|Page 9 of 24:||               |
|Index||237 reviews in total|
vampire movies, zombie movies and horror movies are kinda popular in recent years. don't get me wrong when u need your fix its not hard to find something to tickle your fancy cause there are some decent ones out there. however at the same time many movies of this genre appear similar and predictable almost to the point where it seems the writer and producer has simply just wrote an average script with average ideas, added some monsters, looked for a scary set and added a creepy soundtrack. the original fright night was a horror movie from the 80's( i think) and was totally different to the other horrors we used to watch. our grandad used to make us watch the old black and white ones but this was modern and in colour..lol. the film was memorable because of the story, cast and it was eerie and spooky. very watchable so when i heard about the remake was curious and hoping they wouldn't mess this one up even though that would of been tough as the story so good. kudos they didn't.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The only things shared between Fright Night 2011 and Fright Night 1985
are a few plot elements and the names; otherwise, they're two
completely different movies, coming from two completely different
First, the title: in Fright Night 1985 it referred to the horror movies local TV stations would air at 11 or 12 on Friday or Saturday nights and some TV stations still do. In Fright Night 2011, it refers to nothing except Fright Night 1985.
Then there's Charley - in the original, he's introduced as a blank that fills out as the plot unfolds. In 2011, he's immediately portrayed as a smart-assed High School Kid, defining the tradition this movie comes from, Teenagers as Idiot Jerks movies, i.e., Hostel.
And then there's Amy. In the 1985 version, she begins as a kind of girl friend/sidekick. In the Nightclub scene she blossoms into a sexy seductee. In 2011, she's just kind of there, no particular energy.
Amanda Bearse's Amy, particularly as she is taken by Chris Sarandon's Dandrige, highlights the difference between the two movies. 2011 has nothing of the smoldering sensuality of her seduction or her simpering misery once it was accomplished.
Another big difference, Roddy Mcdowall's Peter Vincent is absent, partially replaced by a Las Vegas magician who appears half-way through and bears no resemblance to his namesake.
Likewise, Chris Sarandon's Dandrige is a tour de force performance; Collin Farrell's character may have the same name but bears no similarity.
More than anything else, however is the focus and pace of both movies. The original has a tight focus, the camera rarely strays more ten feet away from the characters. 2011 rarely gets within five feet of them. The original orchestrates its pacing to full dramatic effect while 2011 just kind of rolls the camera without trying to establish any particular pace. This is, again, an example of the two traditions.
There's a great deal more that could be said and many of the reviews document chapter and verse but, for me, the big point is that 1985 and 2011 are just plain different movies reflecting different sensibilities and cannot be judged in reference to each other.
Since I hate 2011's tradition, Idiot Teenagers, I can't honestly rate it. My choice, Fright Night 1985. That's where the generation gap comes in, I spent the 70's and 80's developing a fondness for these little, well-crafted movies whether studio or independently produced and there were a lot of them. Then sensibilities changed and another generation gap appeared.
Fright Night, the 2011 remake of the 1985 film, is actually a really
good film that features lots of thrills and chills. These days, I fear
any vampire movie that is released will end up being just like a
Twilight film. I'm glad to report that this film features vampire
violence, gore, and very little romance which is the total opposite of
the Twilight films. Granted, I have not seen the original film but I
this is a good stand-alone film and one that most horror fans should
This film is about a mysterious stranger who moves next door to the Brewster family. It turns out that this neighbor, Jerry, happens to be a member of the supernatural family. When he becomes a threat to everyone they know, Charley Brewster hires a vampire professional to end the threat.
I feel really bad for Colin Farrell. When he puts up a great performance, no one goes out to see him. Unfortunately, Mr. Farrell is a box office disaster as this film was. But, he was really good as Jerry. He blends together a mixture of comedy and horror to make a very memorable character. David Tennant is really good as the vampire professional because he is pretty funny.
Overall, this is a great film that may be better than the original. This is not a one hundred percent horror film which is great because I'm not a big horror fan. This film has plenty of comedy and with a dark premise, that addition is welcome. This is one of the better vampire films made within the past decade. I rate this film 9/10.
I knew very little about the original or the remake and expected a
clichéd flick where a kid spends the entire movie trying to convince
his family that the neighbor is a vampire. Surprisingly, it was
anything but predictable! It was as if Director, Craig Gillespie and
writers, Marti Noxon and Tom Holland, threw convention out the window
and made a movie to truly entertain!
With a string of lack luster movies, this seemed perfect film for Colin Farrell to illustrate his range, make his mark and climb back up to the 'A' list. Fortunately, he didn't disappoint and managed to compliment the quick and witty script exceptionally well. Anton Yelchin, Toni Collette and David Tennant round out the recognizable cast and each plays their role quite well.
Fright Night is truly a pleasant surprise and Gillespie does a fantastic job of captivating and surprising the viewer. Even the end credits, which run against Hugo's rendition of '99 Problems,' are entertaining! How often can you say that?
I don't actually remember the original one so clearly, it's been a long
But anyway, this somehow recalled me nostalgy way, some scenes look pretty familiar, very many laughs and everything in order.
This movie was originally like one of a kind, so is this remake. Nice to see this kind of surprises. Still i don't like remakes much but this was truly and exception.
One thing I really don't understand is why this is horror/comedy.. The comedy part I truly understand but there really wasn't any horror ANYWHERE. Maybe it is simply so that if there are vampires it must be horror.
