Fright Night.....

[Funky]

Hey, don't get me wrong. I love Star Trek. Much of my prop collection has Trek items in it. But I'm not ever going to believe that if Trek didn't exist some form of technology would never have existed. Neccesity is the mother of invention, not a 45 year old television show.

 

[CB2001]

Hey, don't get me wrong. I love Star Trek. Much of my prop collection has Trek items in it. But I'm not ever going to believe that if Trek didn't exist some form of technology would never have existed. Neccesity is the mother of invention, not a 45 year old television show.

I didn't say that the show created the technology. I said, "Yet, no one wants to admit that if it wasn't because of science fiction like Star Trek, those viewers who hadn't seen the show wouldn't have caused major advancements in science and technology as we know it." My point: those who viewed the show, as well as other titles of science fiction, found inspiration for the technology. That was the whole point of that topic and the links I posted.

Now, can we get back to the topic again?

 

[Zombie_61]

I saw Fright Night this afternoon (in glorious 2D). I liked it, but I didn't love it.

Decent pacing and good performances throughout. Anton Yelchin (Charley Brewster) pretty much plays it straight, Colin Farrell (Jerry) is sleazy but doesn't quite pull off menacing (he might have been if the CGI hadn't gotten in the way), David Tennant (Peter Vincent) steals nearly every scene he's in (though in scenes featuring Tennant and Yelchin, Yelchin easily holds his own), and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (Ed) who in my opinion is somewhat miscast (I can't elaborate with it being a spoiler). Imogen Poots (Amy) is capable in a thankless role that could just as easily have been played by just about any reasonably attractive young actess, and Toni Collette (Jane Brewster, Charley's mother) is spot on in an equally thankless role. As for the plot, the film definitely draws from the original without being a direct copy.

CGI effects range from quite good (vampire death and blood effects) to barely passable (vampire face changes; I would much rather have seen practical makeups here). There are a couple of nods to the original 1985 film, but they're nicely handled and don't draw attention to themselves.

The main thing that's missing from this film is the tongue-in-cheek charm of the original film. The 1985 Fright Night is pretty dated by today's standards, but still holds up pretty well; I don't think this version will be as fondly remembered 26 years from now.

And now the big question: Would I recommend it? Let me put it this way--I think fans of modern horror film franchises like Saw and Final Destination might like it (though, by comparison, this film is light on gore), but fans of classic horror and the original film might find it lacking. If you really want to see this in a theater, do so; if you're on the fence, wait for cable.

 

[CB2001]

There are a couple of nods to the original 1985 film, but they're nicely handled and don't draw attention to themselves.

Can you at least time me if they have Charlie rolling around in a Mustang that looks like it needs some body work? I mean, come on, that's one of the things I liked about Charlie in the original, the fact that he didn't care about rolling around in car that wasn't flashy, but still had enough respect for classics.

 

[Zombie_61]

^ Uhh, no. I don't recall seeing any Mustangs anywhere in the film.

 

[winghead]

Original is on Right now!! Hope to see the New one!

 

[CB2001]

^ Uhh, no. I don't recall seeing any Mustangs anywhere in the film.

Okay, had to ask.

 

[Amish Trooper]

^ Uhh, no. I don't recall seeing any Mustangs anywhere in the film.

Actually Charlies buddies are seen sitting briefly in a car that needs body work. it has a primer door etc but it is at an odd angle but it looks like a 70's Mustang.They replaced Charlie's Mustang though with a motorcycle that doesn't run.

 

[Chicagovader]

Saw it tonight and thought it was decent, but not as good as the original. Well acted and most of the effects were decent but the pacing of the film felt rushed to me. I don't know that might be because I watched the original just a few weeks ago.

 

[Clutch]

Wife wanted me to see it so I relented. I was pleasantly surprised. I really enjoyed it and thought they changed it up enough to make it refreshing and funny all over again.

 

[TheCollector]

I'll be seeing this when I have the money. I am soley going for Tennant as I'm not much a fan of the other people involed. Maybe the lead male, whoms name I don't know but he was in Star Trek. Other than Tennant he's the only guy I CAN stand to watch. Tennant is an obvious to watch though. He's a brilliant actor.

 

[The Hopkinator]

Saw it last night... And I thought thumbsdownthumbsdown Nowhere near as good as the original.

 

[Amish Trooper]

It won't have the lasting effect like the original. It is a popcorn flick.

 

[Clutch]

Oh cmon'! The original wasn't THAT good! What effect did it have?

 

[Amish Trooper]

Oh cmon'! The original wasn't THAT good! What effect did it have?

That fact that people still talk about it. It was a great 80's horror flick.

 

[StevenRogers84]

It was good, but Tennant was horrible as Peter Vincent......it was like he was trying be Russel Brand.

And he failed horribly at being Russel Brand.

Pretty sure I misspelled names.

 

[EvilRocketeer]

That fact that people still talk about it. It was a great 80's horror flick.

people talk about howard the duck too.....whats your point haha

 

[Amish Trooper]

people talk about howard the duck too.....whats your point haha

Howard who:angel

 

[JMChladek]

I saw it a couple nights ago and I loved it! Big thing is I don't normally watch vampire flicks as they are so overdone these days (kind of like zombie flicks).

Granted I haven't seen the original from start to finish, but I have seen enough to know it was a product of its times just as this one is a product of today's times (and both kind of date themselves a bit as you get further away from their various time periods). David Tennant as Peter Vincent did indeed steal the show I think and Yelchin shows again what good acting chops he has (I haven't seen him do badly with a role yet, even with ones made famous by other actors). I think Tennant was channeling a little Johnny Depp Jack Sparrow when he was in his long hair get up. It was dang weird!

Seeing Charlie's geeky ex-friend turned vampire was downright spooky. I was expecting him to make more SF wisecracks as he kept getting injured, but that didn't really happen. I had to nudge a buddy in the theater though when mention was made about "Farscape Conventions" though (considering he was into Farscape when it was out).

Unfortunately it doesn't seem like Fright Night is doing too well in theaters, which is a shame as I think it is better than the torture porn crap that has been dominating horror lately. Seeing an old fashioned horror action flick where the heroes win, yet with some updates I felt was refreshing. Too bad the rest of the film going public don't seem to see it that way (or maybe they are just waiting for it to pop up on DVD). I think with Tennant in the film, it should do MUCH better in the UK though.

 

[OliverQueenIND]

I loved the film and I want to go as Peter for Halloween.
That said, I tracked down the Shirt peter is wearing in the
final conflict. Now to find the coat.
Dragon Shirt

the image is called "Bravery misplaced" which is very fitting I think