Genres

Visitors Review

lord_malasombra 2013-05-23 20:29:07

A big WHY?

Before I start in on this movie let me first say that I never thoughtI'd be singing the praises of an ex Aussie soap star but Melissa Georgeis both a beautiful and natural actress who acquits herself withexemplary style in what is otherwise a complete turkey from start tofinish. It's fair to say that I wasn't too impressed with the originalmovie but this...well, WHY? Why was it made? Why did anyone go to seeit? Why did I spend the time watching it when I could have been havingmy teeth extracted? This movie is duff on so many levels it's hard toknow where to start. Although hardly a classic, at least the originalhad some suspense and some truly creepy moments. This, on the otherhand, spoon-feeds the "chills", and I use the term loosely, at a rateof knots bordering on the desperate. The story rushes from one scene tothe next so that you never get time to see the family as a united wholebefore the onset of "terrifying" events begin to strain their seams. Inother words, you don't really see any appreciable change ordeterioration in their family unit. The ghosts and goblins owe more toRing and Jacob's Ladder than anything else and let's face it, we'rekind of inured to those particular creepies now. I could sit here allnight dissecting this movie but I think I've already spent enough timeon it and, if you've read this, so have you! It's even worse and morepointless than the Psycho remake. All I can say in conclusion is toagree with another reviewer who advised not to spend any money on thismovie but to wait for it to turn up on television. IF there's nothingelse on!

2013-05-23 13:18:59

how dare you!?

how dare anybody make a movie this awful?! at first, i was completely astounded that this movie could have even made it to theaters. but then, i sadly realized, that this is the exact kind of tripe that is selling; this is the stuff that has completely simple-minded, easily convinced and basically stupid people entertained. tell me- why the little girl with white face paint and black drawn-on veins? did the producers think that we were too ignorant to imagine our own ghost that they had to conveniently provide us with the most generic, trick-or-treater looking, non-scary, seen-it-a-million-times-before image? one thing that moviemakers should try to remember- NOT ALL OF US ARE COMPLETELY IGNORANT, SIMPLE-MINDED MORONS! yes, i know, usually films in the horror genre are total no-brainers. but still, anyone who isn't a part of the pretentious art film movement knows that even a genius can enjoy a good old fashioned scary movie. you know, hollywood has completely run out of scary imagery. every monster has already been used in one way or another. sometimes the only way to really put a scare into the audience is to let them concoct the ghost/monster on their own. believe me, i will imagine something absolutely terrifying. when the creating of the ghost is left to the viewer, we usually base its image on our own worst fears. yet, for some reason, movies like this still try to give us the image, assuming that we are too idiotic and unimaginitive to do it on out own. i won't even go into the technical inconsistencies of this movie (score being louder than the dialogue, horribly flawed storyline, predictable "scares", etc.) and i'll just say that anybody with a brain would be offended by this ridiculously dumbed-down version of a movie that NEVER should have been remade. anybody with no brain at all will find it thoroughly entertaining and they will probably even jump out of their seats at the spots in the movie where the music gets real loud and the gongs smash and then... nothing happens. just some loud music and ANOTHER predictable false alarm. wow, scary, right?!p.s. i did consider giving the movie 5 stars just because ryan reynolds' smoking body kept me glued to the screen at times, but then i figured i would just watch some porn. so, negative 5 stars, it is!

2013-05-23 06:05:44

Awesome film!!

The plot is horrific and suspenseful!!! The house is incredibly evil and scary!!! You'll have nightmares for weeks! Some say the story is a hoax but I BELIEVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DJ Graham 2013-05-22 16:27:30

Average re-make, but nothing done to justify a new film

I loved the first film. It scared the brown stuff out of me.This film seemed to follow the original but it didn't seem to want tomake its mark and be a better re-make.There were a few good scares in it but to be honest they were fairlycheaply obtained. I went to see the movie to have a tense thrillershoved down my neck but this just stuck to instant shocks and loudmusic to scare you.I am not convinced about the characters and to be honest I am alreadystruggling to remember who they were.All in all it was an OK film and if you are seeing it for the firsttime then you will enjoy it. If you go there to just compare it to theoriginal then you may be disappointed.I wont be adding it to my DVD collection.

