Amityville II: The Possession (1982) (1 Viewer)

[Kaskade1309]

Okay, Jim...sorry for the long delay in getting back to you about this...

AUDIO: With Scream Factory releases – I didn’t know how dedicated Scream Factory were with their treatment of upmixes -mono to a new 5.1 mix, like in this case with Amityville II. Sounds like their upmixes aren't very detailed. And sometimes just wrong as in Exorcist III, as you'd mentioned So that was my ignorance and higher expectations. The reviews you that you quoted I had read also in the past (each of them) and was therefore previously excited about the updated ghostly effects’ sounds and more.

Yeah, 99.9-percent of Scream's releases, I'd say (at least from my experience), take the original audio from these titles and offer a 5.1 DTS-HD Master Audio surround remix; I had asked about this on the cancerous Blu-ray.com forum (why Scream never uses Dolby TrueHD as an audio codec) and the responses had to do with licensing money (so it's cheaper for them to remap the sound mixes in the DTS format).

Indeed, they dropped the ball with Exorcist III, and it really ruins the feel of that film's original Dolby Digital surround remix from Warner's original DVD. Now, as for the reviews that I posted that you stated you read (well the excerpts from them anyway), it's surprising that they seemed so far off your expectations based on what these reviewers were saying -- however, that wouldn't be the first time I read a review of a title before buying it, then get it home, run it through my system and proclaim "What!!?? That is TOTALLY not what I'm hearing!!!"

Of course, some of this comes down to how a system is calibrated, and my surround setup is adjusted and balanced for my room/preferences, with the surround channels balanced with the fronts (so one aspect doesn't necessarily overpower another) and the LFE/bass (subwoofer) element not overpowering the rest. That's why I asked you about how your sound system was set up; sometimes, if not always, this can explain differences we're experiencing...

Which brings me to:

Right, the two demonic laughing moments (Sonny with rifle between stair and crucifix, then the birthday party) I played back scenes and walked my ear to a surround speakers during the ghostly moments and never caught anything specific, except a little bleed from the fronts. The surround system is 7.2, which otherwise exhibits soundtracks and discreet effects wonderfully (Tron Legacy was spectacular as was Ready Player One ….not my fav films, but audio was about the best I’ve ever heard). As far as it being calibrated correctly. It might not be perfect, but I was the one who did it and went through and set all the speaker levels one by one when it was set up a few years ago for her. I’m a surround sound freak.

Okay. Now we're getting somewhere, LOL...

That's disappointing about that demonic laughter moment (I was referring to when Sonny hears that creepy "hehehehe" coming from the living room when he's alone before he's taken over by the demonic presence; it happens twice in that scene as he enters the room, finding no one making the laughter...I am unsure what you're referring to at the birthday party, unless you meant when he hears the demon in his mind telling him to "look at the pathetic animals..."). I would, for sure, have thought that this sequence of the film would have been ripe for some off-scene surround activity -- but thinking about it now, it is possible that the laughter doesn't necessarily have to come from BEHIND us in that perspective, so maybe Scream got the audio right?

As for your surround setup, I don't doubt you set it up okay -- but let's go over some basics to get it out of the equation...

First, what kind of system is it? Separate receiver or preamp/processor/amp or a "home theater in a box"? What brand receiver? Did you use the setup test tones and SPL meter? I have always relied on my own experience with this, and, as you said, it may not be scientifically perfect, but it has always worked.

In my setup, for example, here's how everything is calibrated (we sit about 12 feet from the screen and equipment):

Front Left Channel (Polk Audio RTi12 Tower): +6dB
Center Channel (Polk Audio CSi30): +8dB (to compensate for dialogue intelligibility)
Front Right Channel (Polk Audio RTi12 Tower): +6dB (we sit equidistant from these two front channels, so "+6dB" works out right for BOTH)
Surround Right Channel (In-Ceiling SpeakerCraft pre-installed when we bought our house): +6dB
Surround Left Channel (In-Ceiling SpeakerCraft pre-installed when we bought our house): +3dB (the primary "sweet spot" I sit in has that left surround channel in the ceiling above me a bit closer than the right, so I compensated by lowering this channel)
Subwoofer (Polk Audio PSW350): +2dB

Now, with these values, everything seems VERY well-balanced with surround tracks; it's how I usually set up a system, making tweaks here and there based on the room I'm in.

What are your speaker values like?

“Weather” I meant each. Whenever there were storms – outside, or inside the house (insane, but looks cool) rain from the inside at the end. I probably need to listen again.

Remind me again what we were listening for here, LOL....?

Shout’s DTS-HD 5.1 track transfers or upmixes from John Carpenter’s Escape from LA ….sounds like a missed opportunity by Shout, but….maybe it is really expensive as you mentioned. Again, reflects on their treatment.

