sign in
register
Watch
Hulu Apple TV Google Play Movies
+4
Fright Night
Fright Night
+4
JustWatch
Your probable score
?
Fright Night

Fright Night

2011
Comedy, Horror
1h 46m
This update of the 1985 horror comedy focuses more on terror than laughs when teen Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) suspects that his new neighbor, the sinister Jerry Dandrige (Colin Farrell), is a vampire, and turns to a self-styled vampire expert, Peter Vincent (David Tennant), for help. Las Vegas magician Vincent proves useless, and it's up to Charley to save his mom, Judy (Toni Collette), and girlfriend, Amy, from the seductive bloodsucker.

Directed by:

Craig Gillespie

Screenwriter:

Tom Holland, Marti Noxon

Starring:

Toni Collette, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Anton Yelchin, Chris Sarandon, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Lisa Loeb, Imogen Poots, Dave Franco, Sandra Vergara, Emily Montague, Chelsea Tavares

Franchise:

Fright Night

Genres:

Comedy, Horror

Countries:

UK, USA

Languages:

English, Ukrainian
imdb IMDb
Update history
Suggest edit

Fright Night

2011
Comedy, Horror
1h 46m
Your probable score
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer
Avg Percentile 40.75% from 1208 total ratings
Ratings & Reviews Cast Collections Similar Stats Trailer

