Home > Horror >

Fright Night

Watch Now

Fright Night (2011)

August. 19,2011
|
6.4
|
R
| Horror Comedy
Watch Now

A teenager suspects his new neighbour is a vampire. Unable to convince anyone, he tries to enlist the help of a self-proclaimed vampire hunter and magician.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Cortechba
2011/08/19

Overrated

More
RipDelight
2011/08/20

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

More
Kailansorac
2011/08/21

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

More
Adeel Hail
2011/08/22

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

More
The Movie Diorama
2011/08/23

Within the dark depths of Hollywood, some mortal thought it would be a genius idea to remake the 1985 cult classic. Whilst it retains some enjoyment, it is messier than a vampire's drunken night out (hint: pretty messy). At the time of this review, I have not seen the original so shall not be making comparisons. A suburban teenager realises that his friends are rapidly becoming missing, he investigates the disappearance of his old best friend only to find that he may be living next door to a vampire. Marketed as a horror thriller, but actually rather a cacophony of gothically presented genres that feel mundane and outdated. Very reminiscent of 80s classics like 'The Lost Boys' and I'm sure the original 'Fright Night', but this symmetrical representation is costly. The campy aesthetics negates any horrifying thrills, particularly in 2011, and the comedic elements frequently miss. That's not to say the two don't complement each other, as brutal fights with the undead should always be finished off with a one liner. "Welcome to the fright night". Enjoyably cringeworthy, fortunately the film acknowledges that and takes full advantage. Fantastic performances from Farrell and Tennant, who play a chiselled pouting vampire and self-proclaimed vampire hunter respectively. Mintz-Plasse was an unusual casting choice who adds no humour to the narrative. The visual effects and monster makeup were poor. I'm not beating around the blood soaked bush, it was bad. Blood spluttering from freshly bitten necks looked terrible. Human faces transforming into elongated vampiric jaws was hideously mediocre. The constant need to produce 3D gimmicky effects hindered certain scenes and made the whole film look cheap, as if it was more appropriate being a TV film. However, Gillespie's directing talent prevents this. Just a shame that the old school approach ironically adds a hundred years onto the film. Enjoyably outdated, but outdated nonetheless. More importantly, how the heck did Farrell not get any blood on his shirt?

More
Jeffrey Burton
2011/08/24

Edit: While I still believe all the things I said below this movie has grown on me due to the late Anton Yelchin, Imogen Poots and Toni Collette's performances. My outrage has died at this being another movie who's memory has been defiled by the 'let's do a remake and make worse than the original' crowd. The relationships have enough charm to have made this something a 'comfort food movie' for me. Here's to the memory of Anton. Wish he had lived longer. It seems like this movie was written by somebody whose top priority was to defy expectations. The result is a forced and unnatural movie that features the same title and character names of the original 'Fright Night' with none of it's wit, scares, charm or taut plot structure. The first 'Fright Night' was akin to a chess match. This one is more like roller derby. They really should have just called it some other title and invested more into the new plot and character development. That being said, on it's own, it's still a slightly above average Horror/Vampire flick.The late Anton Yelchin (sad face) is good as Charley and there is a talented cast of Colin Farrel, Toni Collette and Imogen Poots (new crush). I guess anybody who has played Dr. Who is supposed to be a genius but I thought this David Tennant dude, was a dud. Roddy McDowell lent so much more class and zeal to the role. I thought Farrel would have been great but where Chris Sarandon provided an air of mystery, depth and seeming enjoyment in being a vampire, Farrell just comes across as some guy who needs to suck blood to stay alive.The attempt to make the story more contemporary, like making the two love interests more sexually savvy, seemed to be jaded and uncomfortable. Also the 'Evil' character isn't given any of the great stuff the kid did in the original and just comes across sad. They even set up the possibility of a redemptive moment for two former friends who have grown apart and then don't deliver. The role of the Vampire's 'familiar', which added more humor and another foe to deal with is cut. They also totally sh!tcanned the Vampire and Amy 'love' plot line that drove the entire 3rd act. The dance club seduction scene that worked so well is reduced to what appears to be lewd make out session in the middle of crowded club. No romance, no mystery and nothing to drive the plot.The vampire 'does and don't' just seemed jumbled and unintelligible unlike the original where there were rules and the breaking or revealing of new rules.All the great special effects makeup of Steve Johnson in the original is now computer aided graphics and pretty lifeless at that. The penultimate shot of Farrel at the end is embarrassing.It's not all bad, hence the 5.5 of 10 rating but I can't think of a single scene or sequence in this movie that is superior or even equal to the original.Hollywood needs to stop with the remake crap and buy some new scripts.

