User Score
7.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 249 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 19 out of 249
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 9, 2012
    5
    Nothing new in this teen vampire flick, except for the lack of nudity. I usually stay away from these movies but the Green Metacritic rating and the name actors peeked my curiosity. It is different from the usual fare (nubile lasses needing no reason to remove their tops), but not here. Someone must owe someone as Mr Farrell and MS Collette appear. Mr Farrell may have had good fun beingNothing new in this teen vampire flick, except for the lack of nudity. I usually stay away from these movies but the Green Metacritic rating and the name actors peeked my curiosity. It is different from the usual fare (nubile lasses needing no reason to remove their tops), but not here. Someone must owe someone as Mr Farrell and MS Collette appear. Mr Farrell may have had good fun being the "bad guy" but Ms Collette is clearly here for her name as she has a very small meaningless part. There are a couple of attractive women (a fetching girlfriend and crying stripper) but also with little dialogue, although our hero does need a sweetheart to encourage him. Mr Yelchin plays it for real, although there are a few laughs, it tries to be a serious film. He is believable and does have some unusual facial expressions, but overall he is average. The film is well made, good pacing, silly and preposterous at times, but aren't most teen vampire films? I wanted to like it as the "names" do a credible job, but it's just not worth seeing. Not horrible, but not recommended (C+). Expand
  2. Aug 19, 2011
    4
    I've been hesitant to write this review because I think Colin Ferrell brings the right attitude to the role, but the film as a whole really left me flat and, most damningly, bored. This horror fan wasn't "scared" in the least - there's nothing frightening about it. And it's just not very funny - aside from McLovin', who is genuinely solid in a small role. The lead actor (Yelchin) was aI've been hesitant to write this review because I think Colin Ferrell brings the right attitude to the role, but the film as a whole really left me flat and, most damningly, bored. This horror fan wasn't "scared" in the least - there's nothing frightening about it. And it's just not very funny - aside from McLovin', who is genuinely solid in a small role. The lead actor (Yelchin) was a poor choice - they could have done much better. Even the Las Vegas act - who is also funny - isn't charming enough to make it a great film. I kept thinking that Bruce Campbell would have been a great choice to sneak into the film somehow. Also, 3D did nothing for the movie - in fact, it almost detracted from my experience. Just another film that I have to disagree with the critics on. It happens. Expand
  3. Mar 6, 2012
    6
    Fright Night is a remake and reinterpretation of the classic 1985 film, Fright Night, about a teenager, addicted to TV horror series (particularly a show called "Fright Night", which has a vampire hunter named Peter Vincent), who discovers that his new neighbor is a vampire, and after the neighbor noted that he knows these secret, he tries to prove this to everyone, together with hisFright Night is a remake and reinterpretation of the classic 1985 film, Fright Night, about a teenager, addicted to TV horror series (particularly a show called "Fright Night", which has a vampire hunter named Peter Vincent), who discovers that his new neighbor is a vampire, and after the neighbor noted that he knows these secret, he tries to prove this to everyone, together with his friend and girlfriend. The big difference between this version and the previous one, is that this is move fells more for a horror one, and can not recreate the atmosphere of the first film. The roles are reinvented and adapted to modern times, and to a different city (Las Vegas): Jerry Dandrige works well, but I think as Jerry Dandrige (the vampire) is not at the same level as Chris Sarandon in the classic movie, that was a better villain. The actors now, are usually better (the vampire slayer Peter Vincent, played by David Tennant is very good and funny in the role), but the film has another air, pulled into the action and horror genre (but ends up being a bit tedious) and have a end that gives the impression that the movie ended too soon. Still, it's a good entrainment as a movie, although lower than the original - My Score: 6.6 / 10.0 Expand
  4. Aug 22, 2011
    5
    Anton Yelchin discovers that a enigmatic neighbor (Colin Farrell) is a vampire. The story unfolds predictably, the action is average and the scares are non-existent. While it's made with energy and a compelling cast, nothing about this remake is worth the effort. Look for a cameo by Chris Sarandon (the vampire in the original version).
  5. Oct 13, 2011
    4
    horror movie? is this a joke? by god that looked like a cheap comedy, where you looked you think the most absurd thing you've ever seen, damn lucky I did not spend my damn money to see it in 3D because it showed normal screen were a mess.
  6. Sep 6, 2011
    5
    Whether or not you have seen the original, award winning "Fright Night", written and directed by Tom Holland and screened in 1985, this slick, modernized re-make will leave you wanting a bit more. Well, maybe a LOT more. Let's start with the positive: The cast. Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell and Toni Collette are all dynamic actors who should be able to really whip their scenes into shape.Whether or not you have seen the original, award winning "Fright Night", written and directed by Tom Holland and screened in 1985, this slick, modernized re-make will leave you wanting a bit more. Well, maybe a LOT more. Let's start with the positive: The cast. Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell and Toni Collette are all dynamic actors who should be able to really whip their scenes into shape. They almost succeed. Unfortunately, the actors' efforts are wasted by poor set pieces, bad pacing, lackluster attempts at humor, and bad directing. Even in a vampire spoof, the laughing should stop when the killing begins. Here, the vampire appearances are far from frightening - they are actually rather boring, and not gruesome at all. Las Vegas should be a great framework for a vampire story - here, we are just shown a small development outside of the strip which is not very spooky at all - it is rather cookie-cutter in its simplicity, which does nothing for the mood of the movie. David Tennant does what he can with the character of Peter Vincent, the great vampire killer - unfortunately, it simply is not enough. The angst he channels does not make its way off the screen, and adds very little to the plot of the movie. The CGI scenes are over-utilized and not at all frightening. Please see Fright Night for yourself - the original and the remake - and draw your own conclusions. Despite the addition of a slick, new atmosphere and popular actors, this movie falls flat - it is literally a pale ghost of the original.