To be honest here, there WERE moments I felt that perhaps the DTS-HD Master Audio track of the Blu-ray on this one sounded a bit richer and better than the DVD's Dolby Digital mix; either way, it's not the most lively of tracks, compared to more contemporary stuff...perfectly suitable for the material, though.

Amityville II: The Possession

– front soundstage, didn’t exhibit stereo separation, between the front left and right speakers (discreetly), from character placement, score or effects, that I could tell. I listened for it. I thought at a damned MINIMUM, Lalo Schifrin's score would be in some kind of stereo – it’s a great, attentive horror score. Do we think it was originally recorded in...mono? Really? Hard to imagine. I will be honest and say I was mostly trying to listen to surrounds, but did attempt to discern the score in stereo, which failed. (Even thought it's more famous, 1980's Friday the 13th was originally mono. But when it finally got an updated DVD release and remix on 5.1, they split out the score really well as well as the special effects.)

From what I understand, MGM's original DVD of the title -- from the box set we both have -- boasted the original theatrical mix of the film, and this was mono. Whether that was 1.0 or 2.0 mono (always thought the idea of two-channel mono was silly, but...) I don't know.

Shout Factory’s treatment of Exorcist III and the dialogue blunder with the waitress…..wow. That says a lot of why a film like Amityville II didn’t get better audio treatment on its 2013, Blu Ray’s 5.1 mix. I have the original Warner Bro's (lol) Exorcist III DVD release (from a bargain bin at Walmart years ago!). Bummer….that film has some powerful moments. I took for fun a digital audio course at our community college back in 2005, and even back then, you could tinker around with a 11.1 mix (I believe). For one project, I did audio for a video commercial, though I didn’t have time to employ the surround effects – but it was at my disposal. If me, an idiot, could do it, I don’t see why others at a film studio could do much better.

Yeah, if you have the Exorcist III DVD with the original Warner snapper case, give it a run when you get a chance and you'll see what I'm talking about -- in that scene with the waitress in the restaurant in particular, you can clearly hear her speak from the off-screen position via the disc's Dolby Digital 5.1 remix. There are other moments throughout the soundtrack that boast wonderful separation/surround effects, including when the thunder crashes after the priest is killed in the confessional towards the beginning, and when the church doors blow open and Christ opens his eyes in the opening title scene. This is all gone on Scream's Blu-ray, instead collapsing into the center like some kind of "downmixed" Dolby Stereo mishap.

Now, just because they messed up on this title doesn't necessarily mean they should have dropped the ball on, say, Amityville II -- but, as you suggested, it is possible that this was an indication of their level of interest in doing these mixes. Still, I applaud this studio (Scream) for everything they have done and put out on Blu-ray for fans of certain films, especially in an age of streaming bullshit.

“Lalo Schifrin’s nice score also fills the surrounds” …..Nope. They didn't. I was surprised that they did not, nor did I notice a decent stereo separation between the front lefts and right. So I would disagree. Painfully ☹ Hopefully, I'm wrong and I'm missing something.

It's surprising you are experiencing such different things than the reviewers; maybe one day you can mail me your Blu-ray (I'll pay for shipping) from this set and I can run it through my system and see what's what before returning it to you...

Blu-ray.com’s review of the picture quality … I simply believe part of it is wrong. Once you see Amityville II: The Possession 1080p on a big, high def TV, the flecks on the opening credits are honestly alarming for a fan. I pulled the 2005 DVD out last night and indeed the opening credit frozen, static flecks I’d previous mentioned are there, but very faint, these are a few on Schifrin's credit on the DVD. Really unnoticeable unless you look hard,

• 

Yeah, those flecks you circled from the DVD I NEVER noticed watching it all these years -- and I would be someone who would have seen that, believe me. Still, something like that wouldn't bother me; I've seen FAR worse in terms of picture artifacts over the years. These are probably from the master print they had to work with; did you notice this on the Blu-ray? Are they worse?

I wouldn't put much stock in anything the douchebaggery brigade over at that site has to say, anyway; was just sharing their sentiments with you for comparison purposes.

However, vs the Blu-ray, they are glaring. Other interiors, I would say that the shadow levels are rather good, too, I’d agree. The grain looks more pronounced on the Blu Ray vs. the DVD. And I will agree that skin tones of …well, the family…. look sickly, per hidefdigest. The skin tone of father Adamsky actually looks fine. Colors are otherwise reasonably saturated throughout. The special effects make up, at the beginning of infestation on Sonny, then the Father honestly look great.

Well, this is kinda good news; how thick is the grain structure in general on the Blu, and at what moments do they get particularly offputting?

I ask because I don't really notice any grain on the DVD, but my display has the sharpness control (which would affect this mostly) at "0," which is the Samsung default in Movie picture mode, which I use.

