Up until just a few weeks ago I hadn’t seen Fright Night in years. In fact, I think I might not have seen it since High School, back when every weekend I would spend my days biking to the local video store, only to close out my evenings by watching the films I had discovered just a few hours earlier.
I remembered enjoying Fright Night, but it had been lost in the shuffle of comedies with a vampire/comedy bent that seemed to come out every couple of years back then. Once Bitten, Vamp and Innocent Blood all existed in this odd little niche of horror films that came out during the eighties and early nineties.
I knew that Fright Night had since grown to become a bit of a cult phenomenon, often being mentioned as one of the better vampire related films ever made, and even one of the better horror films made in the eighties. But my memory was faded on the film, and with the remake’s release fast approaching it seemed as good a time as any to revisit the film.
The good news is that the original Fright Night has aged incredibly well. It’s funny and queer and is filled with whip smart timing. It’s a very smart film, made especially impressive due to the fact that it was aimed primarily at a teenage demographic that didn’t seem to put much weight in that skill during much of that time period. But besides being smart, the film also contains several fantastic performances from its cast and some ridiculously impressive practical effects.
To say it is one of the better teenage comedies of its time period isn’t much of a stretch by any means, nor is it much of a stretch to claim it is certainly one of the better vampire films that you’d be able to track down should the need ever arise. Then, when you toss in the fact that it was one of the first true horror/comedies, a sub-genre that would rise to prominence when a certain scream related film would come along in the nineties, and Fright Night quickly becomes a film that should be labeled must watch for those who are fans of genre films.
With the quality of the original Fright Night confirmed, it now becomes a question on whether or not the film even needs to be remade. For me, that’s a fairly easy “Yes.” Fright Night, while a damn good film, just never quite entered into the popular consciousness like other horror films of its time. While it was popular enough to spawn a sequel, that sequel’s perceived lack of quality essentially killed any chance of a franchise erupting. So lesser franchises (Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, Halloween) stepped in and dominated the horror genre through the eighties and nineties. So a remake stands a good of chance as any to remind genre fans that a damn good movie is just waiting to be watched by those willing to take the time to track it down.
But is the sequel good enough to get people interested in the original? I’m happy to say that is a “Yes” answer as well. While the film is without a doubt inferior to the original, it is still a solid and entertaining film that does its best to pay homage to the original, while simultaneously attempting to stand on its own.
Certain plot points are paid homage to, but the film rarely sticks any closer to the original than that. Yes, his best friend is turned, though when it occurs is a bit surprising. Yes, a scene in a dance club occurs, but it is vastly different than the original. And yes, Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) enlists the help of an elder to fight vampires, but it isn’t some eunuch in charge of a low-rent late-night cable show, but rather a rather inventive and inspired new profession altogether. Even the setting of the film, Las Vegas, makes ridiculously good sense for a place for vampires to hang out.
The one thing the film pays closes attention to is maintaining a solid, if sometimes subtle, layer of dark humor throughout the film. While not quite as entertaining as in the original, Fright Night does its damndest to make sure you know it is having as much fun as you are. From shameless 3D shocks, to over-the-top characters, to a fantastic sight gag of Colin Farrell hissing at a beam of sun light, perhaps the most obvious call-back to the original is a great cameo appearance that leads to a bloody delicious end.
While I might regret the fact that more and more films I enjoyed while growing up are being remade by studios desperate to make a quick and easy buck, for once it seems as if the studio has at least taken the time to make a film that isn’t going to make audiences question why such material as revisited in the first place. And frankly, if forced to choose between Fright Night and the 80th iteration of Final Destination, I’ll take Fright Night and never think twice about it.
Fright Night 3D moves in to your neighborhood on August 19th.
Glad to hear that it’s at least a good attempt at an update. The one thing that gave me a lot of hope is that you couldn’t really do a beat for beat recreation. The tradition of the horror host is a pretty forgotten one these days. And I wouldn’t bet on one teenager in ten getting a Peter Cushing, vampire hunter reference these days. Pity that. About the only thing you can really keep is the initial Rear Window riff and vampires.
But, those cultural changes meant that you’d actually have to try if you wanted to remake the movie. Frankly, I think trying is half the battle these days.
I never saw Fright Night and this post almost makes me feel terrible for that, haha. The Scream series was fun so I can’t wait to check out Fright Night. Crossing my fingers and hoping Netflix has it streaming!
I have no interest in this film. It’s a cynical studio cash-in made for a culturally illiterate audience. They should never have touched the original classic. Anyone who gives a crap about real horror films for real horror fans will not go see this corporate piffle.
