| ||||||||||||||||||||||
MALL.ShopperFavorites.com
Best Prices
Shopper Favorites Web Search |
DVD : The Amityville Horror (Widescreen Special Edition) |
- Don't Believe the HypeI'd have to say that I enjoyed the Amityville documentary that came on the learning channel the other day way more than I liked this movie. Afterall, there are about six Amityville films out right now, and NONE of them are any good. In fact, the original "Amityville Horror" wasn't all that spectacular...So my question is, "Why make this movie? What more can Hollywood utilize to try and scare people when everybody already knows the story behind the DeFeo murders and the Amityville hauntings?"
What's more, I was hoping that this movie would go back to the supposedly true, unsensationalized story behind the Lutzes and their 28 days of hell in their new Long Island home. Not to mention, the DVD version of this film has some extras with an interview with Mrs. Warren, a well-known psychic investigator who, along with her husband and their parapsychology team, examined the Amityville house back in the 70s.
Yet much to my disappointment, the DVD only shows Mrs. Warren babbling on and on about how the Amityville house was the most evil house, sitting on the most evil street, located within the most evil of towns...Yeah, I think you get the idea. On the other hand, instead of listening to Mrs. Warren prattling on about all the eccentricities she sensed in the Amityville house, the learning channel documentary revealed some of the actual pictures the Warrens took during their investigation. One of the pictures was of a childlike entity with glowing eyes standing by the main staircase. Surprisingly, the child closely resembled one of the murdered DeFeo children.
Thus, in my opinion, the ongoing debate as to whether or not the Lutz's made the whole haunted house bit up, or if the Amityville house is actually inhabited by demons, along with the tortured spirits of the slain DeFeo family is a much more interesting source of entertainment than this B-rated horror remake. Instead of dealing with any hardcore facts, this movie goes straight into all the not-so-spooky haunted house hype from the very moment the Lutzes move in, up until their expected, yet extremely disappointing departure.
It's like I kind of got the sense that the makers were relying too much on digitized special effects to make this remake a hit vs. using a solid plotline or any real suspense. In fact, this film draws on some extra, apocryphal nonsense that not even the original Amityville bothered to use. For instance, the movie plays on a rumor that the Amityville house was built on an old Indian burial ground, and that the Lutz's basement was used as a sacrificial temple by a colonial-aged witch named J. Katchum.
All in all, the acting isn't bad, but it's evident that any remake has a lot to live up to in order to match, or even to surpass the film it's based on. Unfortunately, this movie doesn't even begin to match the original Amityville. So in the end, I suggest sticking to the first movie, or even trying to catch the Amityville documentary on the learning channel- -both are of a much higher calibur than this arbitrary horror remake.
Rating:
- A few creepy moments but no sleepless nights with this remakeThe family that now owns the house in Amityville at what was once 112 Ocean Avenue (but now has a different number) have changed the infamous quarter-moon windows in the attic to regular shaped windows to ward off tourists. For that matter, I understand the house in Tom Rivers, New Jersey that was used in the original movie version of "The Amityville Horror" changed those windows as well. I find this interesting because without those "eye" windows I do not think this would have ended up being the most famous haunted house in America. Of course, the half-moon windows on the house were pretty small and in both Hollywood versions they end up being a lot bigger, but then you know what happens when movies get made.
They still tell us that "The Amityville Horror" is "Based on a True Story," but we now know enough about the writing and selling of Jay Anson's book to know that if the label belongs on this film then it belongs on movies like "Troy" because, hey, Homer wrote non-fiction too. But in the wake of "The Blair Witch Project" there is nothing wrong with a good hoax. Besides, this 2005 version of "The Amityville Horror" is the best movie ever made with that title, which includes the 1979 version with James Brolin and Margot Kidder, and all of its wretched sequels. But that does not mean that first time feature director Andrew Douglas (who made the documentary "Searching for the Wrong-Eyed Jesus") is a truly satisfying horror film and the "history" of the house really does not give this movie a free pass on the willing suspension of disbelief. I watched this with all the lights out after midnight and had no problems sleeping, which is not the response the producers of this remake intended to be sure.
