MovieChat Forums > Amityville II: The Possession (1982) Discussion > Garbage...with good parts!

Garbage...with good parts!

posted 14 years ago by mail-2775
6 replies | jump to latest

The first two minutes of this film are as good as the first two minutes of a horror film can possibly be. The cinematography, location, and music are truly excellent.

In comparison, the next two hours of this pig, are like falling off a cliff.

This movie is garbage in every dimension.

The director cannot direct, period. The guy has zero good English language film credits for a lifetime. Let me go ahead and say it, if you don't understand a language better than 99% of the people that speak it, you suck ass as a director in that language. It is somehow considered sacrilegious to criticize Italian directors, but let me jump out there, this guy can't direct in English. People defend trash by Roberto Faenza, Damiano Damiani, etc., but their English movies are trash. Maybe they don't understand the language well enough to know when they are printing garbage, or maybe they just can't direct anyway, but this is junk.

All the actors do a pretty good job, though, considering how difficult it would be to deliver this drivel with a straight face. A good example of this is when the kid is being followed up the stairs backwards by a demon, he seems to really believe it is happening. James Olson was very, very good in this as a Nordic, athletic-looking priest.

What makes this movie profoundly bad is that it is the only film I can think of that is a sequel (prequel) that actually makes you hate the original! I can't believe that people uploaded "goofs" to the goofs page of this film one line at a time, you could finish it quickly by just unloading the entire script!

The original film was pretty scary, from a certain point of view, and it was based, more or less, on true life events. If you ignore the paranormal claims and the fundamental truth that Lutz was a pathological liar, everything pretty much happened as shown in that movie (date, place, events, etc.).

This movie debunks the original by changing all that. Explosions blow up the house two times in this film, a year before the events of the real film The Amityville Horror! The killer fires shots inside the house, long before the killings, it is all junk, this movie never lines up with the facts of the real film.

This movie portrays the DeFeo family as such a bunch of pathetic idiots that it becomes unintentionally comical and the actions of Ronald DeFeo, Jr. become compassionate acts to put these idiots out of their misery.

There was a real crime, a very, very bad crime behind all this, and this sequel just ridicules that.

I urge you, if you enjoyed the The Amityville Horror book or movie, don't watch this, it will ruin it for you after the fact.

From a moral standpoint, this movie should have never been made. It is essentially the 3rd or 4th version of lies coming from a prisoner who killed an entire family. He's blamed everyone for it by now, and this is just one version of it. I give this film a 0 on a ten scale.

[–] linda_lee110282 14 years ago

Quite frankly, IMO this one is better than the original. And if you're familiar with Italian horror, you will notice the first part is almost like one. I thought the orginal was so boring I almost fell asleep during it.This one, on other hand, gives a nice creepy atmosphere, combined with some good scares, together with the representation of a twisted family. I thought the father was scarier than the house most of the times. If the film ended with Sonny being brought to jail, it would be a good horror movie. with many interpretations. The greatest problem is the last third of the film, that is an Exorcist rip-off. That part was awful. I think this film works better if you don't make comparisions with what happened with DeFeos. Of course, it was loosely inspired on what happened, but viewers can not possibly be so stupid to think they are watching a real reenacting of the evens that transpired.

Another thing, you talked, talked and talked, but didn't say WHY the film is bad. It seems it was bad for you because the director is Italian (you say all his English film are bad, but this is his ONLY one), and don't speak English. How the hell you know that? If this was the reason, Sergio Leone films in English would be terrible. Another justification was that "the house exploded two times" (no, it didn't. There was an explosion in the house, but the house itself didn't exploded) or "the family was stupid" or the producers commited the crime to ignore the first terrible film.

And from a moral standpoint, the book and the first film should have never been made either. The Lutzes are the ones who started it all by exploring a tragic story to make few bucks out of it.

And, if you aspire to be a critic, never say "don't watch this film". A review is an opinion, an opinion the viewer can agree with or not, is up to the person to decide if, not you, his/her opinion. A critic is a professinal who helps to point the good and bad parts of an artistc work. However the critic should never almost make an order to the viewer not not watch a film, like you're doing.

[–] White_Thunder 14 years ago

Good proper horror film this and better than all the other Amityville films including the original.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] shawn_381 13 years ago

I just watched this again with my wife - had seen it in theatre back in the day during the craze of Amityville, American werewolf, Terror Train...etc...anyway, made the comment that this movie was a weird mix of entertaining parts and complete crap. We watched the whole thing...but boy oh boy was that mom's acting awful. Whew.

[–] Indifferent_Observer 13 years ago

Thats typical over the top 80's horror for you. Thats what makes me like the movie even more:)

[–] Indifferent_Observer 13 years ago

Thats typical over the top 80's horror for you. Thats what makes me like the movie even more:)

When I was a kid I loved this movie. Watched it yesterday and it was good for a laugh. I still respect the classics(and I use this term loosely here) though.