Fright Night (2011)

Tom Holland's 1985 vampire romp "Fright Night" was a fun, campy little horror flick that had some good laughs, good scares, and some pretty awesome effects. Soon enough, the movie developed its cult fan base. In the end, I find the original "Fright Night" to be one of the most underrated horror films of the 80's.

Frankly, I was actually quite excited for this remake, knowing that it had a great cast and Marti Noxon(who commonly wrote for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer") was at the helm of the script. I personally don't mind remakes. Some people take them way too seriously. Of course, there are some that fail, but a lot of them work really well. The 2011 edition of "Fright Night" works!

Set in a beautiful suburban area of Las Vegas, the movie introduces us to Charley Brewster, a nerdy but charismatic teenager who we find out has given up his relationship with his friend "Evil" Ed to be with the cooler kids, including his hot new girlfriend Amy. Then he meets Jerry Dandrige, a buff, sweet new neighbor that Charley's mom and Amy take a liking to. When Ed tries to warn Charley of Jerry's hidden, and gruesome, intentions, things take a turn for the worse. More people wind up missing, and it becomes evident to Charley that Jerry is a vampire. Nobody believes him before it's too late, and it's up to him and Hard Rock celebrity Peter Vincent to kill this sucker(pun intended) once and for all.

While it pays so much respect to the original movie, "Fright Night" also adds a few new elements that elevate it above other remakes. There are some scenes that are lifted right from the original, even two of the original's most classic lines, but the movie breaks several horror movie rules and invents new ones, like whether or not a vampire can come into another person's house.

The CGI effects in this remake are surprisingly quite good. I didn't see the film in 3D(which I heard doesn't do much for the movie), but in its 2D format, the geysers of blood shoot out magnificently without going over the top, and the makeup is true to the original vampire look in the 1985 film.

"Fright Night" boasts a fantastic cast of well-known actors. Anton Yelchin, as always, does a great job and fits the role of Charley perfectly. Toni Collette stands out as Charley's mother, and Imogen Poots is terrific as Amy. Unlike other horror blonds, the script allows Amy to be smart, and at times brave enough to try to take down Jerry herself. Also, Ms. Poots is an awesome screamer. Christopher Mintz- Plasse is great for the role of "Evil" Ed, and he was born to play that role in this remake. He gets some pretty funny lines and an enjoyable amount of screen time. David Tennant, known for starring in the recent TV revival of "Doctor Who," takes over from Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, and makes for a funny vision of the character.

And then there's Colin Farrell as Jerry. Don't get me wrong. The cast is wonderful. But Farrell eats his role up and nearly steals the show. Sometimes, he doesn't have to do anything, and he still creeps you out. One particular scene in which he has a conversation with Charley sets the character up to be quite fearful. This is not a "Twilight" vampire that Farrell creates. This is a "rip your throat out with no regrets" monster that is impossible not to be freaked out by. Basically, Colin Farrell bathes in his role like the character bath

Fmovies: After a mysterious stranger moves into his neighborhood, a teen and his friends accidentally stumble upon his terrifying secret about being a vampire and recruits a famous vampire hunter to try to stop the trail of carnage left behind and his friends become the next target.

This was a surprisingly decent enough affair that wasn't really all that bad with some good points to it. Among the better parts here is the absolutely fun storyline throughout here that does compare favorably against the original since the ruse is discovered early on. This has a lot of rather fun antics that really push this along, from their initial meeting that clues him, the strange way he continually creeps around the neighborhood to pop up at exactly the wrong time or the few behavioral ticks that give him away which all go wrapped together alongside the previously-discovered videotapes that all help to give this one the work needed to fully reveal the ruse. Beyond this, the scenes stalking around the house where he has to free the captive inside and her eventual fate not only gives this one yet another charge for the ruse yet also features quite a really suspenseful sequence to help build that section more beyond the friendly scenes. There's a lot to come off of that in its action in here, from the house destruction and eventual high-speed chase along the highway that has a lot to like about it during their various chases and encounters with him to the battle in the office that includes some nice stalking scenes through the endless rows of artifacts stored away or battling the creatures in the panic room. As well, this here has the final assault on the underground hideout with all the turned victims providing enough of a battle to allow for some big action moments before the one-on-one confrontation, which is rather entertaining in its own right as there's some rather fun fighting here with their contraptions and some decent enough gore scenes to make it interesting. Along with the vampire makeup and gore, this is a pretty good effort with a lot to like although there are a few problematic elements here. The film's biggest flaw is the fact that the ruse is found out far too early and far too easily, since there's little investigation required to find out his true identity and it's all out in the open with such little push- back or need to look further into who he is which makes for some questionable storyline points. Along with this effort, the film also manages to stumble somewhat in it's CGI which is rather cheesy and clumsy throughout here as there are some exceptionally weak shots in here. The fact that so many of them are due to the wounds inflicted upon him which is quite obvious due to his spastic movements and disorienting behavior during the attacks, and along with the transformation scenes and use of blood and gore all just make for a rather flawed experience. These do knock it down somewhat but not enough to lower it overall.

