Fright Night 2

Unlike the original Fright Night movies from 1985 and 1988 this time around we're not getting a sequel even though the title bills it as such. None of the events from Fright Night 2011 have happened in the 2013 Fright Night 2 universe. What we have here is a re-imagining.

Charlie and the gang are back and this time they're on a high school trip to Romania. Ed Evil is still a tool, Amy is still the girl of Charlies affections and monster slayer Peter Vincent just so happens to be in town filming a special episode of his show at the same time. Let's not forget the vampire. This time he is a she and her name is Gerri instead of Jerry...

So knowing that it's an enjoyable movie with a familiar plot. Unlike 2011's Fright Night I never once felt like Gerri was an intimidating shark on the prowl like Colin Farrell's vampire. She's just hot and wicked. I enjoyed the cinematography a great deal and for a direct to DVD movie they had a decent budget and it shows for the most part. The CGI is a little sloppy a couple of times but for the most part practical effects are used and done well.

I think you'll enjoy it as a once over, but nothing more. Personally I would have preferred to see a true sequel to the 2011 remake.

I had some mixed feeling to go watching this flick. The reason is simple. First of all, the remake of Fright Night (2011) couldn't stand up against the original of 1985 and was even boring and laughable sometimes. To make part 2 with none of the actors involved in part 1 I was a bit afraid if they just didn't want to make money of the cult status of the title. The only reference we had was Peter Vincent returning as done in the original ones and in the remake.

The story had nothing to do with the original 1988 version and nothing to do with the remake of the 1985 version. So here we are left with some students leaving for Romania (how original) to study they have one hell of a sexy teacher (Jaime Murray) with a dark secret. She needs virgin blood to make her look beautiful (Bathory again). That's the main part here in this flick. It wasn't that bad sometimes but it also had some ridiculous situations that should have been funny but failed completely for me.

For those not familiar with Murray, I knew her from Dexter were she goes nude a few times and from Spartacus were she almost always nude. And that's exactly what this flick delivers, nude juggs and one full frontal nudity. Further we do have one very good scene that remembered me of the Hostel franchise with the nude girl hanging upside down to be slashed and her blood dripping in the bath. We do have that scene here too but Hostel was much better. Still, it's the best and most gory part here.

The most terrible thing is the way they are showing Peter Vincent as some reality TV host. That fact tears Fright Night 2 down. And as I have written in so many review lately, horror is back death in Horrorwood. Nobody was waiting for this remake of a remake or whatever. It doesn't add a thing except boobs to the story. Although Murray was the best thing to see, acting and nude, this flick is out there for, euh, nobody. There are so many bad flicks out nowadays and a lot is based on remakes of cult titles. Had it been given, sigh, another title it would be a bit better to review but to say this is the next Fright Night, na.

Gore 2/5 Nudity 2/5 Effects 3/5 Story 2?5/5 Comedy 0/5

Normally I am not one whom enjoy re-makes, but this re-make of the 1988 sequel to the "Fright Night" movie was actually quite good.

Sure, it wasn't fully up to par with the original sequel, but it was still a good movie.

One of the best things in the movie was the good special effects and CGI. The vampires looked pretty nice in all their forms, although I didn't like the animal growling at all.

"Fright Night 2" had some good acting from the cast, which helped bring the movie to life - pardon the pun - on the screen quite nicely. However, the Ed character in this re-make was not as memorable as the one in the original sequel.

If you enjoyed the first re-make of "Fright Night", then you will definitely also want to sink your teeth into this re-made sequel from 2013.

Tho i am a massive fan of horror movies and my opinion might be slightly biased, this "horror" movie wasn't all that i hoped for. The story, like the original from the 80's, is exactly the same as the first part. Main character meets suspicious vampire looking person( in this case, a woman) , goes on to investigate which evolves into a showdown between the pro and antagonist.

Lack of budget means we get lesser known and lesser experienced actors, which is not necessarily a bad thing if only the story or the directing or the pacing or at least SOMETHING is done well and/or original, but nope This one was made purely to cash in on the genre fan base and the fright night name.So unfortunately its a step backwards in the series. If there is going to be a part 3, i would be surprised.

Enjoy. Evil_fred

From the talented mind who brought you White Noise 2: The Light, Mirrors 2, and the forthcoming Leprechaun: Origins and the highly sought after Mexican director of…well, absolutely nothing comes a new vision of a new vision of horror. Fright Night 2, being a remake of a remake, takes the exact same characters as the first film, dumps them in Romania, and instead of continuing the story in any sane fashion, decides it's just easier to start from scratch…again.

Jaime Murray as the new Gerri the vampire is completely wasted in this throw away film that lives more for moments than anything else. Particularly impressive is her little sonar bit in the tunnel of a tunnel of a subway. The rest of the cast is absolutely boring. I don't understand why the filmmakers decided not to continue the story from the 2011 (*ahem) blockbuster. Or why didn't they just create a whole new bunch of characters? Or why not try and remake the original sequel—now, THAT would have been interesting.

And another thing, why is it that all these low budget straight-to-DVD horror sequels have to be so poorly made? There are plenty of great low budget films. All you need is a writer that cares enough about the story, a director that cares about more than getting another title under his belt or paycheck, and a studio that wants to deliver a quality product to its audience. Is that so hard?

Jesus.