Teenager Charley Brewster discovers that his new neighbour Jerry Dandridge is actually an ancient vampire who preys on the people of his neighbourhood. Can he enlist the help of the “famous” vampire killer Peter Vincent who stars in the tv/stage show Fright Night to vanquish the town of this evil?

As part of the Halloween special for the At the Flicks podcast I watched Fright Night (1985) for the first time and found myself having a pretty enjoyable time. It prompted me to find the remake from 2011 which I had also given a miss on release and found myself having an even more enjoyable time. So I thought I would share reviews of both and a comparison.

Fright Night is an original story from Tom Holland. No, not the current Spider-Man actor. This Tom Holland would become famous for writing and directing horror stories, including Child’s Play and Thinner.

Fright Night (1985) was Holland’s directorial debut and starred Chris Sarandon as Jerry the vampire, William Ragsdale as Charley, Dorothy Fielding as Charley’s mother Judy, Amanda Bearse as Charley’s girlfriend Amy, Evil Ed as Charley’s comic relief best friend Stephen and Roddy McDowall as the legendary Peter Vincent.

Fright Night (2011) was directed by Craig Gillespie and has quite a starry cast. Colin Farrell is Jerry the vampire, Anton Yelchin is Charley, Toni Collette is Charley’s mother Jane, Imogen Poots is Charley’s girlfriend Amy, Christopher Mintz-Plasse is Charley’s comic relief best friend Ed and David Tennant is the legendary Peter Vincent.

The remake stays relatively faithful to the original with only two major changes. In the original Jerry had a Renfield like assistant called Billy Cole played by Jonathan Stark, however in the sequel his character is omitted completely. This actually works quite well in the remake as it means that Colin Farrell’s Jerry has to be much more malevolent as the evil in the film. The other change is a flip in the two teenage friends beliefs. In the original Charley is the believer with his friend needing convincing of the vampire next door. In the remake Charley needs to be convinced by his friend Ed.

As I watched the remake I found that it had a genuine affection for the original that made it able to improve upon every facet of the original. It genuinely feels like an underappreciated remake of an 80’s cult classic.

In the original film Charley’s home was in a generic suburban American neighbourhood. In the sequel they have taken these identikit houses isolated from the world to its extreme. The film is set in Las Vegas and Charley’s home is a rectangular block of homes surrounded by desert making for some striking aerial views and a solution to the modern day problems of mobile phones in horror films. It ups the ante in terms of the threat thanks to the isolation.

The strongest aspects of the original were Jerry and Peter. Where as the teenagers were not wholly likeable, especially the awful comedy sidekick played by Evil Ed. In the remake they have improved where the 80’s characters were weak and tweaked where the 80’s characters were strong.

Our vampire Jerry was a well dressed, charismatic and funny villain in the original. So in the sequel, with the omission of the servant figure we have a much darker, brooding and scarier villain in the guise of Colin Farrell. Our vampire hunter Peter Vincent was the star of the show in the original aping the look of Peter Cushing as Van Helsing in classic Dracula movies. So here with another twenty years of vampire history to riff on we have a gothic, alcoholic who actually has a historic link to our villain. Our two lapsed best friends played by Anton Yelchin and Christopher Mintz-Plasse manage to be far more likeable, capable and funny in every aspect compared to the original whilst the mother and girlfriend characters are no longer damsel in distress side characters but actually a real part of the plot. In fact Toni Collette (a modern day scream queen now) gets a fantastic scene with one of her estate agent For Sale signs.

Whilst the 80’s special effects were impressive and gory the remake of course goes one better with gorier computer effects. I know there is a lot to be said for the more practical original effects but the remake does a really good job with the axe wounds and teeth filled mouths here.

The remake even has fun with its end credits showing clips from the film and having the words explode in blood splatter.

All in all I would recommend both but have to say this is an example of a remake improving upon the original.