My dear, dear readers! Invisible readers, that is. I apologize for being away for so long, it truly has been a while since I've written. The end of the school year came and went, and I was busy unpacking and other such. Then we took our usual trip to Colorado (where my cousin convinced me to buy Minecraft...which has taken over my life). I was actually planning to blog out there, but we have no internet, so that's rather pointless. Then Sam (my laptop) died two weeks ago (right when we went back out to make repairs on our cabin in Colorado! Talk about bad timing :( ) and I finally have internet access. Of course, I've only got a week before school starts, so I'm trying to blog and finish up some of my Minecraft projects before I go back. Oh, I need to pack too... Anywho, here's something different: my review of:
Yes! Just today I went to the Alamo Drafthouse Village to see this movie. Last night/this morning (early) I watched the original with Roddy McDowall and Chris Sarandon just so I could get my bearings and make my review. Now, here are my categories.
- Plot/Scriptwriting: pretty self-explanatory, how was the writing, was the plot similar to the original, etc. etc.
- The Cast: Who were they? What else have they done? How did they act?
- SFX/Camera Work: Was the filming good? Was it more like a documentary or did it fall into a
Blair Witch Project-type filming setup? Stuff like that.
And without further adieu, Let us begin, and see just how well the movie stands up to the original!
Edit: SPOILERS AHEAD!
CAST
 |
Charley Brewster
Original: William Ragsdale
New: Anton Yelchin |
Okay, main character! I've only seen Anton Yelchin in one other movie, and that was
Star Trek, which came out in 2010 (if I remember correctly). I loved him in that role, though he had little screen time, and I was interested to see how he acted in this movie (and hear him without a Russian accent). On the other hand, the only thing I know William Ragsdale from is the original
Fright Night, and I didn't much like him in that. It was like listening to Mark Hamill's whiny Luke Skywalker from
Star Wars...Ragsdale was much, MUCH too whiny, which is why I enjoyed Yelchin's frightened-yet-cool Brewster. He seemed more calm and "into" the role than Ragsdale. They didn't give him much to work with script-wise, but that's another story.
 |
Amy Peterson
Original: Amanda Bearse
New: Imogen Poots |
Amy Peterson in the original film was kinda useless. She doesn't believe Charley until they get chased into a nightclub by Sarandon's Dandridge, and then she tries to kill him. However, I have to give Bearse a gold star for prosthetics that still scare the shit out of me when I see the original movie.
 |
| JEEZUM CREEZLE WHAT THE F***?! |
I am 100% serious, when I watched this last night, I had forgotten (it had been a while since I watched it) just how frightening that face was. Agh. Imogen Poots' prosthetics were much less frightening than the Joker-like-shark-smile Bearce sported, but at least Poots wasn't useless. She did a lot of screaming, but she did actually mace "Evil" Ed in the face, which is more than Bearce ever did. She was a lot less useless and had a much less whiny voice, which also made me happy. I have a thing against people with whiny voices...have you noticed?
 |
"Evil" Ed Thompson
Original: Stephen Geoffreys
New: Christopher Mintz-Plasse |
"Evil" Ed...I love this guy. The original Ed was portrayed as sort of the odd-man-out, the weirdo on the street, the one everyone bullied. He wasn't really as brooding or angry as Mintz-Plasse's Ed, and was more psychopathic than anything. I mean when he first meets up with Peter Vincent (as a vampire) he's laughing hysterically the entire time, so I'm pretty sure that the human-to-vampire conversion finally snapped something, or pushed his psyche over the edge. He was funny to watch, but I'm sure I'd be wetting my pants if I met vampiric-Ed in reality. Mintz-Plasse's Ed was a lot more angsty and upset with Brewster for abandoning him as a friend, and became a lot less crazy. That angst translated to anger and jealousy when he was turned into a vampire, and he became almost oblivious to anything else going on around him. Heck, he even got his arm sliced off in an elevator door and kept going! He's like the freaking Black Knight from
Monty Python and the Holy Grail, you know?! This was a great role for Mintz-Plasse, and though I missed Geoffreys' hysterical Joker-laugh, Ed's frighteningly composed nature when trying to eviscerate the main characters was just as scary.
 |
Jerry Dandridge
Original: Chris Sarandon
New: Colin Farrell |
I didn't much like Farell's portrayal of Dandridge. See, Sarandon's Dandridge was much more suave and debonair, preferring to seduce his victims before biting them and draining them. Farell's Dandridge was a brute-force sort of guy, who preferred more to slit the jugular vein and turn his victims into vampires. He wasn't as cool as Sarandon's. Too much blood and guts on this end for me. He acted the part well, and was frightening when he became "shark-faced" (my new term for when a Vampire shows its teeth), but they showed too much. Sarandon's "shark-face" was seen maybe three or four times in the original, where as Farell's "shark-face" was in almost every scene. I gotta hand it to him though, the "blowing up the house" bit was pretty genious...oh, did I mention spoilers? Better do that up above.
