Friday, January 4, 2013

Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes

***DISCLAIMER*** The following review is entirely my opinion. If you comment (which I encourage you to do) be respectful. If you don't agree with my opinion, that's fine. To each their own. I am just sharing my opinions and perspective. Finally, the reviews are given on a scale of 1-5. 1, of course, being terrible. 2, being not great. 3, being okay. 4, being good and 5, being epic!




Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes – 1 out of 5




For reasons no mortal man will ever come to understand a fourth film was produced for the Amityville Horror franchise. The last one went boldly into the third dimension and offered up flies jumping out of the screen and a flashlight being jammed towards your face (because 3-D, so why not?). The last one even offered up the strange concept that it wasn’t technically a sequel due to a lawsuit at the time and the fact they some people still hold to the claim that the events of the first two films were based on actual events *cough—bullshit—cough* and the third film began the fictional world of the house on Ocean Avenue. Some Amityville fans (yeah, they exist) have made the argument that this film; The Evil Escapes, takes place BEFORE the third film because when John Baxter from 3-D gets the house, the furniture is not there and for the fact that when the fourth film opens the house is, kinda, still standing despite seeing it blow up due to demon farts or whatever caused the explosion in the third film. I guess that explanation will work even though the more solid explanation of the fact that, like the whole premise of the classic being based on a real haunting, it’s all made up on the fly works far better.

Gah!  The Yellow-eyed Demon from Supernatural is in this movie!


After a crack team of bumbling priests decides to get all Exorcist on the house (the very film that inspired the lie that the hauntings were actually real), the demon in the house decides to get creative and forcefully enters itself into a very ugly lamp..


Yes...very frightening.


The older daughter of the family apparently stores nuts
in her cheeks.
So, after possessing a lamp (I can’t help but emphasize this movie is about a possessed lamp), all the furniture (lamp included) get sold during a rummage sale. An elderly lady loves the lamp (because she’s clearly legally blind) and sends it to her sister for a gift (because she clearly hates her sister)—not before the lamp kills the lady through the use of tetanus. Meanwhile the lamp arrives at the home of Alice Leacock (Jane Wyatt) who is now burdened with her daughter and her grandchildren. Nancy Evans (Patty Duke) lost her husband and is now forced to raise her three kids on her own and seeks her mother for help. Not long after they and the lamp arrive, the demon uses his demon powers (and uses them through the lamp—once again, I can’t emphasize enough that this movie is centered around a demonic lamp) to torment the family—mainly the youngest daughter; Jessica, and it does so by pretending to be the spirit of her deceased father. 

And the son of the family was played by a young lesbian.


One of the priest, the one who witnessed the demon rape the lamp in order to become one with it; Father Kibbler (Fredric Lehne), is busy silently wrestling with the fact he has a name that sounds like a cartoon dog but vocally puts two and two together to figure out where the lamp is and his business with the demon is not done. It’s round two for the priest and the demon and this time it’s sanctified.

Yes, very clever, movie, but it doesn't make the lamp any more of a threat.


Without a doubt, this 1989 made-for-TV addition to the Amityville franchise is one of the series’ lowest points. Why? Did you not catch the point about the lamp being the antagonist? Forget for a moment that this film has a boring story that offers up no scares and the acting is flat, unrealistic and unimaginative (and this movie has all that and then some) but one can’t escape that the writers, producers and director was trying to make a FUCKING LAMP FRIGHTENING! 

Seriously, this movie was just fucking with us right?


Even if the lamp came with thorns (and this one kinda does), bled from its light bulbs and informed us about our mother’s cocksucking activities in the afterlife couldn’t make this concept threatening or frightening. Shit, even if the lamp grew legs and attempted to bend us over and make us squeal like pigs couldn’t make this idea pants-filling terrifying. That’s like making a horror film about a bed that eats people. Fuck, they actually did that one too.

This old woman is scarier than the lamp...although the lamp was a better actor.


Here’s the kicker…the Lutz family claim this idea is a true story as well. That’s right. The family that saw The Exorcist and the marketing claim that it was based on a true story and used that idea to sell their piece of shit haunted house fiction claim that after they moved (move meaning they ran out of the house screaming like girls to sell the illusion and left all their belongings behind) the objects in the house became possessed and those who have owned the items down the line have suffered the unholy consequences. Sounds totally plausible from the people whose holes in their story are big enough to stuff all the money they made off this ruse with room to shove the house in as well.

Does every child in this family carry nuts in their cheeks like they're freaking
chipmunks?


Normally, watching a movie like this would call upon my ability to make fun of the action that is unfolding in order to make it through with my sanity intact—and I did that—but it still didn’t change the fact that the filmmakers were trying to convince me that a lamp was trying to murder people in a crotchety old woman’s house. The is my first time watching Amityville 4: The Evil Escapes and I can’t help but wonder what levels of ridiculousness the remaining sequels are prepared to show me.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.