Ratings & Reviews

(1219)
Compact view
clear
Compact view
Show
Sort
paxtonPaxton
Rated 08 Oct 2018
80
77th
I throw the trailer on regularly just to watch Colin Farrell say the word, "ripe." If you're going to update Chris Sarandon as a sexy vampire, I'd say Colin Farrell is an inspired choice. Charlie's been watching him, but he's been watching Charlie. God, I've gotta go watch that trailer again. A movie like Night of the Creeps that benefits from a fifty second exchange more than should be plausible.
Rated 08 Oct 2018
billyshearsBillyShears
Rated 02 Apr 2012
75
65th
A million points if Christopher Mintz-Plasse follows the original Evil Ed and turns to hardcore gay porn.
Rated 02 Apr 2012
thedenizenTheDenizen
Rated 21 Aug 2011
70
63rd
Decent remake that tones down some of the comedy of the original for a slightly more tense and scary atmosphere, and a ton of CGI blood. Colin Farrell does a nice job of portraying a feral bloodsucker whose violent compulsions seethe just below the calm surface. Christopher Mintz-Plasse provides a few laughs as the buddy who gets turned and Imogen Poots is very hot throughout. Plus a small cameo from Chris Sarandon, the guy who played the vampire role in the original flick. Not bad at all.
Rated 21 Aug 2011
terrymacterrymac
Rated 14 Oct 2022
60
36th
A watchable and serviceable reworking of the more comical 80s film. The cast provides a lot of the appeal here, even if a couple of the characters were a bit annoying. It looked a bit murky at times, but otherwise the style of the film was decent, as were the effects. I think the original had a bit more appeal, but this was entertaining enough.
Rated 14 Oct 2022
dakota99Dakota99
Rated 09 Nov 2019
7
76th
Never saw the original or have any prior knowledge to the material, based off of the movie solely, this is really good. I attribute that to the cast with Farrell, Yelchin, Poots, Plazze, etc. I really like everyone in this, and it's rare to see something like that. The movie isn't particularly scary, but it's entertaining throughout, and I'd say some of the only downsides were the affects at times. I can't imagine liking this anymore than I do, it's a very good, campy horror flick.
Rated 09 Nov 2019
groovysoulsGroovy_Souls
Rated 14 Mar 2019
70
56th
Fright Night isn't a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, but it's really quite fun. Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, and David Tennant are all quite fun, and the movie itself balances actual horror with cheesy gore very well. It's well worth a watch, coming from someone who's yet to see the originals.
Rated 14 Mar 2019
joseywalesjoseywales
Rated 30 Jan 2014
68
50th
Decent gore and some good laughs, all served up at a nice pace with a ridiculous over-the-top Dr. Who along for the ride.
Rated 30 Jan 2014
barthalenBarthalen
Rated 05 Dec 2011
73
64th
Surprisingly entertaining. A good mix of old school horror and humor, with a few neat ideas. Farrell as a sleazy vampire was a great choice.
Rated 05 Dec 2011
therealj_roTheRealJ-Ro
Rated 24 Aug 2011
80
70th
Pleasantly surprised! I love Imogen Poots, she's gorgeous and actually has acting chops which is nice of course. David Tennant and McLovin' bring the laughs in a big way, and, I can't believe I'm gonna give this to him, but props are due to Colin Farrell. It's a role he gets to have fun with and he very clearly does. He's done some stinkers and been in great movies (typically not great because of him directly, but in them nonetheless). He's quite good here. I feel it does the original justice.
Rated 24 Aug 2011
darknightsDarkNights
Rated 17 Oct 2022
66
60th
Colin Farrell est monstrueusement sexy. Tous les points de ma note tiennent quasiment que sur sa présence. J'aime les méchants sexy, et l'acteur irlandais en impose avec sa poudre blanche, et ses abdos. Le reste du casting fait le taf. Les effets sont un peu cheap (coucou la 3D) mais ça fait le taf aussi. Relecture classique mais pas déplaisante. Le nouveau Peter Vincent est très groovy.
Rated 17 Oct 2022
guy-piranhaguy piranha
Rated 19 Dec 2016
69
61st
although it obviously lacks that special 80's foggy spookhouse flair and the setting is somewhat of a setback, the characters feel more fleshed out this time. the plot also has more buildup to it, but despite raised stakes, the ending still sucked. teehee.
Rated 19 Dec 2016
nilkynarfynilkynarfy
Rated 16 Sep 2012
75
68th
