IMDb > Night of the Demons (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Night of the Demons
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Night of the Demons More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]
Index 52 reviews in total 

30 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

Very poor

2/10
Author: weemonk from United Kingdom
11 October 2010

I managed to watch an hour of this film before turning it off. Remakes of 80's horror films are a dime a dozen nowadays. Some go straight to DVD, some to the theatres, some with big budgets, some with small.

Although well versed in cinema and movies, the original 'Night of the Demons' has evaded my radar and so I had no memories of the original 80's film (soon to be watched though).

Regardless of whether the original was a good film or not, this updated version is a waste of time. Shannon Elizabeth should have words with her agent, as I don't think her career has derailed to the point that she needs to be doing cheap horror films. Edward Furlong is clearly in it for the money and you can sense that he knows he has yet again signed up to appear in something cheap and crap.

The film premise is simple...party goers at an old abandoned house discover skeletons in the basement. One gets bit and possessed by a demon who in turn ends up getting others possessed. Blood and death follow. We've seen it many times before done a lot better.

The acting is poor, the script is basic and flawed. The direction is standard with nothing inventive thrown in.

I used to say to my friends that you'd never get away with making some of the horrors of the 80's in this day and age. The 80's was a glorious time for cheap, cheesy, silly films which are fun and enjoyable with ridiculous stories and ideas which would not pass as well on modern audiences....but it seems we are getting a new wave of these films. Problem is, they aren't as entertaining and magical. It doesn't work for the modern era. Instead, films like this just come off as cheap, careless and crap.

Was the above review useful to you?

32 out of 57 people found the following review useful:

A bearable enough but overall kinda weak stab at trashy remake fun

5/10
Author: t-birkhead from United Kingdom
9 November 2009

I approached this one with a little trepidation, but equally a fair degree of straightforward interest. I'm something of a fan of the original, which delivers a fine freight of cheese, gore and nudity, along with witty writing and inspired direction. It was still a decidedly mindless film though, no heavy plotting or unique insights into the human condition, a workable template therefore for a remake or re-visiting, not the sort of thing that would be too hard to do well with, at least on a mindless fun trash level. Moreover this is the second outing from genre hopeful couple Adam Gierasch and Jace Anderson, after last years Autopsy, a decent but flawed affair that mostly delivered some nasty gore and splashes of sure handed direction. This film sadly is a bit of a step down, not as accomplished or effective as Autopsy, which was already weighted with problems, and certainly no match for the original. On the good side of things, this one does mount well, nicely paced, likeably written and easy moving, it has a certain grasp of how to build up into events satisfactorily and a pleasing feel to it, backed up by serviceable performances and a cool and mildly creepy location. Castwise, Edward Furlong does well, looking a bit tired and frazzled but still bearing ample charisma, whilst Shannon Elizabeth does nicely as Angela, sizzlingly macabre and seductive when needed to be. Otherwise, all do pretty well, though without stand outs. I hadn't heard of many of the cast before watching, I presume a fair few were teen film alumni or folk from US TV, no one is bad as such but no one really distinguished. Chuckles are provided by a little turn from Tiffany Shepis and a brief spot for Linnea Quigley. In the general course of the film there are some moments of imagination, some of flair and a general light dusting of fun, in fact it almost seems churlish to come down hard on such a thing, but much as the film seeks to be likable and I even wanted to like it, it slips up too much. There is never any real tension and though the film is cheesy, laughs are few. Once inside the house and even when things get going, the direction is perfunctory, without any notable flair or real excitement, with some of the action even marred by lame rapid fire editing. There is also unfortunate use of CGI and an over-tame feel to things, there is a smidgen of kinkiness to a few scenes, but the film shies away from nudity or anything really sleazy or steamy, far from the enthusiastic trash of the original. The famed lipstick scene is revisited and beefed up, but to lesser effect, the film generally feels like its pretending to be sexier and trashier than it really is, ultimately coming off a little lame in its efforts. Also, there is an unfortunate lack of gore, with the grisliest moments all too brief and not looking especially effective. Put simply, a few sparkles aside this is surprisingly weak, half baked stuff, it may be mindless entertainment for some but it was very much lacking in potency for me. Approach with care, I'd say.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

A Halloween night to forget.

2/10
Author: lewiskendell from United States
1 December 2010

"Uh okay. So, they're demons."

Lots of pretty, B-level actresses in slutty Halloween costumes being killed. Lots of dumb guys. A decent amount of gore. A paper-thin plot about some demons haunting a house in New Orleans on Halloween. Not very scary. Ample amounts of chessiness and campiness. Some okay monster designs. An amateurish script. Late-night TV quality production values. Some really terrible Halloween-themed rock music. A powerful urge on my part to fast-forward a lot.    

That's basically my experience with Night of the Demons, in a nutshell. I can't compare this to the original movie, as I haven't seen it. But on its own merits, it's not funny or scary enough to really be worthwhile. But hey, boobs. Check the cast list and see if that makes this pretty mediocre flick worth watching for you.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 21 people found the following review useful:

A remake?

