Own the rights?
37 out of 49 people found the following review useful: Yeah, it has problems, but I still love it, 7 April 2005 Author: Brandt Sponseller from New York City
George (James Brolin) and Kathleen Lutz (Margot Kidder) buy a "dream house" in Amityville, New York for a "dream price". Unfortunately, the price was low because just a year before, the house was the location of the Ronald DeFeo Jr. murders--he killed his entire family while they were sleeping. As a priest, Father Delaney (Rod Steiger), blesses the home, he realizes with horror that something evil is lingering there. The dream house is turning into a nightmare.Sometimes our affection for or aversion to an artwork that we've been exposed to a number of times over the years is inextricably enmeshed with our historical, emotional experiences, whether we admit this or not. For example, I strongly dislike soap operas, or indeed any dramas that resemble soap operas. This is probably due to the fact that for years my only exposure to soap operas was when I was home sick from school as a kid. These were the days before cable television and home video. In the middle of a weekday afternoon, you either watched soap operas or you didn't watch television. Subconsciously, I associate soap operas with a feeling of illness.Likewise, Jay Anson's Amityville Horror novel appeared when I was still a teen. I loved it. I can still remember reading it in one long sitting--something I rarely did--in the family car as we drove from Florida to Ohio to visit relatives. I was excited when the film appeared, and liked it a lot at the time.So although I can see many faults with Amityville Horror now, I still have a deep affection for it that triggers my brain to go into an apologetic mode and defend the film. I just can't bring myself to give it lower than an 8 out of 10, and even that seems low to me. But I can easily see how audiences lacking a history with the film might dislike it. It is relatively slow, uneventful and meandering--with a modern perspective, the pacing and "subtlety" are reminiscent of some recent Asian horror. At the same time, maybe paradoxically, scenery chewing has only rarely had a greater ally.Just a couple days ago MGM released newly remastered widescreen versions of Amityville 1, 2 and 3. I haven't seen the film look this good since seeing it in the theater in 1979, and it probably didn't even look this good then. The first thing that struck me was how incredible much of the cinematography is. Director Stuart Rosenberg had an amazing knack for finding intriguing angles for shots and imbuing them with beautiful colors.Unlike recent trends, Rosenberg's colors are not narrowed down to a single scheme. For example, in some shots, such as some of the interiors of the famed Amityville house, we get fabulous combinations of pale greens and yellows. In others, such as many exterior shots near the house, we get intense combinations of fall foliage colors. There are also a number of beautiful shots of the famed "eye window" exterior of the house in differently tinted "negative" colors.Rosenberg evidences a great eye for placing his cast in the frame and shooting scenes to create depth and symbolism via objects that partially block or surround the frame. He also has a knack for creating winding, receding patterns of objects that enhance depth through perspective. My affection for this aspect of the film has little nostalgic attachment, as I didn't pay attention to such things as a kid (I didn't start noticing them more until I started painting, far into my adult years), and the positive aspects of the cinematography were hardly discernible on the previous, ridiculously bad pan & scan VHS release.Of course, most people aren't watching a film like this for the aesthetics of the visual composition. This is one of the most famous haunted house films, after all. The horror is handled somewhat awkwardly, occasionally absurdly, but it still works well enough for me, as understated as it is (I'm not referring to the acting, just the horror "objects"). Aspects such as the ubiquitous flies reminded me of similar motifs, such as water, in Hideo Nakata's horror films (such as Ringu, 1998 and Dark Water, 2002). The beginning of the film, showing the Defeo murders, still has a lot of shock value, despite its relative post-Tarantino tameness. Most of the horror elements are more portentous, but they're regular and interesting enough to hold your attention, as long as you don't mind subtlety.Subtlety, however, was the furthest thing from the cast's minds. Brolin, Kidder and especially Steiger shout their lines more often than they speak them. "Overacting" is not in their vocabularies. Kidder comments on an accompanying documentary that the horror genre walks a fine line between intensity and camp. That may or may not be true in general, but in Amityville Horror, camp is frequently broached. For me, it has a certain charm. I'm a fan of camp and "so bad it's good"; Amityville's performances often attain both.The commentary on the new DVD is amusing given the 1970s publicity that the book and film depicted a true haunting and the subsequent, thorough debunking by persons such as Stephen Kaplan. Hans Holzer, a parapsychologist who has been involved with the story since the early days, and the author of a book upon which Amityville II was based, provides the commentary. He presents himself as an academic, but he obviously seems to have little concern for "objectivity" or skepticism. He not only still talks about the story as true, he invents supernatural excuses for the DeFeo murders and then some, barely mentioning detractors such as Kaplan.If you haven't seen the film yet, you should base your viewing decision on whether you have a taste for deliberately paced horror as well as a tolerance for extremely over-the-top performances. The film is historically important in the genre, as well.