Weird. It has the same strengths and weaknesses as the original. Except replace "inconsistent optical fx" with "inconsistent cg fx." Chris Sarandon actually put in a lot of work to make Jerry Dandrige his own character, and Colin Farrell puts in a lot of work to make Chris Sarandon's Jerry Dandrige his own character. The only thing I hated about it was a few instances of "HEY THIS IS A 3D MOVIE THROW SOMETHING AT THE CAMERA OR HAVE THE MOST FORCED TRACKING SHOTS POSSIBLE." (liked the embers)
Rated 16 Sep 2012
aneyaney
Rated 01 Sep 2012
54
61st
Nice and campy, as it should be. Colin Farrell really makes this worthwhile and owns his role as a vampire. Christopher Mintz-Plasse also manages to deliver a funny performance. Without those two, it probably would have sucked though.
Rated 01 Sep 2012
kojilessKojiless
Rated 10 Feb 2012
50
55th
What I learned from this movie: In Vegas, your house can assplode in a fiery ball of propane-fueled brilliance and no one will bother reporting it.
Rated 10 Feb 2012
constantineconstantine
Rated 05 Feb 2012
57
19th
Still a better love story than Twilight.
Rated 05 Feb 2012
tjekhovTjekhov
Rated 04 Feb 2012
10
3rd
first scene with Farrell is funny, the following seconds you can classify under "waste of life"..
Rated 04 Feb 2012
leonardisLeonardis
Rated 11 Jan 2012
82
38th
probably a good remake (still need to see the original). It’s not great, but very well worth watching for the cast and decent effects.
Rated 11 Jan 2012
dobrava7dobrava7
Rated 08 Jan 2012
30
3rd
the original was way better. This one stunk
Rated 08 Jan 2012
vandelay1Vandelay1
Rated 10 Dec 2011
40
36th
Watchable
Rated 10 Dec 2011
lennyneroLennyNero
Rated 27 Nov 2011
25
14th
Awful remake of the horrorcomedy from the 80's. Substitutes the humour and the horror with failed attempts at suspense. More importantly, the amazing make-up effects were replaced by terrible CGI-effects. A complete failure.
Rated 27 Nov 2011
roonay3kroonay3k
Rated 26 Nov 2011
25
8th
GARBAGE!
Rated 26 Nov 2011
thedicemanTheDiceman
Rated 14 Sep 2011
40
19th
Original was better.
Rated 14 Sep 2011
carpetgiantCarpetgiant
Rated 12 Sep 2011
82
48th
Rather than write a review for this movie, I'm going to describe a profound moment during my movie theater experience. Before the movie started, there was a trailer for the prequel/remake of John Carpenter's "The Thing". I heard someone in the audience sigh loudly and exclaim "Hollywood is so out of ideas! They'll remake anything!" ... and yet, we were in the theater to watch a remake of another 80's horror movie.
Rated 12 Sep 2011
obdurateObdurate
Rated 29 Aug 2011
65
30th
Yeah, it's good. It's tongue-in-cheek in ways and I suppose that makes it a bit satirical, but it's still a vampire movie, which -- at this point -- takes a lot more to impress me. It's solid and a decent time, but really nothing more than that. Everything is competent, though I don't feel like it was that funny.
Rated 29 Aug 2011
daffy69697Daffy69697
Rated 28 Aug 2011
70
15th
As much fun as a root-canal.
Rated 28 Aug 2011
greatscott85GreatScott85
Rated 26 Aug 2011
87
62nd
A very entertaining, funny and well-acted horror-comedy hybrid anchored by strong performances and a conscious effort to update the original while still respecting it.
Rated 26 Aug 2011
panzerwolfpanzerwolf
Rated 30 Oct 2022
62
42nd
It doesn't quite hold up to the campy fun of the original, but it's still a whole lot more fun than I expected it to be. It sports a strong cast, some pretty nice gore and a script that moves on at a decent pace. It actually does go straight to point faster than the original and I wasn't really ever bored watching it. It's clear that it was made to cater for 3D watching and like any movie made for that purpose, seeing stuff flying at the screen is kind of cringeworthy these days.
Rated 30 Oct 2022
spookymaskSpookyMask
Rated 12 Sep 2022
70
60th
Not a bad remake. I like how it took a few similar elements and presented them in another light.
Rated 12 Sep 2022
videoetronVideoetron
Rated 10 May 2021
62
54th
It might be better to watch without having seen the original, else one's brain is distracted by trying to compare them. This one would have benefited more from a slower build at first (even if the original one was also quick to show the vampire's nature) to drive more on the paranoia and make the main character give more naturally into it. The ending explodes a bit everywhere and would have benefitted from being more to the point
Rated 10 May 2021
caffecaffe
Rated 31 Oct 2020
43
24th
