Ryan Reynolds starred in one of the worst horror remakes ever – Jugo Mobile mobile game news

Some things deserve to stay buried. The 2005 remake of Amityville Horror is one.

Ryan Reynolds is famous for many things: dead Pool movies, her great sense of humor, and her high-profile relationship with Blake Lively, to name a few. But what some may not know about the actor is that in 2005 he was the star of a film widely regarded as one of the worst remakes in horror history. The Amityville Horror.

Directed by Stuart Rosenberg in 1979 and Andrew Douglas in 2005, The Amityville Horror The films focus on the newlywed couple, George (James Broslin / Ryan Reynolds) and Kathy Lutz (Margot Kidder / Melissa George), who, along with Kathy’s children, move into a Long Island mansion with a price suspiciously low. The trap, they discover, is his murderous story. And while the Lutzes can accept this, they soon discover that they cannot accept the demonic forces that plague the property. Demons like Jodie the Demon Pig (1979) / Grudge-Like Figure (2005) wreak havoc on the Lutz family, with George having a particularly difficult time. Possessed, he begins to hear voices telling him to kill his wife and stepchildren. It is assumed that the same voices led the previous resident, Ronald DeFeo to murder its family.

True crime fanatics will recognize the name DeFeo, if not Lutz. As the Horror de Amityville As the movies show, there was actually a Ronald DeFeo who shot his family at their home in Amityville, New York. As the story goes, one morning in November 1974, 23-year-old DeFeo walked into a nearby bar yelling, “You have to help me! I think my mother and father were shot! “Forgetting to mention his four brothers, the police were shocked when they discovered the six bodies in the 112 house on Ocean Avenue. DeFeo had shot them while they slept; although this is not the story he originally presented.

At first, the killer had claimed that a hitman carried out the murders, however, when that story was refuted, DeFeo confessed to doing it himself (before changing his story again several times). Although his attorney lobbied for an insanity defense, claiming that DeFeo heard voices from his family conspiring against him, DeFeo was convicted of six counts of second-degree murder and sentenced to 25 years in prison. Skeptics, however, are not convinced and believe that the house is responsible. And it seems that George and Kathy Lutz had a role to play in this narrative.

Again like The Amityville Horror says, the Lutz family was the next to move into house 112 on Ocean Avenue. They too found out about her story, decided to buy the house anyway, and left after paranormal events became commonplace. These experiences are recounted in Jay Anson’s 1977 book that inspired the film series. As it is read, the priest who blessed the house was the first to encounter evil when he heard a male voice telling him: “Get out!”

Not long after, the Lutz family experienced similar horrors for themselves, such as strange smells, inexplicable chills, and loud noises that would keep them awake at night. Like his on-screen counterpart, George is said to have regularly woke up at 3:15 a.m. (the time that DeFeo committed his murders) and saw his wife transform into an old woman. The morning after he saw her levitate, the family fled the house and, as the movie titles say, never returned for their possessions.

Of course, the history of the Lutzes has been questioned, and many believe that it is a hoax to steal cash. But that is beside the point when it comes to evaluating the success or failure of movies. Although the original Horror de Amityville It far surpassed its reboot in terms of commercial success (being the highest-grossing independent film until 1990), it generated mostly negative reviews from critics. As it stands, the 1979 film has a score of 30% on Rotten Tomatoes and a score of 6.2 on IMDb; only slightly better than its 2005 reboot, which has a 23% Tomatometer score and an IMDb rating of 6.0.

One popular Rotten Tomato review says it all, “As the first movie begs the question, ‘why was this movie made?’, The remake begs the question, ‘why was this movie remade?'” Indeed, it doesn’t add much to the original story. They both share the same basic plot, though the priest plays a bigger role in the original, and the house’s story appears more strongly in the remake. The original is slower (let’s say) and unsettling, while the remake is fast and… also unsettling, but in a much less subtle way. Indeed, if there is something that the 2005 film does not lack, it is cheap scares. And although these solve the problem of the rhythm of the original, they do not offer much more than surprising the viewer to wake up. Which is a necessary feature for your credit.

These drawbacks aside, critics have a lot to say about Reynolds in the movie. Unfortunately, it appears that the actor was misunderstood here. A newbie to the horror genre, Reynolds had had success with comedies, They go wild, and The parents in law before starring Horror de Amityville, and since then he has had great success with the subversive superhero comedy, dead Pool, from which it is perfectly cast. Clearly, comedies are his thing. And while no one can blame an actor for branching out, they can scream a bad acting when they see it. I mean, Ryan Reynolds in the second half of the Horror de Amityville.

Although he does a pretty decent job of portraying the kind and funny George in the first half, his transition to the evil and abusive George is inadvertently hilarious. And red lenses don’t help. Reynolds also spends much of the movie shirtless, which, while it doesn’t benefit the story in any way, at least pleases viewers. Even the critics left a good word for those capital A abs.