    - Chipper F. Xavier, Esq.
    Expand
  7. j30
    Apr 29, 2012
    5
    Being a fan of the original Fright Night and director Craig Gillespie, I found the movie disappointing (particularly the ending). You got to hand it to Colin Farrell though, he played a really good villain, too bad it goes to waste on the mediocre movie.
  8. Jan 1, 2012
    6
    Fright Night is a simple horror-comedy which didn't suck like most of the films like in this same genre . I Dont remember the original one but I am pretty sure i did so not gonna judge between them . Colin acting as the Vampire was really good . Anton did good and David Tennant did really good job . I really liked the small town and the weather . Waited so long to see this kinda weather inFright Night is a simple horror-comedy which didn't suck like most of the films like in this same genre . I Dont remember the original one but I am pretty sure i did so not gonna judge between them . Colin acting as the Vampire was really good . Anton did good and David Tennant did really good job . I really liked the small town and the weather . Waited so long to see this kinda weather in a horror film . effect was amazing and Craig did good . Its the script that seems a little dull to me(again not compering) . The could make more awesome . End was not good . but overall enjoyable film just not what i expected. Expand
  9. Sep 10, 2011
    5
    What a waste of a good movie idea and our Farrell and Tennant who are both capable of turning in performances 100% better than this with their eyes closed if given a chance. Shockingly bad performance by Anton Yelchin-wooden enough to play a vampire hunters stake. I was looking forward to this but it turned out to be just another example of a director throwing away a chance of a goodWhat a waste of a good movie idea and our Farrell and Tennant who are both capable of turning in performances 100% better than this with their eyes closed if given a chance. Shockingly bad performance by Anton Yelchin-wooden enough to play a vampire hunters stake. I was looking forward to this but it turned out to be just another example of a director throwing away a chance of a good remake by pandering to the USA teen market. Expand
  10. Aug 30, 2011
    6
    Not a big fan of this movie, it was decent, but not that much. I mean the human to vampire transformations were just ridiculous, it was a bit boring and annoying at same times, didn't make the cut for me for best movies of the year (I already knew it wouldn't, vampire movies are good until they reach the point of exhaustion, which means by the 20 first minutes).
  11. Dec 5, 2011
    6
    Sure, entertaining enough, but nothing special. I'm not a fan of the original and this isn't any better. David Tennant's performance is the highlight. One to watch and then delete.
  12. Dec 25, 2011
    6
    If this review was dependent upon me being scared during this movie then Fright Night would've received a 1/10 from me. But It's quite alright because I found the movie rather entertaining. Colin Ferrell is surprisingly great as the vampire and seeing McLovin in vampire form was definitely a highlight of the film for me.
  13. Jun 10, 2012
    5
    Fright Night is not very good. The acting is average with actors whom, other than Farrell, I've never heard of. I had no idea this was a comedy until I read about it, I only laughed once throughout the whole movie. It also barley has any "fright".
  14. May 23, 2015
    5
    Admittedly I was one of the many fans super-excited about the remake of "Fright Night". It is one of my all time favorite films to sit back on a chilly day when I am feeling blah and just enjoy based on pure nostalgia. I also remember setting in the theatre at 13 and being scared sh*tless of Jerry Dandrige. I think I held my breath through most of the picture terrified of what would happenAdmittedly I was one of the many fans super-excited about the remake of "Fright Night". It is one of my all time favorite films to sit back on a chilly day when I am feeling blah and just enjoy based on pure nostalgia. I also remember setting in the theatre at 13 and being scared sh*tless of Jerry Dandrige. I think I held my breath through most of the picture terrified of what would happen next. So yeah I am still just a little disappointed when I watch the remake with Colin Farrell in the role of the seductive older man new in the neighborhood who just wants to be left alone to feed.