 |
Peter Vincent
Original: Roddy McDowall
New: David Tennant |
I am a huge fan of both of the actors who played this role. I've always had a fondness for the late Roddy McDowall and would have loved to have met him, but that's out of the question at this point, unless I build myself a time machine or find myself a Doctor. Like David Tennant. Yes, he's married and also twice my age, but my GOD is he sexy! I have a thing for British guys :) This is the one character (and pair of actors) I enjoyed the most, and not just because I like them, but because they did a fantastic job. Each had their own quirks, and each was uniquely loveable. McDowall was a much more awkward, fumbling, bumbling, scared-out-of-his-wits type character, with his sophisticated style and brown overcoat. On the other hand, Tennant was much more badass with his black-leather trenchcoat, eye shadow, and shotgun. Oh and did I mention leather?
 |
Actually, though I like Tennant shirtless, I
thought this getup was ridiculous: the long hair, beard,
mustache, and leather pants? Ok, he rocked the
leather coat and pants, but not the beard. |
God I love Tennant. Anyways, McDowall's Vincent didn't have much of a past with vampires, he didn't believe in them, and just did the show for the money. On the other hand, Tennant's Vincent had had a previous encounter with a vampire - one that scarred him for life - and was completely unwilling to help at first. That is, until he, Charley, and Amy were all attacked in Vincent's flat by a Vampiric Ed and a bloodthirsty Dandridge. Then he became "Well I'm scared out of my wits but I'm going to go in looking like a badass" Vincent and rocked. Tennant's portrayal was a lot more vulgar and much less refined than McDowall's (just think of when you first see him and he's trying to fix his leather pants...I mean...WOW...), but it was a fun role anyways. McDowall was also a lot more empathetic while Tennant took the Klingon Approach: "Let's go kill something!". He rocked those leather pants man... whoo did he rock those pants. *drool*
*Edit: Author's Note:
Although I have a huge crush on David Tennant, I have an even bigger crush on Roddy McDowall. Of all of my favorite actors, he is the only one I would ever, EVER marry. If he was still alive. Yes, I would marry him. *sigh* He's so...ok, I'm going to go on before I get into a long schpeel about how gentlemanly he was and...ok, shutting up!
PLOT/SCREENWRITING
The plot and screenwriting were pretty well done and stayed consistent with what happened in the original movie. Mostly. A few things were wrong. First: Charley isn't a popular kid, Amy isn't a popular girl, and Ed isn't really a friend of theirs. I mean he is, but not really. In the new movie, everything I mentioned above is the opposite. Also: Ed doesn't get turned until halfway through the original movie, whereas in the new one he gets turned within the first 45 minutes and you don't see him for another 30 minutes.
Also, there was a lot less seduction on the part of Dandridge. That's why Sarandon's Dandridge was so cool, he seduced everyone. Farrell's Dandridge was a brute force vampire, which took away from his character. The script was decent, not anything to go ga-ga over, and each of the actors did a decent job. They didn't give Yelchin much to work with so he couldn't really run with anything. Tennant wasn't onscreen for as long as McDowall was in the original but he still managed to work the role and make something out of nothing - superb acting. Ed didn't have much screen time either, but he was brilliant in his role and did very well. Amy...well, she did average, nothing to go crazy about. She was fun to watch, but not amazing. I'll mention the mother here as well: played by Toni Collette, the character of Jane Brewster was funny, witty, and made quick replies to snide remarks. I wish they'd given her more of a part, but at least she wasn't as bad as the original...
SFX/CAMERA WORK
By far the best camera work occurred during the car chase scene. That was just plain frightening. I was sitting there and actually thinking I was in the car as well, it was so well done, and I didn't even see it in 3D! As for the other special effects, they were kind of overdone. I mean, the exploding house was cool, but the blood spurting every time Dandridge bit someone's neck? Overkill. A friend of mine calls it "The 300 Effect", after all the blood splatters we had during that movie. Now THAT was overkill! Now the "shark-face" effects were also way cool, and rather frightening as well, but not enough to make me jump. The car chase made me jump, as did the exploding girl that Yelchin saves towards the beginning of the movie. I squeaked during that part...
All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed
Fright Night. Yes, things could've been changed, but all in all it was a great movie. I give it a solid 3.5 stars!
