IMDb > Fright Night (2011) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Fright Night
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
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
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Fright Night More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 10 of 24: [Prev][5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [Next]
Index 239 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

An average burger

Author: arginnon from Budapest, Hungary
12 May 2012

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.

Score: ★★★

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Fright Night? NICE SIGHT!

Author: Warren Marris from United Kingdom
9 April 2012

*** 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 Franchise!!!

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!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

A major step down from the first.

Author: Prolox from Canada
4 January 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

In this remake of the 1985 horror comedy of the same name, CHARLIE BREWSTER (ANTON YELCHIN) is a teenager whom no one will believe when he tells them that his new neighbour, the smooth talking, dangerously good looking, apple eating, sleeps during the day, next door neighbour JERRY DANDRIDGE is really a vampire. Arming himself to the teeth & all alone in his beliefs, following his two former buddies murders, who also discovered Jerry's secret lifestyle. He seeks the help of Las Vegas stage show performer, magician & on stage vampire slayer, the Chris Issaceque PETER VINCENT, in joining him to help rid of Jerry & his legion of the night. But he refuses to believe Charlie's outlandish tale. When Jerry finds out that Charlie knows his secret, he attacks Charlie's friends, girlfriend & mother. Charlie seeks to end his reign of terror or die trying, the latter of which might be the outcome, when many of the people he knows & loves are either ripped apart or become permanent members of the night shift. But as it turns out he's not going to be alone after all, when Vincent himself witnesses the creatures very existence first hand & finds he is nowhere near the brave vampire slayer he is on stage. Can both men stop Jerry & his vampire legion? or will they to wind up dead or worse a vampire? As to be expected & what is usually the case with most horror movie remakes, FRIGHT NIGHT 3D is nowhere near as good as it's original version. There are many reasons, starting with director Craig Gillespie's pedestrian direction & the overall slickness of the production, such as re-locating the films original story from a quiet suburbia to the Las Vegas dessert & a new housing complex & turning vampire TV show host Peter Vincent (Played wonderfully in the original by the late RODDY McDOWALL) into a foul mouthed, full of himself, stage show, Chris Issac rip-off, on stage magician, vampire slayer performer. COLIN FARRELL does well as Jerry, but is hardly the acting craftsman that CHRIS SARANDON is when he contributed to the role back in the original & speaking of Sarandon, he actually has a pretty funny cameo towards the end of the film. The acting is pretty decent & the film manages to wring out a few suspenseful moments & many impressive 3D shots, but it just lacks the original films magic & as I stated before, is nowhere near as funny, suspenseful or scary, as the original. CGI monster effects have also taken the place of actual on screen monster make-up & while I'm not dissing the effects, which are impressive, they are nowhere near as good or as realistic as those seen in the first. All in all, while this may seem like a mostly negative review, it's not mean't to be, but I really can't say I enjoyed the film all that much either, while not a complete loss, it's far from being anything to spectacular & misses out on so many opportunities. CHRISTOPHER MINTZ- PLASSE is fun to watch & one of the better actors here, it's to bad his role is limited. Recommended only to die hard horror fans. As for me, while I may give this film another go down the road, but I think I'm going to stick with the original 1985 film for my thrills, chills & laughs. Despite being followed by a sequel, the film is in no way shape or form, a remake of the 1988 sequel & no relation to this movie at all. In fact it is in some ways, a remake of this film! Borrowing many elements from the 1985 movie than this one did & containing the very same characters & is an improvement over this film (but not by much) it's called, naturally, FRIGHT NIGHT 2: NEW BLOOD

** stars

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Tails of a bit too early

Author: thekarmicnomad from United Kingdom
12 December 2011

Like a lot of people I saw the original and loved it (but then there was less competition back then)

In a lot of ways this is much better. Colin Farrell does an excellent job as moody hottie on the block and watching him and Anton dance around each other trying to avoid saying the 'V' word is a joy. Not a big fan of Tennant and his character is ludicrous but somehow he pulls it off and I found him genuinely funny.

The problem with all these types of movie is they have to turn up the heat and get the action going. Nine out of ten times (like here) the director stamps on the accelerator and wheel-spins off into next doors garden.

Suddenly the plot is torn to shreds as locations, characters and scenes are man-handled into the story to accommodate the acceptable quoter of stakings and be-headings. The previous hour of the movie, which was a joy to watch, suddenly feels like a waste of time as vampires dash all over the show blowing things up.

Saying that the movie is light-hearted, fun and half the people I watched this with really loved it. If you only expect a silly horror-com (like the original) then you are going to have a pleasant evening.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The idea feels worn but the leads save it

Author: amesmonde from Novelist of The Final Version
12 December 2011

After dispelling his friends concerns Charley Brewster finds that his new neighbour Jerry is a vampire and he enlists Peter Vincent a Las Vegas magician and vampire expert to help him.

The 80's original was of its time, Fright Night (2011) successfully takes the offbeat humour of the original and reworks it into a solid piece of entertainment. Five top calibre leads in a mediocre vampire remake somehow make it work. If it were any other actors it may have disappeared into a void. Thankfully the talent of the leads in this eerie cheese-fest is the films strength. It's not the 'why are they doing this' but the 'its cool that they are doing it' factor that's alluring.

Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Toni Collette and the lovely Imogene Poots (28 Weeks Later) are all on form. Although Tennant is good he isn't as involved as he should be and he lacks the dynamics due to the screenplay that Roddy McDowall gave to the character. Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Ed is notable and delivers some funny moments. Yelchin has some memorable scenes including a hilarious one-liner about a vampire hand. Farrell steals the show as the perfect intense vampire.