A pretty fun remake. Cast is great, the script is fun. The effects though are awful, TV-level CG that makes you long for a prostethic of any sort. The direction is pretty anonymous and several scenes are "hard to see"-dark, not "atmospheric"-dark.
Rated 31 Oct 2020
iamdwgIamdwg
Rated 23 Oct 2020
73
43rd
There was only one thing that I didn't love about this movie - the mere fact that they kind of ignored the fact that the original series was a practical effects series. Like, practical effects were a part of the original identity, and they even use practical effects in the 2013 film, which is awesome. This one uses a lot of CGI stuff, and that annoyed me. Otherwise, I love this cast, I loved the atmosphere, and think it deserves to stand hand-in-hand with the other movies
Rated 23 Oct 2020
gatoquentegatoquente
Rated 07 May 2019
82
16th
My SCORING: 99-96=Great; 95-90=Very good; 89-85=Good; 84-80=So-so; 79-70=Boring; Below 70=Forget it.
Rated 07 May 2019
burrrburrr
Rated 31 May 2018
68
31st
68.00
Rated 31 May 2018
ikkegoemikkeikkegoemikke
Rated 13 Feb 2018
51
34th
More reviews here : http://movie-freak.be
Rated 13 Feb 2018
luordluord
Rated 09 Aug 2017
68
64th
Admittedly haven't watched the original... And I think I don't need to, this one has enough pulpy vampire goodness to spare, thanks in big part to an appropriately creepy performance by Farrell.
Rated 09 Aug 2017
michaelsmichaels
Rated 05 Jul 2015
85
88th
I never knew I needed to see Colin Farrell as a bloodthirsty vampire. But I do know that I need to see David Tennant in more films.
Rated 05 Jul 2015
telemecusTelemecus
Rated 27 Mar 2015
13
8th
Very standard, and ultimately boring. horror-fare.
Rated 27 Mar 2015
mrolivierMr.Olivier
Rated 25 Mar 2015
71
66th
The original did some things better (Evil Ed, having practical fx) but overall I found this one more enjoyable.
Rated 25 Mar 2015
magdabagmagdabag
Rated 09 Jan 2015
76
30th
This movie wasn't bad. Even though i think i liked the original better, it was still pretty good.
Rated 09 Jan 2015
vorpalkittenVorpalKitten
Rated 14 Dec 2014
90
86th
Really enjoyable movie, extra great if you're a little bit tired of the "vampires are just immortal people with superpowers" trend.
Rated 14 Dec 2014
hellsditchhellsditch
Rated 13 Oct 2014
79
56th
Fun! (sometimes less is more with these reviews).
Rated 13 Oct 2014
sdplisskenSDPlissken
Rated 18 Jul 2014
60
67th
While its not a patch on the original, totally lacking the fun, this is a remake that I enjoyed more than many retreads. This is played more straight faced than the original, and if a little more thought had gone in to certain scenes (the pointless opening sequence for one), it could have been great. Farrell's Jerry Dandridge is more like a modern day serial killer than the old school vamp that was Chris Sarandon's 1985 character, and he's solid here, and for the most part, so is the film.
Rated 18 Jul 2014
shosannaShosanna
Rated 06 May 2014
20
19th
Where is all this praise for Colin Farrel coming from? He's terrible. He's not threatening, he's not alluring, he's not fun, he's just goofy and cringalicious all the way through - the weakest link in a film that's pretty flimsy overall. Chris Sarandon nailed that cheeky charm and Farrell doesn't come even close. (2/5)
Rated 06 May 2014
frederikaFrederikA
Rated 21 Feb 2014
60
49th
As 80s horror remakes go, definately one of the better.
Rated 21 Feb 2014
talibanTaliban
Rated 21 Dec 2013
90
91st
Fun and unpredictable.
Rated 21 Dec 2013
lumpnboylumpnboy
Rated 16 Dec 2013
30
16th
Worthless.
Rated 16 Dec 2013
djrossdjross
Rated 15 Dec 2013
20
3rd
Not really a horror movie. Not really much of anything.
Rated 15 Dec 2013
hotsakehotsake
Rated 19 Nov 2013
65
63rd
this is a strictly middle of the road movie made better by the fact that I always laugh whenever I see Colin Farrell's attempt to act and those amazingly funny eyebrows.
Rated 19 Nov 2013
abunchofcatsABUNCHOFCATS
Rated 17 Nov 2013
75
39th
Surprisingly good. Yelchin, Farrell and Tennant are all great.
Rated 17 Nov 2013
glm01glm01
Rated 29 Oct 2013
72
43rd
72.000
Rated 29 Oct 2013
overratedoverrated
Rated 05 Oct 2013
43
37th
Weirdly, Colin Farrell was born for this role.
Rated 05 Oct 2013
spaceflohspacefloh
Rated 09 Sep 2013
60
58th
eng; [fright night]; ein junge findet heraus, dass sein nachbar ein vampir ist, der langsam alle seine freunde verzehrt - das will er mit hilfe eines vampirbewanderten las-vegas-magiers verhindern.;
Rated 09 Sep 2013
tjlmovfrks23TjlMovFrks23
Rated 07 Sep 2013
65
30th
