IMDb > Fright Night 2 (2013) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Fright Night 2
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
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 2 (V) More at IMDbPro »

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

32 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

And so it begins. Again. Literally.

Author: Gregburnscds from Toronto, Canada
1 October 2013

From the talented mind who brought you White Noise 2: The Light, Mirrors 2, and the forthcoming Leprechaun: Origins and the highly sought after Mexican director of…well, absolutely nothing comes a new vision of a new vision of horror. Fright Night 2, being a remake of a remake, takes the exact same characters as the first film, dumps them in Romania, and instead of continuing the story in any sane fashion, decides it's just easier to start from scratch…again.

Jaime Murray as the new Gerri the vampire is completely wasted in this throw away film that lives more for moments than anything else. Particularly impressive is her little sonar bit in the tunnel of a tunnel of a subway. The rest of the cast is absolutely boring. I don't understand why the filmmakers decided not to continue the story from the 2011 (*ahem) blockbuster. Or why didn't they just create a whole new bunch of characters? Or why not try and remake the original sequel—now, THAT would have been interesting.

And another thing, why is it that all these low budget straight-to-DVD horror sequels have to be so poorly made? There are plenty of great low budget films. All you need is a writer that cares enough about the story, a director that cares about more than getting another title under his belt or paycheck, and a studio that wants to deliver a quality product to its audience. Is that so hard?


Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 22 people found the following review useful:


Author: movieman_kev from United States
30 October 2013

Having recently watched "Curse of Chucky", my long-held belief that DTV sequels were always crap was shattered as that film exceeded all expectations. So still reeling from my beliefs being shattered, I approached Fright Night 2 with a small sense of renewed optimism. However, dear reader, this DTV film sent me straight back to stark reality.

Firstly, despite the inclusion of the number 2, this is NOT a sequel to the Fright Night remake, but rather another remake. Yes a remake of a remake, and a grossly incompetent, boring one at that. No tension, no frights, indeed not much of anything that can remotely be considered entertaining. You won't want to spend 10 minutes with these characters, much less 100.

Was the above review useful to you?

14 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Promising Beginning, Awful Conclusion

Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
8 November 2013

A group of American students travel to Romania for classes in a local university; among them is Charley Brewster (Will Payne), who has a crush on his ex-girlfriend Amy Peterson (Sacha Parkinson), and his friend "Evil" Ed Bates (Chris Waller). On the first day, they have classes with the sexy Arts Professor Gerri Dandridge (Jaime Murray). When Charley sees Dandridge kissing a student and then he goes missing, he sees from his window a woman dumping a corpse in a truck. Charley investigates and discloses that Dandridge is a vampire that baths on the blood of women. When he finally convinces Amy and "Evil" that Dandridge is a vampire, they request the support of Peter Vincent (Sean Power), who is the host of the TV show Fright Night, to hunt down Dandridge. But the sexy vampire discovers that Amy is capable to break her curse and she brings her to her swimming pool in the underground of her castle.

"Fright Night 2: New Blood" has a promising beginning, despite the annoying and silly "Evil", but goes downhill with an awful conclusion. This movie is not a sequel of "Fight Night" and the camera work and the cinematography are great. But from the moment that Charley and Amy take a taxi to the airport, the story is completely wasted. What in the hell is that hissing sound that Dandridge does in the tunnel? If you want to see this flick, better off watching the 1985 "Fright Night" again and forget either the remake or this unfunny turkey. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "A Hora do Espanto 2" ("The Fright Hour 2")

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 28 people found the following review useful:


Author: trashgang from Midian
1 October 2013

I had some mixed feeling to go watching this flick. The reason is simple. First of all, the remake of Fright Night (2011) couldn't stand up against the original of 1985 and was even boring and laughable sometimes. To make part 2 with none of the actors involved in part 1 I was a bit afraid if they just didn't want to make money of the cult status of the title. The only reference we had was Peter Vincent returning as done in the original ones and in the remake.

The story had nothing to do with the original 1988 version and nothing to do with the remake of the 1985 version. So here we are left with some students leaving for Romania (how original) to study they have one hell of a sexy teacher (Jaime Murray) with a dark secret. She needs virgin blood to make her look beautiful (Bathory again). That's the main part here in this flick. It wasn't that bad sometimes but it also had some ridiculous situations that should have been funny but failed completely for me.

For those not familiar with Murray, I knew her from Dexter were she goes nude a few times and from Spartacus were she almost always nude. And that's exactly what this flick delivers, nude juggs and one full frontal nudity. Further we do have one very good scene that remembered me of the Hostel franchise with the nude girl hanging upside down to be slashed and her blood dripping in the bath. We do have that scene here too but Hostel was much better. Still, it's the best and most gory part here.