The effects are well executed, there are great sets, splendidly done is Vincent's apartment and the Vegas setting gives the film a unique atmosphere and distinct look. Craig Gillespie has an eye for detail and the set pieces are slick and exciting.

The script is average and the idea feels worn. That said, Fright Night has its funny creepy moments and is different enough from the original to be entertaining in its own right.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Bring toilet paper for your EYES

Author: Big D from United States
2 September 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What a waste. Fans of the original BEWARE. The decisions of the filmmakers to lift lines, plot devices and general little things from the original, is totally unmotivated, and downright "lame." The "it" word of the moment, "really", is uttered at least 4 times, ad nausea, in an attempt to keep the dialogue fresh. Bad. Gillepsie, the director, should stick to TV. Toni Colette is a bona fide talent but is disposable in this useless role. Their are so many things wrong with this film, I refuse to carry on writing this review, so in a nutshell- RE-WATCH the original, unless spending money on trite, overblown, BORING dribble like this is your thing. On the plus side, Colin Farrel does call all his young male co-stars "guy."

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

New "Fright Night" Lacks Bite

Author: slasherstudios from United States
29 August 2011

Going into the remake of "Fright Night", I was a bit apprehensive. The original is my favorite vampire film of all time and I just felt that deep down they were going to find some way to mess up the remake. Then the trailers came in (everything looked solid, if a bit underwhelming), then the reviews came in (75% is just about perfect for a horror film), and then the reaction from fans came in—They didn't mess it up! I couldn't wait to watch the remake. I sat down in my seat eager for the movie to start as I put on my 3D glasses and was ready for the wild vampire ride to begin.

The film starts quite promising. We are given a skyline shot of houses in the suburb. The kind of suburb where everyone owns the same car, the same house, and the same two kids. And then BAM, three killings before the opening credits can even hit the screen. I was ready! This is going to be the remake to end all remakes! Sadly, it was not to be. The plot is generally the same as the original with a few small changes. Teenager Charley Brewster guesses that his new neighbor Jerry Dandrige is a vampire responsible for a string of recent deaths. When no one he knows believes him, he enlists Peter Vincent, a self proclaimed vampire killer and Las Vegas magician, to help him take down Jerry.

What doesn't work about this movie? Well, aside from a few stylish touches…pretty much everything. Gone is the old, charming horror host Peter Vincent and in is a Midori chugging whorish magician. Ugh. Gone is the beautiful shot and exciting club scene in which Jerry seduces Charley's girlfriend Amy (it's here, but the less said about the "new" version of this scene the better). Gone is Jerry's homo-erotic relationship with his best "friend"/roommate. Hell, that character isn't even IN this film. What's added? Awful CGI (Amy's vampire scene with Charley is incredibly lame and doesn't look half as good as it did in the TWENTY FIVE year old original) and a final battle scene that belongs more to "Underworld" than it does to the "Fright Night" legacy. That being said, It's worth a rental at least. The movie wasn't so much bad as it was incredibly disappointing. I felt there was so much more they could have done with the premise. What a waste.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Fright Night (2011)

Author: SnakesOnAnAfricanPlain from United Kingdom
7 January 2012

The original for me has no nostalgic value, as I only saw it a few months ago. But I absolutely adored it. This remake does exactly what I want from a remake. It keeps the core components, but makes enough changes to make it a different movie. The little changes make all the difference, and although I preferred everything in the original, this is a different film that I will check out again. Yelchin plays the lead role of a young man that eventually finds out his neighbour is a vampire. Farrell is the charming, sexy, and sinister vampire named Jerry. The tension heightens, but never as much as the original. I loved Farrell's portrayal, where he was truly threatening without ever really trying. However, he was also inexplicably aggressive. I'd imagine vampires would try and keep their heads down, but here Farrell doesn't exactly try and hide his vampiristic tendencies. He'll kill people in the street, or blow up a house. Tennant is a scene stealer as Peter Vincent, a clever update from his predecessor, but with some needless backstory. Tennant is the archetypal fake hero, that claims to be a slayer of the occult. But when his chance to prove his heroism comes to fruition, will he rise to the challenge? The humour and horror are well mixed together, with some scenes being particularly shocking, which is a great compliment for such a worn genre. It is also a very exciting action films at time. The car chase scene, shot in one continuous take is exhilarating and has a nice cameo too. Sometimes it has too much CGI, and more plot holes than I feel comfortable with. Nevertheless, this is a great entertaining film, with a sinister but not to serious vibe.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

A remake that was worth watching, for a change...

Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
26 November 2011

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Not my full cup of tea, but still...

Author: Bene Cumb from Estonia
15 November 2012

I have not seen the original from the 1980ies and vampire stuff is not totally for me, but the names Colin Farrell and Anton Yelchin did invite me to spend this 1 hour 40 minutes among zombie-like vampires and stuff related to their extermination. I was right about the two above mentioned actors, they are really great, but the plot, directing and another actors (well, Tony Collette had too small part to play, she is usually brilliant) were just above average. There was some kind of tension, but some illogical events and peculiar turns gave the movie shallow undertones. I assume it must be okay for those fond of vampire sagas but when the credits appeared I just shrugged my shoulders - without a desire to see the first movie and to compare.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 10 of 24: [Prev][5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

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