Connect with us

Editorials

[Interview] ‘My Amityville Horror’ Director Eric Walter On Daniel Lutz And Searching For The Truth

Published

on

I just watched director Eric Walter‘s documentary, My Amityville Horror, yesterday prior to interviewing him and I was surprised by how much I liked it. In particular, Walter pulls off a difficult feat in engaging the very temperamental Daniel Lutz, something he managed to do over a period of months without ever losing his objectivity on his subject. Walter and I spoke at length about the effect the real-life Amityville saga has had on Daniel Lutz and whether or not he believes the claims the Lutz family has made over the years. The answer, like most things in real life, is complicated.

For the first time in 35 years, Daniel Lutz recounts his version of the infamous Amityville haunting that terrified his family in 1975. George and Kathy Lutz’s story went on to inspire a best-selling novel and the subsequent films have continued to fascinate audiences today. This documentary reveals the horror behind growing up as part of a world famous haunting and while Daniel’s facts may be other’s fiction, the psychological scars he carries are indisputable.” Laura DiDio and Lorraine Warren also make appearances.

The film hits limited theaters and VOD today, March 15th from IFC. If you have any interest at all in the Amityville story it’s a must watch, so check your local listings or hit up SundanceNOW, Xbox, iTunes, PS3 and others. Head inside for the interview!

How did this whole thing come about?

As much of an obsessive interest as I’ve had in the Amityville subject, it kind of found me as much as I found it. Danny actually found me through a website that I run called AmityvilleFiles.com that I started when I was 17 years old. I’m 27 now so that was obviously some time ago. I was enamored with the fact that this was claimed to be a true story, both the account of the Lutz family and the DeFeo murders. I began looking into the trial records for the DeFeo case and the alleged hauntings of the Lutz case to see whether or not it was a hoax. I also talked to a bunch of people who lived in the house subsequently and never experienced anything abnormal. I really dove into this at a very young age. I developed the site because I really wanted to create a place that would give people the unbiased whole story. I didn’t want the perspective of, “this is all a hoax” or “this is all true.” I think it lies between those two things. I wanted people to make up their own minds.

So I was contacted by Daniel out of the blue by a friend of his who claimed he was interested in going public with the story. He was angry at the way the story had been portrayed in the media through so many years. He was also angry at what his stepfather, George Lutz, had perpetrated on the family. He felt very strongly that George was involved in occult dabblings in the house and that whatever he was involved in triggered the hauntings on the family. It was an entirely new perspective, since George had been essentially controlling [the conversation] until his death. For Danny, this was a kind of catharsis, he felt a very deep personal desire to get his story told. And the way he appears in the film is very much the way he is. He’s an extremely angry and intense personality, so a lot of times I felt like I was putting myself in harm’s way in even making this film. Anytime you question the credibility of anything he says, he’s ready to jump down your throat.

It’s interesting because in the film he mentions that one of the reasons he didn’t like George is that he felt like he was walking on eggshells around him. But, it seems to me, that being around Danny himself is also like walking on eggshells.

Oh, you know it’s a sad portrait because in many ways he’s doing what George did at the time. He’s certainly not the same kind of person as George, but George was trying to control the story and in many ways it seems that Danny is now being passed that torch. It’s almost sad. It’s a fatal attraction to Danny, he talks about how he doesn’t want to do it but feels like he has to. There was a lot of concern for me personally about the allegations that were being made against George Lutz because I can’t verify them. I know that Christopher, his younger brother, has also claimed similar incidences where George was involved in the occult. So it does corroborate in a general fashion, but Danny goes into so much more detail. For me, it’s a very sensitive area.

I’m not sure where you stand on this, and I never rule out anything I don’t understand, but it seems to me there’s a very good chance that Danny has been afflicted by this abuse. It seems like he’s very much fighting back against the abuse he received from his stepfather, but at the same time he hasn’t extricated himself from the belief system George forced upon him.

I would agree with that. It’s interesting to see how many people take away different perceptions of it. I thought the film was better left open ended that way because there’s so much grey area to this story and Danny’s story in general that for someone to come in to say, “this is the reason”, I wouldn’t be doing my job. So I agree with you. I think that for me it does’t make sense that a family would get up and leave all of their personal belongings – clothes, food, furniture and all of that. They gave the house back to the bank, George sold his business and moved to California. Kathy and George were newlyweds and had sold both of their homes to move into this house, so they gave up all of their investments. So they were literally living off food stamps in San Diego for several months after this.

So, for me, while I personally don’t believe all that has been said about the Lutz family or all of the things the Lutz family claimed happened to them, I’ve always felt that they believed that this happened. The problem is that they sold the book rights to Jay Anson, who took great creative license with the story and slapped a “true story” sticker on the front of the book. And the book was a bestseller that rolled into 13 movies about the subject – a spin-off, the sequels and a remake that to me was an entire abomination on the case in general.

So to me, selling those rights was was the worst thing they could have done. Because now they’re a direct part of it. Danny and his siblings, their actual names are used in that book. So no matter how hard they try not to, they’re living in the shadow of this for the rest of their lives. And that’s the story I wanted to tell.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading