Reviews by PvtCaboose91

"I've seen horrors... horrors that you've seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies."

Apocalypse Now is a genuinely revolutionary war movie from legendary director Francis Ford Coppola. The film is a confronting, haunting war epic that is stimulating and monumental. Not only is it a fantastic war movie but it's also the most honest account of the futility of war.

Loosely based on Joseph Conrad's classic novella 'Heart of Darkness'; Apocalypse Now is a film that tells a story set in the Vietnam battlefields. The year is 1969 and the Americans are still battling the on-going Vietnam War. U.S. Special Forces Captain Willard (Sheen) is sent on a confidential mission that officially 'does not exist - nor will it ever exist' to terminate a renegade Green Beret named Walter Kurtz (Brando) who has established himself as a God amongst a local tribe. Captain Willard travels up the Nung River in a U.S. Navy Patrol Boat into Cambodia to carry out his mission. He is accompanied by a faction of soldiers who don't have a clue about the nature of the mission due to its high level of confidentiality. As Willard descends into the jungle, he is slowly taken by the jungle's mesmerising powers. As he battles the insanity around him, the journey slowly makes Willard more and more like the man he was sent to kill.

Apocalypse Now is a harrowing war film that will always be distinguished due to its power as well as its hypnotic, virtually unsurpassed brilliance. The unnerving, unforgettable images only heighten the film's reputation as one of the most graphic war films ever made. It will take days, perhaps weeks, to get over the haunting visual images that are a prominent element of this outstanding movie.

The production was plagued with troubles; including wild weather that destroyed the sets, and the elongated production period due to unforseen consequences. Regardless of this troubled production director Francis Ford Coppola delivers an extraordinary, controversial addition to the multitude of Vietnam War movies. And of course the film was shot beautifully on location; showcasing some utterly gorgeous landscape and some eye-catching dense jungles as well.

However the film is about 150 minutes in length, and unfortunately outstays its welcome and loses the attention of the viewer at about the two hour mark. Of course, it was still tremendously well made but I felt that some trimming would have been necessary. And that's only the theatrical version - there's also a 200-minute 'Redux' cut.

Although my attention was thrown a few times as I was watching the movie, Coppola's directing always ensured there was something fascinating going on during the film. This could be a battle, an absorbing dialogue scene or some haunting voice-over narration.

Martin Sheen makes a very credible American soldier. There is always something about him that keeps the audience enthralled during the scenes of heavy drama. Marlon Brando had already made a name for himself after such films as The Godfather and On the Waterfront. Surprisingly his role is very minor in this movie. Nonetheless his performance is superb. During his final monologue it felt like he was a man on the edge; someone who is very close to insanity. His credibility is never thrown. As Brando aged he only became better. The supporting cast is a mixed bunch of now-famous actors including Robert Duvall, Laurence Fishburne, Harrison Ford and Dennis Hopper. All of these actors made an appearance before they became really famous. With this film they are given the opportunity to display talent while still youthful.

Apocalypse Now is a stunning film that will always be not only one of the greatest war movies, but also one of the greatest movies in cinematic history. This Vietnam tale is one that does justice to its source material. Be warned that the film is quite painfully long.

"I feel like I've been in a coma for the past twenty years. And I'm just now waking up."

American Beauty is a virtuoso, provocative, multi-faceted, incisive and unconventional drama that takes a comprehensive glimpse at the American dream gone wrong. I had approached this movie with a great deal of hesitation. There were reviews aplenty from people who praised this film as a wonderful masterpiece of the highest order. Before watching this film I could never have believed that making a film of such stature and power would actually be possible.

American Beauty is a magnificent psychological drama that takes a satirical look at the American community. The characters are versatile and intricate. The movie demonstrates the darkest things of a person's personality. Even though the characters do some truly appalling things the audience can still be involved with the characters because although bad, they are still shown as unexaggerated and human.