its actually a decent remake of the original Tom Holland "Fright Night". somehow it managed to capture some of wits that the original has. the way charlie momentarily being a pyromaniac to kill Jerry was surprising and as a reminder of how vampire flick could be fun like "Fright Night". The assemble is solid and Farell is well suited for modern Jerry Dandrige. yet,its still pale in comparison to the original "Fright Night".some of the plot hole ruined this potential remake.
Rated 07 Sep 2013
difontaineDifontaine
Rated 18 Jul 2013
60
28th
I haven't seen the original but Colin Farrell and David Tennant got me over most of the bumps of this thing.
Rated 18 Jul 2013
jarmannJarmann
Rated 04 Jun 2013
40
10th
Just as moronic as the first one, only this time they removed all the charm and humor.
Rated 04 Jun 2013
nick-hamdenNick Hamden
Rated 02 Jun 2013
80
77th
Great remake. Farrell is hilarious/creepy. Yelchin is cute. Then we also get some Tennant for those Whovians.
Rated 02 Jun 2013
filmfreak88filmfreak88
Rated 15 Apr 2013
40
15th
A bland unnecessary remake.
Rated 15 Apr 2013
zioZio
Rated 05 Nov 2012
50
33rd
Even with some pacing and tone consistency issues, Fright Night is a fun, campy horror film. David Tennant steals the scene whenever he is on, same with Colin Farrell. No scares, but a few tense moments with its fair share of laughs, this is a remake done right.
Rated 05 Nov 2012
vreyVrey
Rated 27 Sep 2012
59
40th
This is a pretty simple movie. Watch it if you want to turn your brain off for a couple hours. I normally enjoy Colin Farrell, but the writing was a little too lacking here. Over all, very average movie.
Rated 27 Sep 2012
eric_janeric-jan
Rated 12 Sep 2012
60
13th
Was hoping for more.. but this was a pretty standard "action horror". A vampire who kills most people easily and has trouble killing a teen boy? I mean, c'mon now.. Also the whole Peter Vincent aspect was a little much lameness.
Rated 12 Sep 2012
hughjactionHugh_Jaction
Rated 17 Aug 2012
70
58th
The original Fright Night gets a Las Vegas makeover for the 21st Century: creepy and quirky enough to be memorable
Rated 17 Aug 2012
ryan_luedersRyan Lueders
Rated 09 Jul 2012
95
94th
A great movie! This to me was more of a comedy-Horror film, but I just thought it was great. Colin Farrell was a awesome vampire (even better his name is Jerry in the movie). Anton Yelchin and David Tennant looked hilarious suiting up to beat down some vamps together. Fright Night brings vampires back to their former glory that Twilight was trying to take away. THEY BURST INTO FLAME IN THE SUN, NOT SPARKLE!! They are also really hard to kill. Really cool effects and just a fun, fun ride!
Rated 09 Jul 2012
wayofthegunwayofthegun
Rated 30 Jun 2012
50
11th
This is a serviceable remake, but doesn't have a whole lot going for it. The original had the fun, campy aspect going for it but this one just doesn't capture that.
Rated 30 Jun 2012
kasperlKasperL
Rated 10 Jun 2012
50
29th
It begins really well with the Yelchin, Poots and Mintz-Plasse setup. Farrell is good as the vampire but I found Tennant annoying. What almost undoes the film, though, is the CG-imagery. Keep it simple... fangs, colored contact lenses and little else, please.
Rated 10 Jun 2012
robertaRoberta
Rated 07 Jun 2012
72
30th
It is scary and funny and not pretentious. Besides Colin Farrell is very menacing as a vampire.
Rated 07 Jun 2012
glumpy99glumpy_99
Rated 07 Jun 2012
67
31st
Silly but passable horror film can't decide if it wants to play it straight or be a spoof, so doesn't quite work on either front; it's never scary nor especially funny, though Farrell has a lot of fun sending up his image as the slimy villian, and Tennant is a hoot as the Russell Brand-ish vampire expert. Collette in support gives a rare unconvincing performance, and the screenplay too often feels like recycled TV writing.
Rated 07 Jun 2012
murravenerMurravener
Rated 09 May 2012
68
16th
Considering the cast this film had put together, it had the potential to be much better than it was. The original walked a line between horror and comedy and this one had tools to do the same, yet instead favored the horror. The problem is, it didn't handle horror very well either. Worth checking out if your a fan of the original, although I can already warn you, you won't be impressed.
Rated 09 May 2012
nofearnofear
Rated 24 Apr 2012
75
61st
Like Buffy? Then you will like this. I am not a fan of these type of films but this one is enjoyable. Doesn't take itself too seriously and wins because of it.
Rated 24 Apr 2012
mlightle3mlightle3
Rated 21 Apr 2012
93
89th
Just pure bloody brilliance.
Rated 21 Apr 2012