24 out of 29 people found the following review useful: S10 Reviews: The Amityville Horror (1979), 18 April 2005 Author: suspiria10 from The Void
George and Kathy Lutz are looking for a place to anchor down and raise a family. The Lutz's and their children (Kathy's from a previous marriage) settle on an impossibly cheap, large and beautiful shore house. But 28 days later the macabre and scary happenings force them to leave…leaving all their earthly possession behind. During the course of those 28 days, the family goes through all kinds of hell a room full of flies, demonic voices and a pig with glowing red eyes. What kind of past does that house have that would make everything horribly wrong. Based on a true story.Real or hoax, you decide but "The Amityville Horror" has all the trappings of an excellent haunted house story. Too bad that the filmmakers falter a bit with a lack of character development that also ends up stifling the actors in the film, that would have helped out immensely. A creepy music score (the one rejected for "The Exorcist") and several good set-pieces help out but the end of the second act kind of gets stale. A good supernatural thriller.
26 out of 36 people found the following review useful: Get out,indeed!, 26 April 2002 Author: SmileysWorld from United States
I was but a timid lad of 14 when taken to a drive-in theater to see this incredibly effective horror film.There is no better monster to create a film around than the Devil himself.When Rod Steiger's character,Father Delaney is in the process of blessing the house,and was greeted by a resounding shout of "Get Out!",I almost took it literally,it was that effective.The Devil is indeed one unwelcome houseguest that is very hard to kick out,as you will see when you watch this film.James Brolin and Margo Kidder head a young family who are the new inhabitants of a home where brutal murders had taken place years before.Soon,strange happenings begin to haunt the family,as the house has trouble letting go of what had happened there.This movie is definitely in my top 10 horror films that I have seen,and if you enjoy being scared out of your wits,this film will do it for you.Give it a look!
27 out of 38 people found the following review useful: Dated but great!, 17 February 2002 Author: seanahalpin from Australia
True, the special effects aren't so special these days. True, the girl with the braces brings tears of laughter rather than terror. But nonetheless, this movie remains a creepy gem from my young days... Everyone misses the point that the real 'star' of the movie is the house! The building is both attractive and sinister - truly gothic in the importance of the setting. Whether the story is true or not, if you want a movie to snuggle on the couch in the dark, eating popcorn, feeling the thrill of a ghost story scare, this is one for you...
26 out of 38 people found the following review useful: OLD FASHIONED HORROR!, 16 December 2004 Author: richard cavellero from NJ, U.S.A.