Lester Burnham (Spacey) is a forty-something year old suburban father who is depressed and unhappy. He has a wife (Carolyn; played by Benning), who is looking for sexual pleasure elsewhere, and he has a daughter (Jane; played by Birch) who hates her father and falls in love with their new next door neighbour Ricky (Bentley). Lester's job is leading nowhere when his company decides they have to cut back on their staff due to money issues. Lester also becomes fascinated and infatuated with one of Jane's friends; Angela (Suvari). Lester's behaviour drives him further and further away from his family that already detest him. From there, we follow each family member who are on their own emotional journey of life.

American Beauty is an extremely powerful drama carried by some superb performances. The acting is truly amazing with Kevin Spacey in a performance that won him an Oscar. Spacey has the look and feel of your usual stereotypical suburban American father. He may seem conventional but these stereotypes are explored; revealing a personality with a lot more depth and complexity. There are several horrible character traits he exhibits; however it's impossible not to empathise with him. His family drifts away from him and we can genuinely feel his motivations.

The driving force behind the film is not only the performances but the screenplay. Each line of dialogue is intriguing and enthralling. There is never a wasted minute during the film's duration because of how meticulously the dialogue was written; intelligent, fascinating and profoundly insightful.

The direction, which also gained an Oscar, is utterly flawless. Sam Mendes compliments the great screenplay with equally accomplished directing. Each scene is both engaging and meaningful; it gives the audience further insight into the characters that are being examined so deeply. On top of this, it's compelling storytelling as well as being occasionally humorous.

American Beauty is a lot more complex and eloquent than it sounds; it's a brilliant and amazing story that constructs an indication of the sad reality of contemporary American society. I never expected a film like this to be as brilliant as it turned out to be. It's relevant to today's society, it carries a good message about life and it is extremely potent. Winner of 5 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Cinematography and Best Writing.

"When life gives you lemons just say 'fuck the lemons,' and bail."

Judd Apatow's company have been popular and successful in recent years. Face it: now the man is going to be known as the God of contemporary adult sex comedies. Personally I think the first few films he made were of a higher standard than his more recent work (I was slightly disappointed with Knocked Up and Superbad). Thankfully by altering the typical formula, Forgetting Sarah Marshall is one of the funniest movies of 2008.

Peter Bretter (Segel) is an unsuccessful musician who does music for a TV show called Crime Scene. The main star of Crime Scene is his girlfriend Sarah Marshall (Bell) with whom he has been together with for over 5 years. But the relationship between Sarah and Peter slowly disintegrates, resulting in them splitting up. At first Peter is significantly disheartened about living life without Sarah as his partner. After an unsuccessful burst of womanising and one-night stands he comes to the realisation that he love life is now ruined because of his heart-breaking split with Sarah. Peter's brother Brian (Hader) suggests that Peter takes a vacation to take his mind off everything. Predictably, when Peter takes himself over to Hawaii for a vacation he is confronted by his worst nightmare: his former girlfriend Sarah staying in the same hotel with her new British rock-star boyfriend Aldous (Brand).

Because of the talent involved you can guarantee that Forgetting Sarah Marshall will deliver the laughs. I hadn't seen the trailer before watching the movie so a majority of the laughs were fresh for me. Maybe if you've seen the trailer too many times the whole film won't be as great.

The movie has a surprisingly high film value in addition to just an entertainment value. Instead of just focusing on the laughs the filmmakers also focused on drama. I have seen many comedies that try to hard to create hilarious situations for the actors. In this case there was focus on this and creating something more than just your average sex comedy.

Jason Segel not only starred in the lead role but he also wrote the screenplay. This is a bonus because the screenwriter can create the character on screen that he imagined while putting the film on paper. His performance encapsulates everything a guy feels after a serious relationship is terminated. This is far from Oscar material but at times his emotions were very palpable and naturalistic. Of course, maintaining the tone of the film there is a lot of overzealous crying as well. There are a number of Judd Apatow regulars that appear in the film's cast. Most notably is Jonah Hill who has been a favourite with Apatow in recent productions. And then of course recognition has to go to Kristen Bell for being a very realistic Sarah Marshall. Like all the cast members, this isn't Oscar material; just a bit of overacting and hilarious mannerisms to guarantee a bunch of laughs.

The director Nicholas Stoller is able to keep the laughs constant without an awkward abundance of them. Particular credit must go to director Stoller for staging many of the scenes in very creative ways. I'm sure it would have been difficult filming when the action moves out to the water at times.