2013-05-22 05:16:04

Masterpiece!

This is the most deepest and scariest horror-movie i have ever seen. It brings out the most nightmarish fantasies out of our heads. And youll defenetly heave a bad headace the next morning of insomnia. The fact that its a true story makes it even more suspensfull... See it!

johnny_richmond 2013-05-21 12:20:35

One of the best THRILLERS I've seen!...

I personally loved this movie....it kept me on the edge of my seat andthose are the kind of movies i love....also Melissa George and RyanReynolds are so cute together at first and she is SO sexy .... I Firstfell in love with her on the show ALIAS where she played Lauren Vaughn.she was later killed off. Ryan Reynolds is such a good actor althoughhis comedic comments tend to get annoying he is very talented and allthe actors are pleasing to the eyes, especially with no clothes on! Ialso love the fact that the director is a first timer and that themovie produced by the great Michael Bay "Texas Chainsaw Massacre Remake2004". I hope they remake other great horror classics in this aspectand keep the audience guessing! Neways i recommend this movie toeveryone. It is so much better than the original and I can't wait forthe Uncut Version on DVD!!!

daworldismine 2013-05-19 11:31:11

a solid retelling of a famous story, yes it isn't true, who cares

the original amityville horror is easily one of the best haunted housemovies, apparently based on true events that have turned out to befalse, never the less its a story that makes a good movie and theoriginal is that, the second installment amityville 2 the possessionwas a good but a bit bizarre sequel, the third installment amityville3d is a well made, creepy at times but ultimately boring movie, therest of the series i didn't bother with as they abandoned the house andbackstory, until last years 'the amityville haunting, and the less saidabout that the better. i hadn't seen this movie since it came out,because im not a huge fan of remakes, and it looked identical to theoriginal i give it a swerve, but the other day i clocked it on DVD forthe price of 2 quid and i thought yeah ill give it a go, and im gladthat i did, its easily the best in the series since the second movie,and ryan reynolds is great in his role. i don't think it betters theoriginal, but its a great retelling and the scares are sharper and morefrequent, i recommend to the right crowd

amanda_olson_583 2013-05-19 00:04:38

Looks good, sounds good, too good to be true

I would definitely recommend this movie as a date movie, and then onanother date, rent the 1979 version with James Brolin and MargotKidder. The sounds and sights were very frightening (especially thatpoor kid getting up to pee and the thing behind him-how traumatizing).By comparison, we've come along way since the days that the horrormovie genre had to depend on sound tech for the scary effects of afilm. The 2005 version, has been anticipated for years because therewas so much creativity in the story. Now it can be brought to life onfilm. It was a shocking movie that will be enjoyed long after thecredits roll. It will probably be scary for some after then, too.

Claudio Carvalho 2013-05-16 21:57:02

Spooky, But Absolutely Unnecessary

I do not like remakes, but I love horror movies, so that was the reasonfor me to see this remake of the 1979 "The Amityville Horror" on DVD.The movie is spooky, because the original story is scary. "TheAmityville Horror" was released in 1979, and has the great merit ofbeing made before "The Shining"(1980) and "Poltergeist" (1982), whichseem to use parts of the storyline of this film. But this remake isabsolutely unnecessary, since it is the same story, once it is claimedto be based on a true event, and in the same year, 1974. Therefore,there is nothing new or original in this remake, with the exception ofthe actors and actresses and some special effects. Ryan Reynoldsvisibly looked for inspiration watching Stanley Kubrick's "TheShinning", with the insane expression of Jack Nicholson and an ax inhis hands chasing his family. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): "Horror em Amityville" ("Horror in Amityville")

2013-05-16 04:24:36

THIS MOVIE IS A RE-MAKE

To the people who say that they didnt follow the original movie, of cource they didnt. This movie is a re-make. New director, producer, screenwriter, actors, and everything. This was their movie, which happens to be BETTER than the orininal. This movie is full of horror and scares. One of my favorite films. And if you people knew you wernt going to like the film or be disapointed with it, WHY DID YOU EVEN SEE IT THEN!!!!!!!!!!!

