Night of the Demons (2009) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
57 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
A Halloween night to forget.
lewiskendell1 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.
23 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Very poor
weemonk11 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.
34 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A remake?
christopherleebolton2 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!
16 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Can someone give this film a clue?
hoodieJ3 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.
38 out of 69 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
It wasn't scary!
paul_haakonsen14 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.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Lost the fun of the original.
p0pnfresh200220 December 2010
Warning: 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.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lacks Any Real Imagination
Michael_Elliott26 October 2010
Night of the Demons (2009)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Remake of the 1987 cult classic has a group of people throwing a party in a mysterious house where decades earlier a Halloween party was thrown and six people disappeared. Flash forward to the present day and the party takes a turn for the worse when one person gets transformed into a demon and starts killing the others. A lot of people are going to hate this movie because they're fans of the original. A lot of people are going to hate this film because it's a remake. And even more people are going to hate this movie because it's unoriginal and not very inspired and it's this group that I fall into. I wasn't overly crazy about the original film but this remake is a complete mess from the word go and by the fifteen-minute mark the thing is out of gas and it was rather painful to make it through to the end. The biggest problem is that the screenplay really doesn't offer us anything fresh, original or worth watching. The characters are all poorly written and I think they're all rather unlikeable. It doesn't help that the performances aren't that good but this is a horror movie so that shouldn't matter too much. I'm not sure what it is but it seems a lot of current horror movies are forgetting to include characters that you either like or care about. Instead we have to watch people we don't care for get killed. It's just boring when there's nothing extra to connect you with the characters. Another major problem is that there isn't a drop of atmosphere and there are certainly no scares. The film is certainly lazy because it's yet another that tries to scare you by cranking the soundtrack up high and having loud noises go off to make you jump. Hopefully future films will get over this cheap trick because it doesn't work and it's simply lazy and boring. Edward Furlong of TERMINATOR 2 fame gets to play the lead here but he doesn't seem very into it. The violence in the film is rather graphic but the CGI effects are rather cheap and silly looking. NIGHT OF THE DEMONS was meant for a theatrical release but it ended up only playing a few dates before its eventually DVD release. The film isn't the worst ever made but the laziness and lack of imagination really seals its fate.
16 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Let's play "hide the lipstick"!
Coventry7 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.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
So awful that it manages to give a worse name to terrible remakes!
Andy-198114 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.
14 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Stick to the original
SeanH197726 October 2010
I had decent hopes for this one, being a fan of the cheesy and fun original, but alas, was disappointed yet again. First off, other than demons, in a house and the title, nothing else is similar to the original. Calling this an update not a remake would seem more apt.

I was surprised to see a few decent B-actors in this film, as when I first heard about it, figured it'd be a bunch of no names with maybe a brief cameo or two. There is one brief cameo I noticed, Linnea Quigley answering the door for trick or treater's.

To the actors, Shannon Elizabeth looks about mid 40s in this film. Definitely not the hottie "Nadia" in the first 2 American Pie films, or sexy like her Maxim Days or for that matter, Scary Movie. Doira Baird looks good, real good if you like your women with breasts the size of pumpkins. Monica Keena, looked amazing. What a body! Not that you get to see anything under those clothes. And Edward Furlong. Not sure what his story has been the past 15 years, but he looks like a bloated drug addict. Not just this movie either. As far as the acting goes, its serviceable, but don't expect major thespian work here.

The directing was all over the map. I think the best parts were in the beginning with the whole silent film tactic used for the back story. It was well done, and although re-used throughout parts of the film, could have been nicer to see more of.

The demon effects were well done, but the gore was hammy. And although there is loads of blood on screen, there isn't much gory deaths. Basically total cheese fight encounters that make you groan in disbelief than getting pumped up for. Seriously, watching a couple young kids playfight in the backyard would seem to have more choreography.

