Film

What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases

Updates:

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

Director: Sam Raimi

Time Out rating

Average user rating

37 reviews

Synopsis

An ambitious loans officer divests an elderly lady of her property and ends up cursed by the now homeless old sorceress. A seer is contacted to help reverse the spell, but things spiral out of control.

Movie review

From Time Out London

A gross-out fright movie that is, in the director’s own words, ‘more like a funhouse ride than a bloodbath’, ‘Drag Me to Hell’ takes Sam Raimi back to his B-movie roots, fusing the scary intensity of ‘The Evil Dead’ with the cartoonish, slapstick humour of ‘Evil Dead II’. Originally conceived as a short story way back in 1990, ‘Drag Me to Hell’ has had a long and strange gestation, which might explain its repeated references to ‘There Was an Old Lady Who Swallowed a Fly’.

Inside a mock-gothic pile, all hell breaks loose as female medium Shaun San Dena (Adriana Barraza) struggles to save a young boy from the malevolent force unleashed by a gypsy’s curse. This brilliantly staged prologue seems to herald the Second Coming of Sam Raimi, but the film as a whole never quite lives up to its throat-grabbing opening.

With one eye on the vacant assistant manager’s job, ambitious loans officer Christine Brown (Alison Lohman) refuses to extend the mortgage of an old gypsy lady, Mrs Ganush (Lorna Raver). Christine blames her boss (David Paymer), but the gimlet-eyed crazy lady sees all. Shamed by having to beg on bended knee, Mrs Ganush fixes Christine with her beady peeper and warns: ‘Soon it will be you who comes begging to me.’ The slighted woman’s campaign of terror involves the projectile vomiting of blood, maggots and green slime, a slice of cake with a swivelling eyeball implanted in it and the summoning of a black goat.

A late replacement for ‘Juno’ star Ellen Page, the sparky Lohman seizes the lead role with both hands and confidently makes it her own. As does the aptly named Raver, whose vengeance starts with cackling laughter, then spirals upwards into imaginative spitefulness. The flashy pyrotechnics make up for a plot that is riddled with holes, and there is a wickedly funny gag about the possibility of ameliorative kitten-sacrifice. But the crude ‘eye for an eye’ morality recalls an average EC Comics story, and you don’t need a crystal ball to predict the wicked twist in the tale.

Author: Nigel Floyd 2009-05-26 10:42:14

Time Out London Issue 2023, May 28 - June 3, 2009

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

Kyle said...

Posted on May 28 2009 20:06 I am going to see this film tomorrow nd it looks fairly good but by the comments you over people have put I am starting to have second thoughts, nevertheless I shall still go and see it and have a jolly good time!
By the way I dont really speak or write like this I just wanted to do it for something to do.
DO YOU LIKE FISHSTICKS?
WELL, WHAT ARE YOU, A GAY FISH!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Report as inappropriate
eman said...

Posted on May 28 2009 17:50 I didnt think it was as bad as the person below but it's true- wierd or differnt or funny stuff doesnt make a good HORROR film. people in my cinema (showcase beckton) were laughing thruout the whole film but not a single scream. i thought it was hilarious at times and i think that it deserves a decent rating because it was quite entertaining. but not that scary really
EMAN

Report as inappropriate
Kamal said...

Posted on May 28 2009 17:42 I've written a little (read: a lot!) more on the film in the comments section of the related article to this film, entitled 'What the Hell Happened to Horror? (see above right). This is the condensed version:
Poor acting, which is made all the more worse because of the slightly higher standard of actors in the film than one would expect. The direction was a deftly achieved throwback to older American horror films, but NOT scary. I couldn't engage with the more absurd elements of the plot and I really didn't care for the characters. The disappointment with this film was largely due to nostalgic critics hailing this as the "best horror in decades" and I felt that it really wasn't. I'm sure fans of The Shining, The Thing, Halloween, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, 28 Days Later, Descent, etc will have a serious problem accepting that this fairly entertaining, not-very-scary (aside from of course the stuff in all of our nightmares - loud noises!) and very oddball film. It is absolutely a refreshing change from the torture porn films but that doesn't make it a good change.

Report as inappropriate
laura 3 said...

Posted on May 27 2009 12:44 AMEN TO THAT SISTERS!

Report as inappropriate
MM said...

Posted on May 26 2009 16:14 Laura - read the review then.
Laura 2 - WTF?
Both of you - learn to speak English.

Report as inappropriate
laura 2 said...

Posted on May 26 2009 14:01 ennit Laura!
we gotsta know, sister. Gobble the goop much, Laura?

Report as inappropriate
Laura said...

Posted on May 26 2009 09:21 I NEED TO KNOW IF THIS MOVIE IS GOOD OR NOT! AND PEOPLE'S DON'T STEEL ALL THE SEATS!
Thank You x

Report as inappropriate