johnnyboyz 2013-05-13 04:20:53

It Does Enough

I must admit, seeing Horror films at the cinema hasn't REALLY been aparticularly large attraction to me over the past year or so. This maybe due to the fact that there haven't been any particularly good onereleased that I can think of so going in with the knowledge that thelast 'horror' film or film that made me jump at least, was 'What LiesBeneath' five years ago, I knew was going to see and feel something Ihadn't yet experienced in a cinema yet, or at least not for a longtime.I hadn't heard of the other films made before this based on the sameevents but WAS informed that it was a true story beforehand. Thisdidn't detract from the pleasurable viewing I had throughout. Althoughthe 'trapped' feeling isn't really evident in the film as it is spacedout quite widely, this isn't a bad thing despite 90 per cent of thefilm's actually in the house. It's spooky, scary and has enough ofthose 'jump' moments to keep a thrill seeker happy every once in awhile. The acting isn't anything particularly special but does it have to be?Reynolds DOES, however, put in a good performance as the nervous, 'Am Igoing Mad?' character that you can really see build up within him asthe film progresses at its clever pace.The erie music that is found within is definitely a talking point. Itseems that 'too much of a good thing is bad for you' and that very muchapplies here. As it reaches its peak, you are basically peering at thescreen KNOWING that someone or something is going to appear- guesswhat; they do! But it's the range of different things that appearduring hallucination that backs it up. Dogs into demons, little girlswith nooses around their necks and torture victims are just three ofthe things ready to greet you on screen as we 'see' what the characterssee.I think that the Amityville Horror is worth the money, but only REALLYif you're into the thrills and jumps that go with a standard horrorfilm. I, myself, as I've explained haven't made a habit of seeing filmslike this over the years and since I was out with some horror fans forthe first time, I wasn't sure what to expect from this film; it turnsout that I enjoyed it.Veterans however, especially 'Sixth Sense' fans may be slightlydisappointed as it can't really get out of first gear. It was onlyafterwards when I realised it was thrills and jumps all the way throughwith no REAL plot. Enjoyable if you're up for it but REAL horror fans Ithink should avoid.

cellardoor969 2013-05-12 19:25:47

another needless remake

I haven't seen the old Amityville in a few years, but I remember itfeeling realistic, (for what it was), and actually scaring me at thetime. The old version had a certain creepiness that the pretty newversion lacked entirely.As another review says, it didn't look like the 70's at all. They madean effort with the clothes, but everyone, and everything was too cleanand perfect and shiny. Even when George (Ryan R.) was supposed to begoing nuts he looked 'perfect' just needed a few eye drops for hisbloodshot eyes.Then, I thought the movie had either entered a dream sequence or thatit was actually a spoof and not trying to be serious when the MTV/modelbaby sitter walks in, in a 70's bikini top... yeah, right, that'sbelievable. On the DVD the writer explains that he didn't put theplayboy babysitter in originally but the 'guys in charge' thought itwas an excellent opportunity to "bring in a babe".Gone was the excellent scene where the couple tries in vain to find thelost money they had saved. Anyone who isn't rich knows how much losinga lot of money in your own house can add to an already heightenedstress level on a family, demons or no demons...The scenes they did keep just didn't pack the same type of punch. Thispriest was attacked by what looked to be a horde of rubber flies andthe basement stuff just seemed like it was meant for another moviealtogether.The scares were good, but they were short lived... I totally missedthat 'creepy feeling' that a horror movie should invite.All that ranted, there wasn't really a point in making or seeing thisfilm, but like the new chainsaw, psycho etc, people just want to make aquick buck without actually creating something original on their own.

2013-05-09 10:13:17

Scary House....Not.