Rated R: Graphic Language and Graphic Violence.

Twenty-six years ago, "Fright Night" premiered in theaters and went on to become a fondly remembered title amongst horror fans. The movie cleverly combined horror and humor to create a fresh take on the vampire and teen horror genres which had started to grow stale. While the movie spawned a largely forgettable direct to video sequel, the original film has remained popular over the years. So, when I first heard that they were planning on remaking the film I was skeptical as I felt it would be very difficult to match the original film.

Boasting an impressive cast which includes Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and Toni Collette, the remake does not try to reinvent the wheel, but instead takes the formula of the original and creates an entirely new entry into the saga.

For those unfamiliar with the series, Yelchin stars as Charlie Brewster, a young man who is trying to balance watching over his single mother, and his growing relationship with a girl way out of his league named Amy (Imogen Poots). He is also wrestling with becoming part of a cooler crowd at the cost of alienating his geeky former best friend, Ed, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse.

Colin Farrell plays the handsome and suave new next door neighbor who easily charms Charlie's mom, played by Toni Colette. Unbeknownst to his neighbors, the charming and charismatic Jerry, played by Colin Ferrell, is actually a vampire who's come to their Las Vegas suburb to continue his nighttime hunts. Ed has become suspicious of the recent disappearances in their community and confides to Charlie that he's had Jerry under surveillance and knows that he is a vampire.

Needless to say this does not sit well with Charlie, who distances himself further from Ed. But when Ed goes missing, Charlie decides to do some investigating of his own. Charlie turns to a local Vegas performance artist named Peter Vincent (David Tennant), whose vampire-themed show portrays him as an expert in fighting the undead. While at first skeptical over Charlie's claims, a few devastating confrontations with Jerry and his minions forces Vincent to rethink his role. The two unlikely allies soon find themselves in a deadly race against time to defeat Jerry and save their loved ones before it's too late.

The film cleverly combines horror and comedy and does a good job of providing some suspenseful moments in between the blood and gore, managing to squeeze in more than a few laughs along the way. While not overly scary, the visual effects work is solid and aside from the converted 3-D is a really enjoyable to watch. The film would've been much better had it been shot in 3-D or simply left as a 2-D film as the conversion really didn't offer anything of value as is often the case in these lab converted efforts.

The cast works very well with one another and Farrell cheekily introduces a few new wrinkles to the vampire lore. I really enjoyed David Tennant's performance and should they do a sequel I certainly hope that they bring him back. Anton Yelchin gives a reliable performance but I was surprised that Christopher Mintz-Plasse did not have a bigger role but he does have some memorable moments in the film. What really impressed me was that the film did not attempt to do a shot-by-shot remake of the original but instead took the premise of the original and offered a fresh take that easily could have been issued as the third chapter in the series rather than a reboot. While there were nods to the

Fright Night fmovies. Remaining in the same vein as many recent horror outings, "Fright Night" is more of an eerie action comedy than a straight-out scare fest. Good. That's my favorite type, especially considering scares in and of themselves hardly garner a pull anymore. Also, with a title like "Fright Night," we have an understanding with the filmmakers that we're getting one of those throwback horror flicks. You know, the ones that gave the horror genre that fun movie-going reputation it had in the 80′s before tasteless gore and tiresome predictability defiled the genre? This film succeeds on that promise, quickly turning itself into the quintessential "fun" horror flick perfect for Friday night.

