Auxmaulous |
Being a big fan of the original I was expecting to be very disappointed (trailers also looked like crap).
I thought it was pretty good. It was a different and updated approach to the old story and they also held true to vampire lore (would have been nice to see more vamp powers though). Restored the role of vampire as a vicious and merciless killer.
Could have done without Mclovin as Evil Ed, but Tennant was excellent as Peter Vincent - a good twist on the role with him playing a Criss Angel-type a-hole Las Vegas entertainer.
I didn't think they could pull it off - but they did.
Cartigan |
Could have done without Mclovin as Evil Ed, but Tennant was excellent as Peter Vincent - a good twist on the role with him playing a Criss Angel-type a-hole Las Vegas entertainer.
I can't say I've seen Fright Night, but being familiar with some of Tennant's other roles and hearing that this role was "jerkass magician," I'm sure there is no way the performance could be labeled kosher.
John Kretzer |
Being a big fan of the original I was expecting to be very disappointed (trailers also looked like crap).
I thought it was pretty good. It was a different and updated approach to the old story and they also held true to vampire lore (would have been nice to see more vamp powers though). Restored the role of vampire as a vicious and merciless killer.
Could have done without Mclovin as Evil Ed, but Tennant was excellent as Peter Vincent - a good twist on the role with him playing a Criss Angel-type a-hole Las Vegas entertainer.
I didn't think they could pull it off - but they did.
I have to say I agree with you...I loved the orginal and dreaded the remake...but they did it well...maybe this is a exception to the rule that remakes sucks.
Also the 3D seemed to give me to screw with my eyes...I have to watched it with one eye closed to aviod hurting my eyes...it is odd in that this is the only 3D movie I have seen that had that effect. Though it might have been where I was sitting(all the way to one side).
Anyway I highly reccomend it to anyone who love real vampire films or loved the orginal.
drayen |
I echo all of the above. I was concerned when I heard that they were remaking this movieas it was always a favorite of mine. When I found out that David Tennant was playing Peter Vincent, I became excited. The first time I saw a trailer for it, I wondered why they didn't show him. It wasn't until the second or third time I saw it that I realized they were showing him once for a split second. That was when I began to worry that it was not a good movie.
As I was sitting in the theater watching it, the first 10-15 minutes left me thinking I was right and it was going to suck. After that, it picked right up! Everyone did a great job. Colin Ferrell played a great bad guy. I didn't even realize it was Chekov playing Charlie until most of the way through the movie. Imogen Poots was driving me crazy because I swore I knew her from something else (it was as the witch in Centurion). David Tennant proved again why he was the best Doctor Who with another scene stealing performance.
Really well done; a great movie!
(I did notice that it was the same writer for both and was very impressed that he was able to so completely reimagine his own story.)
Pan |
Saw it last night. Enjoyed it very much. The cast was enjoyable. Mclovin was doing his usual bit but it didn't take up too much of the movie. Fright night did not try to be too serious but wasn't a parody film as is popular these days. Not torture porn either. I miss these kinds of movies. I give it 4 out of 5. Its really good to see vampires be bad guys again. Oh and David Tennant was fantastic.