THE AMITYVILLE HORROR is a scary-house movie. It's one of those films about a house being haunted. The film is very loosely based upon a real-story about the Lutz family and the DeFeo family. The DeFeos were the original owners of the Amityville house and 28 days after moving in the father of the family went insane and killed his entire family. Years later the Lutz family purchases the house and moves in. Soon afterwards some really bizarre things start to happen: they start seeing ghosts, the wallpaper peels really funny, and the father, George (Ryan Reynolds) starts acting really strange. As the 28th day of their move in draws near the coincidences between what happens with the Lutzs and the DeFeos becomes too much to ignore.THE AMITVILLE HORROR has some good acting from the entire cast. The story builds up nicely and does a fairly decent job of characterization. However, I really didn't like the movie that much. It really isn't all that frightening and the things that are supposed to be frightening come off looking like expensive special effects gags. There's also the whole bit about the house supposedly being built on an old Indian burial ground (I know the original came out before, but POLTERGEIST handles that much better) and the basement having been used as a sacrificial temple by a colonial-aged witch named J. Katchum--that made no sense at all to me in the movie. I realize that this is either a remake or re-imagining of the original film, so the filmmakers were trying to walk the line between staying true to the spirit of the original, but make it fresh. That would have been alright, but THE AMITYVILLE HORROR wasn't a movie worth remaking in the first place.When's all said and done the thing this version of THE AMITYVILLE HORROR will probably be best remembered for is that it was the last film that MGM released as an independent company (it was bought out by Sony and other studios during the promotion of the movie). What a sad way for a great studio of the past to die out. That is a true horror.

TheLoneSoldier 2013-05-08 17:51:09

The first actual scary movie in years....awesome.

Let me just list a few films that have come out in the last few years..The Ring. The Grudge. Saw. Cabin Fever. Creep.What do all these movies have in common...They were all referred to insome way, shape or form to be "One of the scariest films in years". Notso, each one of the listed let me down totally, I'm not a fan of thisnew 'edgy' visual style, such as dirty sets used to evoke a uneasyfeeling, or the use of poor quality visuals (such as CCTV or bad videotapes) that are supposed to do the same. It just doesn't work for me. Also, not one of the films listed above had me caring for theprotagonist. I don't care about a French/German cow with a bad-attitudestuck in an Underground tube station, I don't care about a bad actorwho wakes up in a dirty bath and doesn't remember what happened tohim...the same goes for a reporter (or whatever Naomi Watts was) andquite simply Sarah Michelle Gellar...I really don't care for her.But this is where Amityville differs, Ryan Reynolds is SUPERB and thatis no exaggeration, he shines as a surrogate father to three children,he is warm and funny and obviously a caring family man. The same forMelissa George, who appears a slight too young to be a widow with threechildren but still, acted wonderfully..until the last ten minutes, whenthere are some really quite cheesy lines uttered right in the middle ofthe terror - which really takes the edge off.Anyway, I digress, The scares kick in almost immediately, with agraphic depiction of the actual DeFeo family murders, which truly seemterrifying, as all the while you have in the back of your mind, "Thisreally happened to a poor family". The visual style in this scene addsto the tension as it is unlike anything I have seen before, it alllooks like a nightmare...thus setting the tone for the rest of thefilm, but these prove to be least scary moments and for the rest of thefilm you almost wish it was ALL as easy as the first ten minutes.From 'day 1' the unease is felt, not only by the Lutz family, but byyou. The Lutz family don't seem to notice every creek and groan thehouse makes, be you certainly do. It's all harder to watch (maybebecause this a remake and based on a true story, I use BASED lightly)because the viewer is always thinking "Please, For god's sake get out!"- See what I did there?There are some truly horrific moments which will stick with me for along time, such as the bathroom ghost and the girl on the ceiling. I'ma big Yorkshire lad and let me just say, I had a hard time sleeping,not at first...I dozed off instantly, but strangely at 3:15am, sorryhad to be done, I awoke and my eyes were bloodshot. Again, I digress.Any teenage lads wanting some pretty flesh this film doesn'tdisappoint, look out for the babysitter, what a hotty, but what ab*tch, she deserves everything she get's ladies and gentlemen. One ofthe strangest effects of the movie, for me anyway, was the factthat...even though you could see our man George turning into astone-cold killer and his family was in great danger, for the firsthalf hour or so of his demise, he seemed more like a bad-ass anti-hero,maybe a mistake of the film makers, but to me it just added to theemotion when he finally turned.This film does some amazing things with the original story, and delvesdeeper into a darker and more sinister sub story, sort of a crossbetween Poltergeist and Thirteen Ghosts when you finally go into thebasement/dungeon. The only let down I can gather, is that fans of theoriginal film waiting to see a large Pig with red eyes that walks likeman, are instead greeted with (unfortunately this is where the movieconforms to the trends set by todays shite) a long black-haired girlwith a passion for scaring everyone who enters the house where she wasmurdered...You could say she had a 'grudge' against them.The Amityville Horror is a fast paced, and raw bag of nerves. This is afine horror film, classy and stylized but with parts of pure sicknessand grit. I would advise anyone to go see this, especially fans of theoriginal. **** of 5.

