User reviews

Can a horror remake actually be a good for a change? I mean, how many classic horror flicks does Hollywood have to crap on until they finally give up? "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Amityville Horror", "Nightmare on Elm St.", "Friday the 13th", "House of Wax".......all of these films are examples of why i sometimes HATE Hollywood.

Finally......a horror remake that's WORTH seeing. I must admit, i had some pretty low expectations walking into this, and it did way more than prove me wrong. Initially i thought they were going to make this a straight 'B' movie by incorporating tons of humor with their gore, which would have been fine with me, seeing that i love the genre'. But this movie was more fun than funny. Don't get me wrong, there are some sequences that are funny, but it had more of that 'drive-in' appeal to it's horror. And i loved every bit of it.

It's story is pretty basic, and somewhat cliché'. I mean come on, a vampire living next door. But the weird thing is, it didn't come off as cliché'. And i think the biggest contribution to that was the pace of the film. Once you get past the first 10 to 15 minutes of the film, which are kind of dull, the movie quickly begins to morph into a fast paced gore fest. And now looking back on it......if it were not rated R, then this movie would have been stupid, and it would've fit in with every other crummy horror remake.

But the aspect that i appreciated the most was the writing. For once, they didn't alter any rules to make their film different. They stuck with what already works, and left it up to the actors to make these vampire rules entertaining. And Collin Farrell did just that.

Bottom Line.....Of all the horror movies that come out this year, this will probably be the one you will have the most fun at. It's funny, it's somewhat scary, but most of all, it's pretty damn entertaining. It's one of those movies i would've loved to of seen at the drive-in. If your tired of all this 'Twilight' crap, which they happen to mention in the movie itself, then this is really a breathe of fresh air to all the TRUE vampire fans.

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)

1985 is a popular year for remakes. Some of the movies remade from that year in one form or another are "Weird Science," "Teen Wolf," "Mad Max," "Day of the Dead," and "Fright Night." It's rare that a remake is as good, or better than the original. "Fright Night" was respectable, but not as good.

The movie takes place in a tiny suburb outside of Las Vegas. Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) and his mom Jane (Toni Collette) live next door to Jerry (Colin Farrell), the vampire. Charley and his mom are wholly unaware of this. Charley is far too consumed with his new life of popularity now that he has the hot girl, Amy (Imogen Poots), as a girlfriend. He is made aware of his neighbors night time activities by his nerdy ex-best friend, Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), vampire tracker extraordinaire. When Ed went missing Charley decided to act.

Because I saw the original and it was such a classic, this version only reminds me how much better the original was. The original was funnier and quirkier while "Fright Night" 2011 goes for a more serious approach. They threw Christopher Mintz-Plasse in there, gave him a few funny lines, and dubbed this a comedy. It was hardly a comedy. So now, instead of a rather plain, yet funny girlfriend, Amy (who was played by Amanda Bearse in 1985--well known as Al Bundy's neighbor Marcy Darcy in "Married with Children"), we get a hot-and-she-knows-it Amy who looks like a clout chaser and didn't have a single funny line.

The Peter Vincent (David Tennant) this time also wasn't as appealing. Peter Vincent was the Vegas showman who Charley went to for help against Jerry. In '85 Peter Vincent was hosting a fledgling late night vampire TV show. He was played by Roddy McDowall, an older man with this funny look of fear on his face nearly all the time. 2011 Peter Vincent is a younger British man who drinks, swears, and is surrounded by scantily clad women. He was comedic, but he wasn't funny.

So, as I mentioned, the 2011 version is not as bad as a lot of remakes out there, but the original is still better.

Free on Tubi.

Fright Night is a remake from an underrated 1985 horror gym that doesn't get near the praise it should. However, I watched the remake open minded and was pleased with a lot of new elements to the movie. There are a few nice plot twists and I really liked the main leads especially Colin Farrell and Imogen Poots. I liked that it was a bit more modern and that the setting took place in Las Vegas. It set up nicely the fact that Peter Vincent's magic show was one of the famous Vegas highlights. The movie has a few flaws though one being a poor job on character development for the three friends, which I thought they could have extended a few scenes on in the beginning. Also, it was a huge bummer seeing the fake computer generated vampire effects. That was a huge turnoff that made me say "UGH!" out loud a few times. The Fright Night remake (6/10) is not total rubbish but it's really nothing to seek out.