In closing, the film could have had a lot more. Better kills, cleaner fights, more nudity (why just show a quick peak?), cleaner direction, better story. It plays like a comedy with horror undertones, which if the tables were flipped into a horror with some comedy, would have been much more entertaining. Not the worst thing I've seen this year, but far, far, far from the best or even mediocre. 3/10
12 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
kinda worthy of the gong
swordofgreyskull22 October 2010
So I have an idea, let's take some actors/actresses that were mildly popular at one time but everyone will recognize and put them in a remake of an 80's horror movie! Pure gold, right?! Wrong. (Extra spaces for emphasis) If you have seen the original and like it at all, please do not even attempt to watch this travesty. Nothing even remotely like the original Night of the Demons, the film just seems clumsy and uninspired. I actually watched Dead Silence after this and was more entertained. Oh, and Edward Furlong and Shannon Elizabeth grant us with their presence but it feels like they needed work and accepted the first offer they got.
11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Demonic fun eventually burns itself out
Quebec_Dragon14 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)
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Return
kosmasp25 October 2009
Of Edward Furlong in that case. And while he still has Charisma, he might be the weak link of this movie. He just doesn't fit into this movie. I can't really explain why, but he doesn't seem to feel comfortable when he is on screen. Which is a shame really, because he could've carried this Remake.

It's a long time since I last saw the Original, which wasn't the greatest Horror movie ever, but still pretty decent (especially for the money it did cost). The Remake does have the money, does have a few good ideas (one of them being of the sexual kind) and does have a killer soundtrack (no pun intended). If that's enough for a Rock'N'Roll experience for you, then ho ahead and watch. If you need more to enjoy a movie, you will be disappointed (not that much gore, not that much story, characters not really likable etc.).
11 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not worth it
oprlvr333 July 2013
Whooo..... Young women dressed in slutty "kitten" garb...boobs (nothing smaller than a DD cup) pushed up to their chins; a Fairuza Bulk wannabe playing Vampira hostess...

Whatever

I HAVE seen the original.. and this "remake" does not rock it.

The acting is stool (as in feces), the demon-action so-so, the "graphic" sex scene only okay (I've seen better stuff in amateur porn).. before they turn Demon.

Not much worth writing about except very poor production and acting. I've seen lower budget B films much better than this waste. And yes...I did end up fast-fwd a LOT
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
This is my kinda of movies
atinder20 December 2011
Night of the Demons (2009) (Never seen the old one) I was really looking forward to see this movie and it was NOT let down.

.As a lot Drinking, sex, Boobs and some gory scenes (not a lot) and some good scarce scene, which did make me jump and some really funny moments as wells .

I really liked this movie, it was a lot of fun, i also liked how movie title appeared that really good and i can not wait to see this again on Friday.

8 out of 10 , acting was not great but it was cheesy which was perfect for this movie lol.

Tomorrow need to stock up on some beers. so can see this again Friday! This is PERFECT! Friday! movie

I can not wait to see this again time but I with have some beer in my hand!
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
You know what, I enjoyed it...more than I should have.
pilkkari4 July 2012
I really liked this movie. It's a remake of a "classic" movie from '88. I saw this one first and everything for me worked. Cheesy horror premise; check. Half naked babes; check. Demons a plenty; check check. And now that I have watched the original I think this version is far superior in both acting and script. Not gonna spoil anything major but the premise is the same, teenagers in a haunted house getting possessed by sneaky demons is the main thing . This movie is far superior both in dialog and the script departments. The 2009 version has some twists and spooky moments, the old one just had soap opera wannabe dialog and the whole story followed in that line. I think that the two versions are really different all and all and you should check both of them out. I'm also a sucker for Shannon Elizabeth so it's an 8 from me. I think I have seen the majority of both a and b horror stuff from 2009 and I really thought this was a good one and in no way is this worth a 4. It really improves on the original in every way.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Waste of time
grandfunkfan23 October 2010
I've never seen the original movie Night Of The Demons; many people compare this 2009 version with the 1980s version. I can't make that comparison, but I can warn people, "DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME ON THIS MOVIE!" Night of the Demons 2009 is a total waste of time from browsing the shelves, to grabbing something in a hurry to get home, to fast-forwarding through the movie after viewing less than five minutes.

Night of the Demons 2009 attempts to be scary and funny, but fails on both counts. From my fast-forward view, the movie seems to be nothing but blood and boobs.

There are many good scary funny movies that people could watch; one recommendation is Dark Harvest from 2004.
7 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Night of the remakes, it's clear it's the 2000s
StevePulaski10 November 2010
Director Adam Gierasch gives a mediocre to decent view on the remake of the 1986 film Night of the Demons. The release of this film has been tied up for a while due to the debate whether it should earn a theatrical or direct to DVD run. It finally settled on premiering at the London FrightFest Film Festival back in Halloween 2009 and finally was released on DVD this year. The film falls in the category of unnecessary remakes and as a film itself it just isn't that grade. Not only did the word "remake" turn me off but so did the word "demons".