When I pulled the DVD out again last night and played it, the colonnade stroll looked very flickering and unresolved compared to watching the blu ray where, as I’d said, isn’t perfect, but much more resolved on the Blu ray. But you are definitely right on the DVD. Be fun to hear your thoughts on the blu ray some day.

I don't know WHAT'S going on in that sequence -- it just looks terrible on the DVD, as if something went wrong with the encoding. But you DEFINITELY see that "flashing" in the contrast I'm talking about, right?

As for seeing the Blu some day, maybe we can, as I said, work something out where you ship the disc to me so I can just sample it...

Interesting about Shout Factory’s picture transfer of Escape from L.A. darkening and “fixing” the bad CGI work effectively by hiding it. I wonder how Shout’s process was of transferring Amityville II to the Blu Ray….?

Yeah, it was highly effective, as I said, at least for hiding that shoddy CGI shit; not sure if this is what Shout was SPECIFICALLY going for, but whatever it was, it seemed to work.

That MAY be what happened with the Amityville II transfer...

I'll respond to the rest and your PM as soon as I can.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Okay, Jim...in continuing with the replies to your last post:

Holzer’s daughter….she comes across as a benign friend you had watch Amityville II, and gives you a diplomatic review of it with no new insight. Ehh. She’s not bad, she just doesn’t add anything and is flat boring. She talkes about ghost hunting, and if you watch those ghost hunting shows, she basically says all she does is similar to them. ...So what? Even though she seems like a nice person who's at least somewhat interested. And when she talks about her father Hanz….. you realize what a fragile and huge ego he had – more than I expected. She’ll share an ego incident of his, and smile, brush it off and say, “that’s just how he is.” Over and over. Obviously, you pick up quickly that Hanz was insecure & had spikes of jealousy and envy if HE wasn’t invited to the Amityville party. Yikes! Ok, yeah, maybe I’ll listen to his commentary on the first film - sounds like a hoot!

Wow....so is it safe to say I'm not really missing anything by not owning the Blu-ray and listening to the commentaries? What about the interview with Diane Franklin -- was that interesting?

Yeah, when you get a chance, listen to his track on The Amityville Horror -- it is indeed a "hoot," to put it mildly.

I hear you about still using Pro Logic II – it’s pretty awesome for 2 channel sources. So I know Pro Logic II has the option of cinema or music. It’s competitor, DTS Neo (doing the same thing) also has cinema or music. Between all of these I like watching 2 channel sources into DTS Neo music, since it’s most aggressive with the surrounds. Have you tried that setting in place of Pro Logic II (cinema or music)?

I never played around with DTS:Neo6 for cinema content or music; just always used Pro Logic II...I think that was because the DTS system was designed for 6.1 and higher soundtracks, and I always ran a 5.1 arrangement.

Here's what I want to experiment with, though, but I don't know if it will work due to my receiver's processing limitations:

As I mentioned, when I watch Blu-rays with either 2.0 stereo or 2.0 mono soundtracks encoded as DTS-HD Master Audio, my receiver can't take these and place them either in the center (for mono tracks) or spread them in a "stereo surround" simulation (for the stereo tracks) because it doesn't have the horsepower to process DTS Master Audio beyond playing back native 5.1 or higher signals. So what I am going to experiment with the next time I watch one of these discs -- in my collection, that consists of Christmas Vacation, Nighthawks, Tales From the Hood and maybe a couple of others -- is trying to engage one of the Onkyo AVR's DSP modes like "Mono" or "Mono Movie" to see if I can "force" these tracks at least into the center channel. As it stands, when I play these, the receiver sends the whole track into the left and right main channels (my Polk RTi12s), and this creates an odd "comb filtering" effect with the dialogue, because the majority of dialogue is supposed to come from the center position only.

LITTLE FILM DISCOVERIES

Goof continuity: After Sonny bellows “go away, damned bitch!” Trisha goes downstair 3rd to 2nd floor, and gets on the phone to urgently call Father Adamsky. There is a bushel of pink flowers on this phone table. In a closer shot of Trisha here, it’s just 1 pink carnation.

Holy jumping dog shit -- I NEVER noticed that, and probably never would have....good catch!

I DID notice -- and it still bugs me -- that when the camera moves away from Sonny and the cop at the end, after Sonny is put in the car, and it zooms through the house, up the stairs, the point of view misses a COMPLETE level of the house. It goes up one flight of stairs and then moves into Sonny's room to close up on the now-possessed Adamsky; in reality, there was another level to go up to get to where Sonny and Trish's rooms were. It's almost like Damiani and his director of photography said "It doesn't matter anyway...no one will notice there was supposed to be another level there...."