The original is a good film, but let’s be realistic, it’s hardly an all time classic. It’s a fondly remembered film by those that actually saw it, but it’s also largely forgotten by the general public.
And, it’s a little bit much to get upset about remaking a film that blatantly borrowed from a lot of what had come before. Rear Window. Peter Cushing. Hammer films (who frankly remade a bunch of films in their heyday) in general. Salem’s Lot. And putting a modern spin on a lot of old vampire tropes. The orginal hardly leaped out as an original idea. It was just better done than most.
I’d be more worried about The Thing prequel which doesn’t look like it brings much new to the table, rather than a film that seems to borrow the same basic premise and some character beats, but brings its own modern spin to the genre.
Yeah, the original has aged quite well, which also helps it stand out from most films of its era, but I agree, its a good, not great film.
You could also argue that Scream was heavily borrowing from Fright Night, simply substituting “slasher” films for “vampire” films, but otherwise following the basic conceit of riffing on concepts seemingly entrenched in the sub-genres. Then you have people like Dante and Carpenter who’s films are flush with ideas ripped from other films. Or, if you want another example, just look at the evolution of the zombie in pop culture and film, which is utterly reliant on taking previous ideas and altering them for more modern audiences. That’s a creature that started out as something who has their mind controlled all the way to the virus infected, fast moving versions so prevalent today.
I think its pretty safe to ay that horror, as a genre, is pretty reliant on taking already used ideas and tweaking them for new audiences.
Yeah, I’d much rather rewatch Fright Night than The Lost Boys, which really hasn’t aged well. Even so, judging on originality, The Lost Boys and Near Dark bring more new to the table than the original Fright Night did. Fright Night was just so assuredly done and made its self awareness work in its favor. It definitely was the forerunner of something like Buffy, but it was more in the tone than in any truly original ideas. Mix Rear Window, The Night Stalker, and teen comedies and you basically have Fright Night.
Not to say that originality is the be all and end all of film quality. Or that a successful comedy-horror hybrid can’t be influential even if it is derivative, Shaun of the Dead is derivative itself after all, but there’s a reason Evil Dead 2 comes up before Fright Night when discussing comedy-horror films of the ’80s.
And, if nothing else, the remake probably assures that we’ll get a nice Blu-Ray of the original out soon.
Agreed Robert, and they certainly put in some effort into the story of the film, and the actors certainly are invested, which is a huge bonus. If more remakes were this solid less people would bitch about them.
Hate to break it to you Z, but pretty much every horror film is a cash grab. Its consistently one of the most profitable genres for studios and on top of that remakes are just another way to shave on potential costs. They are around for the long haul, and have been for decades, and most horror fans know that their have been some incredible remakes that were initially desgined as cash grabs. You just need to show support for ones that still put effort into making a quality product.
Hate to break it to you Matt, but I am not at all comfortable with your profit motive language. To people like you everything boils down to a balance sheet. I don’t base my passion on products. I base my passion on expression and craft that goes into that expression. I will never support a product that is an inferior copy of something much better that came before it.
So do you base it on expression, or do you base it on quality of product? Because those are not mutually exclusive events.
What’s even funnier is the more independent a film is, the more dependent it is on making a profit. Most of those films are self-financed and are utterly dependent on making back their money so they will have the funds to make another film. Unlike most other forms of art, film is expensive to produce, so to eliminate the idea that money is a factor is simply grossly ignorant of the process.
I admire your zeal Z. Your wrong but.. Being nostalgic is normal but can be a bit of a narrow perspective. Hollywood has always made 10 percent masterpiece and 90 percent muck. Always. The state of film hasn’t really changed in that regard. You have to see all the duds to find something great. Its fun to not take movies quite so seriously while your doing this. Smoke a jay before you go in and I guarantee you will find something enjoyable about americas grand past time. A new movie with a full house and a larger than life screen. Oh yeah baby. Good times to forget about life on lifes terms.
Well, I believe two french fellas pioneered this whole thing. Just the same, I stand my my sentiments. Ha
Honestly, the trailer didn’t move me to wanna watch this film. However, after reading some good reviews, I think ill give it a go. Sounds reasonably fun to me. The least impressive movies I’ve seen these last few months have been Capt America and Priest. At least this film doesn’t look to bore you to death with a third act like ole Cap rushin in beating all of Germany with hardly a scratch creating no concern that he’s ever really in trouble with the audience. Now that was a bore. Only question is whether or not to see this film in 3d or not as far as I’m concerned.
Lol. I botched that last line. Alright, peace. Nice review matt. Thanks!