2013-05-04 01:35:21

Annoying

When Hollywood makes a remake of a movie that was not good in the first place about a story that has in recent years been revealed as a hoax, I should have done a better job convincing my wife to pass this one over on the Blockbuster shelf.ANNOYING is the best word to describe it.As opposed to having any real sense of doom, fear or foreboding the film stoops to using LOUD SUDDEN spikes of music every 20-30 seconds to try and create suspense.The result is ANNOYING.... much like a neighbor playing his music too loud at a weekend block party.Every 20-30 seconds we seem to get a "TA-DA" full orchestrated chordal harmony in either Em-F or G#m-Aregardless of what is happening on the screen.Adding insult to energy is the music is 20X louder than the dialogue so it becomes an ANNOYING film to try and watch.Also..what is all this hype about "The mystery has never been solved and explained ?"It is pretty well established these days that the whole Ammityville House story was a hoax concocted by the family.Several documentaries have already covered this on TV over the years.... so what's they big mystery.I normally would not have written this review because I knew better to rent it in the first place... but the wife insisted and likewise regrets it now.

Lucien Lessard 2013-05-03 16:38:21

For some certain tastes, this is improvement over the somewhat very flawed 1979 movie.

In 1975, The Lutz Family (Ryan Reynolds, Melissa George, Jesse James,Jimmy Bennett & Chloe Moretz) are moving to New Jersey in theAmityville Community. They bought a large house with a view, includinga lake in the back of their new home. The family are undergoing throughstrange events and seeing or hearing things are not normal. Later theyrealized that the house is cursed and one of the family members ispossessed by an evil spirit in their new home.Directed by Andrew Douglas made an faster paced and shorter somewhatpunchier remake of the popular 1979 horror movie. No doubt, this remakehas its share of faults. But the new script is much clearerunderstanding more of this simple, effective tale. The new version hassome genuine thrills, the performances are good (especially Reynolds inone of his few dramatic roles) but this movie in a odd sense, it iscloser to Stanley Kubrick's The Shining in some moments.This one also has nice but brief memorable roles for Rachel Nichols asthe sexy babysitter and Philip Baker Hall as the Priest. Which thescreenwriter of this new version was wise enough to reduce the subplotof the priest from the original movie. Which to make it tighter and tofeel closer to the family members in this new take. Despite the moviewasn't screened for the critics, i find this version to be slightlybetter than the original. The thing i loved from the original so muchis the effective Oscar-nominated music score by Lola Schifrin (Which itwas reject score for "The Exorcist"!), Strong Performances by JamesBrolin & Margot Kidder and some truly strong creepy moments. But theoriginal had it share of unintentional humour and Rod Steiger'sperformance as the Priest was way Over the Top at times. One of theflaws in this remake is towards the conclusion with an complete falsemoment that nearly ruined the effectiveness in this version.DVD has an sharp anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and anstrong-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an entertainingcommentary track by actor:Reynolds & the film's producers:Andrew Formand Brad Fuller. DVD also has two featurettes, deleted scenes withoptional commentary by Reynolds, Form & Fuller and more. Some willtruly enjoy this remake or disliked it. But die hard fans of theoriginal will probably liked this reinvigorated version. One of thefilm's producers is top action Hollywood filmmaker:Michael Bay (BadBoys 1 & 2, Armageddon, The Rock). Written by Scott Kozar (TheManchinist, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre "2003"). Super 35. (***½/*****).

