Evil Dead II: Groovy or Just Gonzo?

Alright, fellow Gen X'ers and horror hounds! Moviebuff_marc here, back again and ready to rumble with opinions. I just re-watched Evil Dead II and...man, what a trip. It's like Sam Raimi took the original Evil Dead, cranked the slapstick to eleven, and then chugged a case of Jolt Cola. Bruce Campbell is, well, Bruce Campbell. Is there anyone else who could pull off that level of over-the-top physical comedy while battling Deadites? I think not. But here's my question for y'all: Does the shift in tone from horror to horror-comedy really work? I get that Raimi probably didn't have the budget for a straight-up horror sequel, and the Three Stooges-meets-Lovecraft vibe is, admittedly, pretty unique. That chainsaw hand transformation scene? Still makes me giggle like a maniac. But sometimes it feels like it's trying too hard to be funny, ya know? Like, is it a truly great horror film, or just a really, really entertaining one? I mean, compare it to something like The Exorcist or even Night of the Living Dead. Those movies just burrow under your skin and stay there. Evil Dead II, on the other hand, is more like a rollercoaster ride – thrilling and fun, but you're not exactly having an existential crisis afterwards. Maybe that's the point, or maybe I'm overthinking it (totally possible!). So, lemme know your thoughts! Am I being too harsh on a classic? Does the comedy enhance the horror, or does it detract from it? And, most importantly: Chainsaw or Boomstick? (Boomstick, obviously. Duh.)