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

Fright Night is directed by Craig Gillespie and written by Tom Holland. It stars Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Imogen Poots and Toni Collette. Music is by Ramin Djawadi and cinematography by Javier Aguirresarobe. Film is a remake of the 1985 film of the same name, also written by Tom Holland, it sees Yelchin as Charley Brewster, a teenager living in a suburb of Las Vegas who finds the new handsome neighbour, Jerry Dandridge (Farrell) is actually a blood sucking vampire. With nobody believing him and the vampire homing in on his mother and girlfriend, Charley turns to enigmatic playboy magician Peter Vincent (Tennant) for help.

Ah remakes, a word that often spells trouble in film fan circles, especially when populated by the horror faithful. So no surprise, then, that Fright Night has been met with much division whilst hardly making waves at the box office (it made a small profit when various costs were taken off the gross). Yet it did receive some favourable reviews in critic's offices, where like myself they feel that this more than lives up to the original, which was fun and scary but hardly what you call a horror comedy masterpiece. I often have my rose tinted spectacles on for the likes of the 85 Fright Night, but whether we choose to accept it or not, they were real fun films back then, but that was because they were viewed through younger eyes. Now when viewing in the haze of nostalgia, it's not hard to see why some modern film makers feel a remake is possible and can work; Fright Night is one such case.

This is no masterpiece either, it drags for the first third and the CG malarkey really doesn't offer anything particularly worthy to the film's substance. In fact the transformation sequences are quite frankly weak. You don't have to be a nostalgist to lament the absence of a Bottin or Baker. But for all its little missteps, it still rounds out as great fun and scores high in the last third with the well blended mix of comedy, suspense and terror. The dialogue, too, is very enjoyable, with many lines bringing the chuckles. The casting is very good, particularly with the core three characters of Charley, Jerry and Peter. It's great to see Farrell having such fun, free of emotional character restraints, he just lets rip with a sexy and vengeful performance. Yelchin is just so likable, a rising blockbuster star after turns in Star Trek and Terminator Salvation (he would sadly be killed in a freak accident in 2016), here he crafts top work as Charley shifts from geeky teen into babe magnet bravado. While Tennant slots in and steals the movie with a glorious excess of profanity, sexuality and witticisms that befit the nature of the piece.

Next up Farrell went serious and threatened to run the wrath of sci-fi fans with his star turn in the Total Recall remake. Here he comes out of this horror remake, like the film in general, with good credit. So those 80s teens like me should shake off the dust and strap themselves in to a seat for this particular ride. It may not surpass the original, but it is every bit its modern equal, and that is something that newcomers to the Fright Night world should hopefully rejoice in. 7/10

Fright Night isn't a bad remake. This movie has some moments of real suspense, but it also gets a little ridiculous at times. Colin Farrell does a great job as a predatory vampire. The forced 3D moments were distracting, though. Those visual effects looked really corny in 2D. However, I'd still recommend this as a fun vampire movie for anyone who doesn't like the sparkly ones.

It has occurred to me that when people refer to a new "reimagining" of a beloved film, they use the term "unnecessary remake." I've been guilty of that myself. I really tend to think, however, that technically any remake is unnecessary. No one "needs" to be told what is basically the same story (in most cases) twice. I've also heard the argument that bad films are the ones that should be remade, not good ones. I can understand that to an extent, but do people really want to sit through a new version of something they hated the first time? No remake is going to make everyone happy; it's just not possible. Unless of course, you haven't SEEN the original.

So, just how should a remake be judged? As a stand-alone film, or how it compares to a previous one we love so much? And I do love writer-director Tom Holland's 1985 vampire flick FRIGHT NIGHT. It is just the right mix of comedy, terror, suspense, terrific performances, and an affection for old-fashioned scares. Many others have fond memories of it as well, so I relate to the "why"s and the "oh don't screw it up"s, and the "leave it alone"s. After all, beloved films are dumped on all the time by would-be filmmakers out to make a quick buck for the safe Hollywood studios.

Most of the central story is intact: Anton Yelchin leads the cast as Charley Brewster, a used-to-be high-school misfit who comes to the realization, thanks to childhood buddy Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) that his new neighbor Jerry (Colin Farrell) is a vampire. It isn't long before he's convinced his single mother (Toni Collette) and his girlfriend (Imogen Poots) of this discovery...at which point all sorts of bloody hell breaks loose.

Screenwriter Marti Noxon has infused a basic story (whose plot points and situations weren't always very believable) with some new smarts, including adding more depth to the central characters. And the setting has changed to a cookie-cutter suburb of Las Vegas, where people sleep during the day, work at night, and are much more transient. Another interesting change is the character of Peter Vincent. In the original, Roddy McDowall played a hammy horror host and actor: Peter Vincent, the Great Vampire Killer. Here, David Tennant assumes the role, but Vincent has become an elaborate Vegas magician who performs vampire-killing antics on the stage. In both versions, they are recruited by our hero to help slay the bloodsucker. It's an ultra- modern twist, but within the location context, works beautifully.