The most terrible thing is the way they are showing Peter Vincent as some reality TV host. That fact tears Fright Night 2 down. And as I have written in so many review lately, horror is back death in Horrorwood. Nobody was waiting for this remake of a remake or whatever. It doesn't add a thing except boobs to the story. Although Murray was the best thing to see, acting and nude, this flick is out there for, euh, nobody. There are so many bad flicks out nowadays and a lot is based on remakes of cult titles. Had it been given, sigh, another title it would be a bit better to review but to say this is the next Fright Night, na.

Gore 2/5 Nudity 2/5 Effects 3/5 Story 2?5/5 Comedy 0/5

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Bullsquaggle!!!! Do NOT SEE

Author: chappleclan1
7 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I was a fan of the original FRIGHT NIGHT 1 and 2. I loved them.. The remake of the original was decent.. But I though this was going to be a remake of part 2.. This version was a real joke!!!!! Only thing they did was used the premise from the original and put it in this and set it in Romania.. There are a lot of vampire movies that need not be seen in the wake of this Vampire Revolution.. This is one of those movies that need not to be seen!!The only good thing is that they found a sexy vampire to play the evil vampire, but the casting for this movie really reeked! The actor playing Charlie was like a Disney kid. and the love interest reminded me of a child off the nickelodeon shows.. No real acting at all. The Peter Vincent character reminded me of a reality ghost show reject!!! they should have left the original alone!!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

All in all much of the same, unfortunately

Author: Evil_Fred from Netherlands
4 October 2013

Tho i am a massive fan of horror movies and my opinion might be slightly biased, this "horror" movie wasn't all that i hoped for. The story, like the original from the 80's, is exactly the same as the first part. Main character meets suspicious vampire looking person( in this case, a woman) , goes on to investigate which evolves into a showdown between the pro and antagonist.

Lack of budget means we get lesser known and lesser experienced actors, which is not necessarily a bad thing if only the story or the directing or the pacing or at least SOMETHING is done well and/or original, but nope This one was made purely to cash in on the genre fan base and the fright night name.So unfortunately its a step backwards in the series. If there is going to be a part 3, i would be surprised.

Enjoy. Evil_fred

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

I should have saved my time and money

Author: tags_skeewee from United States
31 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I wanted 'Ed' to die a horrible death within 1 minute of his screen time, that was my first sign that this 'sequel' was trying to pull one over on unsuspecting audience. Anyone with an IQ above 1 can understand what drivel this is. No suspense, no build up, no pacing, no seduction, I didn't care one iota about any of the characters, the acting is atrocious, the vampires had sound bites of lions and screaming banshees. The sound track sucked, the ending, who cares. From the start, nothing any of the characters does makes any cotton picking sense...why and how 'Charlie' scales 2 story building.....the chemistry between actors, oh, I forgot, there wasn't any...a band a monkeys could have written a better screen play.Save your time, money, and sanity.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

This 2013 film much closer resembles the 1985 original.

Author: Hellmant from United States
31 October 2013

'FRIGHT NIGHT 2: NEW BLOOD': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Sequel to the 2011 vampire comedy/horror film (which was a remake of the 1985 cult classic of the same name) about a teenager who learns his mysterious neighbor is a vampire. This sequel has none of the 2011 film's impressive cast (Colin Farrell, Anton Yelchin, David Tennant, Toni Collette, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, etc.) and was released directly to video (on a much smaller budget, I'm guessing). It's less of a sequel and more just another remake (and probably a more faithful one at that, if I remember the original that well) except this time the main evil vampire is a sexy female professor and the film is set in Romania (where a class of exchange students are studying). The film is not as entertaining as the 1985 original or it's 2011 remake but it does have a decent amount of amusing vampire thrills and a smokin' hot femme fatale villain (played by the gorgeous Jaime Murray).

The film focuses on three exchange students studying with their class in Romania: Charley (Will Payne), Amy (Sacha Parkinson) and 'Evil' Ed (Chris Waller). Charley is on the outs with his girlfriend Amy because she thinks he cheated on her. As he and his best friend Ed are checking in to their hotel room Charley sees a very attractive woman biting another woman in the building across the road from their hotel. He later learns that the sexy biter is his class professor, Gerri Dandridge (Murray). He also later learns that she's a vampire, as he secretly follows her into a sacrificial chamber, when she drains a prostitute of her blood and bathes in it (to restore her youth). Charley and Ed seek out TV paranormal investigation host Peter Vincent (now played by Sean Power) to help them stop the sinister vampire.