2/10
Author: christopherleebolton from United States
2 November 2010

I'm not sure if this was intended on being a remake of the 1980's version of the same title, but they are most certainly not one in the same. This movie is just another case of fluff horror. Cheesy gore, generic demons, and the token occasional boob shot. The acting in this movie was terrible as well, I've seen better performances in a grammar school play than this movie contained. Not that I expected a masterpiece out of this movie, but some entertainment would have been nice. I could not have imagined a bigger insult to the original movie than this movie. The next time, if you are going to call something a remake with the same title as another movie, you may want to use some of the original plot lines from the older version. This movie has nothing going for it, skip this one at all costs!

Was the above review useful to you?

36 out of 67 people found the following review useful:

Can someone give this film a clue?

2/10
Author: hoodieJ from UK
3 September 2009

Film 4 frightfest premiere 'Night of the demons' is all over the place as a film. Unfortunately it tries to be a teen comedy and a scary horror. It fails spectacularly at both. The gore despite being brutal is quick and can barely be seen and the scares unoriginal. Everything that happened in the film felt like the director was constantly winking at the audience. If this film was so self-knowing then why did the characters descend into parody. This film was all over the place. It wanted to be Scream and Friday the 13th. There is the worst exposition you'll ever see when the demons are explained. But I think the director thought he was being funny. I just thought it was stupid. The bad taste was totally misjudged, there were some scenes which were so over-the-top, yet everything else seemed restrained.

'Night of the demons' is a very odd film. See it only as a curio of why modern horror has gone badly wrong.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Lost the fun of the original.

2/10
Author: p0pnfresh2002 from United States
20 December 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The only reason this is getting a 2 is because the creature effects were actually pretty good. The movie took too long to get to the gore. I was looking forward to the new plot points, change of location, reason for demons. But none of the saved this terrible movie. Edward Furlong looks like a bloated Jodie Foster and Shannon Elizabeth was sadly under used in the sexy department. It makes no sense that the survivors could figure out all of the details of the demons' plans in like 5 min and sit in a room until dawn to be protected. Barely a chase and the demons took over too quickly. The original and even the sequel are just good B horror movie fun, and this was just garbage.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

So awful that it manages to give a worse name to terrible remakes!

1/10
Author: Andy-1981 from United States
14 November 2010

Firstly, the plot of this film slightly differs from the NIGHT OF THE DEMONS from 1987 that we all know and love. There are new elements introduced that explain the backstory of the possessed house where teens get turned into demons. But explaining evil is fruitless, it can't be done without sounding generic, and that's the way it sounds in this movie.

The writing, directing, and acting are all horrid. Edward Furlong looks and sounds like he is still on the same hard drugs that cost him his role in TERMINATOR 3. The others are no better, as the characters get on your nerves less than five minutes into the movie and things never improve from there.

The writing consists mainly of clichéd "chick" dialogue, as well as nonstop blatant profanities. The direction is clichéd MTV style, with swooping, rapid-fire camera-work at every turn, and production values that are far too glossy. Any chances at scares are ruined by the terrible direction and gratingly abrasive heavy metal music.

Since there is no suspense or mood built whatsoever, the gore scenes are rendered incredibly boring, so gore cannot be recommended as a reason to watch this mess. Despite having an obviously higher budget than the original, the makeup effects in the original are far superior to this film! The filmmakers were obviously too inept to take advantage of the money and new technology they had.

The nudity cannot be recommended, as the girls have ridiculous (and quite disgusting) fake breasts. Even the sex scenes and gratuitous girl-on-girl kissing scenes are as unsexy as they can be.

Speaking of disgusting, the famous lipstick scene is reenacted in a much more repulsive manner, which (like everything else in the film) seems to be done for the sake of being disgusting.

ZERO stars, NOTHING to recommend, not even of a "so bad it's fun" level -- a crappy movie you'll regret paying for. My faith in Screamfest definitely went down for showing this drivel in its 2010 lineup.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

It wasn't scary!

5/10
Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
14 October 2010

I remember watching the original "Night of the Demons" back in the late 80's, so I had somewhat mixed feelings about this movie. Initially I thought something in the lines of "why does the world need a re-told version of this movie?" When the movie started, I was pleasantly surprised with the intro, at least, because it had that certain unique Lovecraftian touch to it. But I also thought, if this is how the movie is going to be all the way through, it will be too much, too unbearable. Luckily, the movie did change over to become an ordinary-styled movie.

Well, the storyline is pretty straight forward, and no twists or turns to the events that unfolded. The movie was also somewhat true to the original 1988 movie, but of course with some major changes, which was actually good to see. But overall, the story was predictable and somewhat stale, even if you haven't seen the original movie.

The effects and the setting was quite alright, and the demons did looks alright, I will give them that much.

There was a sex scene in the movie that made me almost still my coffee. That was just too ridiculous, trust me, you will know what I am talking about when you see the movie, or if you have already seen it. I am not giving away details, but that was just downright stupid.