During the first hour or so of 2011's new incarnation, I was shocked to think that I may end up liking this remake even more than the original. But after some hair-raising moments in the first half, culminating in a dark, desert car chase, the film threatens to go off the rails in a sequence that's a bit hokey, over the top, and unfortunately timed. And there are a few iffy CGI instances as well. Luckily, things get back on track with a climax that's executed with a uniquely creepy wit, and a few good shocks and surprises. Director Craig Gillespie (LARS AND THE REAL GIRL, "United States of Tara") earns respect for pulling off (for him) an unfamiliar genre; he also pays homage to a few memorable scenes in the original without trying to copy or disrespect them.

Most of the performances are engaging and authentic (aside from Mintz-Plasse in his later moments), with Tennant's wry turn a real treat, and the ever-wonderful Collette's naturally grounding presence adding a needed weight of normalcy. It is Farrell, however, who is the real deal; he absolutely nails this role (no, he won't make you forget the original's suave Chris Sarandon, but in fairness, Jerry is written much differently in this update). Farrell combines sexiness and utter menace to the fullest: this vamp means business! Some of the best work of his admittedly spotty career is on display, including the film's most brilliant moment, where Jerry's fidgety impatience with being invited into the Brewster home is both hilarious and nerve-wracking.

FRIGHT NIGHT is a solid film in its own right; if there's not enough love from the original's fans to spread out to its remake, that's unfortunate.

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.

Was this movie nessecary from a remake standpoint? No not at all. Is it still a fun vampire movie? Yeah I think so. It's a generic movie that made me have fun but not much more. The all Star cast it's a bit distracting and using the name of a better movie is cheap tricka but for what it is it's a decent enough movie.

Charley lives in Nevada and is now popular after his nerdy friend dies. Mysterious disappearances are happening and there might be a vampire in the neighborhood.

The movie mixes elements of horror comedy and action like the original. It sometimes forgets it's supposed to be a mix and shifts between being serious and funny. It's distracting when it shifts back as the movie tells you it's one or the other now. Other than that I feel like the different elements where fine. Enough to have fun, not enough to be special to me.

The passing also make the movie feel generic. It's just one of those checkmark movies where nothing feels too special but just like script and movie making 101.

The all star cast is fun but very distracting somehow. It kinda overwhelmed me with all of these famous people poping up every five seconds. I think I got used to it but it was distracting to begin with. The vampire actor is having so much fun with the role. The role is played nearly campy but I think it works for a movie like this. Charleys acting falls a bit flat most of the time with wierd line delivery.

The soundtrack was very good and mixed songs and composing effectively. Sometimes the songs are a bit distracting and on the nose though.

The effects are really bad to a distracting degree. It looks like computer animation no matter What they did and I commended on it every time it was used.

It's nice to have a vampire movie Honor the lore we are used to from back in the day whilst making fun of these tropes. The original also did that though.

This is just an ok film. It has nothing amazing going for it but nothing too terrible going on either. It's generic but still a fun time.

After a rewatch. It's pretty fun. A good time with friends. But I most say, the shifting genres and tones are still really out there.

wish I had seen the original Fright Night from 1985. Usually you don't watch a remake until you see the original but with Fright Night it was different for me. This remake of Fright Night is one of the few films that I liked that is aimed towards my (teenage) age group.

With the same idea as the original, a teenager finds that his neighbor is a vampire. With many ideas involving teen themes, this turns into survival story in the Las Vegas area.

Unlike most remakes which usually have bad casts, this film is just the opposite. Known actor Anton Yelchin is the lead with rising stars Christopher Mintz-Plasse and David Franco in supporting roles. Established star Colin Farrell plays the villain who is a vampire let loose into a cast full of teens. The vampires in this movie are of an old style and not like the modern vampires of recent movies and I appreciated and liked this.

The Las Vegas setting provides cool hip scenes as well as some desert scenes which is kind of different for the horror genre. The movie also has an ending that puts everything into perspective and closes the film very nicely. All of this makes this film really stand out.

Fright Night is solid and a hit. I think it is one of the top remakes ever.

I can't actually remember the original nineteen eighties Fright Night. I did watch it somewhere around 1989 and promptly forgot it. I don't know what that means - either I didn't think much of it or my memory's shot to bits.