Excited about the remake I decided to go out and just but the original Amityville Horror. Being a huge horror buff, I just had to and besides I had only seen some of it's absurd sequels. hearing mixed reviews from friends and critics from terrifying to hilarious I turned it on with my boyfriend at the time and prepared myself for something scary. I must say that I was quite impressed. And although slightly disappointed in some of the films scenes ultimately I must say this is one old fashioned scary flick! I can hugely recognize the appeal it had in it's it's hey day. With the exception of Texas chainsaw Massacre, Evil Dead, the Omen and some others I rarely see what people did in their horror classics nowadays. Like The Exorcist, pretty damn boring and funny in my opinion. But getting back to this film. It builds a creeping mood filled with fright inducing suspense. The effects are simple but effective and the performances are somewhat over the top but necessarily wacky. The film's overall lasting appeal has little to do with the film's apparent campiness. it has more to do with the real terror inducing legend that inspired it. Like the Chainsaw remake the new ones looks to amp up the horror and intensity which would be greatly welcomed. Although a great horror classic Amityville's finale is somewhat anti climactic and after a long and impressively scary build-up it fails to deliver the end goods. But whoa some of the scenes from the imaginary friend Jody flying out the window, to the visitor at the door, to the voice in the house and just everything in the basement this film is all about delivering some authentic chills. 8/10
22 out of 34 people found the following review useful: Excellent For it's time, 5 November 2004 Author: tomewarden from New Jersey
This movie was based on the true story and it did a great job of re-creating what actually happened. The creepy way the little girl talks to the seemingly empty rocking chair and the 3:15 am horrifying nightmares over and over again would make anyone feel a little freaked out. The reaction of anyone who has anything to do with the church should have been a sign to get out of this house. The flies, cold spots, and eyes peering in and outside of the windows are all things that actually happened inside that house in Amityville Long Island. I recommend this movie to anyone who wants to enjoy a scary movie or for anyone who has been freightened of a house before. This movie does the trick without any fancy special effects.l
11 out of 13 people found the following review useful: Bizarre, Bad, Badly Bizarre, Bizarrely Fascinating!, 25 October 2004 Author: curtis martin from Bothell, Washington, Land of Rain
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Stuart Rosenberg's "The Amityville Horror" should have catapulted him to the throne of the King of the Surreal, because this disjointed, shrill, and inexplicable flick is just as weird, if not weirder than, the oddest work of current King David Lynch. I'm not sure what the hell was going on in Rosenberg's life at the time, but this same year he directed another weird, cartoonish-yet-lethargic genre film, the Charles Bronson revenge vehicle, "Love and Bullets." Also both "Horror" and "Bullets" share totally inappropriate and WAY over the top performances by the great & unique Rod Steiger. VERY MINOR POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD(if such is possible with a movie that makes no sense)Nothing much happens in "Amityville Horror" until the climax, just a lot of odd little things. But when that climax comes, and the movie suddenly ends, you realize that it answered no questions and, more importantly, made no sense at all! The film has no logic but dream logic--perfect surrealism. Characters float about aimlessly in search of some kind of coherent story, crying, screaming, chopping wood. The secondary characters appear and disappear without having any impact on the plot and without really doing anything, much the way characters in a dream come and go, shift and change for no reason. A psychic has visions--nothing comes of it. A cop has suspicions--he does nothing with them. a child has an imaginary ghost friend who may be at the root of it all--or not. A priest's life is ruined--because there were flies on the window! And--there's an evil pig in the window! I'll repeat myself--There's AN EVIL PIG IN THE WINDOW!! An EVIL PIG THAT DOES NOTHING! Really, the film is fascinating--all the more so since it is obvious that its fascinating qualities are entirely unintentional. A CLASSIC!
8 out of 10 people found the following review useful: The House on Ocean Avenue, 16 April 2005 Author: sol from Brooklyn NY USA
(Some Spoilers) "The Amityville Horror" would have been an average "Hunted House" movie if it weren't for the fact that a real massacre happened there back in 1974. Young 23 year-old Ronald "Butch" DeFeo quietly went berserk as he calmly took a shotgun and shot to death his entire family, six persons, some time after 3:15AM in the early morning of November 13, 1974. The movie isn't really that much based on the DeFeo killings but on the George Lutz, James Brolin, family who moved into the Defeo home a year later. George and his wife Kathy, Margot Kidder, and their three children lived in the Amityville "Horror" house for just three weeks and then left, taking their pet dog Larry with them, leaving everything behind but the clothes on their back and the van that they drove out of there with and, in the movie at least, were never seen or heard from again. The movie and book on the Lutz's experience at that house was so effective that Ronald