Before, After and During Spider-Raimi

We hear Sam Raimi just doesn’t care, that he just has an eye for film (or delivery, or TV if you like campy “Xena: Warrior Princess”).  He’ll show you “with great power comes great responsibility” along with his weaknesses and misdirection (“Darkman,” “The Gift,” and “Spider-man 3”).

Raimi’s roots run deep (starting in Michigan) and may tend to claw and rape (“Evil Dead”).  Believe it or not, this is a good trait.  Uncomfortable scenes can get one noticed (and continue to grow within the viewer’s imagination).  Eye-bulging acting before an extreme wide-angle lens (also “Evil Dead” as well as “Evil Dead II”), however, is a tricky trick.  Camerawork such as this can be heavy-handed (see Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s “The City of Lost Children” or Terry Gilliam’s “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”).  Mention the seasick motion to either of these directors, and they’ll splice in a few more warped angles.  That doesn’t mean they’ve constructed a proper scene outside of the cult category.

A portion of the public happens to like what these directors are doing, another happens to award them, and the majority take a collection and hand over millions of dollars.  And these directors, who can do what they want according to the studio who wants the same; well, they’ll all take your money.  They should.  But don’t expect the now established, but still hired, director to change his/her style.

No.  Not everyone can master balancing an unevenness.  To disturb and engage in a way only he, the director, Sam Raimi, knows how.

But here’s where it gets trickier.  Having this outlook on making a picture is great, and it has worked.  A director, like Raimi, is doing what he wants and getting paid for it.  Nowadays, quite a feat.  The studio’s bright lights are shining.  If you look close, they’re also lighting up the plain-to-see blemishes; and Raimi’s heart-filled ideas fall short of originality.

Example: Sam Raimi’s “Drag Me to Hell”

Tagline: Christine Brown has a good job, a great boyfriend, and a bright future.  But in three days, she’s going to hell.

The poster’s tagline is only poetic if, again, you know what you’re getting into – a Sam Raimi film.  On a night out, in 2009, I distinctly remember using this newspaper advertisement (and tagline) as an example of how we’ve lowered our standards.  “But that’s Sam Raimi’s new film,” my wife said.  “What time is it playing?!” I excitedly exclaimed.  Again, excited because I knew what I’d be getting into.  And too, the tagline suddenly seemed brilliant.

Understand, this is not a bias reaction.  I’m not a lover of Sam Raimi.  But the tagline – Christine Brown has a good job, a great boyfriend, and a bright future.  But in three days, she’s going to hell. – suddenly seemed satirical.  And he co-wrote it with his brother Ivan.  And there was very little build-up advertisement.  And this was his first film following the “Spider-Man” trilogy.  How funny.  How … Raimi.

“Drag Me to Hell” will get you laughing if you appreciate the “Looney Tunes”-dark comedy style.  You’ll jump more than once if tipping camera angles and demon hooves thump your soft spot.  And the performances are dead on (Alison Lohman, Justin Long).  No one is pretending to be in trouble for the picture.  The few characters involved are mildly bewildered, but only because the next scene has to follow.  That’s just the way this story is going to be told.

Although, somewhere between the unrealistic fun and an individual’s realistic reflex, you can’t help noticing that you’re watching an exorcism of Sam Raimi.  What is it that’s possessing this filmmaker to lose so much control?  Which part of Raimi is trying to get out?  Which part of Raimi is being contained?  And do I like witnessing the struggle?

Yes, eventually Raimi falls under his own spell and relishes in gimmicky nonsense.  With “Drag Me to Hell,” you were comfortably surprised by the solid story; but do you laugh during the séance/exorcism scene or make fun of it (and the goat)?  Strong winds blow for too long a period and, by the end, you know it could have been cut from the final version.  Maybe anticlimactic.  Could this had been said for “Evil Dead” nonsense or is that what made the film?  (It’s what made the film.)

All ends well for “Drag Me to Hell.”  A few more classic Raimi scenes involving rain and graves, and you’re not backing off from the film’s last image but screaming for whatever will come next.  (That would be “Oz: The Great and Powerful.”)

“SPIDER-MAN” SIDE NOTE: “The Amazing Spider-Man” is not meant to be Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man,” just as “Spider-Man 3,” was never comparable to Raimi’s first “Spider-Man.”  In 2002, the world rushed to their keyboards and Internet-ly mentioned the abundance of continuity errors of “Spider-Man.”  But Raimi’s goal was never to please anyone but himself (and a studio).  The point of “Spider-Man 3”?  Possibly to eventually make “The Amazing Spider-Man” in 2012.  But let us not get too philosophical or else I’ll have to remind the non-hardcore fans that the new Spider-Man director Marc Webb’s only other full-length feature was the high-end indie “(500) Days of Summer.”

To read other movie reviews, check out movie-attractions.com