Amityville - the True Horror of Poor Filmmaking

I sat in the darkened theater as The Amityville Horror began, hoping against all hope that the 2005 remake of the classic-yet-schloppy 1979 film would at least be a little spooky.

After all, what kid growing up in the '70s and '80s didn't watch the original Amityville and get a bit freaked out by the cheesy blinking "eyes" outside the window or the "well to Hell" in the basement of the house? Or perhaps the single most effective visual from the film - the two main windows on the upper portion of the house itself? It was funky filmmaking, but it worked. And as time moves on, we find ourselves fond of the original; it's earned a special place in movie history and is one of horror's classics now.

With the advancements of special effects and, you'd think, the sophistication of screenwriters and directors in the 21st Century, one would think a decent horror film wouldn't be too hard to come by. Especially when the horror film in question is a re-make of a well-known flick. How difficult is it, really? The groundwork is already done; all you have to do is fill in the blanks with some creativity and wham - you have a re-make.

I guess it's not that easy, as has been painfully demonstrated by the sloppy, uncreative work of Director Andrew Douglas and Screenwriters Sandor Stern and Scott Kosar, who was likely brought in to try and fix this trainwreck. Kosar was responsible for the final screenplay of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake in 2003, which was a great horror flick.

The new Amityville lacks any kind of effort when it comes to pacing. As the events begin to roll out on the screen, I couldn't help but feel as if someone had their finger on the fast-forward button. It seems that Douglas felt the story was already known, so all of the character/story development was thrown out the window. We're shown the house and the demonic events start coming so quickly that they don't even have time to be scary. Good horror usually comes to a slow boil, as in The Exorcist, Psycho or more recently, Poltergeist. Even the original Halloween allowed for story development before scaring the bejesus out of us.

As the Lutz family becomes terrorized by the house, there is absolutely no emotional involvement from the audience. Shallow characters coupled with relatively poor acting leave us begging for the house to win! Just because you shoot a horror film, you don't have to settle for lackluster talent. Pssst... pass it on..

One of the biggest problems that Amityville suffers from is any resemblance of continuity. Is it night, is it day? Is it raining, is it sunny? The editing is so poor that one minute, Kathy Lutz is driving back to the house frantically trying to save her family from death and destruction in the hazy afternoon sunlight and the next, possessed hubby George is creeping around the house as it's pitch black outside with lightning flashing and rain pouring. This is absolutely ridiculous and was so bad by the end of the film that I sat in my seat giggling.

Music can save a horror film. Actually, music can save or make any film. Hum a few bars of the tunes from JAWS or Raiders of the Lost Ark. Now try Halloween or The Exocist (special award points to those who can actually hum "Tubular Bells"). You get the point. In 1979, the score for The Amityville Horror was nominated for an Academy Award.

The creepy main title track of the film was something I was looking forward to hearing this time around - especially since it's peppered throughout the trailers for the film. Film score fans beware - the original, famous tune has been left out of the final cut, for whatever reason! I felt completely ripped off - it was the final insult for me! How could they tout the music in the trailer and then not use it in the actual film? To me, that is simply wrong.

Amityville 2005 does have some nice exterior shots of the house (which is no one's success story except for the builders of the home used in the film), and being set in the 1970s, the sets were well-decorated, thanks to Daniel B. Clancy, who was just about the only person to get something right on this project.

With a running time of rougly 90 minutes (animated films for kids are longer now, folks - this should be your first warning sign), what should have been a slow-burn of tension and demonic terror is an almost-comedic bobsled run through a boring script with uninteresting "plot twists" and forgettable characters. What a total waste of money - ours and the studio's.

It seems to me that the only possession here was in the mind of the executives who actually thought this was a good release. Films like this make their originals that much better.