“Find your marks” So hanging up the mirror in the dining room near the beginning. Right after the Dad (Anthony) and Sonny do it, you can see Magner and look down or Jan quickly move to find their marks, so that they and the whole family will all be composed - for the camera - in the reflection of the mirror in the following moment.

Another WTF moment for me -- I will have to watch that scene again....

Also, for the first time, I'm wondering why the windows are all blacked out and don't look reflective at 13:53.... this is right after the dining room mirror's corner cracks. Looks like windows have no reflections....?

Yeah -- this happens in another scene, too, after the house goes up in flames at the end....you see the windows with like some kind of "protective grille" over them, and I think this had to do with the fact that they actually set the house on fire for that shot, using tricks and anti-flammable precautions (there's a story about this). So my guess is that in that end shot, at least, whatever was over the windows was part of the apparatus to make the windows explode in a fireball...

Here's another quirk about those windows in this film: Ever notice (and they did this in the first one too with different colors) that the lights glow an eerie blue in certain scenes, such as when Adamsky finds the ripped bible in his front seat or just before Sonny hears the noises downstairs and he is taken over by the presence, when inside his room the lamp is just a normal soft incandescent color?

Check this out -- in this publicity still, the windows are glowing white:

And in the actual film, here is what they look like when Adamsky looks up at them:

They're now like an eerie blue...

Now, they glow the same way when the family drives off in the Lincoln Continental to go to church so Anthony can apologize to Father Adamsky, yet when the camera goes back to Sonny in his room, it looks like this from the inside:

As I said, the same thing happens in the first film, with those windows suddenly changing colors, sometimes in the same scene!

On a side note, Happy Holidays, Jim, and hope you stay safe!

 

[JimJasper]

Okay, Jim...in continuing with the replies to your last post:



Wow....so is it safe to say I'm not really missing anything by not owning the Blu-ray and listening to the commentaries? What about the interview with Diane Franklin -- was that interesting?

Hey Scott!

I think the interviews are pretty good. I liked the screenwriter one the best.

Diane Franklin ...was fine. She talked about the choice of taking the role, her approach to the incest part (which I never believed), & quite a bit about Magner and how she didn't connect with him nor stay in touch, but admired his demanding performance. She said Magner stayed away from others. Rytanya, did not say this about Magner at all. Diane loved Rutanya. Burt Young recently said he had a fling with Franklin on the set....so when Diane talked about Young, I watched her carefully, and she was positive but diplomatic (and looking down) when she talked about Young LOL. She and everyone involved really noted that they had a very positive time on the set - everyone worked hard and were focused and took chances. Liked the director a lot. Lots of trust in tough (violent) scenes. Good collaboration, and a few ad libs. It's a good interview for fans like us.

Yeah, when you get a chance, listen to his track on The Amityville Horror -- it is indeed a "hoot," to put it mildly.

...Ok, that makes me want to see it with his commentary!

I never played around with DTS:Neo6 for cinema content or music; just always used Pro Logic II...I think that was because the DTS system was designed for 6.1 and higher soundtracks, and I always ran a 5.1 arrangement.

Here's what I want to experiment with, though, but I don't know if it will work due to my receiver's processing limitations:

As I mentioned, when I watch Blu-rays with either 2.0 stereo or 2.0 mono soundtracks encoded as DTS-HD Master Audio, my receiver can't take these and place them either in the center (for mono tracks) or spread them in a "stereo surround" simulation (for the stereo tracks) because it doesn't have the horsepower to process DTS Master Audio beyond playing back native 5.1 or higher signals. So what I am going to experiment with the next time I watch one of these discs -- in my collection, that consists of Christmas Vacation, Nighthawks, Tales From the Hood and maybe a couple of others -- is trying to engage one of the Onkyo AVR's DSP modes like "Mono" or "Mono Movie" to see if I can "force" these tracks at least into the center channel. As it stands, when I play these, the receiver sends the whole track into the left and right main channels (my Polk RTi12s), and this creates an odd "comb filtering" effect with the dialogue, because the majority of dialogue is supposed to come from the center position only.

Wow, Ok....well, that is interesting. I think you are right with DTS Neo:6 as I ran it in a 7.1 hardware set up. Loved it. Yes, that would be fascinating to know what the results would be with the DSP modes of Mono or Mono movie..... Keep me updated

Holy jumping dog shit -- I NEVER noticed that, and probably never would have....good catch!

haha, yes. Honestly, continuity error to the one carnation composition next to her, is really beautiful - very European! The cinematography crew, again, knew what they were doing to get a nice shot.

I DID notice -- and it still bugs me -- that when the camera moves away from Sonny and the cop at the end, after Sonny is put in the car, and it zooms through the house, up the stairs, the point of view misses a COMPLETE level of the house. It goes up one flight of stairs and then moves into Sonny's room to close up on the now-possessed Adamsky; in reality, there was another level to go up to get to where Sonny and Trish's rooms were. It's almost like Damiani and his director of photography said "It doesn't matter anyway...no one will notice there was supposed to be another level there...."