bakcheiabakcheia
Rated 12 Apr 2012
65
51st
I actually really enjoyed this.
Rated 12 Apr 2012
cinemaasiaCinema_Asia
Rated 04 Apr 2012
50
12th
Serviceable remake of an 80's camp horror classic. Was not expecting much out of Colin Farrell but he's surprisingly not terrible. Mintz-Plasse makes for a great vampire. The American suburbs is still a terrifying place to live.
Rated 04 Apr 2012
radresRadres
Rated 25 Mar 2012
65
32nd
At least it was not shredding Vampire Lore
Rated 25 Mar 2012
worstcasesceworstcasesce
Rated 24 Mar 2012
1
0th
Definitely has its problems but you know what? It moves quick, and it's a lot of fun. It's not deep but Colin Farrell is fantastic. Score is not a grade.
Rated 24 Mar 2012
deanazhollisdeanazhollis
Rated 26 Feb 2012
93
77th
Definitely something I thought I would NOT like. Remakes of movies? Really? Why? However...this was definitely something of it's own. The story line and the horror and action was quite there for me. Also, I loved that I had sympathy for the characters that turned, especially the friend and the "whore" woman imprisoned. Definitely a MUST to see and enjoy. And if you think it would diminish the original, don't. It did NOT disappoint.
Rated 26 Feb 2012
ozymandius10ozymandius10
Rated 20 Feb 2012
72
59th
Could've easily been a run of the mill horror flick, but a tailor made role for Colin Farrell and pretty funny story elevate it to fun-watch status.
Rated 20 Feb 2012
damildamil
Rated 03 Feb 2012
55
34th
It sticks reasonably close to the original, mostly just updating it. I liked the performances from Anton Yelchin, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and especially David Tennant (even if he was just playing Criss Angel meets Russell Brand for some of it). I really didn't care for Colin Farrell though. Anyway, yeah, not really a good movie and I could pick it to pieces. But I knew what to expect, and I just enjoyed the ride. Also, I got a kick out of Chris Sarandon's cameo.
Rated 03 Feb 2012
mistersplicemistersplice
Rated 20 Jan 2012
65
51st
6+ recommended :: Doesn't completely malign the original (which is good) and it also offers up some surprises (also good) ...but the script could have used one more rewrite.
Rated 20 Jan 2012
agentsnipeAgentSnipe
Rated 16 Jan 2012
85
88th
This is the type of movie that I can tolerate being remade. The 1985 film of Fright Night is fun, but in no way sacred. I liked it quite a bit. Very enjoyable despite the overall vampire saturation of current media. The film mostly rests on the shoulders of Anton Yelchin & Colin Farrell. Two likable actors who are willing to bring it to a goofy vampire flick. The complete Peter VIncent character re-imagining was only annoying to me because David Tennant was slightly annoying to me in this role.
Rated 16 Jan 2012
topaz024topaz024
Rated 15 Jan 2012
40
3rd
Frustrating stupid main character that I wanted to die. The original wasn't great either but it's the Godfather compared to this.
Rated 15 Jan 2012
misterlizardmisterlizard
Rated 14 Jan 2012
50
52nd
Dumb but enjoyable vampire movie full of little homages to others in the genre. Colin Farrell is surprisingly good as the villain and, along with Tennant's scenery-chewing alcoholic vampire killer, steals most of the scenes. The scenes without them aren't so great, although the presence of Imogen Poots makes them pleasantly watchable.
Rated 14 Jan 2012
bunkenBunken
Rated 31 Dec 2011
40
24th
Mr. Farrell brings something new to the genre which by now and for now seems to have overstayed it's welcome. Please give the vampires a little rest, and let them resurface in 5-10 years. Other than that, Fright Night is straight on from the beginning and without to much fucking around.
Rated 31 Dec 2011
mjvmoviemanMJVmovieMan
Rated 18 Dec 2011
54
24th
'Fright Night' is entirely watchable, but it doesn't do anything I didn't expect it to do. Despite some marginally entertaining performances, I didn't find an ounce of suspense here.
Rated 18 Dec 2011
dst7175dst7175
Rated 15 Dec 2011
65
53rd
Colin Farrell was a pretty good vampire.
Rated 15 Dec 2011
oldgoatoldgoat
Rated 13 Dec 2011
60
30th
Nothing particularly stood out about this movie except the casting was above average. No huge flaws, no awesome moments. They dropped the ball not explaining exactly what all the vampire artifacts were, would have been one of the more interesting parts of the movie.
Rated 13 Dec 2011
vn1xVN1X
Rated 06 Dec 2011
75
67th
