Have you ever wondered why one of the most beloved horror-comedy movies of all time, Army of Darkness, doesn't actually have "Evil Dead" in its title? It's a fascinating story of studio interference, box office disappointments, and the eventual triumph of a cult classic. Buckle up, because the road to Army of Darkness is more twisted than a Deadite's spine!
Sam Raimi's journey is a true inspiration. Imagine a group of ambitious young filmmakers, braving freezing temperatures in a remote cabin, splattering their friends with copious amounts of red-colored corn syrup – all in the name of horror! That's the origin story of The Evil Dead. Raimi and his buddy Bruce Campbell, working-class kids from Detroit, dreamt of making a horror movie but were short on cash. They relentlessly pitched their idea to everyone they knew, eventually scraping together $375,000. This was just enough to bring their spooky, gory cabin-in-the-woods vision to life. They shot the film on 16mm film using rented cameras, a testament to their resourcefulness.
The Evil Dead clawed its way onto screens and became a surprise hit, grossing $2.4 million. Overseas, it exploded into a notorious sensation, raking in a staggering $27 million! This marked Raimi's arrival as a filmmaking force. In 1987, he followed up with Evil Dead 2: Dead By Dawn, a sequel/remake that retold the original story with Campbell reprising his role. But here's where it gets controversial... Evil Dead 2 embraced a more comedic, downright silly tone compared to its predecessor. Made with a more substantial budget of $3.5 million, it showcased Raimi's evolving style.
Sadly, Evil Dead 2 didn't achieve the same blockbuster status as the original, earning only $5.9 million. While critics generally liked it, and horror aficionados consider it a masterpiece, it was technically a box office bomb. And this is the part most people miss... While its theatrical run was underwhelming, Evil Dead 2 steadily built a fortune on home video, proving the enduring appeal of Raimi's unique brand of horror.
This brings us to the central question: why wasn't the 1993 follow-up titled Evil Dead 3? In a 1992 issue of Cinefantastique Magazine, Raimi's longtime producer Robert Tapert explained that the Evil Dead name actually hindered the film's marketing potential. Universal Pictures, a major studio distributing Army of Darkness, wanted to distance it from the previous films. But here's where it gets controversial... Was Universal right to assume the Evil Dead name was a liability?
Army of Darkness might seem bizarre to viewers unfamiliar with the Evil Dead universe, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The film picks up where Evil Dead 2 left off. Ash (Campbell) uses the Necronomicon to banish the demons, but gets sucked into a portal along with his Oldsmobile, landing in 14th-century England. He's immediately a total jerk, demanding the medieval villagers find a way to send him back to 1993. Ultimately, he must confront an evil doppelgänger and its army of (rubber) skeletons. It's truly one of the funniest movies ever made.
Because of its elaborate setting and special effects, Army of Darkness required significant funding from a major studio. It cost $11 million to produce. Universal, wanting to minimize risk, insisted on dropping the Evil Dead title. Raimi even suggested Medieval Dead, a clever title, but still too close to Evil Dead for Universal's comfort.
Tapert explained Universal's reasoning: "Universal – and they're right to do it – said the 'Evil Dead' title is a drawback because, based on how it did theatrically, no one saw 'Evil Dead II.' It was a flop for all practical purposes – though it did very well on video, far outstripping what it had done at the box office. So they felt that fans would know this is 'Evil Dead III,' and the rest of the audience would just see it as 'Army of Darkness.'"
While dedicated fans recognized it as the third installment, there weren't enough of them willing to see it in theaters. Army of Darkness grossed only $21.5 million.
In 1992, Tapert and Campbell believed the title change would broaden the audience. The Evil Dead movies had a devoted cult following, but by definition, a cult audience is relatively small. Campbell famously said that a blockbuster is a million people seeing a film ten times, while a cult movie is ten people seeing a movie a million times. Cult followings typically wait for home video releases, resulting in lower theatrical revenue.
Campbell supported Universal's decision, stating: "We're real tickled about that. [...] The fact that it's called 'Army of Darkness,' I think is fine. If more people will come and see it, I'm all for it. The first two were limited releases. I think it's a logical progression..."
Ultimately, the title change didn't seem to significantly impact the film's box office performance. Raimi could have called it The Medieval Dead, and the audience turnout might have been similar. It's a tough sell to market a horror movie with Looney Tunes-esque humor, a bizarre time travel plot, and a hyperkinetic pace.
However, like its predecessors, Army of Darkness became a home video sensation, achieving cult classic status and generating millions in revenue. The irony is that the Evil Dead name eventually gained so much recognition that it was remade in 2013. The remake, with a modest $17 million budget, grossed $97.5 million at the box office. This success led to the Ash vs. Evil Dead TV series in 2018, conceived by Raimi and starring Campbell, and then a sequel to the remake, Evil Dead Rise in 2023. Evil Dead Burn is currently in production.
What was once considered a potential curse is now a blessing. Evil Dead has evolved into a highly successful horror franchise. Do you think Universal was right to change the title, or would Evil Dead 3 have performed better? Did the comedic tone help or hinder the film's success? Let us know your thoughts in the comments!