More
cls0680
2011/08/25

A lot of people have slammed this for not being true to the first one, but I think that's the good part of it. Its like a good song cover, it takes the original and doesn't just copy cat it, it changes a few things, gives it a personal twist, without totally destroying the integrity of the original. There are a lot of connections that were made obvious, but not ridiculously obvious. The biggest difference between them is this one is more vampire, and less love. If you're expecting a love story, or seduction, watch the original. That is the biggest difference - Jerry uses Amy, Jerry doesn't love Amy.This was a fun, updated version, which - I thought - made more sense than the first. It had more back story, anyway, so you understood why Jerry chose that neighborhood, and not just "oh a vampire moved in randomly." Sarandon's Jerry was like a 1980's GQ mag highlighting sweater fashion. Sideways glances in half lighting and talk of love and pain constantly. I was always more afraid of his little friend, who seemed more devious. Collin Farrel is definitely more menacing and believable as a shrewd killer vampire. Sometimes he is uneasy and jittery, followed by a relaxed "cool" and it keeps it uncomfortable in a good way. And his "animal" responses are unexpected, natural, and appreciated. The rest of the cast was also excellent, I thought. The real star is easily David Tennant who is hilarious, and you have to love him. Christopher Mintz-Plasse twist on "Evil" was good and believable, I felt much more for him than I did in the first movies. I really never "got" Evil in the first movie, but this one makes him much more real and not just an obnoxious hyperactive sidekick. Imogen Poots' "Amy" was such an improvement on the first movie's Amy who was SO whiny and annoying.If you watch movies specifically for special effects, you can pass on this one. The effects are not good. Bad CGI. And some things, in retrospect don't make much sense - and I think those things are mainly the character's responses. I kept thinking "why is he not more upset about this?" or "why didn't someone notice this?" or "Really - no one is questioning this??" BUT, the movie itself is pretty good and if you overlook the bad effects and the unrealistic lack of concern sometimes, you'll probably like it and have fun watching it. You had to have some kind of ability to overlook stupidity to watch the first one anyway, right?

More
ivo-cobra8
2011/08/26

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. May the actor rest in peace. It is sad he is no longer with us anymore. The basic plot is about Jerry Dandridge (Colin Farrell). He's dangerously charming – and utterly lethal. That's because he just happens to be a vampire, and out for blood…buckets of it. After high school senior Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) makes the connection between Jerry's suspicious activity and a steadily rising body count, he vows to end the reign of terror next door. But he can't do it alone. His only hope is Las Vegas magician/vampire-slayer Peter Vincent (David Tennant). Together, this unlikely duo set out to end Jerry's evil rampage. But Jerry is a ruthless, relentless killer, and he's not going down without a fight. Get set to sink your teeth into this thrilling re-vamp of the terrifying horror classic. Fright Night will captivate you from the very first bite! The rating to this movie I am giving an 8/10, because this film deserve it and it was really enjoyable horror flick! Fright Night is a 2011 American neo-noir comedy horror film directed by Craig Gillespie. A remake of Tom Holland's 1985 film of the same name, the film was adapted by Marti Noxon. The film premiered at The O2 in London on August 14, 2011, was produced by DreamWorks Pictures, and widely released by Touchstone Pictures on August 19 in Real D 3D.8/10 Grade: B+ Studio: Touchstone Pictures, DreamWorks Studios, Reliance Entertainment, Michael De Luca Productions Distributor: Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Starring: Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, David Tennant, Toni Collette Director: Craig Gillespie Producers: Michael De Luca, Alison R. Rosenzweig Screenplay: Marti Noxon Story: Tom Holland Based on Fright Night by Tom Holland Rated: R Running Time: 1 Hr. 46 Mins. Budget: $30.000.000 Box Office: $18.298.649

More