davidsawyer-me 2013-04-29 18:42:16

Seriously lacking

Even though it seemed to have a lot of elements of a good movie thisfell flat on it's face. As remakes go or what ever this continuationwas of the Amityville saga it was terrible. I watched this lastHalloween with a friend because we got in the October mood. Well, thismovie was one big disappointment. Also I am getting so sick ofHollywood leaning on CGI as a crutch for everything they do. No matterhow detailed the CGI is it always seems rather cartoonish and continuesto break the 4th wall. I know this saves money on budget and allowsthem to do stuff that they couldn't otherwise do with props or realspecial effects, but I just don't like CGI unless the entire movie isone of those CGI Animated movies which is meant to look like aglorified cartoon, or an episode of some sci fi movie in which thelaser beam is CGI. Anyway, This movie is like chewing your favoritepiece of gum but it's the sugar free kind. Sure it still tastes likestrawberry and it still tastes sweet, it even chews like the realthing, but in your mind you since that something is amiss, you feelthat something is wrong. You just know that it's fake. Just like a fakepiece of gum this movie seemingly has most of the elements of a goodmovie but something is missing from the acting, the filming, thescript, the house, the props, but you just can't place your finger onit. You just know that it's missing. Have you ever bought a cheapFamily Dollar brand of Kool Aid. It may have a vibrant pink, red, orpurple color. It may mix well. It may smell super sweet. But when youdrink it, well... it tastes bland and ambiguous. You think to yourself"hmmm if I wasn't told this was Cherry and if it wasn't Red I couldn'ttell what flavor this was supposed to be". It has a faint, vague andambiguous flavor that without the dye and perfume you could not discernwhat flavor it mimics. The 2005 Amityville Horror is nothing more thana cheap dollar store knock off of the real thing.

2013-04-28 22:56:45

Scary, Scary

Yes so it was a hoax, big deal. It still is scary, but nobody wants to take it seriously anymore. Take it seriously, watch it alone in the dark. Like the Blair Witch this film was ruined because the producres had to declare that it was a hoax, then people considered it laughable. As I recall when it first came out everyone was scared!! Stop ruining a great film and take it seriously!!!

2013-04-25 02:12:58

Semi-classic of hokey horror.

While far from a success (artistically speaking, the movie was a smash hit at the box office), The Amityville Horror still serves a semi-important place in the haunted house genre (opening the effects laden door on what was once an imagination driven genre) as well as a place in the history of independent cinema, it being the final movie released by the legendary American International Pictures.Based on a supposed true story, the movie undermines its credibility by going for flamboyant (and quite fictionalized) melodrama, especially concerning the priest character played by Rod Steiger, who overacts horribly. The Stuart Rosenberg directed thriller works best in subtle moments, but those are few and far between as the newly married Lutz's move into a seeming dream house and are confronted with a wide variety of paranormal phenomenon. Lalo Schifrin contributes an icy, creepy score, but little else lifts this movie above cheap, melodramatic TV movie of the week sensationalism.

jpaulin-1 2013-04-24 22:43:54

a solid horror film with intense feeling

This film grasped my attention for every minute of it running. I foundthe feeling intense, as the film concentrates tightly on the life ofthis family that moves in to a new house that has a tragic past. Thingsstart to happen, and even though there are not particularly surprisingplot turns, I think the film deserves its place. I found other reviews about this film which were quite the opposite andI was surprised - but one difference is that I've not seen the olderversion of the film.The milieu, a certain solitude and the grandness of the house; nearbywater and a boat shack, these are all quite classic for a horror film.It's thrilling to see how the house starts to haunt the family, thefather cracking down bit by bit, reality melts with illusion and theonce happy family becomes a gloomy and desperate lot. I would certainly recommend the film.