I thought one of the film's only real downfalls is that the film is slightly formulaic and clichéd. That being said, the film manages to stay away from about 75% of the typical clichés found in this genre. Beware that there is plenty of profanity and lots of sex scenes. This includes graphic moaning, full frontal nudity (of a guy) and graphic discussions of a sexual nature. You know this is definitely a movie from producer Judd Apatow.

Forgetting Sarah Marshall is everything we've come to expect from a modern adult sex comedy. Within the film you'll find a large assortment of memorable quotes and raunchy gags. If you enjoy other Apatow films like The 40-Year-Old Virgin and Knocked Up you will have a blast watching this one.

"God would have mercy. He won't."

With Sylvester Stallone featuring in multiple Rocky and Rambo sequels throughout the 1980s, there is little wonder why he got type-cast, or why interest in both franchises continued to decline. 1982's First Blood remains an excellent action-drama which is notable for emphasising the pain of Vietnam veterans in a compelling, stirring and exciting way. But the sequel, 1985's Rambo: First Blood Part II, degenerates into an over-the-top action show-reel which bears little resemblance to its predecessor. 1988's Rambo III continues the tradition of its immediate predecessor, taking us even farther from the iconic character as originally conceived. With any meaningful or substantial sense of poignancy vanishing from the series, the character of Rambo becomes a larger-than-life, prototypical American action hero here. There's absolutely nothing in this third Rambo adventure that has not been previously seen - it's full of violent action, minimalistic dialogue and more explosions than the mind can fathom. Nevertheless, Rambo III is a lot of fun for its target audience, and it succeeds as a brainless action ride.

A somewhat propagandist return of John Rambo (Stallone), this entry in the series once again puts the titular hero in the middle of a political topic of the period - in this case, it's the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Rambo III finds the troubled Vietnam veteran living a secluded life in a monastery. However, when Rambo learns that his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman (Richard Crenna), has been captured by the Soviets, he takes it upon himself to wage a one-man war on the Russian forces to rescue his old friend. With assistance from some Afghan rebels, Rambo amasses enough ammunition to start World War 3, and heads into Soviet Territory. From this point onwards, the movie is nothing but action, with the badass protagonist taking the fight to the Russians the best way he knows how.

Upon release in 1988, Rambo III did not click with critics and movie-goers; it was heavily panned, and only grossed a third of its predecessor's box office earnings, which is particularly troubling since it was produced for a reported $63 million, the highest budget in film history at the time. Considering the disappointing box office, it's no wonder the Rambo series subsequently lay dormant for 20 years. For all of this, however, the film is not a total loss. Supported by a tremendous budget, director Peter MacDonald (who replaced Russell Mulcahy not long into filming) creates the most epic-feeling instalment in the franchise, with exotic locations as well as lots of guns, fiery explosions, big action sequences, and helicopters. In keeping with action films of the period, there are also cheesy one-liners and villainous villains, in addition to a vast body count. And, of course, the film is frequently badass. Although the dialogue is utterly risible from time to time, there are some notable interactions which are sure to provoke big dumb grins. It is all accompanied by a flavoursome, rousing musical score courtesy of franchise mainstay Jerry Goldsmith.

Aside from the frequently awesome action sequences, Rambo III does aim for a heartfelt message and tries to bring Rambo full circle. However, these ideas are half-hearted, buried underneath the relentless set-pieces - in short, the filmmakers are unable to emulate the heart or poignancy which characterised First Blood. Additionally, although Rambo III succeeds as a big dumb '80s action film, it can be criticised for its sheer ridiculousness. Rambo and his rebel amigos encounter a number of preposterous situations throughout the film and make it out alive, making this the silliest entry in the series. What happened to the grounded action of First Blood?! Rambo III is also painfully by-the-numbers, and the first half tends to drag - this is actually the longest entry in the series to date, despite being the most thematically slim. On the acting front, Stallone's performance (perhaps deservedly) earned him another Razzie Award for Worst Actor. In addition, the film was also nominated for Worst Picture, Worst Director, Worst Screenplay and Worst Supporting Actor (for Crenna).