Styled after Alfred Hitchcock's "Rear Window" (which inspired its own modern retelling, "Disturbia") with a suave vampire living next-door instead of a mysterious stranger, this plot is very similar to its original. Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin; "Star Trek") is a ex-nerd who has joined 'the cool crowd,' dropping his oldest friend "Evil" Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse; "Kick-Ass") for a hot cheerleader girlfriend (Imogen Poots; "28 Weeks Later"). Things are looking oh-so-grand for the little flake (I mean, come on, any guy who hurtfully tells his friend "the day my life got better was the day I stopped hanging with you" is well a douche), he gets a new next-door neighbor that his mom (Toni Collette; "The Sixth Sense") takes a liking to: Jerry Dandrige (Colin Farrell; "Horrible Bosses"). Now Jerry seems like a cool guy, but as we all know, you don't cast Colin Farrell to be your average next-door neighbor. Ed's attempts to convince Charley that Jerry is actually a vampire fail, but when Ed himself goes missing and Jerry shows proof of what he is, Charley goes to the only person who might have the answer: Peter Vincent (David Tennant; "Doctor Who"), the Las Vegas magician who boasts of supernatural knowledge on how to kill vampires.

The choice to modernize the original 1985 "Fright Night" doesn't like that bright an idea considering the current rule that all horror remakes suck, but somehow this became a unique effort due to diligent actors, a reliable director, and successful laugh and scare gags. It is, without exaggeration, the first great entry in the long line of atrocious horror remakes. It takes what we liked about the original and comes up some clever changes that update the story 26 years to the present.

From an ingenious kill method at the end to wickedly suspenseful chase scenes, "Fright Night" boasts some surprisingly memorable scenes – some of which are incredibly suspenseful considering we think we should know what to expect from a vampire thriller. The opening is a startling 3D shot through dark thunderclouds that ends in an impeccably-executed family massacre. With Craig Gillespie's (the outstanding director of "Lars and the Real Girl") imaginative direction and Ramin Djawadi's (scorer of "Iron Man" and "Mr. Brooks") jarringly effective and wholly memorable musical score, the film hits all the beats it strives for with manic zeal.

The all-star cast deliver a gratifying romp of suspense and chuckles, but the movie belongs to its villain and its anti-hero, Colin Farrell and David Tennant. The rest give solid performances (especially Mintz-Plasse), but they pale compared to the main act.

It has occurred to me that when people refer to a new "reimagining" of a beloved film, they use the term "unnecessary remake." I've been guilty of that myself. I really tend to think, however, that technically any remake is unnecessary. No one "needs" to be told what is basically the same story (in most cases) twice. I've also heard the argument that bad films are the ones that should be remade, not good ones. I can understand that to an extent, but do people really want to sit through a new version of something they hated the first time? No remake is going to make everyone happy; it's just not possible. Unless of course, you haven't SEEN the original.

So, just how should a remake be judged? As a stand-alone film, or how it compares to a previous one we love so much? And I do love writer-director Tom Holland's 1985 vampire flick FRIGHT NIGHT. It is just the right mix of comedy, terror, suspense, terrific performances, and an affection for old-fashioned scares. Many others have fond memories of it as well, so I relate to the "why"s and the "oh don't screw it up"s, and the "leave it alone"s. After all, beloved films are dumped on all the time by would-be filmmakers out to make a quick buck for the safe Hollywood studios.

Most of the central story is intact: Anton Yelchin leads the cast as Charley Brewster, a used-to-be high-school misfit who comes to the realization, thanks to childhood buddy Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) that his new neighbor Jerry (Colin Farrell) is a vampire. It isn't long before he's convinced his single mother (Toni Collette) and his girlfriend (Imogen Poots) of this discovery...at which point all sorts of bloody hell breaks loose.

