Fright Night

At the time it came out, a remake of Fright Night seemed like one of those unnecessary movies - what was so wrong with the Tom Holland original, which gave us a subtle/over-the-top performance from Chris Sarandon and some cheeky humor from Roddy McDowell as a vampire named Jerry and the would-be 'celebrity' vampire hunter? Did it need an update? But upon the sudden and to put it mildly tragic death of Anton Yelchin, I thought it was certainly time to watch it. And among a cast that features really major talents like Colin Farrell, David Tennant and Toni Collette, Yelchin holds his own. More than that, he is necessary for the movie to work: he has to be believable as a young guy who starts off somewhat unsympathetic (trying to be 'cool' by ditching his nerdy friend for an attractive girl), and over the course of the story has to man up and not do what his dad did, which was ditch the family behind.

Yelchin plays the 'straight man' to a point where we can find him believable as being both completely scared and yet ballsy enough to go for what he has to go through to save and protect the ones he cares about - his mother and then, when she's taken by this 'Jerry' fella, Amy - and it's interesting to see this *after* Green Room, where he played a somewhat similar character though in a different setting (actually substitute Nazis for vampires and you got a somewhat similar premise, with Yelchin as the vulnerable but strong-willed and tough protagonist). If you've ever liked this actors work, this is a must-see of his.

Looking at 2011 Fright Night on its own terms, outside of viewing it as some kind of after the fact thing for Yelchin, it's... good. Better than expected, really, as far as these kind of remakes can go (in other hands it could be easily disposable trash like Sorority Row or something). With Yelchin there as the main core for the audience to put their 'what would I do if' perspective on, Farrell and, in the second half of the film, Tennant get to have the time of their lives in these roles. Farrell is so evil he even eats an apple to show off how much of a nasty fella he is! Though it may not possibly require, shall one say, 'range', it takes real screen presence and a sense of menace, and I think Farrell makes this a memorable vampire as far as a) sex appeal (I mean, women and some men wouldn't kick him out of bed), and b) when he gets nasty and violent, the threat feels real. For Tennant, it's not a complicated character either - a fraud of a "vampire hunter" who is mostly for Las Vegas show - but he also gets to have fun in the role and can deliver exposition that is not in the least boring or distracting. And Toni Collette is... Toni Collette, good in all of her scenes. Even McLovin' and Dave Franco give some good supporting turns, turning cliché parts into something with personality.

At any rate these characters are put into a setting that is rather novel: having it in/around Las Vegas makes it so that it's believable that people would be out and about largely at night, being the primary time vampires get their food. I liked seeing that and that it was used to good effect. Where the movie loses me most is in certain parts of the execution of the action. I don't know if it's because I'm tired of wasteful or lackluster CGI, but any time Farrell or any of the other vampires "Fully turn" (which doesn't seem to have a lot of logic, it only seems to occur when they're extra mad) it looks really bad and fake, and a particular over the top car chase, which is attempted in part in one "long" take ala Spielberg's War of the Worlds (no coincidence I think it's a Dreamworks production, the setting and lack of/absentee father seem like Spielberg notes). Practical effects could have taken more time or been more intensive, but the results would last longer and not take one out of the movie like here.

If one can look at the substance of Fright Night it does work - the screenplay comes from Buffy the Vampire Slayer creative Marti Noxon, and the sense of whip-smart timing in the dialog and come-backs about how people look at vampires is especially funny, even from Peter Vincent most of all - and is a fitting tribute to the original. That film had a little more deadpan wit due to McDowell as Peter Vincent, though it too had some dated things as well (maybe in a cool way) like 80's synth music. Will this hold up so well? I don't know. But for what it is, it's entertaining and successful for being bloody (it looks as if the blood is not all CGI which is good) and knowing of the genre (it's self-conscious of vampire lore and movies, but it doesn't wear you out on it like the other 2011 post-modern horror, Scre4m)

Twenty-six years ago, "Fright Night" premiered in theaters and went on to become a fondly remembered title amongst horror fans. The movie cleverly combined horror and humor to create a fresh take on the vampire and teen horror genres which had started to grow stale. While the movie spawned a largely forgettable direct to video sequel, the original film has remained popular over the years. So, when I first heard that they were planning on remaking the film I was skeptical as I felt it would be very difficult to match the original film.

Boasting an impressive cast which includes Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and Toni Collette, the remake does not try to reinvent the wheel, but instead takes the formula of the original and creates an entirely new entry into the saga.

For those unfamiliar with the series, Yelchin stars as Charlie Brewster, a young man who is trying to balance watching over his single mother, and his growing relationship with a girl way out of his league named Amy (Imogen Poots). He is also wrestling with becoming part of a cooler crowd at the cost of alienating his geeky former best friend, Ed, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse.