When demons enter the picture trouble follows. Demons require a lot of pointless backstory. Unfortunately you need the backstory to understand the damn movie itself. It's like Final Destination, only it's much more easier to understand whats going on because, while not logical, is a strangely effective way for you to keep watching to show how odd these people die. Demons are fictional creatures and they involve spells, writings, and a history. It gets worse when people try to explain whats going on and it's like "just give it up" you can explain it twelve more times and it doesn't make an ounce of sense. In one scene they are in a room where supposedly the demons cant enter because of the writings on the wall. We never know what these writings mean or let what they even say.

Since I haven't seen the original film, I can't judge it in any way, shape, or form. I'm not even positive if both movies share the same plot. This version revolves around the sexy Angela Feld who is holding a party at the Broussard mansion, which is reportedly haunted by demons and other mythical beings. The party is filled with sex crazed, hormonal kids who just want a piece of the sex pie when suddenly the police come an invade the party, scolding the teens, and forcing them to vacate the area.

A group of teens neglect to leave and then realize that now the gates won't opened and they are subjected to seclusion inside the creepy mansion. Though after an encounter with corpses in the basement, Angela and many others turn into blood thirsty demons that now feed on the lives of the innocent teenagers. As Roger Ebert would say, "a dead teenager movie".

While this remake is probably not as recognized as the 2009 reboot of Friday the 13th, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The original NOTD was popular during the 80's, but it is definitely overshadowed by slasher classics like Friday the 13th, Halloween, and Nightmare on Elm Street. This remake does have something going for it though; insanely catchy metal soundtrack, some cute teenage girls, no CGI, no Michael Bay, and Eddie Furlong.

If Eddie Furlong wasn't in this film it wouldn't have been wouldn't have been half as good as it was. Reminds me of how Giuseppe Andrews made Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever and if he was absent the film would have been less than what it already is. Sly and sexy Shannon Elizabeth of American Pie and Jay and Silent Bob Strikes Back too plays a good role in this film. It is quite fun to see her strut her stuff on set, even when she is a blood thirsty demon.

In no means does Night of the Demons qualify as a passable remake. I highly doubt the original film is like this. For what it is, it's definitely a remake in 2009 and nothing less. This is something Ill watch once and never touch again. This is the kind of film that sits on the shelf for weeks until the stock boy picks it up and says "Who would leave this out?" and throw it in the back where it would sit for years to come. That's a bit harsh, but Gierasch does little to impress with this mediocre remake of another 80's film. But Monica Keena gets my sympathy; first she is caught in the dueling duo of Freddy and Jason, now she's victim to demons? Someone take this girl FAR away from teen parties.

Starring: Shannon Elizabeth, Monica Keena, Bobbi Sue Luther, John F. Beach, Edward Furlong, Michael Copon, Diora Baird, and Linnea Quigley. Directed by: Adam Gierasch.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fun movie in the spirit of the original
TdSmth510 May 2012
Angela to raise some funds organizes a huge party. Attending the party are 3 female friends of hers, a guy who's interested in one of the girls and his buddy, and a drug dealer who used to be the ex of one of the girls. The cops eventually arrive and shut down the party. When our group of kids try to leave, they find the gate locked. In looking for alternate exit they go the basement, where they find a bunch of skeletons. One bites Angela's finger.

Now Angela turns into a demon who's after her friends. During spin the bottle she makes out with one of the guys who becomes a demon as well. He ends up having sex with one of the girls and that turns her into a demon. Angela literally chews of the face of another girl who now is a demon. That leaves 2 guys and a girl who have to deal with the 4 demons. One of the guys is played by an unrecognizable Edward Furlong. The girl is played by Monica Keena, who still doesn't show any skin but at least makes out with another girl. Keena should seriously consider suing her cosmetic butcher, who has ruined her face.

The kids find shelter in a room that has protective writing scribbled on the walls. The house has some dark demonic history. 7 demons are needed but they only have before sunrise to achieve their goals. It's only a couple of hours more but Angela and her minions have some tricks up their sleeve as well.

