The remake

The remake


March 28th, 2005, 1:57 pm #1

I heard that George Lutz will not be paid for the remake of the Amityville Horror. I think he was also not paid for the first. This seems like some kind of copyright violation.

Joined: April 16th, 2006, 7:07 pm

March 28th, 2005, 2:01 pm #2

John, here is the transcript from a letter from Geaorge Lutz to a Chicago reporter that confirms that George was not happy with the first version nor will he be paid or consulted for the remake.


From: George Lutz
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 1:20 pm
To: Chris Cashman
Subject: 'Amityville'

Dear Chris Cashman,

My name is George Lutz and I am the subject of various statements and I assume quotes of the article reprinted below. These statements that were attributed to me are not true. I was not interviewed or contacted by anyone associated with your organization.

Furthermore, I did NOT sign an agreement with Dimension films to remake the first movie...... the agreement does not reflect any such language as MGM has historically maintained that they have those specific rights. When I questioned through my attorney their intent to do a remake they sued me.

I do not ever recall using the words that "I hated the first movie"...... I wish I had at times when asked about it, but I have certainly expressed my family's concern about it's inaccuracies and embellishments.

This statement/quote:
"Lutz, who has said that the remake will be more truthful to his family's experience in the home."... this is fabrication in the extreme. The people making this movie have chosen once again ( as they did when they made the first version) not to involve me or my family. I have no idea what kind of a movie they are making and they do not want us to know. They spent many months earlier this year promising to invite me to their offices for discussions, and cited 'scheduling problems' with the writer and Mr. Bay as the reasons for the delays that continued month after month in these proposed 'discussions'.

There did come a point when I expressed my concern about issues that I had hoped to discuss with them and that the delays meeting with them were forcing me to contact MGM directly (which we did)... but my only take on their intentions at this point is the one they created... they have chosen to deal with the story my family lived through with complete disregard for the whatever effect this may have upon us. They could have made a truthful, factual and accurate movie.... We as a family have always believed that is what should be done. I should add here that they "may" say they are trying to do just that, but I have to ask "HOW?" do you do that without any involvement personally by those who lived it.

When you are dealing with "life rights" in any forum there will always be distortions and we have spent 25 years living with and trying to undo the first movies effects caused by these kinds of acts of indifference and intellectual dishonesty... even taken further, the movie going public has the .... right.... to see this portrayal accurately, not with the outrageous events that writers and directors create because they want to.

I have no reason to believe that a faithful reflection of Jay Anson's book is the path they have chosen and I wonder why anyone with a true story would ever deal with MGM or Michael Bay productions if this is how they conduct business. Until such a time as I am shown otherwise by these people, the success they created for themselves here with this production will be a shallow excuse for the public trust they disregard and the damage that they do. In the future, I can only hope that the true story will be done by someone that cares enough to with integrity less the artistic license employed by others.

I do request you retract the following in your next publication.

"Last year George Lutz signed an agreement with Dimension Films to remake the first movie. Lutz, who reportedly hated the first film that starred James Brolin, has said that the remake will be more truthful to his family's experience in the home".

I would and do further request that the source for this statement be clearly referred to in the retraction.

Thank you for your attention to this.


George Lutz

Confirmation of reply: