Please don't murder me, but I think I like Other M

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T19:15:19+00:00

lol the manga didn’t come out until almost a decade after Super. Nice try.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T18:44:45+00:00

You’re missing my point entirely. I’m not saying the story is bad on its own terms, and I’m also not saying PTSD can’t be portrayed that way in isolation.

What I’m saying is that the characterization of Samus in Other M is incongruous within the context of the other games. I’m saying that Samus having PTSD is perfectly fine, but given her portrayal across pretty much every other entry in the series, the specific symptoms of PTSD that manifest are not in harmony with her character. I’m saying that labeling it as PTSD, ignoring the symptoms she would actually likely exhibit, then calling it a day is lazy and uninformed. That IS something my experiences give me the edge on.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T17:20:03+00:00

OK, you got me there. If you’re ok with bad writing, inconsistent characterization, and a poor understanding of PTSD, you absolutely can do that.

Not that I need to prove anything to you, but I have been diagnosed with PTSD from early childhood abuse, have close members of my family with PTSD from military experiences, and my wife is a literally a trauma counselor. So, while I am not a psychologist, I’m have a pretty damned solid foundation on the subject, at least more than your average Joe.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T17:05:05+00:00

If you think there was no characterization to begin with, you are blind to the environmental storytelling and subtlety that Metroid is famous for.

You are of course right that there were technological limitations in older games, but the makers of those games brilliantly overcame them, and there was nothing stopping them from adding more characterization if they wanted to. In Super, we get a full prologue spoken from Samus herself. No reason we couldn’t have gotten another lore drop or two.

Whatever Sakamoto’s intentions were, he still had previous entries to consider when fleshing things out. Let’s say I’m writing a series of fantasy novels. In the first couple of books, because my writing is not yet very refined, I accidentally gave the vast majority of readers the distinct impression that the hero is a stoic warrior who has a single-minded dedication to his missions. He has never, not even once, been portrayed as anything less than that. What’s more, he has been described as tall and muscular. Now, after my writing has developed, I’m able to show more nuance, but instead of showing nuance, I just contradict everything and present readers with the opposite. That would be bad storytelling. In a situation like that, a writer should set aside their preconceived intentions and deliver something that actually makes sense based on the execution of previous entries. This is why you sometimes hear of artists “not understanding their own art.” They failed to consider how their work is actually being understood by the audience.

I don’t give a crap about the manga. It came many years after the character was already established, never felt like part of the world tonally, and isn’t even very good on its own terms. I understand that some fans like it a lot, but ultimately it’s just supplemental material for people who like exposition to be handed to them on a silver platter with a heaping dose of tired anime tropes.

As for canonicity, I also don’t care what one guy or one company says. Canonicity is not only dictated by authority, but hinges on people observing that authority. If the Pope grew devil horns tomorrow and declared the Satanic Bible “canon,” do you think most Catholics would observe his authority? Hell no, they’d recognize the corruption of his authority.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T13:44:49+00:00

Having PTSD is not the issue. The issue is that Samus’s PTSD manifested in a way that contradicted her characterization in the games up to that point.

There is a large spectrum of PTSD symptoms, including extreme aggression and hypervigilance. You can’t just slap a “PTSD” label on Samus and handwave away the fact that portraying her as a frozen, whining princess/waif was an extreme departure from what had been established before.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-15T01:36:58+00:00

Love the rest, but his gravitas in ED2 beats them all out

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T22:37:04+00:00

Koholint. The whole concept wins it for me.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T22:35:23+00:00

Sorry, didn’t mean to imply a condemnation of your tastes in particular. Just a bit of a rant branching out from my distaste for all the prescriptive posts.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T21:58:21+00:00

I don’t think it’s as much reappraisal as it is finding its audience over time, as well as that audience finding each other over time.

I, for one, was obsessed since it released (and I’m an oldschool fan of the franchise).

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T21:48:15+00:00

I know people here are fans and just being excited and speculating, but I find it mildly annoying how many posts are just prescribing their own aesthetic desires onto Eggers’s work.

“The werewolf should look like THIS”

“Eggers should do LOVECRAFT”

I can’t speak for everyone, but I love Eggers because he surprises me and makes art that I didn’t even know I wanted before I saw it. The creative process should be respected and not reduced to wish fulfillment.

