Research Into Similar Films - Part 3

Similar Films:

The Amityville Horror (2005)

This is a remake of the 1979 film which was already based on a book written in 1977, based on the events that happened to the Lutz family after moving into a new house. This new house was the location of a mass murder, committed by Ronald DeFoe Junior after he shot and killed all 6 members of his family living in the Amityville House in 1974.




Synopsis:
Ronald DeFeo Jr shot 6 members of his family with a shotgun after claiming that he heard voices coming from the house that told him to do so. A year later the Amityville house was put up for sale and was bought by a family of 4 called the Lutz'. Stepdad George and Kathy Lutz, and their children Billy, Michael and Chelsea who were all under the age of 15. As time went by the children started to hear strange things and whispers coming from different areas in the house. Later on so does Kathy and George. George suffers from severe nightmares and hallucinations of him killing his family. He gets progressively worse and becomes unattached, aggressive and odd where he once was completely loving and kind hearted. All the tension builds up one night to George becoming completely deranged and attempting to kill all of his family with a shotgun, much like Ronald DeFeo did. Kathy manages to fight him off and render her husband unconscious as they leave the house abruptly in a boat as she realises it is the house that is making him this way. The Lutz family never returned for their belongings. It took them 28 days before they fled from the property. 


Unique Selling Point:

The original Amityville House in 1974

I believe that the unique selling point is the fact that this film is based on true events. Whether it is loosely based on the original story and has been adapted for entertainment purposes or whether everything that happened to the Lutz family is in the film is irrelevant as the fact that the film is a true story is enough to terrify a person. I also think that the cast does actually add to the unique selling point. By the cast, I mean Ryan Reynolds. Before this Ryan was in films such as Blade: Trinity which is maybe classes as a type horror, purely based on a couple of slightly graphic scenes involving vampires, which is the basis of the Blade franchise. Although in Blade: Trinity he did in fact add a comedy element to the film as opposed to Blade, the main character, so he wasn't exactly well known for his serious films, playing someone who becomes quite disturbed like in Amityville Horror. Other than this he had mainly appeared in films such as Harold & Kumar Get The Munchies with is purely a comedy. I believe that having an actor that plays roles that aren't completely serious and especially having him in films that aren't at all serious could well spark an interest in a person who may already be a fan of him. Also, according to at least 7 fan made lists by users on IMDb.com he was considered in every top 20 of the most attractive actors of 2004-2005. This shows that he may have been cast to bring another element into the film. Especially since Ryan spends at least 3/4 of the film without a shirt.

Ryan Reynolds/Melissa George as the Lutz family.

The real Lutz family in front of the Amityville House.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/amityville_horror/
As we have seen from my previous reviews, Rotten Tomatoes as a source of incite in films had been quite reliable. This is more than likely because as well as involving reviews from professionals, it also includes ratings from just the average public who have seen the film. I find this to be a good aspect to rely on as you see if from both perspectives, the professional and the 'normal' person. On Rotten Tomatoes the 'Tomatometer' (the scale system on rating of the film by the critics) is on 23%, which out of 100% is very low. When looking more into the comments from the critics they have said that the film is a 'very bad remake'. I believe that most of the views on the film are going into watching with the idea that they are going to see the original, and are always disappointed. This happened with other horror films such as Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Wicker Man and The Omen. All of which, including The Amityville Horror when the original was released were all films that were called out as 'pinnacle turns. This basically means that they would create a new type of horror film, set the boundaries for others and even could create another sub-genre of horror film. The trouble with recreating an original film is that there will always be something to measure it up and compare it to. You would go into watching the film, given you've seen the original, with idea in mind of what you're about to see. You're bound with a bias, again giving you liked the original, and I believe that this may have happened with this remake, because I have seen the original and this remake, although I liked both. 
The difference also with the fact that the remake has been given lower reviews than the original is more than likely because there was a 26 year gap between them. It's obvious that technology is going to highly advance after this amount of years and there are a few comments on some forums that I have looked on saying that this remake has lost some of the personality and zest from the original and replaced with computer animation. I feel that because especially in the 21st century we expect higher standards of film, especially regarding special effects, and especially in horror films. Because we expect more from films, directors and producers are driven to more aspects to impress to satisfy this hunger of realism that people want so much and I feel that this is the reason why audiences don't respond too kindly to remakes.