    I do like the fact that the story was so different that there was very little to compare to the original. Other than the names and a few key moments that were more like nods to the 1985 film than mirror images there was little to go on with this film. The story was simple but smart, the characters were just a little too one dimensional and left the story feeling flat. It seemed that at pivotal moments when the characters should have been more animated they came off seeming unsure of who they were in relation to the story. Maybe the actors listened to all the hype or bad press buzzing around the net while filming "Fright Night" or maybe they just saw it as a paycheck. Either way the only character that seemed to care at all about her role in the film was Toni Collette as Ms. Brewster. She had a very limited role so that is saying something there. The characters I wanted to see really play out on screen was that of Peter Vincent and Jerry Dandrige. Those should have been the roles that pushed this film beyond re-animation and placed it into a reboot category. Instead they came off almost dead inside and pointless to the story-Like an after thought.

    Now it pains me to say bad things about any film that is part of a genre I love but I really am slightly sad about this film being so under whelming. The effects seemed a little SyFy channel to me and at key moments when the scares could have really sold me on this film they seemed contrived. As if there was some check list off stage and the director just went through each kill and gore moment repetitiously then said "okay, cut!" The original had so much more wow and shock factor than this remake. Which I know you can't really compare the two stories because there was enough of a variation to keep this newer version individual except by today's standards and abilities in film making there is so much more that a film can utilize in order to scare the sh*t out of us and this film just didn't do that.

    I am still on the fence about adding this film to my collection. On one hand it has Collin Farrell in it and I have a nice collection of his stuff on my shelves. I have to say though there are so many things that disappointed me in this film that I just don't know if his hotness is enough for me to embrace this movie. I may just hold out for "Total Recall" to come out and prey they don't f*ck that film up as well.
    Expand
Metascore
64

Generally favorable reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 21 out of 30
  2. Negative: 1 out of 30
  1. Reviewed by: Helen O'Hara
    Aug 29, 2011
    60
    Funny and scary - and sometimes both at once - it lives up to the original, even if it fails to surpass it.
  2. Reviewed by: Keith Staskiewicz
    Aug 19, 2011
    75
    It ends up getting a surprising number of things right.
  3. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Aug 19, 2011
    50
    While this nouveau Fright Night does a reasonable job of maintaining the fun spirit of the original film, between the blood splatters and vamp stakings, it never builds on what the original had to offer -- and thus never quite makes a convincing case for its own existence.