Yep, I finally noticed that, Scott, a few years ago. Granted it's quickly done on a shadowy step, but you can tell the cut - it's a blip. Gosh, adding the second floor would have added just a few seconds, so I don't get it either. Sure, the high school and college crowd probably didn't give a shit, per your "it doesn't matter anyway..." as this was right before video rentals when people could start to study films more closely.

Perhaps another reason may also be that I'm guessing the sets were at least 2 half houses. Many of the scenes have a level, and stairs that go up or down. Cast did say that the interior sets were huge, but I can't imagine that they made a 4 story life-sized set, let alone a 3 story. Scenes from the second floor landing, however....do have stairs that go up, and stairs that go down. Leaves one curious. Even so they could have cut into the 2nd floor....they did previously with the demon stalking Sonny. Wish we could find some production photographs. I think it was a lot of work. I think they spent $8M on this picture's production?

Another WTF moment for me -- I will have to watch that scene again....

Yes, cast aims to get carefully posed before the Delores says, "I think we're a very lucky family." It's very smooth by the actors, but they are intent. Magner is the most obvious, turning to the camera and looking for his spot on the floor. Also, you'll note the mother help the little Mark get stabilized on top of the chair for the shot, too, it's not too obvious...but it is noticeable.

Yeah -- this happens in another scene, too, after the house goes up in flames at the end....you see the windows with like some kind of "protective grille" over them, and I think this had to do with the fact that they actually set the house on fire for that shot, using tricks and anti-flammable precautions (there's a story about this). So my guess is that in that end shot, at least, whatever was over the windows was part of the apparatus to make the windows explode in a fireball...

I bet you are right. I bet it's an extra shot from that scene that was later used in editing....wow. It is odd and compelling in that moment. It was the first time I saw it actually

Here's another quirk about those windows in this film: Ever notice (and they did this in the first one too with different colors) that the lights glow an eerie blue in certain scenes, such as when Adamsky finds the ripped bible in his front seat or just before Sonny hears the noises downstairs and he is taken over by the presence, when inside his room the lamp is just a normal soft incandescent color?

Check this out -- in this publicity still, the windows are glowing white:

View attachment 84484

And in the actual film, here is what they look like when Adamsky looks up at them:

View attachment 84483

They're now like an eerie blue...

It does look fascinating, .....Speaking of Adamsky in the promo picture....the chimney that faces the street (this house looks like it has 2 fireplaces)....but there is no fireplace on that side on the main level -it would be between dining room/kitchen. Going up, the fireplace isn't in the kids' room. Going up further up through Sonny's window facing the street...no fireplace, though some of its brick....I'm left curious what the function is with this "fireplace?" structure on the street side of the house....?

Now, they glow the same way when the family drives off in the Lincoln Continental to go to church so Anthony can apologize to Father Adamsky, yet when the camera goes back to Sonny in his room, it looks like this from the inside:

View attachment 84485

As I said, the same thing happens in the first film, with those windows suddenly changing colors, sometimes in the same scene!

Cool shot.... I haven't seen this before. I haven't paid attention to them essentially changing in the same scene.... yikes! Adds to the creep factor almost....


Not impressive set up that I borrowed to review the blu-ray (my stuff is in storage):
"Klipsch Reference Theater Pack 5.1 Channel Surround Sound System" from Costco

+ 2 indoor outdoor KLH speakers for the 2 rear-surrounds.
Receiver: Sony STR-DN1020
7.1 set up:
FL +1.5 dB speaker size selection: small (was set back a little)
C 0.0 dB speaker size selection: small
FR 0.0 dB speaker size selection: small
SR +2.0 dB speaker size selection: small
BSR +3.0 dB speaker size selection: small
BSL +3.0 dB speaker size selection: small
SL +2.5 dB speaker size selection: small
Sub 0.0 speaker size selection: not applicable

Ran through a auto-test, and the volume levels (white noise) sounded properly distanced.

Not impressive, but sure fun. Sorry it took so long, but let me know your thoughts, champ! As mentioned.... Amityville II The Possession mono to remixed (2013) 5.1 audio, had a few moments but many missed opportunities, imo.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Great analysis, Jim -- thanks! Will get back to you in detail, my friend...

 

[Kaskade1309]

Hey Jim,

Hope you had a good and safe new year; here's to hoping the new one is better, eh?

I think the interviews are pretty good. I liked the screenwriter one the best.

Diane Franklin ...was fine. She talked about the choice of taking the role, her approach to the incest part (which I never believed), & quite a bit about Magner and how she didn't connect with him nor stay in touch, but admired his demanding performance. She said Magner stayed away from others.