DeFeo's lawyer tried to use the unprecedented defense that his client was demoniacally possessed to get DeFeo off by using an insanity defense.The movie has a number of shocking scenes but all and all it never really takes off and leaves you wondering just what's happening on the screen, is it real or is it the Lutz's imagination. We have the story of the Lutz's little girl calming to see Jody all through the movie and later Kathy even sees "Jody's" eyes in the night window that look like a pair of glowing oranges. Later George actually sees Jody in the window of his daughters room looking like a giant version of Porky Pig but whats the bottom line about "Jody"? Is she real or just an hallucination on the part of the Lutz's? There are also a number of scenes of blood oozing out of the houses walls and stairway thats so gross that it cause the Lutz's to slip and fall trying to run out of it, is that also real or just their, the Lutz's, imagination? The fact that the movie is said to be based on a "True Story" makes you begin to wonder if these scenes, and many others in the film, really happened. Were also told later that the Amityville Horror House was built on a sacred Indian burial ground by this Shawn Ketchum who was driven out of Salem back in the 1690's and settled on long Island. It's there where Ketchum used that site, that was a hidden red room in the houses basement, to practice Whichcraft and Satanism and it's that reason that the house was haunted all these years. Still up until the DeFeo murders, some 300 years later, nothing worthwhile or newsworthy seemed to have happened there?Besides what the Lutz's went through in the movie regarding the "Amityville Horror" poor Father Delaney, Rod Steiger, went through a lot more and he didn't even live there. Going to the house, at Kathy's insistence, to bless it Father Delaney gets attacked, after being locked in a room in the house, by an awful odor from thousands of flies who magically appearer out of nowhere! Getting back to his church Father Delaney tries to call the Lutz's to tell them to leave the house as soon as possible only to have his hand badly burned by the telephone! Trying to get his superiors in the church to believe him, and have a possible exorcism on the house, Father Delaey is told by Father Ryan, Murray Hamilton, to go take a long vacation and forget to come back. The poor man in a last act of desperation tries to pray for help at his church only to freak out and hallucinate a vision of the church collapsing on top of his head. We last see Father Delaney sitting on a bench in the park, a broken and beaten man, with his assistant Father Bolen, Don Stroud, trying to cheer him up by telling him about how great the sunset is which only will upset him even more since he lost his sight during his traumatic experience in the church where he thought that the world came to an end and in a way it did, for Father Delany.
7 out of 9 people found the following review useful: overrated snoozer, 18 November 2004 Author: richusa555 from usa
This is the never ending movie, two hours of boring acting and choppy scenes. Spoiler! The baby sitter getting locked in the closet was the only scary scene, well that and when they showed James Brolin in his underwear. Yuck! This movie has lots of problems and the main one is redundancy. George is always complaining that the house is cold, yet you never see him putting on a coat, and you never see his breath. He's constantly fussing with the fire place and then chopping wood, sharpening the axe and always with the axe.Anyone who lives in a house, and especially if you live on long Island, there's no way you can heat a house that size with a fire place anyway. Evertime Margot Kidder goes in her kid's room, she has to close a window, constantly closing windows. I guess there's just something scary about an open window. The messy dialogue between the catholic priests was especially time consuming and wasteful. At one point their hollering at each other like football coaches, in some vain attempt to ham it up and make their arguments more intense. Eventually the priest is yelling is head off in the church and then some gargoyle chips break off and fall on him making him go blind. Maybe he shouldn't have yelled so loud. I found this movie really boring and was relieved when it was over.
4 out of 4 people found the following review useful: Who says the Lutz's don't throw wild parties?!, 6 January 2006 Author: SickBoySimon from Brentwood, USA
Semi-classic thriller of the 70's, requires some patients from the audience but ultimately becomes a nicely moody film about America's most infamous haunted house.Couple moves their family into a Long Island house, where the previous owners where murdered, and begins to believe that there are evil forces at work in the new home.Based upon Jay Anson's novel, which itself is supposedly a true story, The Amityville Horror is a film that largely relies upon it's eerie, unsettling atmosphere to induce chills and it often works well. It also packs the occasional good shock. While some may see this films subtlety and occasional weirdness as a senseless plot, it really helps to create a rattling sense of dread. It plays out well, building tension slowly to a climatic finale and a open conclusion that leaves a great sense of mystery. Kudos also go to a wonderfully chilling musical score. The cast is fairly good, stars Brolin and Kidder are in top-form.While it may be bashed by many critics, The Amityville Horror has remained one of the 70's better horror oddities, and has become a cult classic for good reason. *** out of ****
Add another review