The original is still heralded as a classic by many horror fans, but, as I couldn't remember it, I went into this remake with little to no expectations. And, from what I saw, it copied the original pretty well. It didn't do a shot-by-shot remake, but kept the overall feel of the first movie (based on what I've read about its predecessor), i.e. a blend of comedy, horror and gore.

Maybe this remake would have sunk without a trace, but it's lent a hand by a pretty decent cast. A good start is A-lister Colin Farrell as the enjoyably evil vampire, then you have ex Dr Who David Tennant, Toni Collette, Imogen Poots, Anton Yelchin and the always amusing Christopher Mintz-Plasse.

Charming Colin Farrell moves in next door to Anton Yelchin and it's not long before he's 'outed' as a vampire. Soon people start getting their throats torn out and a decent amount of bloodshed is to follow.

Fright Night is nothing too revolutionary, but vampires have been so in fashion of late that it's hard to find a completely original movie in the genre. It's a popcorn flick. It you fancy something frothy and lightweight then you might enjoy this (alternatively, the ladies may just fancy Colin Farrell - I'm sure they'll be happy with what they get).

Fright Night (2011) gets a respectable 7/10. If you're tired of seeing vampires that sparkle in sunlight, try this one. It's old school throat-tearing.

IT was a pathetic attempt to include scenes and pieces from the original fright night, but at the same time, incorporate a more unique storyline and character development. A 12 year old could have directed something with more flow. It jumps from the beginning with opening chars, then in 15 minutes, rushes to the actual idea that he is a vampire. Colin Farrell must have hated making this movie b/c he did not do nearly a good job as a vamp. Peter Vincent character is a retarded comic relief that makes no sense to the film at all. Its a half-breed retard who tries to be funny and then some. I never seen a more pathetic film that tried to throw everything into one movie. It is a retarded , piece-mewled film that was not worth a movie ticket and wont be worth the time to watch FREE on TV.

Senior Charlie Brewster finally has it all: He's running with the popular crowd and dating the hottest girl in high school. In fact, he's so cool he's even dissing his best friend Ed. But trouble arrives when an intriguing stranger Jerry moves in next door. He seems like a great guy at first, but there's something not quite right, and everyone, including Charlie's mom, doesn't notice. After witnessing some very unusual activity, Charlie comes to an unmistakable conclusion: Jerry is a vampire preying on his neighborhood. Unable to convince anyone that he's telling the truth, Charlie has to find a way to get rid of the monster himself. -- (C) DreamWorks

Although the original FRIGHT NIGHT was downright cheesy (from the effects to the performances), its balance of humor and scares made it entertaining. This remake takes the basic storyline and modernizes it, like how DISTURBIA modernized REAR WINDOW. Apart from the fact that the story is still the same, the plot changes quite a bit. In fact, the first half of the film has more in common with DISTURBIA than the original film itself, and the second half veers off in a completely different direction from the original, although there are some recognizable similarities. There are also some clever updates that improves upon the original film, like how the setting is now in Vegas, where people work and party all night and sleep all day, which is a perfect location for a vampire to hunt if you ask me.

With all the changes, the remake does retain the original's wackiness without taking itself too seriously. There's a sense of self-awareness that is common upon many horror films these days that try to be cool and hip, but it works here. As much as it works as a comedy, there are some scary scenes as well due to director Craig Gillespie building up the suspense. There's one jaw dropping sequence in particular that is very well orchestrated. Without spoiling anything, I will say that it's all in one impressive long take. Unfortunately, the film does favor the use of CGI over the original's practical effects, which should be expected in a modern horror film. Some of it looked rather cartooney and cheesy.

Most of the characters are changed as well, even from their screen time. Amy's character, played wonderfully by Imogen Poots, has a more substantial role here. Where in the original Amy was pretty useless and girly, this updated Amy is more in the line of modern heroines, which is another way to say that she kicked ass. Toni Collette has some time to shine as well playing Charley's mother, Jane. Where she pretty much disappears halfway in the original, Jane is actually brought into some of the exciting action here. Evil Ed, played by Christopher Mintz- Plasse, is also changed dramatically (and for the better) and gone is his cheesy line, "You're so cool, Brewster!" However, I will say that he is the weakest link in the film, mainly because I couldn't take him seriously (which is due to the fact that I still remember him as McLovin).

The film's main character is played well by Anton Yelchin, but the more colorful supporting actors really outshine him here, especially David Tennant, who plays Peter Vincent. Going by the pattern, his character from the original is also changed to a British drunk who works as a Vegas star in which Tennant plays really well. And lastly, the film's villain, Jerry, is played wonderfully by Colin Farrell, who really never loses his cool. Although much younger, he definitely brings the same charisma into the role as Chris Sarandon did in the original.