Do you mean you didn't believe the true aspect of the incest narrative as once spewed by DeFeo from his jail cell? Because that's where Tommy Lee Wallace and Damiani got the idea from, to include in the film...

I thought it was a crock of shit, myself, and only a way to somehow implicate his sister Dawn in the murders.

That's interesting about Franklin -- though I have read that in that Scream Factory interview, she speaks about the incest part (what did she say precisely?). Also very interesting about Magner; I wonder why he was so stand-offish with the rest of the cast and why they didn't keep in touch.

Rytanya, did not say this about Magner at all. Diane loved Rutanya. Burt Young recently said he had a fling with Franklin on the set....so when Diane talked about Young, I watched her carefully, and she was positive but diplomatic (and looking down) when she talked about Young LOL. She and everyone involved really noted that they had a very positive time on the set - everyone worked hard and were focused and took chances. Liked the director a lot. Lots of trust in tough (violent) scenes. Good collaboration, and a few ad libs. It's a good interview for fans like us.

Young recently said he had a fling with the much-younger FRANKLIN on the set? I never heard this before now, and I like Young in just about everything he's done, even The Sopranos...

Wow, Ok....well, that is interesting. I think you are right with DTS Neo:6 as I ran it in a 7.1 hardware set up. Loved it. Yes, that would be fascinating to know what the results would be with the DSP modes of Mono or Mono movie..... Keep me updated

Yeah...from what I remember, DTS Neo:6 is for systems with more than 5.1 arrangements, which is why I steered away from it, as I have always run no more than two surrounds. I will let you know if I experiment with the DSP modes, my friend...

Yep, I finally noticed that, Scott, a few years ago. Granted it's quickly done on a shadowy step, but you can tell the cut - it's a blip. Gosh, adding the second floor would have added just a few seconds, so I don't get it either. Sure, the high school and college crowd probably didn't give a shit, per your "it doesn't matter anyway..." as this was right before video rentals when people could start to study films more closely.

Perhaps another reason may also be that I'm guessing the sets were at least 2 half houses. Many of the scenes have a level, and stairs that go up or down. Cast did say that the interior sets were huge, but I can't imagine that they made a 4 story life-sized set, let alone a 3 story. Scenes from the second floor landing, however....do have stairs that go up, and stairs that go down. Leaves one curious. Even so they could have cut into the 2nd floor....they did previously with the demon stalking Sonny. Wish we could find some production photographs. I think it was a lot of work. I think they spent $8M on this picture's production?

Yeah, it would be awesome to be able to find some production photographs; I've found some random clips of like Olson standing around the set of the house and stuff like that, but never any focused images of like the interior Mexico sets, which would have been dope...

What's weird about the whole trilogy thing is that while all three films were shot in New Jersey for the exterior and Mexico for the interior, they each take on different characteristics when you pay close attention...for example, the "attic" area shown to the Lutzes in the beginning of the first film makes it look like a sprawling, room-less ATTIC, which the realtor (she was in Twilight Zone: The Movie, too) suggests could be used as a "play room." In the second film, this top story/level of the house contains separate bedrooms for Sonny and Trish, and isn't an "open" area like in the first film, at all. And, for being a prequel to the Lutz events, the house is much cleaner inside and looks more modern (again, though, as we talked about, this probably ties in with the "Walkman" effect, wherein Sonny is listening to a device that wasn't invented during the DeFeo years in the home; the filmmakers are suggesting that while this is supposed to take place before the Lutzes moved in, the time frame of the actual FILM is set in the early 1980s).

Yes, cast aims to get carefully posed before the Delores says, "I think we're a very lucky family." It's very smooth by the actors, but they are intent. Magner is the most obvious, turning to the camera and looking for his spot on the floor. Also, you'll note the mother help the little Mark get stabilized on top of the chair for the shot, too, it's not too obvious...but it is noticeable.

I am definitely going to be looking for this the next time I watch the DVD; thanks Jim...

I bet you are right. I bet it's an extra shot from that scene that was later used in editing....wow. It is odd and compelling in that moment. It was the first time I saw it actually

It does look fascinating, .....Speaking of Adamsky in the promo picture....the chimney that faces the street (this house looks like it has 2 fireplaces)....but there is no fireplace on that side on the main level -it would be between dining room/kitchen. Going up, the fireplace isn't in the kids' room. Going up further up through Sonny's window facing the street...no fireplace, though some of its brick....I'm left curious what the function is with this "fireplace?" structure on the street side of the house....?

Don't even get me started on the inconsistencies about those fireplaces -- or the fact that in the third film, the side of the house that faces the street doesn't have the iconic attic windows (did you ever notice that?)...yeah, the fireplaces make no sense. According to the layout of the house, the chimneys are on either side of the ends, yet they "rip through" Trish and Sonny's rooms at what appears to be weird layouts...

But are you saying you don't think Sonny's room had the chimney going through it? You can see the brick running up the house, and also in his room if you look at that pic I provided...

Cool shot.... I haven't seen this before. I haven't paid attention to them essentially changing in the same scene.... yikes! Adds to the creep factor almost....

But I always wondered what the hell this was all about....I know you can explain it away with "well, it's a haunted house, and it can do what it wants with the windows!" but, really, why did the colors change so much in those windows, especially in the first film? You can even see the clinging colored gels they used to color the windows in certain shots of Rosenberg's film -- especially the close-ups of the orange.

Not impressive set up that I borrowed to review the blu-ray (my stuff is in storage):
"Klipsch Reference Theater Pack 5.1 Channel Surround Sound System" from Costco

+ 2 indoor outdoor KLH speakers for the 2 rear-surrounds.
Receiver: Sony STR-DN1020
7.1 set up:
FL +1.5 dB speaker size selection: small (was set back a little)
C 0.0 dB speaker size selection: small
FR 0.0 dB speaker size selection: small
SR +2.0 dB speaker size selection: small
BSR +3.0 dB speaker size selection: small
BSL +3.0 dB speaker size selection: small
SL +2.5 dB speaker size selection: small
Sub 0.0 speaker size selection: not applicable

Ran through a auto-test, and the volume levels (white noise) sounded properly distanced.

Not impressive, but sure fun. Sorry it took so long, but let me know your thoughts, champ! As mentioned.... Amityville II The Possession mono to remixed (2013) 5.1 audio, had a few moments but many missed opportunities, imo.

I'll take a closer look at these values and analyze them with you in the near future; in the meantime, wishing you the best of health, my friend!

 

[JimJasper]

Do you mean you didn't believe the true aspect of the incest narrative as once spewed by DeFeo from his jail cell? Because that's where Tommy Lee Wallace and Damiani got the idea from, to include in the film...

I thought it was a crock of shit, myself, and only a way to somehow implicate his sister Dawn in the murders.

Hello man! Doing alright here, hope you are doing great. Primarily, I meant D Franklin's explanation of how her character could fall into the situation.

D Franklin is otherwise great in the film and other films I see her in. And kudos to her for talking about this extremely difficult scene where she isn't possessed. But you are right, the writers/director got the idea before the film - from Butch!

That's interesting about Franklin -- though I have read that in that Scream Factory interview, she speaks about the incest part (what did she say precisely?). Also very interesting about Magner; I wonder why he was so stand-offish with the rest of the cast and why they didn't keep in touch.

She justified coming at this provocative part of the film by being genuinely innocent and wide-eyed about it. She "didn't have any friends" moving into the new house, DF said. Just...uggh. Not really her fault, but the writing of her character. It seems she didn't get a lot of direction for it.

DF talked quite a bit about Jack Magner (JM), mostly because it's obvious that most fans really would want to see him interviewed since he's essentially the star. Yes, DF said JM was very distant from her and the rest of the cast. She said she really didn't know his background at all, though he was great to work with always professional with her and others, and determined. She called his performance amazing. Said she didn't stay in touch with him after the film and said "it was a shame.".... honestly, she seemed to be mostly diplomatic, and positive about JM.

Rutanya on the other hand said that the whole cast hung out, got to know each other and bonded in some rehearsals, which was helpful in doing the strong scenes. She included JM in this revelation, so it really strange that this is notably different from DF. As I may have mentioned to you, JM had recently married, and really bonded with Rutanya, and said he and his wife wanted to move near Rutanya and her family in Boston Massachusetts. And JM and his wife did after the film! Like close - a block or two away. So.... I just don't understand the dynamics. And DF said she loved and bonded with Rutanya (who wouldn't she comes across as a sweetheart).

Young recently said he had a fling with the much-younger FRANKLIN on the set? I never heard this before now, and I like Young in just about everything he's done, even The Sopranos...

Young has a strong presence, no doubt. Yes, I'd read it somewhere, then months I saw it on a very very very rough Youtube video.....looked like it was recorded around 2010 or so.....and now I can't find it....very light and grainy. I think the interviewer was just one guy. Anyway, yes, he did say it (sloppily) while smoking a cigar and he had a cane or something... that this happened during their time on the set. It was a surprise.

Yeah...from what I remember, DTS Neo:6 is for systems with more than 5.1 arrangements, which is why I steered away from it, as I have always run no more than two surrounds. I will let you know if I experiment with the DSP modes, my friend...



Yeah, it would be awesome to be able to find some production photographs; I've found some random clips of like Olson standing around the set of the house and stuff like that, but never any focused images of like the interior Mexico sets, which would have been dope...

What's weird about the whole trilogy thing is that while all three films were shot in New Jersey for the exterior and Mexico for the interior, they each take on different characteristics when you pay close attention...for example, the "attic" area shown to the Lutzes in the beginning of the first film makes it look like a sprawling, room-less ATTIC, which the realtor (she was in Twilight Zone: The Movie, too) suggests could be used as a "play room." In the second film, this top story/level of the house contains separate bedrooms for Sonny and Trish, and isn't an "open" area like in the first film, at all. And, for being a prequel to the Lutz events, the house is much cleaner inside and looks more modern (again, though, as we talked about, this probably ties in with the "Walkman" effect, wherein Sonny is listening to a device that wasn't invented during the DeFeo years in the home; the filmmakers are suggesting that while this is supposed to take place before the Lutzes moved in, the time frame of the actual FILM is set in the early 1980s).

It's been so long since I saw the first film and 15 years or so since I saw the 3rd film. But you have me curious and I might have to investigate! I'm sure you are right about the structure and it's upper, open rooms. Oh you are so right about the times and how screwy the prequel element is in this one. Another funny thing in part 2 is that under the basement stairs, it's just flat open air. No red room at all. I thought that was funny that they didn't try to continue that (bullshit, but highly publicized) part of the story.

Don't even get me started on the inconsistencies about those fireplaces -- or the fact that in the third film, the side of the house that faces the street doesn't have the iconic attic windows (did you ever notice that?)...yeah, the fireplaces make no sense. According to the layout of the house, the chimneys are on either side of the ends, yet they "rip through" Trish and Sonny's rooms at what appears to be weird layouts...

Really? I'll have to make another visit to part three to check out the "eyes" of the house....not facing the street???? Wow.

But are you saying you don't think Sonny's room had the chimney going through it? You can see the brick running up the house, and also in his room if you look at that pic I provided...

View attachment 86344

Well, in Sonny's room (pic you provided), which is street side, the chimney portion rips through it as you say, but on the main 1 level (on the street side).....it's just no where at all between the dining room and kitchen. So......what is the point of it? Where is the fireplace portion of this....fireplace / chimney? On the street side of the house. It seems to be nowhere. One wonders how it was designed in the Tom's River house...

But I always wondered what the hell this was all about....I know you can explain it away with "well, it's a haunted house, and it can do what it wants with the windows!" but, really, why did the colors change so much in those windows, especially in the first film? You can even see the clinging colored gels they used to color the windows in certain shots of Rosenberg's film -- especially the close-ups of the orange.

Yikes, I'll have to pay more attention to the windows on my next viewings of the film. That will be fun actually! Yo now have me curious.... "the clinging colored gels"..... I will be looking!

Fun stuff!

 

[Kaskade1309]

With regard to the window "gels," check these out:

Then, in another part, they're this color:

Here's the side of the house missing the windows in the third film (they were hoping no one would notice for the quick moment the scene pops up):

 

[JimJasper]

Wow!!! I just never noticed those different lighting effects.....and holy cow. You are right! The street-side windows were changed after the 1982 part 2 film and this shot from the 1983 3-D film...fascinating.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Wow!!! I just never noticed those different lighting effects.....and holy cow. You are right! The street-side windows were changed after the 1982 part 2 film and this shot from the 1983 3-D film...fascinating.

Do you see the colored elements they put behind the glass to make the windows appear in different shades, as seen in that first pic?

I guess the idea was to suggest the house is "changing emotions" as the story goes on...

 

[JimJasper]

I see, said the blind man. haha! I thought we were looking inside the house via those white beams inside each window I thought, but it actually does look like gels on the inside.... interesting - I would have never caught that, and how it changes in a film and /or amongst the films.

 

[Tino]

'Amityville Horror' Killer Dies; Ronald DeFeo Jr. Fatally Shot His Parents, Four Siblings

Ronald DeFeo Jr., the man who fatally shot his entire family on Long Island, a crime so horrible it was immortalized in a movie, has died while serving 25 years-to-life for the murders.DeFeo, who shot and killed his mother, father, two sis…

dailyvoice.com

 

[Kaskade1309]

'Amityville Horror' Killer Dies; Ronald DeFeo Jr. Fatally Shot His Parents, Four Siblings

Ronald DeFeo Jr., the man who fatally shot his entire family on Long Island, a crime so horrible it was immortalized in a movie, has died while serving 25 years-to-life for the murders.DeFeo, who shot and killed his mother, father, two sis…

dailyvoice.com

Was wondering when this was going to happen; he didn't look so good in the last few interviews I saw.

 

[SixOfTheRichest]

Creepy, scary effective possession flick. Perhaps better than the first, but I still have a soft spot for that one too.

 

[Kaskade1309]

Agreed on all counts, Daz...