Mary Poppins Returns
Log in with Facebook
Forgot your password?
Don't have an account? Sign up here
and the Terms and Policies,
and to receive email from Rotten Tomatoes and Fandango.
Already have an account? Log in here
Please enter your email address and we will email you a new password.
No consensus yet.
Tomatometer Not Available...
No consensus yet.
All Critics (8)
| Fresh (2)
| Rotten (6)
| DVD (3)
Without the "Rear Window" frame, "Fright Night 2," is just another forgettable buffoonish vampire movie.
Nothing more than a cheapo regurgitation of its predecessor.
a fairly standard slash-and-grab vampire movie
Better than a lot of Part 2s -- but not by a whole heck of a lot.
Being a die-hard fan of the original Fright Night, I finally got around to seeing the sequel. I had heard mixed things about, and I was skeptical about seeing it. However, I found the film to be pretty good, but not as good the original. This sequel is a more laid back flick than the first. Watching the first film, you realize that there is a different tone in atmosphere with this one. The film is good, but lacks the elements that made the first one such a classic. The problem with this film is that it essentially follows the same ideas as the first. With that being said, Fright Night Part 2 offers nothing really new or original, but is nonetheless a fun little film. This is one of those sequels that could have been great, but it's slightly disappointing. This film could have been better if Stephen Geoffreys who played Evil Ed would have returned. The film is slightly more tongue in cheek than the original, and is gorier, which ruins the tone of the film a bit. The original Fright Night wasn't gory and tended to rely more a dark atmosphere to create its horror. However with this sequel, the filmmakers went for more gore, which for me anyhow cheapened the film a bit. The standouts here are Julie Carmen as Regine Dandrige and Traci Lind as Alex, Charley's new girlfriend. The script may not be as solid as the first film, but this is still a pretty good vampire film. This could have been a far better sequel as well. The film had some good ideas on-screen, but I think that they could have toned down the gore and make it a bit more atmospheric. The sensual traditional vampire elements were there, and Julie Carmen was definitely perfect in her part. The best way to describe Fright Night Part 2 is as a cheesy, mindless good time. Just don't go expecting something memorable like the 1985 classic, you'll be disappointed. However as far as real vampire films are concerned, this is still one of those films that keeps with the traditions. This is a film worth seeing and still fun, just not as fun as the original.
This was a completely unnecessary sequel to a great film, not to mention it is more than just a major downgrade in filmmaking. Vampires randomly come in, the main cast change their minds from the thoughts they originally had by the end of the first movie, which makes absolutely no sense, and overall, this film disgusted me. A director who had nothing to do with the first film decided to helm a sequel that stared lead female vampires and a vampire that doesn't like blood, but enjoys to eat insects. Besides the ridiculously similar plot line, the bad acting, the untrue dialogue, and the stupid jump scares, there are a few moments that reflect on the original and would make any viewer smirk. However, the originality is missing, which makes this film almost unwatchable to think it is a sequel to a classic. I will never watch this movie again and quite frankly I despise the creators for thinking of it! What a shame!
Pretty much the same plot and layout as the first film really which I guess is a shame as its nothing very original but I suppose they stick to what works and this does work..again.
Slightly more speedy with the plot and more interesting as you know whats happened previously so there's not much boring teen angst stuff going on at first, it doesn't take long before we hit vamp speed. So we have more vamps this time round which is nice as the small group are quite a cool little bunch with plenty of variation and imagination on display, I especially love 'Louie' the werewolf looking vamp, 'Belle' is a unique looking vamp kinda in the flashy outrageous style of singer 'Prince' and Carmen is beautiful as 'Regine' the sister of 'Dandrige' from the first flick.
As said its the same as before plot wise so nothing special there but again we have some lovely makeup and special effects to show yet more melting, crumbling, exploding and dissolving vampires in their last throws, still have some dodgy looking puppets at times with some obvious cheesy sets and bluescreen but it still manages to look better than cgi in my opinion cos at least the effects/sets/makeup are real. Its a good sequel which just gives you more of the same with more imagination in the way they do it, 'how can we make a vampire death look even more fantastic and gooey?'
Interestingly some ideas and sequences do seem to have been heavily borrowed from the classic sexy vamp flick 'Vamp' (1986) with Grace Jones, if you watch the two there are definitely similar ideas being used with the sexy dance routines of Regine and even her final death scene where she raises a skeletal forearm from her freshly cooked corpse. I still find myself asking why on earth 'Brewster' doesn't give in and become a vampire lover with Regine...I would of for sure haha.
View All Quotes