The original vampire antagonist, in the 1985 film, (played by Chris Sarandon) was also named Jerry Dandridge (with a J and a y) but the main villain in it's 1988 sequel was his sexy vampire sister Regine (played by Julie Carmen). I know I saw both films but I don't remember much about the second movie at all. So I can't say if this new sequel is better than it, or not, but I do know that this 2013 film much closer resembles the 1985 original (than it's 1988 follow-up). All of the characters names are the same, including 'Evil' Ed (who was originally played by Stephen Geoffreys), except for the slight spelling change of Gerri. The film was directed by Eduardo Rodriguez (who also directed the 2012 action film 'EL GRINGO', which was a lot of fun) and written by Matt Venne (who's made a career out of writing direct to video sequels, like 'MIRRORS 2' and 'WHITE NOISE 2: THE LIGHT'). I have no big problems with the film, it has some decent gore and frights, but it's just not very involving and is a little dull. For me the best thing about it is it's villain. I really like Jaime Murray (who also played a stunning femme fatale villain in the 2007 horror film 'THE DEATHS OF IAN STONE', which was pretty good). It's not a bad sequel but it's also not nearly as good a film as it's predecessors.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Ho and Hum...

Author: Filmsploitation The Film Podcast from United Kingdom
9 October 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The Review: So just what you needed right? A direct to video sequel to the remake of the 1985 cult horror film 'Fright Night'. Not that it is a sequel as much as a remake of the remake as well as a remake of the sequel to the original… Oh hell I have no idea what this film is. Other than a bit pointless.

By day Gerri Dandridge is a sexy professor, but by night she transforms into a real-life vampire with an unquenchable thirst for human blood. So when a group of high school students travel abroad to study in Romania, they find themselves ensnared in Gerri's chilling web of lust and terror.

So does this seq-make ( or re-qual) offer anything new? Well other than heaps of nudity ( although oddly not from the seemingly perpetual professional nude Jamie ) no. Not really. Even the blood isn't that forthcoming.

Murray and the mostly unknown cast are fine, as are the FX (when they do happen). The payoff is well handled but it's all a bit seen it all before.

Don't get me wrong- this isn't a terrible movie BUT if you have seen the original, it's sequel or it's remake, very quickly you will notice almost every element is borrowed from one or more of these far superior films. Yup this is DTV Lost Boys 3 territory fun at times but instantly forgettable. As original as a Katy Perry song and about as interesting, at least for those people who don't get their kicks from bargain basement horror films.

So if you are a horror fan who (gasp!) has yet to see a Fright Night movie… Watch the 1985 original. Or it's better than expected remake. At least that had Colin Farrell and David Tennant.

For more check out

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Murray is great but it's the epitome of an 80s horror sequel

Author: amesmonde from Novelist of The Final Version
8 October 2013

American students on a visit to Romania get more than they bargained for when they encounter a female vampire on which the legends are really based and call on help from Peter Vincent, a monster hunting reality star.

Despite a critical and fan black lash the 2011 Fright Night remake it was surprisingly entertaining enough. Fright Night 2 - New Blood starts well enough with its explosive and Paranormal Activity-esqe opening where an unseen vampire (on camera) assailant murders its victim. From pole dancing clubs to underground stations story wise with elements reminiscent of the fictionalised version of the real Elizabeth Báthory, this instalment may have fared better as a standalone vampire film.

Following a gratuitous Jamie Murray moment as Gerri Dandridge (and others littered throughout) we're introduced to a handful of stereotype characters, and a recast Peter Vincent (Sean Power) on his Most Haunted, Ghost Hunters, Faked or Fact-like programme which coincidently is being filmed in Romania. Aside from characters names it shares very little, if anything as a sequel to Fright Night the remake or the originals.

Writer Matt Venne serves up a sequel in the vein of a 80s horror cash-in follow-ups, it's a rehash/retelling of the same story, the overarching concept with a different backdrop. It features a nice touch where the antagonist uses bat like sonar to locate the leads. There's a few one liners, even a borrowed line from 'Happy Days' Fonz.

With a fitting soundtrack, a horned eerie score and some good blood and makeup effects it mainly benefits from Murray's natural allure and performance. To director Eduardo Rodriguez credit it has some great Gothic settings and locations and some novel camera work - other than that think a hybrid execution of it predecessor, the Subspecies series and American Werewolf in Paris. Aside from being more graphic it presents what the likes of Teen Wolf the TV series, True Blood, Vampire Diaries and Grimm to name a few offer.

What it lacks in originality, epitomizing all the trappings of a horror sequel it makes up for with its Hammer looking settings, violent and bloody soaked fun setups and surprising production values given its direct to video debut. Murray fans will be pleased.

Was the above review useful to you?

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

Add another review

Related Links

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