All things considered, Rambo III is a perfectly adequate way to pass 100 minutes of your life. This is the weakest in the Rambo canon, but it's certainly entertaining, and fans will get what they yearn for in terms of explosions, stunts, high body counts and memorable kills. If you're not a die-hard action nut, though, there is absolutely nothing in this outing that will appeal to you. The film may be dedicated to the people of Afghanistan, yet the politics of the film are laughable - Rambo could have been fighting alongside any foreign army facing a Communist threat, and the film would have been virtually identical in execution. In spite of its flaws, Rambo III remains an enjoyable piece of work that makes up in thrills what it lacks in relevance.

6.2/10

"I loathe the bus. There has to be a more dignified mode of transportation."

Sixteen Candles is one of John Hughes' earliest movies. During the 1980s Hughes was the guru when it came to classic high school comedies that accurately encapsulate the torment and pain of life as a teenager. This film was Hughes' directorial debut. His career immediately took off as he directed such famous iconic teenage classics as Ferris Bueller's Day Off and The Breakfast Club among several others.

Sixteen Candles is unfortunately one of Hughes' weakest films. It had all the suitable ingredients, but it was far too stereotypical and unfunny to be anything special. Over two decades after it was released and I still hear comments from people who have nostalgic memories of seeing the film. I'm sure when it was first released it was very popular. Time just hasn't been good to the film at all.

1980's teen favourite Molly Ringwald plays a teenager named Samantha Baker. Samantha's life hasn't been too good lately and wakes up on the morning of her 16th birthday full of promise and high hopes that it will be a special day. But Samantha's sister is getting married in the next few days and it has taken precedence over everything. Because everyone is so preoccupied with the upcoming wedding they all completely forget about Samantha's birthday. To make things even worse, Sam has a massive crush on the most popular guy in school (Schoeffling), and a young geek (Hall) develops an enormous crush on her.

I thought the concept of this movie was extremely good and I figured that it would be in good hands with Hughes at the helm. Despite such promise I found Sixteen Candles to be a teenage comedy without many laughs at all. Instead there's mindless potty humour, some clichéd jokes and a bunch of stereotypical characters. Most teen comedies from the 80s had a selection of stereotypical characters; however the characters presented here are shallow and played out for laughs. In a film like The Breakfast Club the characters are stereotypical, but also a lot deeper.

The script for this film just didn't have enough laughs. I will admit that there were a few decent lines of dialogue; however most of the jokes were crude and bleak (some even outrageously offensive). The filmmaking is fairly standard for the genre. Hughes knows how to direct a movie quite well. It was just the screenplay (that he penned himself) that ultimately doomed the movie.

Throughout the film's duration I blankly stared at the screen, expecting something interesting or funny to occur. No such luck, unfortunately. I don't know whether this can be attributed to my sense of humour or the screenwriter - either way the laughs are still very limited. I also noticed quite a bit of offensive material thrown in here as well (it basically encourages rape at some point). Ultimately, this script could have been a lot better if Hughes had removed the offensive stuff and instead replaced it with actual laughs.

Molly Ringwald's career was built on the 80s teen flicks she featured in. In this film I couldn't find many redeeming features in her character. Because her family forgot her birthday she feels that she has permission to be a bitch to everybody. I didn't find myself empathising with her very much. A very young Anthony Michael Hall plays an interesting young geek. He's quite irritating at times. Even so, he is still given a few good lines to work with.

Sixteen Candles falls strictly in the teen coming-of-age genre. Time hasn't been good to the film at all. The whole thing is clichéd and predictable, with a few too many unrealistic "feel good" moments. The only redeeming feature of this flick would be the limited but occasionally funny gags that are mainly toilet humour or sex-related dialogue. The impressive 80's soundtrack was another thing that I certainly liked. Some of the music is classic and catchy. If you were a teenager of the 80s you'd remember music like this.

Sixteen Candles is a film you can afford to miss. You're not missing anything spectacular. Honestly, it's not worth your time.

"Nobody has ever escaped from Stalag 17. Not alive, anyway."

When people look back at the classic World War II movies there is one indisputable fact: most of them are a story about the fighting or being in the trenches. Most Hollywood WWII films are just about the combat and the drama while on the front line. The opening narration states quite clearly that no films are made about the camps that housed the prisoners of war.