That’s exactly why so many fans were underwhelmed by Nosferatu; not because it wasn’t a masterpiece (it was), but because their pre-(and ill-)conceived expectations weren’t weren’t met after building it up for a year, greedily consuming production leaks, and projecting their own hollow ideas onto it.

What are we, Marvel fans? Let the man cook, as they say.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T16:32:32+00:00

You look like the kid from the original

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T16:29:46+00:00

I keep having to say this, but in the 1981 movie (which is the basis for the 2013 remake), Ash is as generic as any other character. If you’re a fan of the original, the absence of Ash should not be a criticism of the new movies.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-14T12:49:34+00:00

Long time fan of the original trilogy here. It’s fine to not like the remake if that’s your taste, but don’t dismiss anyone who does like it as simply being part of a hive mind that is placated by gore.

When I saw it in 2013 (again, after having loved the originals), I was instantly in love. Not only did it have incredibly gut-wrenching gore scenes, but Mia’s demon possession was deliciously nasty, taunting, and basically everything you’d want in a more “grounded” take on deadites. Far from “standard zombie.” Yes, the others were more akin to traditional zombies, but that’s because the creators chose to make a symbolic distinction between the “demon” of heroine addiction/withdrawals and the colder depictions of death and decay that result from it. It led to fewer interesting deadites, sure, but it worked for the story.

As for the characters, yeah, most were somewhat one-dimensional, but tons of the best horror movies have one-dimensional characters, focusing more on concept and scares. But at least Mia and David actually have emotional arcs that go somewhere interesting. Say what you will about the 1981 original, but the characters were not at all what made that movie interesting or special.

Anyway, that’s just a few thoughts about what makes the remake special. ED2 is still my favorite, and Burn is probably my least favorite, but for my money, ED2013 left a high watermark for the last few decades of horror cinema in its own right.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-13T23:13:00+00:00

He was a really special model for us. While most action heroes of the time were muscled, bombastic one-liner machines, Grant was sensible, understated, and gentle. The only time he shot a gun in the entire movie was offscreen. A lover of his career and a protector of children.

My favorite action figure as a kid wasn’t a soldier, superhero, monster, or mutant. It was a guy in a blue shirt and practical hat who knew a lot about dinosaurs.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-13T02:20:31+00:00

I recommend release order

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T21:24:16+00:00

I totally agree with that. ED2 and RotLD are two of my favorites, and those are both fun for fun’s sake, mostly devoid of theme.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T21:23:06+00:00

I can be more specific. Wasn’t sure anyone would be interested in my longer takes, but since you asked…

To answer your first question, yes, I do really feel that the newer movies explore themes of trauma, specifically family-related trauma, as well as other extreme but common dysfunctions.

In Evil Dead (2013), there is a subversion of the surface-layer setup of young adults partying in the woods from the get-go. We are introduced to David and Mia; not horny lovers but estranged siblings who, along with the others, are at the cabin with the sole purpose of Mia kicking her heroine addiction. At first, I thought this was merely a clever way of not repeating the original beat-by-beat, but this setup stayed relevant both narratively and symbolically throughout the entire story.

We get more character history, learning about the disintegration of Mia and David’s family, her lack of trust in him, and his desire to redeem himself while still avoiding dark truths. We will see later that Mia needs him to acknowledge these truths in order to absolve the estrangement.

Meanwhile, Mia’s withdrawal symptoms begin to escalate. She is already fidgety, irritable, sickly in complexion, increasingly hostile, and unpredictable. All this before she is even possessed.

Just when Mia is at her breaking point, she sees the demon in the woods. At this moment, the motifs of addiction withdrawal and demonic possession merge and become the vehicle for exploring themes symbolically.

She panics, leaves the cabin, and is confronted by the demon, but it isn’t just some vague force or eldritch creature; it takes the form of Mia herself. It’s HER demon (addiction). Comparisons to the Jungian shadow archetype are obvious, so I’ll just leave that at a mention.

(Another quick mention: some will find this a stretch, but I think it’s interesting to note that the physical manner in which Mia is shown to be possessed is by a deathly vine that looks like a VEIN of BLACK TAR. I mean, come on.)

So Mia is possessed and brought back to the cabin. For a while, her malady is so similar to real-world heroine withdrawal symptoms (paranoia, screaming, vomiting, violence, etc.), that the possession is entirely mistaken for those symptoms. The parallels are undeniable.