Worth to watch if you like classic horror-humor, not being too intellectual but having great laughs, at least I did :) 8/10
If you are a fan of Colin Farrell, then you have to see this movie. I can't imagine any one else playing the vampire but Colin. Colin did a great job in being the bad guy. The way that he walked and talked was awesome! He played a very believable vampire (would love to get bit by Colin!) and his acting was truly incredible. I had never seen a movie with David Tennant before but am a fan now. I loved how he went from a super sexy vampire killer to an ordinary Joe. How brilliant to have his character remove his persona on film by taking off his tattoos, etc. To be honest, this movie wasn't what I thought it would be, but it didn't disappoint. I thought it would be a really scary movie and was very pleased to find that it had a comedic side. I would truly recommend this movie be watched. Don't understand why people can't watch a movie for entertainment without being a critic about everything. Just watch a movie and be entertained, that is how a movie should be viewed.
Teenager Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin), living in Las Vegas suburbs,
has managed to advance from his lowly position as a dweeb thanks to
entering a relationship with Amy (Imogen Poots). The social progression
however brings about a push to change his friends, thus excluding his
best pal and ultra-nerd Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) from his
contacts. Ed attempts to warn Charley that his next door neighbour
Jerry (Colin Farrell) is a blood-thirsty vampire and soon after
disappears. Thus Charley's suspicions start to build and he soon finds
himself seeking assistance of illusionist and self-proclaimed
vampire-hunter Peter Vincent (David Tennant). Who turns out to be a
A rare case of a remake, which draws inspiration and references from the original, but aims to deliver a fresh new story and outlook. Although all the characters are the same knowing the original won't help you piece together the entire plot, at best leaving you to admire the subtle and not-so-subtle changes to the story. Colin Farrell with his magnetic presence makes for a great neighbourhood vampire - powerful, ruthless, sexually enamouring, but simultaneously controlled and seemingly 'ordinary'. Whereas Farrell is an improvement on the original, David Tennant comes with a 'different' take on Peter Vincent, neither inferior or superior, just alternate and equally enjoyable. Summarily (apart from some miscued acting by Mintz-Plasse) the cast fleshes out a new perspective, which makes "Fright Night" a self-sustaining horror, irrespective of the original with a markedly different story fronted by a great cast.
The is no Hitchcock type attempt to introduce doubt as to the identity of the neighbour. We know he's a vampire and the only question is how quickly others will recognise this obvious reality. Unfortunately Jerry's happy-go-lucky attitude towards getting it his way, introduces an aching necessity to suspend belief in plot feasibility (well... naturally... if vampires really existed). The plot holes are pretty much the biggest flaw, while the lack of uncertainty lowers the suspense bar, thus having the story sold through its intriguing narrative and some well drafted characters. As such the well struck mixture of comedy, action and some horror flair pretty much helps to cover up the problematic issues from the basic premise (which is in fact much better worked than in the original as various idiosyncrasies are reimagined with smarts, such as placing the story in the evanescent Las Vegas quarters).
The movie does not waste time to get to the heart of the action. There
is a quick and well balanced introduction to the heart of the subject
matter, and the audience is not left waiting to experience suspense.
Collin Farrell does a great job at playing a charismatic, but
dangerous, neighbor that pulls the family and audience straight in to
the action. The cast is well chosen, there's no doubt about it a
collection of teenagers that refuse to accept a nerd's truth about
vampires, a magician in Vegas, and a few more.
It has been a while since I last saw any horror film, and I smiled when I felt fear come over me. The fear doesn't come alone though, there is a hefty dose of comedy and an impressive amount of action. The film is definitely fast paced and dynamic as the settings change continuously in a fluid manner, and there's a generous dose of vengeance fueled gory action that would leave any audience with a feeling of satisfaction.
Collin's a sexy guy, but when he's a monstruous mean character, you want to see him suffer. No spoiler intended, but in the confrontations, he takes it as much as he dishes it, and the result is fun.
The movie is nothing special it all. I had a hard time figuring out
whether it was a comedy or a horror film, because if it was the first,
it wasn't funny enough. It had some laughs, but that's about it. If it
was the latter, it didn't take itself seriously enough. It wasn't scary
at all. If they were trying to do a mix of both genre's, they failed at
that too. Sure they've taken the basic elements of comedies and horror
movies, but the mix wasn't right. The two genres simply went against
each other, and in the collision both suffered greatly. But Fright
Night still didn't fail to entertain.
There were some pretty good stuff in the movie too. The first thing is David Tennant. I hated him in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (he played Barty Crouch Jr.), but in this film he was entertaining as hell! Colin Farrell did a good job too, the others were either too flat or (in the case of Christopher Mintz-Plasse) they went over the top.
What also worked was the music. Ramin Djawadi is the man! His awesome soundtracks never fail to impress me, I can't wait for his next movie. Sadly that's pretty much the end of the positive aspects of the film. It was kinda stupid, the story was dumb, the directing average. Although they tried to put some deeper meaning into the movie, it didn't work.
If I was to compare Fright Night to a food, it would be an average burger. Fun enough, but won't silence your growling stomach for long.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I have never been a fan of remakes, even worse when you find they are
done by Dreamworks and Distributed by Disney - That horrific tale is
even worse when the remake in question is a classic 80's Horror movie
Yet DREAMWORKS/Disney have worked wonders with this new take on an old favourite...
It does not match the humour of the 80's original... But the acting is amazing! Colin Farrel comes across as just the perfect side of both charming and thrilling. Despite only a short appearance really given the length of the film,David Tennant as "Peter Vincent" is amazingly funny and perfectly believable as the films Anti-Hero (Well, You cannot call an alcoholic nut job a hero can you!)... He also has some of the films best lines...
Really enjoyed it! and unlike the 80s classic - I did indeed jump out of my seat despite the fact that the scares were so obvious I should not have done!!! But who cares! Sometimes that little bit of familiarity is what saves a film...
A definite one to watch... Glad I have it as i will watch this one again!
|Page 9 of 24:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|