Colin Farrell plays the handsome and suave new next door neighbor who easily charms Charlie's mom, played by Toni Colette. Unbeknownst to his neighbors, the charming and charismatic Jerry, played by Colin Ferrell, is actually a vampire who's come to their Las Vegas suburb to continue his nighttime hunts. Ed has become suspicious of the recent disappearances in their community and confides to Charlie that he's had Jerry under surveillance and knows that he is a vampire.

Needless to say this does not sit well with Charlie, who distances himself further from Ed. But when Ed goes missing, Charlie decides to do some investigating of his own. Charlie turns to a local Vegas performance artist named Peter Vincent (David Tennant), whose vampire-themed show portrays him as an expert in fighting the undead. While at first skeptical over Charlie's claims, a few devastating confrontations with Jerry and his minions forces Vincent to rethink his role. The two unlikely allies soon find themselves in a deadly race against time to defeat Jerry and save their loved ones before it's too late.

The film cleverly combines horror and comedy and does a good job of providing some suspenseful moments in between the blood and gore, managing to squeeze in more than a few laughs along the way. While not overly scary, the visual effects work is solid and aside from the converted 3-D is a really enjoyable to watch. The film would've been much better had it been shot in 3-D or simply left as a 2-D film as the conversion really didn't offer anything of value as is often the case in these lab converted efforts.

The cast works very well with one another and Farrell cheekily introduces a few new wrinkles to the vampire lore. I really enjoyed David Tennant's performance and should they do a sequel I certainly hope that they bring him back. Anton Yelchin gives a reliable performance but I was surprised that Christopher Mintz-Plasse did not have a bigger role but he does have some memorable moments in the film. What really impressed me was that the film did not attempt to do a shot-by-shot remake of the original but instead took the premise of the original and offered a fresh take that easily could have been issued as the third chapter in the series rather than a reboot. While there were nods to the original, outside of the premise it was very much its own film.

The film is not going to set any high marks for new standards in horror nor is the plot fresh and original. It simply knows what its target audience and source material are and sets a course right down the middle without attempting to deviate too much one way or another. "Fright Night" just might be perfect for those looking for a dose of nostalgia and some highly suspenseful, fun entertainment.

Three stars out of five

R.I.P. Anton Yelchin (1989 - 2016). It is a tragedy he past away yesterday so young and he is no longer with us anymore. So my review is dedicated in memory of Anton.

Fright Night (2011) I s a really good decent remake of the original horror flick Fright Night (1985). Usually I hate remakes and reboots, but there are some good remakes that I like. Fright Night is one of them! I love Vampire movies and this one is pretty good and well done. I know that Original is the best vampire slasher horror film, but that doesn't mean that remake is awful, which is not! This movie is good and has a good story and does not copy the original. The idea of this film is pure originality. The writers and the director did not copy the original film, but he used his imaginative, that's what makes this film so good. This film is very hated and bashed from critics and fans who just don't understand this film, I do and I love it. It is my favorite slasher comedy horror vampire flick! Sorry but I love it!

This remake is actually good, it Is not bad it is good! - I enjoyed it - The scene when Colin is in the doorway and he is telling Charlie that it's up to him to look out for his girl & his mom - Colin plays that scene just about perfect - a warning & menacing at the same time:)!!!! This movie is fun I loved it. It didn't drag, it was just right, It had a comedy and it had a horror to it, it was a good remake! An example of a good horror remake. Colin Farrell is extremely, extremely underrated in everything he does, it is sad because he is awesome as Jerry the vampire, I like him as vampire. This awesome actor made me lough before he even told a joke. And I just lough because this guy is awesome. This was just a good fun time at the movie theater, I didn't see it in movie theater but you know what I mean, it is a good fun time. It has fun with it, doesn't take it self too serious, like the original one did, which kind a brought the movie down for me. This one knows it is a satire comedy, horror comedy and it treats it as such. Too bad this movie failed! Of all the remakes this one failed! Well the sucky remakes make the money! This is by far the second good horror remake I believe, the first one will always gonna be My Blood Valentine 3D (2009) and the third will be Sorority Row (2009) not that good horror flick but still a good horror film! I am sorry that was awesome, I did enjoyed this movie.

This was an excellent film that distinguished itself from the amazing original but still through out a few shout outs here and there. The cast was awesome with amazing performances by Colin Farrell & Anton Yelchin in the staring roles. The good thing: Amy's (Imogen Poots) part from the original as a girl not sure of herself has been changed to more of a girl who isn't shy about herself or how she feels about Charlie. Also, instead of Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) being the skeptic, it's now Charlie (Anton Yelchin) who doesn't believe his next-door neighbor is a vampire. The bad: I have one problem with it and that is David Tennant as great vampire slayer Peter Vincent, don't get me wrong but for me will always be Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, cause this actor can kick the out of David Tennant''s ass and any vampire out there. I wish they would putt Roddy McDowall back in the role instead of David Tennat. I don't like this version of Peter Vincent AT ALL - they should have kept him true to the original. But Roddy McDowall died in 1998 before they could cast him back. May the actor rest in peace. It is sad he is no longer with us anymore.

