THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (2005)

The original Amityville Horror was not a classic. That's something that needs to be clarified. I've heard so much whining and complaining just about the fact that this remake was being done at all. I'm still hearing some complaints now that it's out. Why? The original Amityville Horror was a pretty good movie that had a couple of classic scare scenes in it. When watching it now though, it feels dated. It's not on the level of The Exorcist or The Shining, and neither is this remake, and let us hope Hollywood never tries to do anything stupid like remake those aforementioned classics. But this new Amityville Horror is a better movie than the original. It's more frightening, has quicker pacing, and it's just better entertainment.
When I saw the trailer, the one thing that worried me was Ryan Reynolds playing George Lutz, a loving husband and nice guy turned psycho due to demonic possession. I wasn't sure he could pull it off, but he did an excellent job. He's not as gruff or menacing as James Brolin was in the original, but he didn't need to be. The demons in the film did a great job at that. When he had to be psychotic in a scene, he pulled it off. In the scenes with his stepchildren he was very effective. At first his comedic skills are put to good use to establish him as the nice guy. Later his quick, funny wit turns into vicious snaps at his wife and the kids. Director Andrew Douglas also did a good job with all the actors including Melissa George who is just as good as Margot Kidder was in the role of Kathy Lutz, wife of psycho George. The child actors all did great jobs as well.

There were a few things that missed the mark though. One of the demons haunting the house looks like Gollum from The Lord Of The Rings. This demon isn't in the film so much it becomes a major problem, but it was still a little silly to base him (purposefully or by coincidence) on one of modern cinemas most famous faces. The scares are done very well for the most part and the effects are great, especially the ghouls who look genuinely creepy. The pacing is also adequate with the story constantly moving forward, but it felt like the movie ran out of gas a little toward the end. The finale wasn't all that bad but it felt forced, like the filmmakers were running out of ideas and had to throw something in but It was still fun to watch, but not as good as the first 3 quarters of the film.
Amityville Director Andrew Douglas had only one previous credit for the 2003 documentary called Searching for The Wrong-Eyed Jesus before heading over to the haunted house for MGM. This is a very good effort for his first big Hollywood film. His shots are good and his general direction is pretty smooth. The script is decent for the most part, but there are a few lapses in believability here and there though the scares come so often that you don't have much time to think about these things. After a few days of seeing evil spirits doing crazy things, I would get out of there after a day or so. Actually I think I would leave after a minute or so. Not the Lutz family though. They tough it out for a few weeks. But like I said, so much is going on you probably won't even think about this small stumble in logic until after the movie.

If only all remakes were this good. A remake of The Amityville Horror makes sense. It was a movie that could be improved upon. When a movie can be done better a remake is a good idea but what is not a good idea is remaking a classic like Dawn Of The Dead. It's also not a good sign that remakes are in the works for The Fly and Halloween. Why remake masterpieces? The Hills Have Eyes is being redone, and that's fine if it's done right. The original was good, but not great. The point is remaking masterpieces is a bad idea. The original Amityville Horror was no masterpiece. The Amityville Horror of 2005 isn't either. It is however, a rare accomplishment, in that it's a remake that surpasses the original.