barely characterized bodies to kill off.  You won’t find a character like Stu in most horror films of the past few years, and that’s a damn shame because he complements so many scenes.  He’s the very embodiment of anyone who undercuts everything you do in order to look better than you, and the moment when he tells Christine she got his sandwich order wrong is perfect.

I liked seeing Raimi (after the luke-warmness of Spiderman 3) go back to his origins, and I actually think his old horror/comedy schtick translates pretty well to a larger budgeted film.  It allowed some authentically haunting shots he probably wouldn’t have been able to get otherwise.  I was particularly struck by the last shot of Christine, her face starting to disentigrate into a skull as she’s dragged underground.  Effectively arresting.  I had a lot of fun with this movie and would probably recommend it to anyone with a bit of tolerance for the gore.

Susan:
Not so fast, Geoff.

You’d really recommend this to anyone with a tolerance for gore?  I definitely would not.  Much like my love of Glitter, I think the love of a Sam Raimi horror flick requires an appreciation for a certain kind of cinematic approach.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not slamming the flick.  But I also would not recommend this to just anyone.  Even I got a little bored toward the end, enjoying the pure entertainment value but never truly frightened nor laughing very hard.  You have to be willing to sacrifice some funny and some scary in order to enjoy this flick.  It doesn’t do both well.  It’s a B-movie with a high end budget.

You liked that the movie had some fun with itself?  Well I think that this horror movie had TOO much fun with itself (and Geoff, I am super pissed that you’ve made me be the one who is critical of Raimi because this is going to seriously affect my street cred).  I like the idea of a horror flick that screws with your head.  I don’t need a bunch of vapid, flesh-less characters who are only there to get killed off, but come on.  When Christine Brown screams, “I beat you, you old bitch!” at the gypsy during their car fight scene, that’s a line that was intentionally over the top and funny.  It’s campy.  And that’s okay, but not everyone (I would argue most people in fact) aren’t going to be able to get into this flick.  Gore or no gore.

Geoff:
Of course it’s over the top and funny, and I WOULD recommend this to anyone with a tolerance for gore.  14-year-old morons aside, I think most people willing or wanting to watch a horror film, most people who have seen any or many of the other lesser-known and/or poorly acted and/or poorly written and/or campy and/or funny horror flicks of the world, will be able to find a place in their heart for Sam Raimi’s style.

I sacrificed not one ounce of my funny bone in enjoying the hell out of this movie, and I think it knows it’s not particularly scary and so doesn’t try to be.  Sure, the movie has some parts that try and make you jump, but for the most part the film’s horror portions are an excuse for further comedy gold, a set of tropes to recognize and smile at as Raimi takes them and turns them and presents them to you with a smirk.  The film knows it’s playing for comedy, and I guess I’ll just have to part ways with you where you say it has too much fun with itself, because I had a great time.

Susan:
“Comdey gold?”  Are you effing kidding me, Geoff?  I will give you a chuckle, but I BALK, repeat: BALK, at your claims for “comedy gold.”  I’m sorry, I understand fully the appreciation for so-bad-its-good, but you usually don’t, so I’m having some trouble understanding why you loved this movie so much.  I have to say, it looks like you’re letting Raimi’s cult fame affect your review.  My guess is that if this were directed by a no-name but starring the same cast, you’d be talking about how the filmmakers failed to make a successful horror movie, and how you laughed more than you jumped.  Pretend you didn’t know you were supposed to like Raimi.  What do you think of it then?  This is why I hesitate to offer an across-the-board recommendation.

And as far the 14-year-old “morons” go:  be careful, Geoff, your elitism is showing.  Just because they didn’t like this movie doesn’t make them stupid.  Raimi is actually TRYING to make a bad movie here.  If the teenagers sitting next to me picked up on that, GOOD FOR THEM.  If they appreciate and enjoy a bad flick, great.  If not, it doesn’t mean they are stupid.  It just means they haven’t yet been exposed to that beautifully awkward nerd-who-plays-guitar they will date in a couple of years who will teach them all about how wonderful Evil Dead is.  And that’s okay.  Not everyone is going to like this thing.  Like I said at the start, you’ve got to appreciate a certain aesthetic to really “get” Raimi.

I hate that you get the last word this week, Geoff, since we’re actually getting contentious, but okay.  What’s it going to be?

Geoff:
Seems that instead of going after the film, it’s just me that’s being gone at.  You’re not slamming the film, but you ARE calling it a bad movie???  Huh??

It’s not the fact that Raimi directed it that made me like it a lot.  There are plenty of Raimi flicks that are not good, and no amount of appreciation for Raimi would make me love them (For Love of the Game, anyone?).  It’s the fact that a good number of scenes got me to laugh out loud, and the movie plays as a movie that wants you to laugh out loud.  Why else even include a character like Stu?  Why else continue the hair-tearing joke after the old lady’s dead?  Why else have the old man in the middle of the street?  Why else use the comedy sound effect when Christine gets hit over the head with the gravestone?  When a movie’s effectively funny, it’s effectively funny regardless of whoever’s at its helm.  This film is not a straight horror movie, and it’s not trying to be a straight horror movie, and it is not so bad it’s good, and you don’t need to ” ‘get’ Raimi” to like it.  If you like gore and you like jokes, you will more than likely have some fun with this movie.  If you don’t, then my apologies for recommending it as a subjective fucking human being.

Also, was the pack of teenagers entirely female?  Or will the guys in the group also meet beautifully akward guitar-playing teenaged girls who like Evil Dead?  This whole freakin’ BLOG’S elitist, Susan.  The jig was already up a long time ago for both of us.  Just read our “about us” section, which you wrote, by the way.  Allow me to apologize in advance for getting in your face rather than talking about the film, but I don’t think my calling a couple of 14-year-olds “morons” in a moment of debate is any more elitist than your taking pleasure in a film specifically because it makes Christian Bale look foolish, and I don’t think it means I ” ‘get’ Raimi” and they don’t. Like you said, people sometimes haven’t yet been exposed to certain things, and if those teenagers are the sort to continue watching a shit-ton of movies, or even just horror flicks, then they might have a few years before recognizing (NOT necessarily enjoying) when certain films are trying to be funny, much as I did when I was an unexposed 14-year-old moron.