The basic plot is about Jerry Dandridge (Colin Farrell). He's dangerously charming – and utterly lethal. That's because he just happens to be a vampire, and out for blood…buckets of it. After high school senior Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) makes the connection between Jerry's suspicious activity and a steadily rising body count, he vows to end the reign of terror next door. But he can't do it alone. His only hope is Las Vegas magician/vampire-slayer Peter Vincent (David Tennant). Together, this unlikely duo set out to end Jerry's evil rampage. But Jerry is a ruthless, relentless killer, and he's not going down without a fight. Get set to sink your teeth into this thrilling re-vamp of the terrifying horror classic. Fright Night will captivate you from the very first bite!

The rating to this movie I am giving an 8/10, because this film deserve it and it was really enjoyable horror flick!

Fright Night is a 2011 American neo-noir comedy horror film directed by Craig Gillespie. A remake of Tom Holland's 1985 film of the same name, the film was adapted by Marti Noxon. The film premiered at The O2 in London on August 14, 2011, was produced by DreamWorks Pictures, and widely released by Touchstone Pictures on August 19 in Real D 3D.

8/10 Grade: B+ Studio: Touchstone Pictures, DreamWorks Studios, Reliance Entertainment, Michael De Luca Productions Distributor: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Starring: Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, David Tennant, Toni Collette Director: Craig Gillespie Producers: Michael De Luca, Alison R. Rosenzweig Screenplay: Marti Noxon Story: Tom Holland Based on Fright Night by Tom Holland Rated: R Running Time: 1 Hr. 46 Mins. Budget: $30.000.000 Box Office: $18.298.649

The original Fright Night was already a cult classic which makes this remake unnecessary. But since all vampires these days are less scary and like what Evil Ed said "Love Sick", it can be necessary for some reason. Bringing back the true vampire camp. Although it's not as scary as the original but Colin Farrel's performance improves the vampire villain. This Fright Night is endlessly watchable and fun. This may sound strange but I think this version is better than the original.

The original have the disturbing schlocky masks but this version actually has the vampire danger and thrills. The credit goes to Colin Farrel. He gives a lot of vigor and terror to the evil vampire. David Tennant has his own Peter Vincent. His charisma and delight shines through all of his scenes. Just like Roddy McDowall, David Tennant nearly steals the show. But Farrel really owns this show.

It's a welcome back, actually. It's not a cash in remake. It's the returning of the vampire horror to our cinemas. Our vampire movies these days are just tired and relies to nothing but the senseless violence. And some of them are in love with a bland girl and sparkle in sunlight. But the biggest thing that is missing in most modern vampire movies is how scary these monsters are. They are not only bloodsuckers. They can be terrifying for somehow.

The filmmaking is obviously good but some of the CGI tones the scares down a little bit but it works though. The score sounds nothing like the score of the original but it's true to its vampire genre. The movie is shot in 3D but most of the film is dark and 3D usually dims the aspect of a film but if you are in for some blood and sparks coming out of the screen then try it. Not quite recommending though.

Overall, Fright Night is enjoyable. Maybe the biggest mistake they made is the jump scares since Fright Night isn't really fond to that trend. Well, this is definitely better than all the unnecessary horror remakes we usually get every year. Colin Farrel made a lot of things better. Vampires are evil again. It has plenty of joys and thrills. Fright Night is recommendable by bringing back the true elements of the genre.

All that needs to be said about the remake of Fright Night is that it ends with a terrible cover of Jay-Z's already bad "99 Problems" blasting over the ending credits. This is a completely random song choice that belongs in another movie and is tonally out of nowhere, a feeling that permeates most of the picture's long 105-minute running time. The movie starts off like a typical teen horror movie, only slightly worse. The dialogue in the high school scenes is horribly inauthentic, feeling like an R-rated CW drama of "The Vampire Diaries" variety complete with the usual clichés of bullying jocks, super stereotyped nerds, and the aforementioned "hip" teen dialogue. When the second act kicks in, the movie heads in the direction of the comedy-horror hybrid it should have been going for all along. The only problem with this is that there is no real sense of tension as the blood is all CG and anyone who has seen the original knows what's coming long in advance. The Las Vegas setting sounds cool in theory, but it's never used in a way that adds to the proceedings. Despite having the very cool idea of having the remake set in Vegas, screenwriter Marti Noxon and director Craig Gillipse decide to keep almost all the basic story beats from the original movie instead of using the new setting to their advantage. The one change that is made that actually does work is the new interpretation of Peter Vincent, hilariously played by David Tennant. Tennant is the pulse that keep the film alive. His energy and dead-on comedic delivery almost give the remake a purpose to exist beyond making a buck off a cult classic. Other performances are okay, but Anton Yelchin is too old to being playing a high school kid and Imogeen Poots is given the girlfriend role that hasn't changed since the 80s. One thing that has changed since the 80s: there used to be original horror movies. 3/10