As for the cast. Well, there were some known faces, no major stars though. I am not a fan of Edward Furlong, but he actually did a good job in the role here. I had to look twice when I first saw Edward Furlong, but yeah, that was him alright. And another familiar face is Shannon Elizabeth, though her performance in the movie seemed more like it was some project she just wanted to get over with.

I suppose for people who haven't seen the original "Night of the Demons", this movie will be quite a blast. It has enough action and suspense to keep you interested. There is also a good amount of gore and effects in the movie. So that is a plus. But for us who have seen the original version, then this action-packed remake is a hollow attempt at bringing something old back to life. Don't get me wrong, the movie is good in itself, it should just have been made as something else, not a remake of that old movie.

For me, this movie was the type that you watch once and never again.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Demonic fun eventually burns itself out

5/10
Author: Quebec_Dragon from Canada
14 April 2014

I found this surprisingly enjoyable with pretty decent directing and cinematography. As an example, notice how the flashback hanging scene was filmed. Notice also the peculiar angles chosen and the transitions between characters at the party. This was not just standard-TV movie quality with minimal effort. The acting was nothing to write home about but I found Edward Furlong (the kid from Terminator 2) really looking and acting the part of the messed up, desperate, drug dealer-addict (how much acting was involved is another question ;) The girl playing Maddie was fine and I found the goth hostess of the party, Shannon Elizabeth, pretty appealing and seductive. I even felt a bit sorry for her.

The plot itself involving demons having to corrupt and possess several people on Halloween night in an enclosed manor was serviceable, and had a few nice twists, and a few bad ones near the end as well. I found the make-up effects on the demons rather good, especially for the girls. I can't say I was ever really scared, but there was suspense. Pretty fun B-movie fare with above-average directing, yet once the survivors got in a room protected by spells, things started going badly. Badly as in illogical or very convenient things happening that shattered my sense of disbelief. I kept asking myself how could this happen (demon hands through walls), why the demons acted this way or just didn't do anything (when someone climbs down a rope), why this character did these stupid, unnecessary things (going out to shoot demons and what comes afterwards). Seems to me the writers painted themselves in a corner with that protected room and had to start "cheating" so the rest of the film wouldn't just be boring waiting. I would have given a 6 (good), perhaps more, for the movie until that room and 4 (poor) for that part after. I suppose it averages to 5.

Rating: 5 out of 10 (average)

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Let's play "hide the lipstick"!

5/10
Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls
7 May 2012

Hey, perhaps if all remakes were as unpretentious and amusing as "Night of the Demons", people wouldn't complain so much about the deterioration of the horror genre in general… This one is several hundred miles away from being a good or even semi-memorable horror movie, but it's entertaining while it lasts and offers plentiful of adequate make-up effects, a suitably light-headed atmosphere and a whole lot of yummy voluptuous actresses in revealing Halloween costumes! In all fairness, I also have to admit that it was pretty impossible to mess up a remake of the modest 1988 cult-favorite. The original "Night of the Demons", as well as both of its sequels released during the 1990's, was a very simplistic and unpretentious little flick also and it's rather easy to accomplish a present day update for the post-2000 horror audiences by making just a few minor changes left and right. The titular night still refers to the Halloween celebration, but instead of an abandoned funeral home like in the original, the party mansion is now a sinister family estate where once – in the roaring 20's – a horrible tragedy occurred when a desperate woman tried to win the love of a man trough a séance, but she ended up awakening seven demons that were even exiled from hell for being too bloodthirsty. To reign again, the demons require seven human bodies to possess, and let this just happen to be the exact number of idiots that remain loafing around the house after the police rudely interrupted the party. Hostess Angela is the first victim to mutate, and through seductive games and lesbianism she gradually causes the rest to go demon too. The mansion's history records may have altered slightly, but director/co-writer Adam Gierasch nevertheless blatantly copies the main trumps and highlight sequences of the 1988 original. Most notably the infamous sequence with the lipstick receives an update and furthermore the movie revolves on luscious twenty-something people that flirt, drink and cannot keep their hormones under control. The kills and make-up effects are well-handled, but nowhere near as imaginative as in the old installments and there's zilch tension, logic or sympathy for the characters. I presume that supporting actresses Diora Baird ("Texas Chainsaw Massacre: New Beginning") and Bobbi Sue Luther ("Laid to Rest") were exclusively cast for their large bra-sizes and their willingness to share their beautiful boobs with the rest of the world, whereas Monica Keena ("Freddy Vs. Jason") has the tough responsibility to depict an amiable and more or less intellectual heroine. "Night of the Demons" also features two relatively washed up stars of the 90's in the shape of Shannon Elizabeth and Edward Furlong. The former hasn't appeared in anything significant since she went topless in "American Pie" and the latter will probably always remain the kid from "Terminator II" and "American History X". But seriously, Edward Furlong looks terrible these days… Pretty much like he's consuming nothing but drugs and alcohol since the year 2000. Oops, I just quickly checked his biography here on the site, and it actually appears to be true. Sorry, Edward.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 6:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history