Editorials
‘Amityville Hex’ Is a Low-Point Even for This “Franchise” [The Amityville IP]
Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”
There’s something simultaneously exciting and horrifying about discovering the worst entry of the Amityville “franchise” more than 35 films in. And yet, Amityville Hex truly is *that* bad.
The first of writer /director Tony Newton’s two entries, 2021’s Amityville Hex is a disaster in nearly every way. From amateur acting to a repetitive script to an egregiously long (and unearned) runtime, the film embodies all of the negative qualities that have earned “Amityville” films derision and mockery.
Modeled on the screenlife model popularized by Host and, to a lesser extent Unfriended and Searching, Newton’s film focuses on vloggers who participate in “the Amityville Hex”, which involves reading a chant on camera, then documenting the aftermath.
It’s a fairly simple premise, but the film loses its way almost immediately. After opening with a bracketing device involving reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) introducing the dangerous viral trend, the film narrows its focus to a Skype chat celebrating the birthday of vlogger Shawn (Shawn C. Phillips). Personalities in attendance include British dick James (Newton), long haired gamer Kent (Ken May), and two women with no discernible personality: Rheanon (Rheanon Nicole) is…outgoing, and Sarah (Sarah Schultz) is…a redhead.
It’s clear from the start that something is off when the five characters fail to interact in a convincing way. Not only do they barely seem to know each other, but the rhythms of regular conversation is upended by long pauses that suggest each actor recorded their performance individually before it was stitched together.*
*Judging by the timing, the film was likely filmed during the pandemic so actors would have been in isolation, but multiple other films were filmed under the same conditions and don’t suffer from this phenomenon.
Problematically, this Skype call is the only group scene of the film, so these characters never reunite to discuss the effects of the hex. The rest of the film features each individual directly addressing the camera/their audience with a mix of tropey influencer jargon and/or extensively detailing inane symptoms as the hex ruins their lives.
As if this wasn’t pedantic enough, the film packs in a whole host of other content creators who also try to cash in on the “viral” Amityville Hex trend. This includes Chester the Conspiracy Killer (Drew Marvick), Moviebuff1 (Kyle Rappaport) and late in the film, even Troma creator Lloyd Kaufman himself.
Some of these are real YouTubers, gamers, or “Internet personalities” but none of them are characters. Amityville Hex has no interest in developing its cast or even telling a compelling narrative; the film is basically just a collection of randomly organized scenes of non-professionals rambling at the camera for long stretches. It’s as if each actor was given a prompt by Newton and encouraged to improv their scenes (badly) by themselves without considering how it would all play when the film was edited together.
In other Amityville films, we’ve seen filmmakers let scenes ramble and run long in an effort to stretch their film to feature length. That’s not the case here, however: this is a 100-minute movie! If anything, Newton (who also edits and handles special effects) needed to be much more aggressive with his cuts.
One particularly grating element is that nearly every character is seen reciting the hex. In addition to the initial Skype call, each subsequent character reads it, which means viewers can expect to hear (part of) the following passage at least ten times over the course of the film: “I ask the dead, I call upon thee, let the Amityville Hex consume me. I offer you my soul, please take Amityville Hex, consume me now. Make no mistake, I call out the number 666 three times. 666 666 666. May this hex take me over.”
Once was sufficient; more than five times feels like we’re being hit over the head with a mallet.
The fact that the hex is inconsistent (in both words and results) underlines how poorly conceived and executed the film is. In the first twenty minutes alone, the final line of the hex is delivered at least three different ways: characters say “may this hex take me over,” as well as “make this hex take me over,” and, bizarrely, “my this hex take me over” (clearly this was a flubbed line, but no one bothered with a second take).
In the days that follow, characters document their symptoms in excruciating (read: boring and repetitive) detail. The side effects include nightmares, headaches, hearing voices, and eventually murder and suicide, but aside from eventually death, there’s no consistency in how anyone is affected.
Even when characters begin dying at film’s end, at least half of the time it’s unclear why or how it is happening. One character holds an imaginary rope above their head and dies; one screams for multiple scenes at the corner of a room before simply dropping to the floor. There’s no internal logic or rationale for why people react the way they do and no desire on the film’s behalf to explain or explore it in any greater detail. It’s the cinematic equivalent of a shoulder shrug.
The film also repeatedly insists that characters are only reading the hex in an attempt to increase their viewing numbers. Multiple performers preface the act by calling it a hoax or a joke, or referencing another character who did for it for fame (even as they themselves perform the same routine).
Initially this seems like Newton’s commentary on the desperation of influencers to latch onto a viral trend, but the critique never amounts to anything. It’s unclear if Newton is being ironic or self-aware; after all, his own project is a literal cash-grab trying to capitalize on the same Amityville brand notoriety as thirty other creatives.
If Amityville Hex has something to say about vloggers or viral trends, though, it’s buried under rote and repetitive scenarios filled with insufferably boring non-characters.
If this were a horror short, it *might* have been watchable. At one hour and forty minutes, it’s torture. There’s simply nothing worth recommending here.
The Amityville IP Awards go to…
- Parody Gone Wrong? Ironically the production values and entertainment factor most closely resemble the Amityville “parody” on YouTube, which is saying something.
- Stronger Recommendation: Last editorial I suggested this entry might be like The Ring. In truth, a better comparison is Jane Schoenbrun’s We’re All Going to the World’s Fair, which is also a low-budget, low-fi take on dangerous internet trends. The difference is that Schoebrun’s film has compelling characters with narrative arcs, good editing, and a reasonable-for-the-story 86-minute runtime.
- Lawnmower Man: If there’s one element worth praising, it is Kaufman’s death when he re-enacts The Happening by driving over himself with a lawnmower. There’s a horrendous dummy effect that made me guffaw, so that’s something.
- Best Dialogue: At one point Shawn, who is perpetually shown wearing a hat, clarifies to his audience that he’s not “fucking doing well” by removing his cap and digging “balding hat hair” out of his mouth. It’s a delightfully bizarre and unintentionally campy line. Unfortunately this is followed up by approximately two minutes of the character repeatedly swearing that he’s done with all of this and us, which immediately removes any and all goodwill.
Next time: we’re closing the book on frequent Amityville creator Dustin Ferguson (Amityville Clownhouse and Amityville Toybox). With only nine entries left in the “series,” it’s time for Amityville in the Hood (2022).
Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.
Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.
Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.
It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.
At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.
It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.
As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.
Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.
Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.
Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.
I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.
‘Infested’ Review – One of the Best Spiders Attack Horror Movies in Years
Dev Patel’s ‘Monkey Man’ Is Now Available to Watch at Home!
Five Underseen Vampire Horror Movies to Stream This Week
‘Stream’ – Horror Movie from the Team Behind ‘Terrifier’ Sets August Theatrical Release
Limited Edition ‘Creature from the Black Lagoon’ Monster High Doll Releasing This Week!
You must be logged in to post a comment.