Overall, FRIGHT NIGHT (2011) is very enjoyable, funny, scary, and is definitely one of the better remakes that have come around. Its use of old-school vampire lore is surprisingly refreshing considering that the TWILIGHT SAGA is the standard of what vampires are these days, and the cast is terrific. As for the 3D, I'd say skip it and watch it in 2D if you can because the majority of the film does take place at night, so it was hard for me to see what was going on.

After a mysterious stranger moves into his neighborhood, a teen and his friends accidentally stumble upon his terrifying secret about being a vampire and recruits a famous vampire hunter to try to stop the trail of carnage left behind and his friends become the next target.

This was a surprisingly decent enough affair that wasn't really all that bad with some good points to it. Among the better parts here is the absolutely fun storyline throughout here that does compare favorably against the original since the ruse is discovered early on. This has a lot of rather fun antics that really push this along, from their initial meeting that clues him, the strange way he continually creeps around the neighborhood to pop up at exactly the wrong time or the few behavioral ticks that give him away which all go wrapped together alongside the previously-discovered videotapes that all help to give this one the work needed to fully reveal the ruse. Beyond this, the scenes stalking around the house where he has to free the captive inside and her eventual fate not only gives this one yet another charge for the ruse yet also features quite a really suspenseful sequence to help build that section more beyond the friendly scenes. There's a lot to come off of that in its action in here, from the house destruction and eventual high-speed chase along the highway that has a lot to like about it during their various chases and encounters with him to the battle in the office that includes some nice stalking scenes through the endless rows of artifacts stored away or battling the creatures in the panic room. As well, this here has the final assault on the underground hideout with all the turned victims providing enough of a battle to allow for some big action moments before the one-on-one confrontation, which is rather entertaining in its own right as there's some rather fun fighting here with their contraptions and some decent enough gore scenes to make it interesting. Along with the vampire makeup and gore, this is a pretty good effort with a lot to like although there are a few problematic elements here. The film's biggest flaw is the fact that the ruse is found out far too early and far too easily, since there's little investigation required to find out his true identity and it's all out in the open with such little push- back or need to look further into who he is which makes for some questionable storyline points. Along with this effort, the film also manages to stumble somewhat in it's CGI which is rather cheesy and clumsy throughout here as there are some exceptionally weak shots in here. The fact that so many of them are due to the wounds inflicted upon him which is quite obvious due to his spastic movements and disorienting behavior during the attacks, and along with the transformation scenes and use of blood and gore all just make for a rather flawed experience. These do knock it down somewhat but not enough to lower it overall.

Rated R: Graphic Language and Graphic Violence.

Initially I had some restrictions against watching this movie, as I was rather fond of the original, plus Hollywood remakes of older movies tend not be worthwhile watching.

However, this 2011 remake of "Fright Night" was actually surprisingly nice. It held true to the original movie, but still went one step beyond, instead of just being an updated frame-by-frame remodeling. This version was everything the old movie was and then some.

The cast in the movie was actually quite good. One of the initial reservations I had against the movie was Colin Farrell (playing Jerry the vampire), but hand on heart, then he was actually amazing in this role. It was like he was tailor-made for this particular role and he did a great job. Now, I am not saying that Anton Yelchin (playing Charlie) was bad, far from it, but I enjoyed William Ragsdale (playing Charlie in the 1985 version) better. In this 2011 version they totally set up a whole new Peter Vincent (played by David Tennant), though I preferred Roddy McDowall who played Vincent in the 1985 version. There was just something more fun and charming over him. However, the way that the 2011 Peter Vincent was portrayed was good, especially with his background story.

There was one really, really cool scene in the movie. And without saying too much, then I will say that fans of the 1985 version will get a kick out of seeing Chris Sarandon making a return to the movie.

The effects in the movie were great, and the vampires did look nice too.

"Fright Night" (2011) is a movie that can be thoroughly enjoyed by movie watchers both familiar with the old "Fright Night" movies and new-comers to the series as well. Lots of action, good effects and a great story. And it is also nice if you are tired of watching vampires with sparkling skin and sickening large hair styles.

I was thoroughly entertained and I think for a remake, then they actually took the 1985 version and gave it a very nice boost in the right direction. So thumbs up for this remake. Finally a Hollywood remake that was worth watching.

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

Everything one could want in a comedy-horror movie. Perfect amount of comedy and action and fast paced with a solid soundtrack. If you like this movie, watch Odd Thomas that also stars the late Anton Yelchin in another comedy/horror movie.