Celebrated writer/director Billy Wilder succeeds in creating one of the first movies about the prisoner of war camps that operated while the combat was occurring in a different part of the world. Stalag 17 is a film set in a German POW camp as we follow a cavalcade of fascinating character portrayed by a group of interesting actors.

The American prisoners held captive spend most of their time scheming ways to escape. But after an unsuccessful escape attempt resulting in the death of two prisoners, there is mourning among the Americans who are being treated unfairly by the cynical Col. von Scherbach (Otto Preminger). It soon becomes obvious that there must be a traitor among the prisoners; a mole that is feeding the Germans information regarding plans and the location of hidden items.

Stalag 17 is one of Billy Wilder's earlier movies. This was before The Apartment and Some Like It Hot; films that are even now held in high regard. Despite this being a reasonably early film, Wilder still manages to insert some great black humour and sharp dialogue mixed within all the drama that is also happening.

Like most of Wilder's movies I think the screenplay is exceptional. Realistic dialogue, funny lines, an interesting host of characters and a very engaging set of events. Stalag 17 may be a comedy but it also has a high level of authenticity in its replication of the POW camp. It looks like every last costume, set or prop was manufactured with the uppermost quality in mind. It would be very hard to replicate such a realistic and engaging atmosphere even using contemporary filmmaking technology.

William Holden was awarded an Oscar for his exceptional performance as the cynical, sharp-tongued POW who is deemed suspicious among the prisoners due to the amount of privileges he is awarded by the German soldiers. Holden's character is a slick soldier who isn't as fearful as his fellow prisoners. There was much acclaim towards the other cast members as well. Like I previously stated, each character is in possession of their own distinguishable personality. The result is simply a bunch of intriguing, multi-faceted characters that are excellently conceived and implemented.

Stalag 17 is unquestionably a war movie that is well made and very entertaining. I held my breath during some of the suspenseful scenes during which a daring escape was occurring or a tense situation was unfolding. There is also great emphasis on the dialogue. The script is so well written that there are several clues that can be picked up more easily after seeing the film several times. The script's greatest strength is also its unpredictability. I had no idea what was going to happen next. I was completely in the hand of the filmmakers wondering what was to follow. This is one of the greatest compliments you can grant a film of the war genre.

Before watching Stalag 17 I had seen several episodes of the classic TV sitcom Hogan's Heroes. Of course this film is a lot more serious than the light-hearted classic TV show; however both of them have the common setting of a POW camp.

Stalag 17 is a classic war drama that is unconventional, suspenseful and brilliant. A must if you're a fan of Billy Wilder movies.

"I had this friend, who had this friend who shot documentaries, and he and his whole crew went down to the Amazon, and they were all eaten by snakes, and that's a true story!"

The first film, Anaconda, was probably the worst monster blockbuster to hit cinemas since...ever. I have no idea why, but the studio seemed to think that a sequel to a dreadful film would be a good idea. But this sequel only lies in the name as there is no link between the two other than the central monster being an anaconda.

Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid is a film that doesn't even work as a guilty pleasure; like its predecessor, the film is B-Grade, appalling and just plain dreadful. Watching the film necessitates a comprehensive disconnection from reality; it's plagued with inconsistencies and factual errors that arrive by the bucket load. The snakes shown here are far from realistic. They are shown to have a fondness for biting, to be fast moving and the size of a Sydney monorail. Usually one could excuse these things for the sake of entertainment, but these ideas aren't sold in a way that's anywhere near believable. Examples include bad CGI, crummy acting, artificial atmosphere, and a predictable script.

The plot isn't terribly good here either - a plant called the blood orchid is discovered in a remote deep jungle in Borneo. Apparently this particular plant is the 'fountain of youth' and only pops up for a very limited amount of time. Predictably, a pharmaceutical company wants to send a team into Borneo on a scientific expedition to retrieve the orchid before it disappears. Upon arrival in the jungle, the anacondas start eating people.

