Sound Off: Craig Gillespie's 'Fright Night' 3D - What Did You Think?
by Alex Billington
August 19, 2011
Now that you've seen it, what did you think? You can't run from evil when it lives next door. One of two big 80's remakes hitting theaters this weekend, Fright Night is an updated take on the Tom Holland campy horror comedy. With Craig Gillespie at the helm, this time they've set it in contemporary Las Vegas and given us Anton Yelchin as the unsuspecting victim, and Colin Farrell as his vampire next-door neighbor. So how is this remake? Entertaining as the original or enjoyable in its own ways? Does it make vampires cool again? If you've seen it, write a comment below and tell us what you thought of Fright Night.
A remake that's good, how can it be? No, seriously, I thought this Fright Night remake, in 3D, was actually great. Colin Farrell does an awesome job as the new vampire in town, he's cool, he's funny, loved watching him, and his story with Anton Yelchin worked well, for the most part, I thought. I do believe there are some pacing problems, but I enjoyed this a whole lot more than I thought; I was impressed. Director Craig Gillespie's visuals and cinematography were fantastic (the darkness was part of the atsmophere), obviously that entire scene with the camera in the car was awesome, but that was just one scene (more!). Overall, I think it's a solid contemporary remake of a funny 80's horror comedy. David Tennant was awesome, too.
What did you think of Fright Night? Great remake or dark and boring? Did you see it in 3D? We will remove any comments that indicate you have not seen the movie, as this area is meant to discuss the film only once you have seen it and can talk about your thoughts. Please keep the comments civilized!
Reader Feedback - 16 Comments
I just saw it and i thought it was great !! The 3-D effects i really thought were better then avatar. Its a movie i hope they do a sequal. I thought it was kinda funny how they had the guy who played the vampire in the original do a cameo..
Bobert_ls on Aug 20, 2011
BOBERT_IS dont exaggerate it did not look better than avatar, it was a cool movie and the 3D was decent but better than avatar no......iam not a avatar fan but i can tell when something is BADASS and the 3D that avatar did has not come close to any other movie to date..period
jammir on Aug 20, 2011
I enjoyed the 3D in transformers3 far more than Avatar.
Ryderup on Aug 20, 2011
this is how you truly remake an 80s monster flick. i was not disappointed and the expectations i had for it were brought up to par nicely.
Jericho on Aug 20, 2011
I've seen it twice now--once at a free screening and again under my own dime--and the best advice that I can pass around is this: just sit yer butt down and enjoy it. Shelve any prejudices you might have against the word "remake" and lock up that comparison/contrast urge. "Fright Night" 2011 stands on its own as a decent enough film that gives nods to the original. It's not fine art, and it's not destined to be a seventeen-award Oscar winner. It's good, solid ENTERTAINMENT. Just take it as that. You're getting David Tennant in a black silk robe, already... what more do you want?
Me on Aug 20, 2011
David Tennant. I ave to wonder if people love his character simply because he is the Doctor. I didn't see anything about his character that deserves the hype and praise he has received thus far.
Beefncheddar23 on Aug 20, 2011
i think you were the one who compared the two roles just now...
Jericho on Aug 20, 2011
Absolutely awesome movie! Loved it. I was a huge fan of the first one, but I think this one is just as good.
Marie on Aug 20, 2011
I just saw it and enjoyed it quite a bit. It moves along quite nicely and really gets you right into the story and action. Colin Farrel was terrific. Incredibly suave and cool. It looked like he had a good time with the role. The rest of the acting was good as well. I thought David Tennant and Chris Mintz-Plasse had some good characters with nice comedic beats, but both were maybe a little under used. Minor complaints with the CGI, not the greatest at times, but not enough to really bother me and kind of gave it that b-movie, cult goodness the original had. The third act seems like it rushes a little bit, but that was fine since it just kicks into some good action sequences. Solid enough ending. Overall I thought it was really good.
SDotKillsALot on Aug 20, 2011
I thought it was a horrible remake! Colin was trying to hard to be sinister! There is only one Jerry dandridge! Peter Vincent was lame, it was hard to keep my attention, the 3D was pointless! The original still the best! And to top it off we left with a half hour left it sucked so bad! Can I have my 2 hours back!
Billdiesel on Aug 20, 2011
now tell us how you really felt....
Jericho on Aug 20, 2011
Not half bad... yes even including Colin.
bc on Aug 20, 2011
Saw this tonight , It was a real good movie & enjoyed it very much. The 3D was a very nice touch here & there and did not get in the way at all.
Raptor on Aug 20, 2011
Best of the 3 flicks I saw that day (All 3D movies too...) The 3D was boardline underused. It was there when it needed to be and it looked pretty good, if not great then. I'd have liked to see it utilized more though. Good performances all around. Is this the second coming of Colin Farrell? First Horrible Bosses and now this? Plasse, great job! Whoever cut that trailer spoiled the middle of his character arc for me though. Ya blew it, Capice? Peter Vincent midori addiction? Absolutely pitifull, but in a very entertaining way. Who drinks Midori STRAIGHT? At "least" fix a Tokyo Tea. That was embarassingly funny for the character to me. The one thing I hate about movies like these is when (supporting) characters are confronted with some unbelieveble situations/monsters/antagonists and they continue to disbelieve the truth behind what's happening. Also when the protagonist refuses to disclose all information to the "support" which allows the "support" to continue in disbelief of what's going on. The flick relied on a lot of those plot devices which are usually reheated for basic cable movies. So, I was taken out of the movie on multiple occasions; moreso towards the end than the beginning. I, however, always found myself sucked back into the story afterwards. Jerry was kick ass, I honestly forgot Vamps could be that devious. (True Blood fan, sue me. It's not like there's been any other respectable Vamps kicking around lately, "Let The Right One In" excluded.) Bottom line, good movie. Worth the 3D price, good actting, reheated dramatic situations (and not because it's a remake), and not enough of the character faves (Plasse, Tennant, Farrell). I'd like to have seen some hotter girls in the movie. (stripper and gf; moms was requisite hot and Vincent's chick fit the bill almost perfectly.) /rant.
That 1 Guy.... on Aug 21, 2011
Saw it with my mom last night. We both like the original, and we both were surprised to find the this remake was BETTER. Would you believe it, a remake that's so good it surpasses the original (bare in mind, 1985 Fright Night is a classic) and a vamp movie that's actually scary. I loved how it blended comedy in horror appropriately to the point where you could chuckle one second and scream the next. Also loved the cameo. I didn't see it in 3D, but you may want to try it. BOTTOM LINE: Great movie, did not disappoint. P.S. What all the haters about Colin Farrell got to say NOW!
Lamar on Aug 21, 2011
It was pretty camp mixed with good horror. Could have called it something different really, but fair playzes. I enjoyed it.
Crapola on Aug 26, 2011
Sorry, new comments are no longer allowed.