The story is that in 1974 Ronald Defeo (Brendan Donaldson) took a rifle and killed everybody else in his family claiming that voices in the house told him to do so. The spookiest thing about the real murders was that all of the victims were shot in their beds from behind apparently without any of them waking up. But the script by Scott Kosar (who also wrote the remake of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre") starts improving on reality at this point by having Ronald kill his youngest sister, Jodie (Isabel Conner), last in the closet of her attic bedroom. You might remember from the original movie and/or book that Jodie was the name of the pig from hell, but this time it is a little girl with a bullet hole in her forehead (hang on, because this is going to be one of those good things/bad things). When George (Ryan Reynolds) and Kathy Lutz (Melissa George) move into the house, the youngest of her three children, Chelsea (Chlo Grace Moretz) and Jodie become friends. But after 28 days in the house, the Lutz family will flee for their lives.
For me Jodie is the pivotal character because of the way she changes the whole equation. We know going into this movie that this is a haunted house and that there are malevolent ghosts. We thought that maybe they were the ghosts of the dead Indians buried beneath the house, but that really does not matter to what is going on in the film. But Jodie is a much more recent ghost and it appears that she might actually be a good ghost and not a bad ghost. After all, in what is my favorite scene in the film, Jodie pays back the evil, wicked, bad, mean and nasty babysitter (Rachel Nichols) who delights in telling Billy (Jesse James) and Michael Lutz (Jimmy Bennett) about the murders. However, this film does not know what to do with the idea that there is a new ghost in there with the old ghosts, although that is clearly behind the film's final "boo!" right before the end credits.
Ultimately, the horror here is not the house but what it does to George Lutz, and although the special effects are greatly improved this time around, the creepiest moments belong mostly to George, especially when he has an ax in his hands. In retrospect, everything that I liked about this film is something that Kosar came up with, and not from Anson's book, Sandor Stern's earlier screenplay, or any of the myriad stories the Lutzs have been telling over the years. But far too often Douglas relies on the old standard of a character turning around to be surprised by another character standing right, and you can only do that so many times before it becomes annoying. There are also some montages that will remind you of a Nine Inch Nails music video, however the cumulative effect is that this movie is going through a bag of tricks rather than telling a coherent haunted house story. The performances and special effects are much better here, but in terms of a coherent narrative the 1979 version would actually have the advantage, and that is not a good thing.
Rating:
- who says a remake can't be as good as the first one,this is proof that they can(they both stink)yet another remake of yet another movie that no one has wanted. wake up hollywood,where is the creative spark you once had. are thing so bad that you have to remake movies insted of coming up with something fresh?
you know the plot,you know what's going to happen,and with the exception of ryan reynolds who turns in a fine proformance.other than that this is one lame duck of a movie!
Rating:
- So?Another remake lacking any real reason. Im getting sick of some of the remakes way did I have to pay to see the same show. I cant see the difference from the old one. The acters may even be wores. expiate the wife is more f^$kabal but there are some improvements. But not as many as one Should expect
Rating:
- The Amityville Horror 2005 version was freaky but goodIn the early 70's, a guy killed his family in the middle of the night while they were asleep. When asked by police why he did such a thing, he told them that voices from inside the house told him to do it. Ten years later, a family moves in the house. Twenty eight days later, they had to flee from the house because of the demonic spirits in the house, telling them to get out.
This movie was based on a true story. It was really scary, but knowing that this actually happened in real life, made it even scarier. It stars Ryan Reynolds as George Lutz and Melissa George (I don't remember her in any other films) as Kathy Lutz. Also starring three kids, Jesse James as Billy, Jimmy Bennett as Michael, and Chloe Moretz as Chelsea, who play Kathy's (Melissa George) children in the film.
I recommend this movie to anyone who likes a good scare. The second time I watched it, I knew what was gonna happen, and I still got scared by the same scenes from the first time I watched it.
MALL.ShopperFavorites.com
|