All the characters are terribly, painfully clichéd - there's the serious one that knows how to avoid being eaten, the dumb (or joking) characters who get killed first and a few babes who wear singlet tops to please the men. The whole movie can pretty much be summed up by looking at the front cover. There are no intriguing plot twists and no attempt to remove this from the "B-Grade horror trash" category.

I couldn't believe how bad all the filmmaking was for this production. For one, the directing is tremendously weak. Because the actors deliver their lines in such a shockingly bad way, there is also no passion in the performances and therefore the scares are non-existent. The music is usually meant to assist in the filmmaking and the creation of first-rate scares. Instead the music makes the film even more predictable. Every time the music gets even mildly intense we know that an anaconda is about to pop up and eat someone. It's all so predictable.

Heck, I'll even go so far as to say that the cinematography and locations were bleak. For the most part it felt like it was being filmed on a sound stage. That's not the desired effect on the viewer. And I think the principal flaw is the CGI. It made the snakes look utterly horrible.

Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid should never have been brought to fruition. The first film was bad enough, but it seems the studio figured they just hadn't tortured their viewers enough. This sequel is even worse than the first movie. And that's one heck of an insult. Interestingly enough, the monkey gets more close-ups than anyone else in the cast.

"This film was supposed to be my big break, and it turned out to be a big disaster!" (This is actually a quote from the movie. Little did they know they were actually predicting the future)

Before I finally watched Anaconda I was decisively aware of the pasting and criticisms surrounding the production. I don't think I heard even one good thing about the movie. I sometimes enjoy seeking out simple reasonably short (80 or 90-minute) films I know will be crappy. And so equipped with warnings and bad reviews to boot I decided to finally watch it.

Anaconda is a campy, appalling B-Grade horror fest that is every bit as bad as I heard it was. From start to finish, the film is plagued by a dismal script loaded with stereotypical conventions, predictability and despicable characters. The visual effects look embarrassing, with an anaconda that moves like a flimsy animatronic and isn't in the least bit convincing. While watching this "thriller" (I use the term loosely) I was closer to tears of laughter as opposed to shock.

Anaconda follows a documentary crew that head out on the Amazon River to make a documentary concerning a mythical Indian civilisation. While heading upriver, they pick up poacher Paul Sarone (Voight, in his worst performance to date) who surreptitiously plans to use the boat + crew to hunt a large anaconda. As predicted, instead of the original plan the crew become snake bait as they are terrorised by a forty foot anaconda lurking beneath the water.

If you're going to take this film seriously, turn your arse around and go rent something else. Anaconda is seemingly played out for laughs, and if the filmmakers intended to make it serious...they missed the mark completely. The antics of the snake we see in the film are absurd. Every time the snake turns up, there are more factually impossible things that continue adding to the already massive pile of criticisms about the film. These factually impossible snake mannerisms include the thing refusing to die after being blown up, burnt and shot in the head (without a mere scratch, that is).

Performances are all dreadful; following the standard characters clichés (including the most despicable characters dying first, there's someone who wants to catch the snake instead of killing it, the big-breasted girl who's there for show, etc) not to mention the costume design is even dull!

But wait, there's more - each character could be outsmarted by a 5-year-old, the visual effects get worse as time goes on, the "scares" aren't even effective, there's no intensity, when the snake attacks things it made me laugh, the snake is "voiced" by an actor, and the film is almost painful to watch. I could go into so much detail but I think I've pretty much hammered the point convincingly.

At the end of the day, I am aware that Anaconda was meant to be a bit of fun. But...it's not. Instead we're treated to something that is so painfully appalling it couldn't pass as a home movie.

"Mrs. Lutz, get you and your family out of that house. Right now!"

The original The Amityville Horror was one of the worst horror films I'd had the hardship of enduring. Hollywood is renowned for remaking horror films with the thought in mind of improving upon the original. Because the original film was so dreadful and ineffective I realised that it wouldn’t be too challenging to construct a superior film. And hence, this updated version of The Amityville Horror is one of the first Hollywood horror remakes that I found to be of genuinely decent quality.

This remake is superior to the original in terms of production values and quality of the filmmaking. The original concept was screaming for a remake...and it finally received what it was looking for.

