Amityville 3-D

Surprisingly, this second sequel to the supposedly fact based thriller "The Amityville Horror" is a worthy installment in the otherwise wretched series of shockers. Richard Fleischer, a Hollywood veteran whose directorial credits include such diverse fare as "The Vikings" and "The Boston Strangler," brings a skill to the proceedings that were conspicuously absent from the original film, which was more notable for the laughably bad performances of James Brolin and Rod Steiger than it was for inducing chills. The performances in "Amityville 3-D," or "Amityville: the Demon" as it is known on television, didn't deserve Oscar consideration, but they are professional and, in the case of Candy Clark's suspicious photographer, almost inspired.

The movie opens in typical haunted house fashion: a seance is being held in the notorious Long Island house where, in earlier films, toilets backed up (shudder!), marching bands played in the dead of night (shudder again!), and a giant red-eyed pig named Jody roamed the premises and engaged in small talk with children (Babe in an early role?). The seance produces mysterious apparitions and odd noises, all of which are exposed by two of the participants--a reporter and his photographer-- as a hoax. The realtor denies any involvement in the souped-up spookiness and explains to the reporter (Tony Roberts on holiday from Woody Allen's repertory company) that the house's infamous reputation is such that he's willing to sell it at a bargain rate. Roberts, newly divorced and eager for a peaceful environment in which to write his great American novel, buys it, all the while ignoring the warnings of his less courageous colleague, the delightful Miss Clark.

Roberts, a stubborn type who sneers at the supernatural, moves in and continues his sneering even as anyone who sets foot in the house experiences terror and, ultimately, death. But, dumbo that he is, he continues to pooh-pooh any notions that the house is cursed.

Some talented performers are on view in this film, and if not for their admirable abilities to keep a straight face, the movie would be a lot funnier than it's supposed to be and sometimes is. Roberts is his usual non-plussed self, refusing to accept any supernatural explanations for the bizarre circumstances taking place around him.

The special-effects are adequate, but they do the trick, and probably worked better in 3D, which is the way the film was presented theatrically. The process is evident in the use of so many scenes in which hands are extended toward the camera and, in one scene, a frisbee is tossed directly at the audience.

"Amityville 3D" will never take its place beside the greats of the horror genre, but neither will its two predecessors. However, unlike those failed shockers, number 3 succeeds on its own modest terms, providing, amid the occasional unintended chuckle, a few moments of genuine suspense and a thrill or two. It's a satisfying spook show on the same level as the William Castle flicks of the late 50s and early 60s ("The Tingler," "House on Haunted Hill," et al).

There must have been a law in the 1980's that stated that if you are to make a third film to a set of horror movies you must make them in 3-d as this was one of them, along with other such fine films as Jaws 3-D and Friday the 13th part III in 3-D. Sad to say, but I enjoyed all these movies even though I know in my heart of heart they were all bad movies. However, just because a movie is bad does not make it non-entertaining. Well at least to me it does not...perhaps to a more mainstream viewer, I admit I am a little more offbeat than most people to say the least. This story has a guy moving into the Amityville house for whatever reasons after he proves this one little group of people are fake psychics. Through a series of events though he begins to find out just how real the horrors are in the house that has had cast evil upon all those who lived there. I have to say the movie is not as graphic as the second movie, but it has a lot more to it than the first movie in the ways of scares and such and it has a nice conclusion too. Still the movie has to many 3-D moments too to be a really good movie. You know the scenes, pointless scenes where they aim something directly at the camera and such. Still, the movie runs at a fast clip and is entertaining to watch, plus you get to see a young Meg Ryan in one of her first roles.

I had the opportunity to sit down and watch the 1983 horror movie "Amityville 3-D" here in 2022, and of course I did so, as I might have only seen this movie once back in my early childhood. And since I couldn't recall a single scene from the movie, of course I opted to watch it.

The storyline in "Amityville 3-D" was okay. It was simplistic and sort of starting to feel like watered down soup brewed from a tasteless broth already. You're not in for a grand cinematic experience in horror cinema when you sit down to watch this movie from writer David Ambrose and director Richard Fleischer.

I was surprised to see that the movie had Meg Ryan on the cast list. Sure, it was in a support role, but she was there and it was fun to watch. I will say that the cast ensemble in "Amityville 3-D" put on good enough performances as was, given the limitations of the script and storyline. And it was also fun to watch Robert Joy in a movie such as this.

Well, of course the "Amityville" franchise had to get in on the 3-D effects of the early 1980s. You know, the ones that were also seen in movies such as "Friday the 13th Part III" and such. However, don't count of this being over the top 3D special effects. It hardly even worked, and I was alternating between no 3D spectacles and wearing 3D spectacles. The screen looked the same with and without them.

For a horror movie then "Amityville 3-D" was pretty generic. Nothing over the top or particular scary here.

"Amityville 3-D" is watchable for what it was, but you're not in for a memorable movie experience.

My rating of "Amityville 3-D" lands on a four out of ten stars.

In the house where Sonny slaughtered the Montelli family, the reporter John Baxter (Tony Roberts) and the photographer Melanie (Candy Clark) disclose two charlatans, who cheated the persons pretending they were medium. The broker, who presently owns the house, is having difficulties to sell the mansion due to its fame, and John decides to buy the house by very low price. When he moves to the cursed place, many fatal tragedies happen with the broker, his daughter and his lover Melanie. This movie is very silly and boring. Its greatest attraction in the present day is to see Meg Ryan in the beginning of her career. The Brazilian DVD is a shame: it has a recent picture of Meg Ryan on the cover, and her name is highlighted as if she were the lead actress, showing a total lack of respect of the distributor with the viewers and consumers. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): `Amityville 3D'

After the somewhat controversial second Amityville movie, it was perhaps a surprise another sequel followed so quickly, but there was a 3D trend to jump on, so off we go!

It's actually quite a novel setup, following reporter John Baxter (Tony Roberts) who, along with a team including Parapsychologist Dr West (Robert Joy) specialises in uncovering paranormal hoaxes. The movie opens with him exposing a fake in the Amityville house, leading to the tenants being evicted and the house empty. As such the realtor (John Harkins) offers him the place for peanuts, and being a professional sceptic the house's nasty reputation doesn't phase him. As spooky incidents in and around the property pile up, will he maintain his defiance? And what is with that spooky well in the basement?

I liked the setup, it certainly makes a slight change from the previous two entries protagonist families. One thing I find interesting about the Amityville series is how no 2 movies feel the same, but unfortunately the one unifying factor between the first 3 is how disjointed they feel. This starts off better, but quickly falls into the familiar trap, with Baxter's teenage daughter Susan (Lori Loughlin) and her friend Lisa (Meg Ryan) briefly seeming to take centre stage. Even the deaths in the movie have no real 'theme' or logic - the car death is 1. Nonsensical 2. Nowhere near the house. We briefly lurch into Poltergeist-esque territory at one stage before an ending that makes no real sense, but does feature a pretty cool looking demon.

In terms of acting, it's a step up from part 2, I mean I've seen a lot of the cast in other movies, and most of them are at least workable. I doubt Meg Ryan talks about this one much.

In the pantheon of Amityville movies, I actually find this one of the more enjoyable entries. That's a liberal use of 'enjoyable' though as a lot of these movies are dreadful. This one is watchable, though I'm not sure I'd go as far as recommending it.