Night of the Demons is just what you expect and want from a remake of the classic 80s movie. It's sexy, funny, entertaining, gory, fun. Although more nudity wouldn't have hurt. It's good to see the lovely Shannon Elizabeth. The other girls are also attractive and very voluptuous. I'm glad to say that Gierasch has improved his direction over the years and in this movie he does an excellent job. His writing together with Jace Anderson is great, the dialog is natural for kids and the script overall is smart and fun. The special effects though aren't very convincing. Perhaps it's the lighting but there's no doubt that a mask is a mask. Still, a worthy and honorable remake.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Night Of The NOT Very Good
torstensonjohn10 July 2018
Paying respect to a film by trying to remake it DOES NOT always pan out. This is the case with the 2009 version of Night of the Demons. Being a smaller than normal budget film and having to mediocre stars in Furlong and Elizabeth as leads did nothing for this movie. In my honest opinion NOT a very good film choice for Shannon Elizabeth. The first film in 1988 scores an almost 7 out of 10 with originality and this barely hits 5.

The plot is generic as college age kids party at an abandoned house that has a haunting secret. Typical scenario as police raid and bust party and half dozen young adults get locked inside. They roam the house, find strange markings, skeletons in a secret room and demonic hell results. The dialogue is bland, full of "f***s" and "s***s", the acting is tragically phoned in and there is no scare tact at all.

It is a simple supposed to be gore fest that fails at most levels. I would NOT recommend but if in need for a filler for the afternoon you can watch this flat remake of a 1988 cult classic. 4/10
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A demonic night
TheLittleSongbird27 May 2018
Was drawn into seeing 'Night of the Demons', with a cool poster/cover, an intriguing and quite creative premise and as someone with a general appreciation for horror. Haven't seen the original 'Night of the Demons' yet so can't judge. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive.

'Night of the Demons', simply put, turned out to be a terrible, worse than feared film with next to no redeeming values and so much done catastrophically wrong. Very nearly one of the worst films seen in a while, which is saying a lot for somebody who on the most part has been encouraged by their film/television watching and has more often than that been quite generous. Decent idea, very bad execution.

Lets start with two positives. The scenery is atmospheric, if wasted by the schlocky way the film is shot and particularly edited.

The demon effects are remarkably pretty good.

However, the story does feel over-stretched, the whole film is dull and it takes forever to get anywhere, and some of it feels vague, under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less scary. Too many characters are too sketchy and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their irritating and illogical decision making and behaviours insult the intelligence. Making the film feel bland and forgettable with not enough heart put into it. The acting is also terrible, with only Shannon Elizabeth trying (Edward Furlong phones it in) trying, while the music is cheap and inappropriate.

Dialogue can be stilted and rambling while the pace is uneven, dragging in a lot of the second half and never is it exciting. Found too many the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the supposedly creepy atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness and the lack of tension and suspense. A large part of the problem being the excessive gratuity of the elements thrown in to "spice things up", especially the gore that it feels tasteless.

A lot of the film completely fails to make sense, both in underdeveloped plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations. The demons look pretty good but don't act very scary and they're used poorly. Momentum is nowhere and the atmosphere completely falls flat. Everything feels both overdone and tame.

Summing up, very bad. 2/10 Bethany Cox
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Nice homage to the original
garyklinecc29 May 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Nice homage to the original. The writers apparently decided to 'fix' a few things with the original plot, but in the end they deliver a comfortably typical horror movie.

In the original, there was no reason why the demons should have failed to kill/possess all the kids. The demons seemed to just show up randomly and chase them around. Here, the writers spent some effort to lay down some rules, so the demons can try to work around them. The kids (young adults, really - they're all apparently over 21) even get a means to fight back. So there's a real battle going on, and just maybe, some of them will walk out alive. Or not.

From the early mirror scene, I could tell that the director knew that he was making a cliché demon/slasher/horror movie, and it's a remake to boot. So while he plays a little bit with our expectations, he ultimately delivers the conventional horror movie that the audience is expecting.

No, its not terribly inventive. No, there's very little here that's new. But it has sex, it has gore, it's got a few jolts and some wry jokes, and a nice little surprise at the end. This is a movie that wears a smirk and a wink, and hopes you enjoy the show.