George (Reynolds) and Kathy (George) Lutz move into a Long Island home that was the site of a grisly mass murder several years ago. Not long after moving in, the whole family begin seeing disturbing images of ghosts and horribly demented figures. After a priest discovers that the house is haunted with satanic spirits, he warns them to get out of the house before it's too late.

The original production was a laughably woeful film that was dumb and wasn't scary. The one thing I had hoped for was at least a higher scream rate with this remake. Thankfully, it delivered. Some of the ghastly images had me squirming in my seat. Not to mention a few genuinely spine-chilling moments that caused me to have goose-bumps running over my body. Due to this remake's terrifying nature your eyes will be glued to the screen.

Kudos to the director for his ability to keep the audience enthralled during the intense horror scenes that are kept very taut. And of course the music is another filmmaking aspect that had to be done correctly in order to inspire the appropriate atmosphere. The music here was great and set the tone capably.

Ryan Reynolds is an actor I usually see in comedic roles. Whenever I see the man I usually laugh at his mannerisms and witty dialogue. But here Reynolds displays his potential as a serious actor. Sure there's the odd occasional moment when it's suitable to have a laugh but when he begins to turn evil...Reynolds is quite something. I never would have imagined him doing such a good job in a horror movie. Melissa George is a little clichéd at times but delivers a very good performance from start to finish. I guess she did all she was able to do with a bit of an iffy screenplay.

One of the only shortcomings of the film is its screenplay. At times it's rather dumb. In spite of saying that, some of the dialogue was quite realistic and skilfully written.

The Amityville Horror was a complete surprise for me. Because of how appalling its source material was I had never expected such admirable results. Evidently the film is far from brilliant - but considering how bad the film could have been the effort is outstanding. The Amityville Horror is a rare event that proves there is at least a glimmer of hope for the future of horror remakes. Trust me, I take a strong stand against horror remakes and don't want any others to get the green light; however this particular production is highly enjoyable. For horror buffs, this is a must.

"What do you want from us? Goddamnit, this is MY house!"

Normally I enjoy classic horror movies because of their inventiveness and their predisposition to be quite terrifying at times. The Amityville Horror strives to be original and scary, but at every opportunity it fails quite astonishingly. The film contains none of the elements that make a good horror movie. Instead of being gripping and scary it's contrived and spurious.

A newly wedded couple named George (Brolin) and Kathy (Kidder) Lutz move into a spacious Long Island house that they believe to be their dream home. Many years ago a mass murder was committed within the walls of the house and as a result the house is haunted with satanic spirits. A local priest (Steiger) feels the presence of pure evil in the house but is powerless to drive it away. The satanic spirits eventually compel him to blindness as he tries to convince George and Kathy to leave the house before it is too late.

The Amityville Horror is a good concept that was loosely based on a true story (and a novel by Jay Anson). Prior to watching it I had anticipated something a lot more terrifying and exciting. However, I was instead left watching this lifeless excremental horror movie that couldn't be scary even when it tried to be. Not to mention the fact that the whole thing is highly farfetched, hence further annihilating every opportunity it had to shock the audience.

James Brolin at least brought some style to his role. Unfortunately he couldn't bring much intensity to his character, but it was obvious that he at least tried to bring some life into the picture. Margot Kidder was occasionally quite whiny and annoying. You could at least feel her character's motivations. She presented us with a very credible interpretation of a house wife. Rod Steiger plays a moderately minor role here. Notwithstanding small screen time he is still one of the only actors to actually inculcate a sense of tension during the scenes of horror that still failed nonetheless. He was perceptibly determined. He just couldn't accomplish much with such a dull screenplay.

The direction is unfortunately an aspect that is sorely deficient here. The director couldn't make the film at all scary, which could probably also be attributed to the screenwriter as well. The music built up some suspense, but was ultimately let down by the feeble visual images and dreadful ideas.

The Amityville Horror had a very good concept. Unfortunately that's one of the only compliments I can grant the film: it ultimately wrote a cheque it couldn't cash. I expected something much less than this austere, dull horror film with a flimsy script that was executed dreadfully. Honestly, the film is dated and ineffective not to mention stupid and contrived. The Amityville Horror scores as a horror film you can honestly afford to miss. Remade in 2005.