The Amityville Horror

2005

Action / Drama / Horror / Mystery / Thriller

108
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 24% · 164 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 52% · 250K ratings
IMDb Rating 5.9/10 10 117151 117.2K

Please enable your VPN when downloading torrents

If you torrent without a VPN, your ISP can see that you're torrenting and may throttle your connection and get fined by legal action!

Get Hide VPN

Plot summary

In 1974, a family of six was brutally murdered. A year later, George and Kathy Lutz and their children move into the site of the horrific event, which is haunted by a murderous presence.


Uploaded by: OTTO
October 22, 2012 at 02:16 AM

Director

Top cast

Ryan Reynolds as George Lutz
Chloë Grace Moretz as Chelsea Lutz
Melissa George as Kathy Lutz
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
600.40 MB
1280*720
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 30 min
Seeds 8
1.10 GB
1920*1080
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 30 min
Seeds 28

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Bored_Dragon 6 / 10

"Houses don't kill people. People kill people."

"Houses don't kill people. People kill people."

The film debut of the then eight-year-old Chloë Grace Moretz is a remake of the 1979 film of the same name. This is an average "haunted house" horror, based on true events. Decently done and moderately entertaining, it stands out only with the performance of little Chloë, and especially the scene on the roof, which is the only thing that remains etched in my memory even after five years.

6/10

Reviewed by gavin6942 6 / 10

Nothing New, But Hardly a Bad Picture

A year after the DeFeo family is slaughtered wholesale by a rifle-loving father, a new family -- the Lutzes -- move in. Soon, the family feels an eerie presence in the house and George Lutz (Ryan Reynolds) -- the new dad -- begins to change.

The movie overall is a respectable one. The mood is very nice, the New York Times rightfully called it "a modest improvement over the original", and I freely admit there were moments I was on edge thinking something nasty was going to come popping out, a feeling I very rarely have anymore after seeing so many "scary movies". So all in all they did something right. One scene in particular, where something is in the ceiling (I couldn't quite make it out) was creepy, and the dead girl in the window was unsettling. I also take a little pride knowing the film was shot in Wisconsin (in the towns of Salem and Silver Lake, near Kenosha).

Someone commented that this was very much a Ryan Reynolds fetish film, having him taking up almost all the scenes. More specifically, it's a Ryan Reynolds chopping wood fetish film. He is in 85% of the shots and in many of those he is chopping wood. And why is his shirt constantly off? Yes, I see those pecs and abs, Ryan... I know you were in that "Blade" movie... but come on, you were also in "Van Wilder"... you're not a threat.

Melissa George (Kathy Lutz) on the other hand did not take her shirt off enough, and when she did the camera was positioned in such convenient ways. Was this film PG-13? I don't believe it was, so why tease the audience like that? By the way, George's performance was the weakest of the entire cast, even the children. Some people have commented on how she is a TV actress, and I agree this might have something to do with it. (For a better Melissa George film, see "Triangle".)

Another reviewer complained that Kathy didn't remove her children fast enough when George began turning violent. I disagree. The family has been together a while, George has been nothing but loving and supportive (I mean, geez, he bought her a house). The whole film takes place in about a week, as far as I can tell. The man deserves a few days of blowing off steam.

What's the deal with the babysitter (Rachel Nichols)? She shows up looking like a prostitute and then talks seductively to a little boy. This was very confusing for me. I don't mind... and actually, I really liked her character, but it was still odd.

My friend warned me about the babysitter in the closet scene, which he said was the creepiest thing he saw since "In the Mouth of Madness". Well, I think ITMOM was John Carpenter's best film (even more than "The Thing", "They Live" and "Prince of Darkness") but it never scared me. The closet scene had me on edge -- but only because he had me convinced it was going to be awful. Really, the scene was nothing out of the ordinary. (You'll have to see for yourself what happens, maybe you'll be grossed out more than I was.)

There were many "Wicked Little Things" connections, which is a slam on WLT. If you read my review for that film, you'll see I complained about how unoriginal it was. After seeing "Amityville Horror", I can add so many more instances. Both films star Chloe Moretz (the Dakota Fanning of horror). Both have her with an "imaginary friend" that is a dead girl. Both inform their mothers they won't be hurt. Both carry disfigured dolls previously owned by the dead friend. So, um, for the guys who made "Wicked Little Things" -- if you were gonna rip off "Amityville Horror", why didn't you at least bother to get a new actress? The producers do say on the commentary that "she was amazing" and I appreciate that Chloe was singled out.

I didn't expect much from this one, hearing it was nothing special and many saying it was monotonous. Well, I liked it. I think it all went together very well, and they do a fine job of explaining the backstory, which is something many horror films fail miserably at. (I don't recall if the original explains it as well, but I'm willing to bet it doesn't). By remake standards, better than average. By movie standards, not bad. I stamp it with my seal of approval.

Reviewed by Leofwine_draca 7 / 10

A rare beast - a superior remake

Another year, another remake. At least THE AMITYVILLE HORROR remake has some sense behind it: the '70s version is very much a flawed film, one I found interesting and engaging, but not particularly well made or paced. This one sticks very much to Jay Anson's book as its source material, attempting to show a realistic sequence of events centred around a real-life haunted house. For the most part, I liked it a lot. It's an exercise in atmosphere building, relying on suspense over gore, eerie chills over shocks, and it's these elements of the movie that lift it far above the norm.

Of course, being a Hollywood movie, there has to be more, so we get thrown-in chase scenes across rooftops, a villain who keeps coming back from the dead, a hint at a SAW-style gore sequence in which a woman's hair is caught in a boat's propeller, some unnecessary and flashy MTV-style editing and the presence of a creepy young ghost girl who doesn't really add much to the proceedings. There's also an extended flashback that attempts to explain the house's haunted reputation, it's something to do with Native Americans being tortured in the basement back in the 17th century, apparently.

To be honest I found all of this stuff quite superfluous. The central plot of the film concerns George Lutz's character, showing how the house slowly changes his personality as he becomes 'possessed' by the evil therein. THIS is the stuff that's scary, not that flashy stuff. When I heard that Ryan Reynolds was cast in this movie, I despaired, because I hated him in BLADE: TRINITY and he's always seemed to be one of those big-headed, can't-take-anything-seriously type of actors. Well, this film is an exception, because he's GREAT in it. I found him sympathetic and scary at the same time, and I thought he did a great job of portraying how George's mind was gradually transformed. Good job on the contact lenses, too. Basically, every scene with Reynolds is a highlight in this movie. The rest of the cast don't have a great deal to work with, particularly Melissa George (30 DAYS OF NIGHT), who always seems to suffer in thankless roles in horror films. The kids shriek a lot, but Jesse James has the second strongest part as the slightly older boy who suspects that his stepfather might be hiding something.

For the most part, I found this a definite improvement over the original. Some of the scenes are mishandled and disappointing as a result – the scene with the priest and the flies is nowhere near as disturbing as I found it in the original – but for the most part this is taut, psychological horror fare and a cut above Hollywood's usual remake standards.

Read more IMDb reviews

1 Comment

Be the first to leave a comment