I love the little touches, like the glimpse of a party guest wearing an "Alice in Wonderland" outfit. :)
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Punk rock demon flick remake with rocking soundtrack, just OK.
Hellmant13 December 2010
'NIGHT OF THE DEMONS': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five) Low budget Halloween horror film from director Adam Gierasch, co-written by Gierasch and Jace Anderson. The same team also co-wrote the Tobe Hooper film 'TOOLBOX MURDERS' and Gierasch directed the 2008 after-dark-horror fest entry 'AUTOPSY' (both entertaining 'B' horror films). This is a remake of the cult classic of the same name from 1988 which spawned two sequels. It stars an assortment of B movie stars and has-beens (like Shannon Elizabeth and Edward Furlong). The film tells the story of a trio of girls (Monica Keena ,of 'FREDDY VS. JASON' fame, Diora Baird and Bobbie Sue Luther) who attend a Halloween party thrown by their friend (Elizabeth) at a notorious mansion where six people disappeared eight years earlier and the owner hung herself. Two of the girls run into their ex-boyfriends (Furlong and Michael Copon) and their friend (John F. Beach) and the seven get locked in the mansion after the party's shut down by the cops. They find the skeletons of the six missing people in the basement and soon learn they're being picked off by demons. The film has a great carefree punk attitude and the soundtrack rocks. It's a little reminiscent of the 'EVIL DEAD' films and Gierasch's directing is more than adequate for this type of film. A lot of the acting is pretty bad though, the dialog is weak and many scenes are kind of pointless. I haven't seen the original film or it's sequels so I don't know how this remake compares but as far as other B horror films go I'd say it's pretty average.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A good remake!
JMDoane4223 November 2010
Finally, a remake I actually enjoyed more than the original. Granted though, that's not saying much since the original was nothing special.

This film doesn't take itself too seriously. The humor comes not necessarily from the dialogue (although there are a few funny lines) but from the absurdity of the situation. The demons don't really follow any rules, they seem to be intent only on forcing the survivors into one laughably bizarre predicament to the next. But that's not saying it feels fake. The actors do a good job of keeping the dialogue light but still conveying the sense that they really are in mortal danger.

The effects and costumes are well done. There's a few scenes of sudden gore and brutality that caught even me off guard, and I consider myself a horror veteran. MAJOR kudos to the director for not using a hint of CGI, the gore is all "real" here.

The only scene that I really remember from the original is the infamous "lipstick" scene. And apparently I'm not the only one that it made an impression on, because the director has recreated that scene here and even taken it one step further....that's all I can say. The line of dialogue after that scene had me busting out laughing.

In summary, don't expect a deep plot and don't take it too seriously. Come for the non-CG gore effects, gratuitous nudity, and a good laugh or two.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Decent 80's horror tribute
white_fire412 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The original Night of the Demons, when I first saw it, I thought it was terrible. It had some interesting things happening in it, but for the most part, it was a lot of babbling about nothing, a lot of teens being stupid and what not.....in keeping with the original, the remake is actually really good at that.

The teens all wind up at the mansion for a party that angela has thrown, and in a reversal from the original, she's not some crazy goth chick that nobody likes, instead, she's actually got the mansion completely full of people and throwing a hell of a party.

Now....had they kept the mansion full of people to allow for a hell of a lot more killings, there would at least be entertainment value there. Instead, the police show up, bust the party, and through very stupid reasons, the main people all end up back inside, and the gate somehow locks them in.

This movie is infamous, much like old 80's horror films, for the constantly changing outside of the house. The gate itself is different when you see it every time, the outside of the house is made out to be insanely huge, yet shots showing the whole exterior, you know it's not that big. Ironically, the inside, for the most part, stays the same (keep an eye out later in the movie though, when they leave a room covered in spells on the wall....very bad continuity shot at one point) The demon effects are meh. The only actually good looking one was Suzanne imo. The rest were pretty generic, and even Angela wasn't anything special, which was very disappointing. Almost NO demon talk whatsoever, and very little actual gore. They did the lipstick scene though, which was nice to see, and unfortunately, was about the only neat scene in the whole movie. You see very little of Angela.

This one does try to give reasoning and a story behind everything happening, and why the demons are there....when it does come out, of course, it feels like cliché crap, although Furlong has some very good lines about stuff like that.

Overall, it was made much like the movies of the 80's were, just more polished and neat looking, but still shitty. Quite a big budget for straight to DVD though, and it's worth a rental at least.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed