Media trips up on Amityville house-for-sale story

Sigh. Gosh media, you are so silly. This is not even the real house for sale! CNN gets it sort of right except for the headlines. Regardless, people will be easily confused.

‘Amityville’ house back on market, blood not included –

Just in time for Halloween, the owners of the home made famous in the spooky 1970s film “The Amityville Horror” are dramatically slashing the asking price on their Toms River, New Jersey, colonial, which was used for exteriors in the film.

It was also the perfect place for Hollywood producers, who used it as a double for the real Amityville house when shooting the 1979 movie. The film, based on Jay Anson’s 1977 best-seller, featured buzzing flies, ghostly eyes, blood pouring from the walls and a satanic voice warning a visiting priest to “Get out!” The film starred James Brolin, Margot Kidder and Rod Steiger.

Let me spell this out…

This is the house that was used for the Amityville Horror movie, not the actual house where the events allegedly occurred. This house for sale has nothing to do with haunting although it was alleged that weird things took place during filming (concocted for publicity). It is in Toms River, New Jersey.

The original Lutz house was in Amityville, Long Island, New York.

The actual Amityville house today. NOT FOR SALE. Leave these poor people alone.

The “horror” that took place in the original house was attributed (in the book, by paranormalists) to an Native American burial ground underneath (denied by local Natives). These evil “spirits” possibly caused Ronald DeFeo, Jr. to kill his family in 1974 (he was not of right mind to begin with).

So, the house which is the subject of this story, in Toms River has ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to the events that supposedly took place in Amityville unless you assume that the demons somehow came over to visit the set.

This is from wikipedia:

The first three films were filmed at a house in Toms River, New Jersey which had been converted to look like 112 Ocean Avenue after the authorities in Amityville denied permission for location filming. Although not all of the films in The Amityville Horror series are set at the former Lutz home on Ocean Avenue, the distinctive Dutch Colonial house is traditionally used as the main image in promotional material.

In May 2010, the house was placed on the market with an asking price of $1.15 million. In August 2010, the house was sold to a local resident for $950,000. On August 21, 2010, the departing owner held a moving sale at the house, and hundreds of people turned up for the event.

Those current owners still live there.

Gosh, this story is stupid. The Daily Mail version of this story is a complete mess, making pretty much no sense what so ever. But it has pretty pictures.

Also, I might mention that the Lutz’ Amityville story made famous in the Jay Anson book and subsequent movie franchise was almost certainly a complete fabrication.

Modern day Amityville Horror was alleged to have happened in another Toms River house. It was not nearly as dramatic. But, nothing was ever really as dramatic as the fictional drama, The Amityville Horror. Now you know. Go about your business…

  11 comments for “Media trips up on Amityville house-for-sale story

  1. Melissa
    October 5, 2012 at 11:56 PM

    I think it’s Interesting the owners of the actual Amityville house have had NO paranormal occurances. In fact the only nuisance they complained about was the incessant ” looky loos” and ” ghost hunters that hung around the place. To even suggest a prop house is haunted is ridiculous, but not surprising. Remember the craziness surrounding the poltergeist movies. Two actress’s from the movie passed away one was murdered the other had a strange disease. The press had a field day with those with conspiracy theories and curse stories instead of the sad truth.

  2. October 6, 2012 at 8:12 AM

    This article is almost comical except a multiple murder took place in the REAL Amityville house. Incidentally the producers of the original 1979 movie wanted to do exterior shots of the actual house, but the Amityville officials would not allow it, and I don’t blame them one iota, considering by that time there was already a media frenzy over it.

    I recall there being several deaths surrounding the cast and crew of The Exorcist.

    If there were paranormal occurrences today or at any time since the Lutz family occupied the house, one would consider the implications as experienced by George and Kathy Lutz when they went public with their experiences. They may think very seriously about going down the same road.

    People are entitled to believe something either happened or it did not. Sharon says “almost certainly a complete fabrication”. Nobody was there in those 28 days except the Lutz family, so none of us can actually comment one way of the other. We can speculate and base our opinions on the evidence that has presented itself (as circumstantial as it may be).

  3. October 6, 2012 at 8:49 AM

    The stories and evidence do not match up for the events that the Lutz reported. There WERE people there during the 28 days and their stories don’t corroborate the fiction. Joe Nickell also did a piece.

    The Anson book is full of exaggerations for effect at least. There has never been a documented case that was even close to being as dramatic and horrifying as described in that book. And, I daresay they never will be because that would defy natural laws and I don’t believe that can happen.

    But the owners since the Lutz’ have had no problems. But the Lutz’ claimed the haunting FOLLOWED them out of the house, so that actually does not matter. If they really did believe they were being persecuted by evil, they certainly were haunted people and this was not a haunted house.

    Finally, there are plenty of people who love to have a haunted house, not the least of which some scientists who would finally be able to study this stuff. So, they WOULDN’T think twice, they would jump at the chance.

  4. corax
    October 6, 2012 at 9:44 AM

    this is the Place the movie was filmed. potentially making it more valuble to movie buffs. to own a spot where something was filmed…

  5. October 7, 2012 at 12:46 AM

    I’m familiar with Joe Nickell and his investigations. That’s all I’m going to say on that for now.

    Regarding Jay Anson’s book, although George and Kathy Lutz shared copyright with the book, the material Anson used to write it came primarily from tapes that George and Kathy Lutz had done. The tapes were recorded in an attempt for them to come to terms with what they had experienced. Anson took those tapes and I believe never returned them to the Lutz’s.

    George and Kathy were the first to admit that not everything in the book was 100% accurate (due to literary license) and yes they knew the risks when taking this path. Of course the naysayers would jump on this and say (and have done so) that the Lutz’s admitted it was a hoax, rather than taking the comments into the correct context. But then again we all know the media have never been good at full disclosure.

    I honestly would like to have seen another investigation with the house. The last one I believe was in 1977 with Professor Hans Holzer, resulting in the Indian Chief theory. I am not 100% convinced of this one, as some people believe it was negative energy (or evil spirits) conveying the image of an Indian Chief to deceive them. This is one theory but who really knows?

    Where the source of the paranormal activity originated I do not know, and believe that the activity followed the Lutz family from the house, which could counter any claims the paranormal activity remained on the property and why subsequent owners never had any experiences (that we know of) or perhaps even if the activity was not as severe as the Lutz’s had experienced. There are a lot of variables to explore but because nobody has any definite rules and modus operandi regarding hauntings, we will never fully know.

  6. October 7, 2012 at 3:34 PM

    The actual Amityville House is now for sale in NY for $1.15 mil

  7. October 7, 2012 at 3:51 PM

    Link please? Because last I heard that was back in May of 2010 and is since owned by David & Caroline D’Antonio purchased in Sept 2010 for $950,000. Source:

  8. October 8, 2012 at 3:05 AM

    Rebecca you might be getting it confused with the Toms River house.

  9. October 8, 2012 at 3:22 AM

    I don’t understand why the author goes out of her way to point out that this is the house used in the film. The article cited makes that quite clear. In what way was CNN being silly or getting something wrong?

  10. October 8, 2012 at 1:03 PM

    Because of the hype about it being haunted. Note that the Daily Mail version and most headlines distorted the story.

Comments are closed.