The Amityville Horrorhas become a staple of the horror genre, but there are numerous differences between the original book and the two films it directly inspired. Based on a supposedly true story of a haunting in upstate New York, Jay Anson’s bookThe Amityville Horrorbecame a smash hit when it was released in 1977. This inspired 1979’s cinematic adaptation of the same name. Starring James Brolin and Margot Kidder, the success of the film spawned a decade-spanningAmityville Horrorfranchise. The first film would be remade in 2005, with Ryan Reynolds and Melissa George in the lead roles.
Although both versions of thehorror movie are based on the true storyfrom the book and share the same characters, there are somenotable differences between the book and the films it inspired. This ranges from the lore surrounding the haunting to the specifics of the event itself. There are even some ideas that only appear in the two films but not the book, and aspects of the original book that weren’t recreated for the big screen. Here are the biggest differences between the various different versions ofThe Amityville Horror.
10 Horror Movies Where A House Is A Character
From Elm Street to Amityville, these houses, manors, and more are some of the most iconic set pieces in the genre.
10The Amityville Horror Opens Differently Between Versions
The Book & 2005 Remake Are More Overtly “Based On A True Story”
One of the biggest differences betweenThe Amityville Horrorcomes at the very beginning of the first cinematic adaptation, withthe original book and the 2005 film heavily leaning into the “true crime” elements of the story.The Amityville Horrortakes inspiration from the real-life events of the DeFeo murders. The book’s opening chapters are largely about that true crime, relaying the facts of the case. The 2005 film reinforces this element of the story during a montage following the film’s opening, showing news footage of the event and highlighting how the film is “based on true events.”
By contrast,the 1979 version ofThe Amityville Horroris a more character-driventhat doesn’t lean so heavily into that aspect of the story. While the film does reaffirm the real-life origins of the event, the film is more focused on the Lutz family moving into the house, skipping the closer attention to realistic detail that appears in the other two versions of the story. This sets up the 1979’s film to be a more standard horror movie, while the book and 2005 movie tried to highlight that the horror that inspired the film has real-world inspirations.
9The Nature Of The Amityville Hauntings Are Different
There Are Way More Ghostly Sightings In The 2005 Film
While all three versions ofThe Amityville Horrorfeature a supernatural force within the Amityville house,the exact specifics of that entity are different in the two films. In the original story and the 1979 film, the presence is seemingly demonic in nature. The entity possessing the house is quietly mysterious and dangerous, driving George to the brink of madness and targeting the family. The 1979 films ties this to a mysterious John Ketchum, who conducted Satanic rituals on the land. This demonic influence is different in the 2005 film, which instead features more overt hauntings.
The 2005 movie features the spirit of Reverend Jeremiah Ketcham, a vicious figure from centuries before whose influence takes over George and unleashes him on the rest of the family in the climax of that film. The 2005 movie also features the ghost of Jodie DeFeo, who haunts the family but is implied to be doing so in part to scare them away from the same supernatural forces that led to her family’s deaths.
8The 2005 Amityville Horror Is More Focused On The Family Dynamics
George’s Drama With The Family Is More Pronounced In 2005’s Remake
One element ofThe Amityville Horrorthat is consistent throughout all three versions is the presence of the Lutz family. George and Kathy Lutz are recently married, with the latter having three children from a previous marriage. That detail doesn’t factor heavily into the book or the 1979 movie, as the family is more or less united. However, the 2005 version ofThe Amityville Horrorleans more heavily into the tensionsbetween George and his new step-children.
Jodie DeFeo
Isabel Conner
This is clearest with the divide betweenGeorge and the oldest of Kathy’s children, Billy. The two have multiple combative moments during the film, and an increasingly unstable George even quietly threatens Billy in the 2005 film. While the George of the 1979 film became more aggressive and short-tempered the longer they stayed in the house, he never became as big of a threat as 2005 George did.
10 Underrated Horror Movie Theme Songs
These horror theme songs are some of the best in the genre, but are often overlooked, as fans first tend to think of horror themes like Halloween’s.
7The Priest Is Different In Each Amityville Horror
The Priest In 1979’sThe Amityville HorrorHas The Roughest Time Of All Three
In all three versions ofThe Amityville Horror,the archtypical horror movie priestcomes to the house to try and bless it only to be repealed and warded off by whatever supernatural force is haunting the building. However, the extent of the supernatural attack andthe identity of the priestis different in all three versions of the story. Father Mancuso appears in the book and hears a voice demanding he get out of the building. His attempts to warn the Lutzs over the phone is cut short, and he suffers from fevers and blisters. Ultimately, Mancuso escapes largely unscathed.
By contrast,Father Delaney in the 1979 film is accosted with visions of flies before he can bless the house. The hauntings continue, and Delaney doesn’t just suffer from fevers and blisters. His car eventually goes haywire and he even ends up blind. Father Callaway appears in the 2005 film and experiences similar premonitions to Delaney, but is spared the harsher attacks that occurred in the original film. Instead, he reappears later in the film to warn the Lutz family to flee.
6The Marching Band Doesn’t Appear In The 2005 Film
A Great Musical Scare Isn’t In The 2005 Remake
One of the more memorable ways that George experiences the haunting of the Amityville House in both the original book and the 1979 film includes a mysterious musical noise that lures him downstairs. In the book, George is woken by the sound of an entire marching band downstairs. When he goes to check it out, he finds that all the furniture has been moved in the living room, as if to make space for a large group of people. By contrast,the 1979 film features a mysterious drummingthat brings George downstairs instead of an entire band.
This is one of the best scares in the 1979 film, an unsettling music turn that initially appears to be part of the soundtrack but steadily proves to be ringing in George’s ears as well.This type of scare is absent from the 2005 film, which instead uses the ghostly apparitions of people like Jodie to haunt George and other characters.
5The Ceramic Lion Is More Dangerous In The Amityville Book
The Lion Statue Is Way Creepier In The Book
One of the items that appears in the original film and the book that inspired it is a ceramic lion. The sculpture actually appears multiple times in the literaryThe Amityville Horror,appearing all around the house and seemingly moving of its own accord. When George eventually trips on the lion, he seems to have a clear bite mark on his foot. The book highlights these moments, making the lion one of the clearest ways the haunting is chasing the family.
While there is a ceramic lion in the first cinematic adaptation ofThe Amityville Horrorand George does trip on it, the lion is far less overt in the film.Even the apparent bite mark on George’s foot is brushed aside, which is a major contrast from the book where the lion was a more prevalent piece of the haunting. Notably, the 2005 film largely did away with the lion, similar to the mysterious music. This allowed the film to keep the focus more on the family and the effects the ghostly hauntings were having on them.
5 Best Movies Based On The Amityville Murders (& 5 Worst)
The Amityville Horror franchise has over two-dozen films that explored the original murders so there are bound to be a few bad entries over the years.
4The Identity Of Jodie Differs From The Original Story In The 2005 Remake
How Jodie Was Reinvented From A Demon To A Ghost
In all three versions ofThe Amityville Horror,a presence identified as Jodie plays a part in the story. In the original story and the 1979 film, Jodie is the apparent imaginary friend of Missy. However, it’s steadily implied that Jodie is the demonic presence behind the haunting. Described in both versions as a pig with glowing red eyes, Jodie is implicitly the main threat ofThe Amityville Horror, even if it doesn’t actively attack the characters in the film. Jodie even follows the Lutz family when they flee the house in the original book.
Jodie is reimagined in the2005Amityville Horrorremakeas one of the DeFeo family who is killed by her older brother Ronald. Jodie appears throughout the 2005 film as the imaginary friend of Chelsea Lutz, and frequently haunts the family. The film sets up the idea thatJodie is less dangerous than her demonic counterpart in the book and prior film, implying that Jodie is actually haunting the Lutz family in a bid to make them flee the house and spare them the gruesome fate that befell her and her family.
3The Babysitter Is Different In The Amityville Horror Films, And Isn’t In The Book At All
There’s No Teenager Who Gets Scared In The Original Book
Both cinematic adaptations ofThe Amityville Horrorfeature a teenage babysitterwho watches over the Lutz children while their parents are out of the house. Functionally, they fill the same role and experience the haunting first-hand. However, their characters are very different. In the 1979 film, Jackie is an innocent young woman played by Amy Wright who wears orthodontic headgear and is terrified by the demonic Jodie. By contrast, the more sexualized Lisa is played by Rachel Nichols and is presented as a flirty contrast to Billy.
Notably, Lisa is directly targeted by Jodie and left traumatized by the encounter.The concept of a babysitter was an invention of the filmsthat didn’t appear in the original book. While there are differences in the hauntings that appear in both the book and the films, this is one of the most obvious unique elements that wasn’t in the book.
2The Haunted Land Gives Each Amityville A Different Origin
The True Origins Of The Amityville Hauntings Differ From Story To Story
All three versions ofThe Amityville Hauntingreveal that the land the house is built upon is cursed,giving the supernatural events a direct explanation. However, all three end up deviating from one another in that revelation. In the book, the area is a location where local Native American tribes would send their unwell (both physically and mentally). In the 1979 film, the house is revealed to be constructed atop a Shinnecock burial ground and was previously the home of an infamous Satanic worshiper, John Ketchum.
The 2005 version ofThe Amityville Horroramplifies this element by revealing the house was alsothe site of occult experimentation by Reverend Jeremiah Ketcham, who conducted dark acts on the site in the 17th century. The 2005 film effectively turns Ketcham into the overarching source of the dark events surrounding the house, even overtly possessing George towards the end of the film and turning him against his family.
1George’s Role In The Finale Of The Amityville Horror Differs
The George Of 2005’s Film Is Far More Dangerous
George is one of the main characters in all three versions ofThe Amityville Horror, and his personality is seemingly impacted by the supernatural elements at play in the story. However, all three play different roles in the final stretch of the story. In the original book, George isn’t possessed like his movie counterparts and instead flees the house with the rest of the family. This is a direct contrast to his actions in both movies, where he is briefly taken over by a supernatural force and turned against his loved ones.
In the 1979 movie, George almost attacks the family with an ax but is talked down by Kathy, restoring him and allowing George to help the family escape the house.The George of the 2005 film is far more affected by the possession. On top of being fooled into killing the family dog, he ends up attacking the family so feverishly that he has to be knocked out by Kathy. These changes highlight the different ways the cinematic versions ofThe Amityville Horrorremix the original story for more visceral scares.
The Amityville Horror
Cast
The Amityville Horror is the first film in the long-running horror franchise. In the original 1979 film, a family moves into a home where years prior, a brutal murder was committed. Quickly after moving in, they begin to experience supernatural events that take a toll on the father’s sanity. James Brolin and Margot Kidder star as the newlyweds George and Kathy Lutz.
The Amityville Horror is a 2005 horror film directed by Andrew Douglas. It stars Ryan Reynolds and Melissa George as George and Kathy Lutz, who move into a house in Amityville, New York, only to experience disturbing paranormal activities. The film is a remake of the 1979 classic and is based on the purportedly true events that inspired Jay Anson’s book of the same name.