Screenwriter Marti Noxon has infused a basic story (whose plot points and situations weren't always very believable) with some new smarts, including adding more depth to the central characters. And the setting has changed to a cookie-cutter suburb of Las Vegas, where people sleep during the day, work at night, and are much more transient. Another interesting change is the character of Peter Vincent. In the original, Roddy McDowall played a hammy horror host and actor: Peter Vincent, the Great Vampire Killer. Here, David Tennant assumes the role, but Vincent has become an elaborate Vegas magician who performs vampire-killing antics on the stage. In both versions, they are recruited by our hero to help slay the bloodsucker. It's an ultra- modern twist, but within the location context, works beautifully.

During the first hour or so of 2011's new incarnation, I was shocked to think that I may end up liking this remake even more than the original. But after some hair-raising moments in the first half, culminating in a dark, desert car chase, the film threatens to go off the rails in a sequence that's a bit hokey, over the top, and unfortunately timed. And there are a few iffy CGI instances as well. Luckily, things get back on track with a climax that's executed with a uniquely creepy wit, and a few good shocks and surprises. Director Craig Gillespie (LARS AND THE REAL GIRL, "United States of Tara") earns respect for pulling off (for him) an unfamiliar genre; he also pays homage to a few memorable scenes in the original without trying to copy or disrespect them.

Most of the performances are engaging and authentic (aside from Mintz-Plasse in his later moments), with Tennant's wry turn a real treat, and the ever-wonderful Colle

R.I.P. Anton Yelchin (1989 - 2016). It is a tragedy he past away yesterday so young and he is no longer with us anymore. So my review is dedicated in memory of Anton.

Fright Night (2011) I s a really good decent remake of the original horror flick Fright Night (1985). Usually I hate remakes and reboots, but there are some good remakes that I like. Fright Night is one of them! I love Vampire movies and this one is pretty good and well done. I know that Original is the best vampire slasher horror film, but that doesn't mean that remake is awful, which is not! This movie is good and has a good story and does not copy the original. The idea of this film is pure originality. The writers and the director did not copy the original film, but he used his imaginative, that's what makes this film so good. This film is very hated and bashed from critics and fans who just don't understand this film, I do and I love it. It is my favorite slasher comedy horror vampire flick! Sorry but I love it!

This remake is actually good, it Is not bad it is good! - I enjoyed it - The scene when Colin is in the doorway and he is telling Charlie that it's up to him to look out for his girl & his mom - Colin plays that scene just about perfect - a warning & menacing at the same time:)!!!! This movie is fun I loved it. It didn't drag, it was just right, It had a comedy and it had a horror to it, it was a good remake! An example of a good horror remake. Colin Farrell is extremely, extremely underrated in everything he does, it is sad because he is awesome as Jerry the vampire, I like him as vampire. This awesome actor made me lough before he even told a joke. And I just lough because this guy is awesome. This was just a good fun time at the movie theater, I didn't see it in movie theater but you know what I mean, it is a good fun time. It has fun with it, doesn't take it self too serious, like the original one did, which kind a brought the movie down for me. This one knows it is a satire comedy, horror comedy and it treats it as such. Too bad this movie failed! Of all the remakes this one failed! Well the sucky remakes make the money! This is by far the second good horror remake I believe, the first one will always gonna be My Blood Valentine 3D (2009) and the third will be Sorority Row (2009) not that good horror flick but still a good horror film! I am sorry that was awesome, I did enjoyed this movie.

This was an excellent film that distinguished itself from the amazing original but still through out a few shout outs here and there. The cast was awesome with amazing performances by Colin Farrell & Anton Yelchin in the staring roles. The good thing: Amy's (Imogen Poots) part from the original as a girl not sure of herself has been changed to more of a girl who isn't shy about herself or how she feels about Charlie. Also, instead of Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) being the skeptic, it's now Charlie (Anton Yelchin) who doesn't believe his next-door neighbor is a vampire. The bad: I have one problem with it and that is David Tennant as great vampire slayer Peter Vincent, don't get me wrong but for me will always be Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, cause this actor can kick the out of David Tennant''s ass and any vampire out there. I wish they would putt Roddy McDowall back in the role instead of David Tennat. I don't like this version of Peter Vincent AT ALL - they should have kept him true to the original. But Roddy McDowall died in 1998 before they could cast him back