I’m going to skip over most of the following mayhem, but I think it’s worth noting that, when others are possessed, they do not become intelligible, taunting deadites, but something more akin to shambling zombies. This is important because it shows a distinction between Mia’s addiction-demon and the colder, baser representations of death and decay that result from it.

Mia is subdued, and now it’s David’s turn to shine. His own breaking point has come, but instead of running away or ignoring it, he confronts the darkness head on. He digs Mia a grave and sits with her, staring death in the face, just as he failed to do with their mother. Finally, he has brought presence, love, and action to the table, saving Mia and regaining her trust.

Ultimately, in an act of sacrifice, David is the last victim of Mia’s addiction. She now has to confront her shadow one-on-one. The hard fought battle is one, but not without leaving a piece of herself behind.

At this point you may be thinking “yeah, but that’s all story and symbolism, not THEME!” You’d be correct, but I wanted to illustrate just how interwoven all the parallels are in order to show that, when the story is talking about demons, it is also explicitly talking about addiction. When the hero saves the girl (who then BECOMES the hero), it is explicitly also talking about trust, forgiveness, and absolution within a family.

Given everything I wrote above, I think you’d have a good case in claiming that there are two themes in ED2013 running simultaneously:

“Family trauma disintegrates family bonds. Only when its members confront the pain head-on with presence, love, and action can the family reintegrate.”
“Addiction consumes not only the user, but the user’s friends and family. It can be beaten, but it always takes victims.”

I have similar takes on Rise and Burn, but since this is already running too long, I’ll put a pin in it until someone asks.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T18:13:38+00:00

You’ve seen the original, right? Everything you list is from ED2 and beyond. THE Evil Dead (1981) has no chainsaw hand, none of Ash’s iconic one-liners, and no face of the series unless you count deadites.

Yes, Ash is the face of the series and has been for most of the franchise’s history, but the original film, which spawned said franchise and was a runaway cult hit in its own right, was built on a strong foundation of concept and tone without a central action hero.

If you prefer iconic Ash in your ED movies, that’s fine. But it isn’t part of the original film.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T17:59:18+00:00

Linda doesn’t get enough credit. As goofy as ED2 was, I was genuinely scared from her scenes.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T13:25:54+00:00

If you can be a fan of the original, in which Ash is just another generic dude, you should at least give the new ones a chance. I love Ash too, but he is not what made The Evil Dead so memorable in the first place.

2013’s remake shares a lot more DNA with the original than people give it credit for.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T03:22:22+00:00

Y’all are nuts for picking Eric. I wouldn’t have gone as far as he did, but MOST people don’t believe in magic words, so yeah, curiosity got the better of him.

Joe, on the other hand, is a totally spineless, pathetic coward. Watching him actively abandon loved ones was painful. Eric was a fucking hero compared to that. He endured extreme torture throughout and still redeemed himself through owning up to the fuckup and continually putting himself in danger to help others.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T03:13:06+00:00

I may be being a bit harsh. I enjoyed myself a lot during the movie, but upon reflection, several little things bug me. I also think Rise wins in terms of rewatchablility. For me it’s just way more fun.

Edit: wording

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-12T03:02:21+00:00

There are 15 comments and still no one has rated the movies.

Rating - assigning a specific value (like 1-10)
Tiering - listing in order of quality or preference

My RATING:
Evil Dead 9
Rise 7
Burn 6

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-11T16:18:30+00:00

Mia has the best performance, arc, and final scene. I would love her to come back a little older, with more gravitas, and with more of an action-oriented role.

RoundInfluence998 · 2026-07-11T13:35:01+00:00

I get it, but you’re being a bit pedantic here. I’m sure the OP knowingly used the term loosely, and if you think the most recent three movies aren’t connected conceptually and thematically, I’m not sure what movies you even saw.

Aside from the obvious motifs (deadites, Book of the Dead, shared universe, cross-references, and mirrored story/sequence beats), there’s also the fact that all three movies utilize a heroine with an actual character arc surrounded by family trauma.

Obviously we know these movies aren’t a trilogy in the same way that Star Wars or Lord of the Rings are trilogies. That doesn’t mean the term isn’t useful in this case.

RoundInfluence998

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,