Had a day pass to Empire's Big Screen Event at the O2 in London yesterday, lots of nice things going on, screenings, Q&As yaddayaddayadda. To cut along story short, the new Fright Night movie premièred with an introduction from the Doctor himself, David Tennant. Is he the former Doctor now though ? I don't really follow it ?
Anyway on to Fright Night, as far as remakes go, this is a another one that falls into the utterly pointless category and that's not coming from a person with loyalties to the original, I've got no real love Fright Night '85. I was 2 in 1985 and not being a horror aficionado I never sought it out in my teenage years, only eventually happening across it late one night whilst channel surfing in my early 20's. Much like the remake it left little impression on me, though i could appreciate that had I have been 13 in '85 I may of had fun with it.
I'm not sure teenagers today will be able to say the same, it's been a while since I've seen such bland, Vanilla, exercise in soulless corporate film making (I try to avoid it !) there's so little ambition from top to bottom with this film I found myself wondering how anybody drummed up enough enthusiasm to make it onto set everyday. This is none more so evident than with Colin Farrell (a hit and miss actor at best for me, a hit being In Bruge's a miss being pretty much everything else he's been in) in arguably the easiest role to have some fun with, he does nothing except skulk around, mumble a bit and try and pass off bored as moody, he's not helped by a script that gives him very little to work with, it's just that he sticks out in the chief villain role. Everybody else does okay, Anton Yelchin (who looks scarily like an old man trapped in child's body now he's a bit older) has already proven he's too good for nonsense like this, Toni Collette, well just Isn't around enough to make an impression, which leaves the special guest himself Mr David Tennant, now to say that he steals the show would be an exaggeration and would suggest there was a show worth nicking in the first place, but i have to say he added a much needed dose of fun to preceding's and at the very least looked as though he wanted to be there. Making a film based around his character (a Jack Sparrow of the horror world if you will) might have actually been worth while, Marti Noxon's script instead opts for the old horror clichés, not a single moment passing that comes as a surprise or offering something new which for a such a good writer of Buffy is practically unforgivable.
In terms of gore (by today's standards) there's very little on display and for you purists out there it's almost all CGI. I'm not sure what rating it'll get stateside but here it'll get a 15 for language alone here so i don't know why they didn't ramp up the blood and guts to at least satisfy on that front, just another example of a lack of ambition.
Now lets discuss the 3D, there's no reason for this to be in 3D, except a couple of gimmicky shots that look a little out of place, 99% of this film takes place at night (the clue is in the title)
3D flat out DOES NOT WORK in the dark. I'm not a hater, 3D can be great, hell it was the only reason to see the last Transformers film, but the sooner Studio's get it into their heads that 3D is actually detracting from their films the better. As it is, 3D turned a bad experience into a horrible one. So in a word, AVOID.