Good movie but grossly overrated

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

First of all this movie is not part 2 to the Fright Night remake from 2011. It is a remake of the 1985 original Fright Night and the 2011 remake. So it is the 2nd remake of Fright Night 1. The characters Charlie Brewster, Evil Ed, Amy Peterson, Peter Vincent and vampire Dandrige are here as in the original, however this time the location is set in Romania. I was entertained from beginning to end. The special effects were great considering this is a made for video movie. Lots of blood and guts you get the idea. So rent or buy this movie, get some popcorn and enjoy. Don't think of this movie as a remake because it still is not as good as the original and you may be disappointed. Think of it as a modern vampire movie set in Romania and you will most likely enjoy it.

I didn't have high expectations and I figured it would at least be worth viewing to the end. However, at almost an hour into the movie; I just stopped watching.Pros: The actress that played Jeri. There was enough money for a good film. The original story was brought to the present: Fright Night as a reality series. Vampire cannot be filmed. Comic book story. Cons: Evil (Eddy) was too distracting (like a flock of flies buzzing around your head) to the point that you wanted to see him die early (terrible actor); so the story can develop and maybe have a chance to recover. The story starts good and to me stayed OK for about 40 minutes, then it took a nose dive. Charlie & Eddy are reminded of class attendance, then suddenly they have free time and aren't bothered by attending classes; perhaps the writer/director could have thrown it in that it was the weekend and they didn't have class to attend. The actress that played Jeri had her time, as well as talent wasted by doing this movie. Peter Vincent agrees to assess the Vampire for $3,000 and I guess just took Eddy at his word. Instead of Charlie discovering Jeri is a Vampire; it just gets thrown out there from the very beginning.When you have a good story with a steady unfolding of events, then it involves you, so that you don't have time to notice things like no class anymore.I would address the movie further, and feel I wasted enough time already by watching the movie.

Okay... Pardon my French... but WTF is this? What we have here is an indescribably bizarre production... It takes NO account of the events of the first Fright Night film which came out two years earlier (Despite it being classified as a sequel) and is in itself, a virtual remake of the ORIGINAL 1985 Fright Night... Which was rebooted in 2011!! Didya get all that?! If you did, gold star for you... If not, don't worry, because you could get all the top scientists and academics in the world into a little room... And they STILL couldn't come up with any idea as to why this film should exist.What they've done is take some of the best characters ever found in a comedy/horror, stripped them of all personality so much so that even calling them generic would be a kindness, removed all the tongue-in-cheek laughs that made the 80's Fright Night so funny, and added non-stop brainless gore. Oh, and the fantastic Jerry Dandridge (The Big Bad from the original) has had a sex change... she's now known as Gerri. This adds nothing of consequence to the plot...Apart from adding in lots of NEARLY nude scenes where we get to see ALL of Jaime Murray's breasts... apart from the nipple. The attention to detail to avoid the unveiling of said teat is astounding for sure... If it isn't her long hair covering it up, it's a background item. She must have had a clause in her contract... show me tits, you pay an extra million. Shame they didn't shower that kind of attention on the rest of this sorry production.Peter Vincent is now a charmless fake paranormal investigator instead of a lovable old ham film actor, and love interest Amy is a nagging annoyance rather than a supportive girlfriend. Our 'hero' Charlie Brewster has lost most of his brain cells in transition, and now makes mistakes left,right and centre that put everyone in jeopardy. Only Evil Ed seems to retain SOME of his manic persona, but his jokes aren't half as funny this time around, and when he gets staked as a vampire, what was a very moving moment in the 80's Fright Night is mishandled by epic proportions.Entire segments of that film seem to have been ripped out and given a 'modern' direct-to-video rewrite... Which in other words means, they screw them up royally. They remove all subtlety and intelligence, and replace it with hokey dialogue, predictable last minute escapes and buckets upon buckets of blood. It's tedious, mind-grating and not rewarding in the slightest, particularly if you're like me and have witnessed the wonder that is the original.If you want to make a crappy horror flick, that's GREAT... But please don't steal the script and characters from a classic, and urinate all over them from a great height with your nonsense. Special mention to the mawkish, cheesy, sick-inducing ending which made me scream at my TV like a crazy man. They were SERIOUS with that scene? There was no IRONY behind that nauseous spectacle at all? No last minute JUMP like you get from so many others of this genre? Nope. I suppose in a way though, it DOES wrap up nicely what has been a complete pile of... manure from start to finish. Well done for consistency, at least. But nothing else. Now, get ye gone thou Spawn Of Satan disguised as a DVD, lest I smite ye through your case with my patented stake. GO!!! 3/10

This is a very strange film. I expected a remake of the original Fright Night 2 only to find that it wasn't that at all. Then I assumed it was a sequel to the remake, but as Charley Brewster had no knowledge of vampires or Peter Vincent, it wasn't that either. OK, so how about just being a fun trashy horror film with an absolute knockout lead actress as a seductive vampire? Well, yes and no. Jamie Murray is marvellous and she is the saving grace of the film, and her performance partially rescues the affair. However, she needed to be featured more and her character been allowed to cut loose more extensively. As it is, the film misfires in the belief that the audience will be rooting for the drippy and charisma-free Charley and his vapid girlfriend, an ex-Coronation Street luminary (I'll skip over 'Evil' Ed, as should you) and I'd have been quite happy to see Countess Bathory triumph! As for 'Peter Vincent', Sean Power isn't Roddy McDowell (or David Tennant for that matter) and we'll leave it at that. Also, the Countess Bathory angle is confusing as Gerri ultimately has three forms: the seductive 30-something Gerri, a wizened Gerri who needs to bathe in blood to get back her youthful visage, and a monstrous vampire form. Of the latter, if that is what a vampire truly looks like then why does she age in her human guise? It doesn't make sense, but since little does in the movie I don't suppose it is worth pondering. So, more Gerri and less moping Charley and Fright Night 2 could have been an effective B-feature. But it isn't. Oh, well, there's always the next season of Defiance.