A fun horror flick that doesn't take itself too serious. For once Colin Farrell is a charismatic appearance on screen and seems to be having a lot of fun with his part. Actually the entire cast does not disappoint and this combined with CGI that actually works(!) make it a fun and exciting ride worth your time.
Rated 06 Dec 2011
begoniabolbegoniabol
Rated 05 Dec 2011
70
60th
Sometimes funny, awful soundtrack and nerd guy is the coolest character. I like the fact that it doesn't take itself too seriously. Why do they have to make the 'final vampire look' so goddamn scary
Rated 05 Dec 2011
pickpocketPickpocket
Rated 04 Dec 2011
6
55th
Nearly every scene without Colin Farrell sucks, guy is great in this. Story is pretty gay but its vampires so it honestly should've been expected. Typically a soundtrack doesn't really stand out unless its really great but this one felt clunky and out of place like they had no idea how to match the mood of the scene with an appropriate song so they just picked what sounded cool, it doesn't work though. And holy shit James Franco's brother looks and sounds exactly like him.
Rated 04 Dec 2011
tavingtonTavington
Rated 03 Dec 2011
1
11th
Better than Twilight, that's for sure. Thumbs up for badass C. Farrell. Too bad it's (just) a remake, since it has a lot of potential to be vampire parody but it doesn't go into that. What a shame.
Rated 03 Dec 2011
muutanetmuutanet
Rated 29 Nov 2011
31
22nd
Unnecessary remake. Okay the moment Colin Farrell stood by the door and could not come in was really a nice scene. The best from the story. But EVERYTHING else were pain to watch. Colin and Toni acted good, but in vain. The story was just terrible. Worse towards the end.
Rated 29 Nov 2011
kusanagiKusanagi
Rated 28 Nov 2011
80
69th
I've personally wanted to see a Farrell in a role like this for a long time now, and I'm glad to say he delivered.
Rated 28 Nov 2011
cruelclowncruelclown
Rated 27 Nov 2011
65
44th
Sadly this film has much potential to be cult YA film but lackluster characterization and ending pretty much ruin its chances.
Rated 27 Nov 2011
gideonGideon
Rated 26 Nov 2011
2
59th
Entertaining!
Rated 26 Nov 2011
chmulcr0nchmul_cr0n
Rated 26 Nov 2011
65
40th
plot-wise the movie alters relatively regularly from really cool to pretty dumb. execution-wise it's usually not that great with some exceptions. nice cast/performances and has its fun moments.
Rated 26 Nov 2011
slantmagSlantMag
Rated 20 Nov 2011
25
61st
"Despite some unexpected cultural observations and insights into its male protagonist's sexual insecurities, Fright Night is very much a product of our time." - Ed Gonzalez
Rated 20 Nov 2011
bofbof
Rated 15 Nov 2011
55
31st
I'll be damned if it isn't better than the original. Well paced, fun (David Tennant as an alcoholic vampire hunter!), and thank FSM someone still bothers making vampire movies where they're actual MONSTERS and don't spend half the movie moping or making a big mystery of whether they're really vampires or not. Let's establish right away that Colin Farrell is a bloodthirsty beast with not a single shred of human emotion anywhere in him. The 3D was utterly pointless, of course, but when is it not?
Rated 15 Nov 2011
moraesfelipemoraesfelipe
Rated 05 Oct 2011
40
13th
It tries to be seductive and funny but the script is too naive and poor to deliver any of these stuff for more than 30 minutes. The CGI and the fake 3D are also negative and unnecessary, you know.
Rated 05 Oct 2011
ofterdingenOfterdingen
Rated 03 Oct 2011
62
58th
Not as straightforward and elegantly told as the original but entertaining nonetheless.
Rated 03 Oct 2011
spleenspleen
Rated 25 Sep 2011
78
61st
For Gods Sake! Someone! Anyone! Help us! This terror must be stopped! Quit letting Marti Noxon write!
Rated 25 Sep 2011
kramyessevKramYessev
Rated 16 Sep 2011
24
5th
No atmosphere, no tension, no humour, no soundtrack, no tonal consistency, no enjoyable characters, no fun, goddamn motherfucking CGI, and worst of all, no respect for it's source material. Everything the brilliant 85 film had, the 2011 remake has not. The only things saving it from being one of the worst remakes of the year are David Tennants very, very mildy amusing role and the tolerable 3D.
Rated 16 Sep 2011
graveyardtangraveyardtan
Rated 14 Sep 2011
60
21st
Even the characters who aren't supposed to be douche bags are douche bags in this juvenile, sexist mess of a vampire remake. Also, I feel just awful for Christopher Mintz-Plasse, who will never escape the career killing clutches of McLovin.
Rated 14 Sep 2011

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...