The Amityville Horror

LennyB

New member
Hay

The remake of the 1979 horror was on last night. I hadn't actually seen it all, and decided to give it a go. This had to be perhaps one of the most dire movies I've seen in a long time. I mean ok, its normally the case a lot of remakes are bad, the same can be said about The Haunting (remake of the 1963 version), which was also dire.
This one was more or less just a show up of bad actors, using sex as a front to cover up their hidious acting (the 9 year old kid was a better actor then the older cast), and just straining the plot out into a thin paste. Ryan ReynolRAB taking his shirt off at any availble moment might have a lot of people drooling, but lets face it, do you really endure watching 3 minutes of shirtless action well the rest of it is crap? If I had to pay the same about of money on just seeing a movie about a guy taking his shirt off, I'd sooner buy an axm magazine.

The whole truth and lies surrounding the amilyville horror always insteaded me when I first watch the 1979 version, and learned there really is a place and some of the events may or may not have happened.


I just don't think however that in times today, you can get away with making a movie with this kind of plot to it, I mean how is it that you can watch a scary movie from pre 1970 and it still grips you with that shame chill it did on first release, but film makers are totally unable to recapture those subtleties today, and rely on using dodgey camera angles and over the top cgi?

I was laughing through this film more then getting chills.
 
I actually thought it was one of those rare not too bad remakes.

The remake uses the same tired formula Hollywood has been using in most horror movies since 2000.
The shaky,frenetic,too polished style that we also saw in Texas Chainsaw,Halloween,Exorcist 4,Dawn OT Dead,Hitcher etc. and makes it impossible to build much real tension.

But I was never a big fan of the overrated original and found this one a slight improvement.
I found the acting to be ok and felt t actually was aided by the above mentioned because I had seen the haunted house story done so many times it held little novelty for me.
 
When i first watched it, i heard that it is based on true story. So, my first impression is pretty much spooky.

But then the chills runs out when it turns out that the story was made up.
 
It was based on a book. That was a piece of fiction made up by George Lutz and his lawyer. It was never a true story.

I enjoyed the book, because at the time Lutz hadn't admitted he'd made the whole thing up and a lot more happened in the book than happened in the movie. But between the book being released, and the movie being made, it became common knowledge that Lutz had invented the whole story purely because he had a passing resemblance to Ron Defoe, which kind of spoilt the impact that the movie was supposed to have. And the fact that a lot of the supposed happenings within the book were totally missed out of the movie meant it wasn't even a very good adaptation, even if you didn't know it was a complete work of fiction.

The Hammer House Of Horror story The House That Bled To Death was totally based on The Amityville Horror, even down to the final bit where Nicholas Ball admitted he'd made the whole story up just to make some money, the same way that Lutz did. But Lutz survived - Nicholas Ball's character was killed off by the stepdaughter who's cat he murdered just to create another scary episode. He's dead now though - had a heart attack a couple of years ago.
 
I watched it too... having sought advice on this forum as to choose it over The Mexican...

I didn't hate it BUT it wasn't great either... to respond to some of your points...

:cool: Try watching Near Dark a 1987 vampire film starring Adrian Pasdar of Heroes fame, my friend rented it from Blockbuster and because I made him sit through my awesome foreign language choice The Beat My Heart Skipped I was forced to sit through this crock of shite.

;) Yes that little girl plays the role of Nick's daughter Kiki on Dirty Sexy Money.

:p Was my favourite parts really. :o
 
I don't think it was that bad. How much Stephen King was influenced by the original story when he wrote The Shining I don't know but this 2005 Amityville definitely ripped off The Shining in places. The kid actors were really good and made it a lot better than it could have been. The best bit is when the babysitter gets trapped in the closet and goes insane.
 
When the little boy gets up to go for a pee in the middle of the night and as he's washing his hanRAB that face appears in the mirror behind him. That totally spooked me! :eek:
 
Probably not in the slightest seeing as The Shining was first published in February 77 and The Amityville Horror was first published in September 77, seven months later.
 
True enough. The original is very overrated. I think it's status comes more from the fact it was one of those early wave of video-horrors that everyone would rent out in the early 80s. The reamake is even worse, which I didn't think would be possible.
Amytville II is the best the lot, particularly the eldest daughter ;)
 
At least the Dawn of the Dead remake was actually very good, one of the brilliant remakes to come out.

I didn't think much of the AH remake, can't even remember the original.
 
No question DATD 2004 was excellent but I was just pointing out that most horror movies these day are so blatantly studio creations as opposed to the directors own personal vision,
i.e the likes of Romero,Craven,Carpenter.
 
Back
Top