Anyone up for the Fright Night remake?

I'm done done done with the remakes. Enough already! Like "Let The Right One In", this film is a prime example of something that does NOT need to be revisited. Count me out. They won't be getting any of my hard-earned money.

No, I'm actually DOWN about a needless FRIGHT NIGHT remake. I won't be seeing it, and I look forward to skipping it. The 1985 version still holds up and is way "modern enough" in feel to be left alone. 

Agreed.  The clothing, hair styles and look of FRIGHT NIGHT are so modern that I'm certain they could just put it back into theaters and today's crowds would think it was a new movie.  It's not like this is old like PIRANHA.

Agreed.  The clothing, hair styles and look of FRIGHT NIGHT are so modern that I'm certain they could just put it back into theaters and today's crowds would think it was a new movie.  It's not like this is old like PIRANHA.

Well, maybe the 1995 remake of PIRANHA would seem new enough for them.

The SFX technique of FRIGHT NIGHT (1985) holds up well today. I guess most modern audiences wouldn't say the same for the effects in the '70s version of PIRANHA. (Not that new FX are a sole reason to remake an older movie, but at least PIRANHA had the 3D gimmick). Either way, the 2010 remake flopped. I thought supposedly "everyone wants to go see remakes which is why they keep making them"? 

We didn't need two more versions of PIRANHA, but I did go to see the current one for the 3D factor, and since I am not a big fan of the '70s one and so have no devotion to it. I'll tell you one thing - after seeing the 2010 version, I can easily grow to love the first (what a suprise)! 

I also have had enough of this remake mania that has swept through Hollywood in the last 6 years or so, it's so rampant that they don't even disagree that it's only because they are afraid of risking money on "untested material", it almost seems as if they are proud of their cowardice and lack of talent.

Yeah yeah, I know all too well that as an industry Hollywood has always cannibalized itself but it really has gotten out of control lately......I mean they are remaking Straw Dogs for god's sake..........STRAW DOGS MAN!     And it's being set in the southern states of America rather than England, and David is a scriptwriter instead of a mathematician in this........WHY?    What is the damn point of this?   The only reason I can come up with, since it's not as if the original has a lot of name recognition to justify any hopes of franchise cash grabbing, is that the director thinks he can do a better job than Sam Peckinpah, uh huh, good luck there pal.

Ugh........

I personally love STRAW DOGS and consider it a masterpiece but there are many, many critics who hated it and bashed the hell out of it when released as well as today. 

However, I'd say 98% of movie fans today would hit the eject button around the three-minute mark.  My prediction on a wide release of STRAW DOGS $24 million.

These movies aren't being made for those of you in this thread.  They're being made for the people who have time and money to blow on weekends.  They are the ones who count and they are the ones these movies are made for.  If Kevin, Joe or I go then that's great.  Extra money.  If not, the studio doesn't give a shit because they still have their large opening weekend while we sit at home watching our newly released DVD or Blu-ray of the original (which will happen now) that puts even more money into their pockets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Elliott 

These movies aren't being made for those of you in this thread.  They're being made for the people who have time and money to blow on weekends.

Yep, if remakes weren't making money, they'd stop making them. The general public either doesn't care or doesn't know and they pay their $10 and that's all that matters since it's a business.

Not even a little bit.

Fright Night among my favorite films, great FX, amazing writing and brilliant performances combine to make one of the genre's timeless classics.

No desire to see a remake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin M 

I also have had enough of this remake mania that has swept through Hollywood in the last 6 years or so, it's so rampant that they don't even disagree that it's only because they are afraid of risking money on "untested material", it almost seems as if they are proud of their cowardice and lack of talent.

 

Yeah yeah, I know all too well that as an industry Hollywood has always cannibalized itself but it really has gotten out of control lately......I mean they are remaking Straw Dogs for god's sake..........STRAW DOGS MAN!     And it's being set in the southern states of America rather than England, and David is a scriptwriter instead of a mathematician in this........WHY?    What is the damn point of this?   The only reason I can come up with, since it's not as if the original has a lot of name recognition to justify any hopes of franchise cash grabbing, is that the director thinks he can do a better job than Sam Peckinpah, uh huh, good luck there pal.

 

Ugh........

I assume that that movie's going with the very original 'all southern people are violent hillbillies', with an emphasis on the violence? I can understand remaking movies like Piranha, those can be improved. But movies like Straw Dogs? I can't imagine improving those at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Borst 

I can understand remaking movies like Piranha, those can be improved.

I'd definitely put Fright Night in the same category. It's an OK movie but it's certainly not some untouchable cinematic classic either.

As far as mid-to-late-80s horror films go, there aren't many I could call "classic", but I do think FRIGHT NIGHT is one of them, and it has pretty much that type of reputation.  Either way, the 1985 film works. It got it right. It is FRIGHT NIGHT, The Movie.

I mean, they're not even remaking old literary works anymore ... they're just taking every single 1980s movie script that hasn't been redone yet, and are redoing them.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR 

Yep, if remakes weren't making money, they'd stop making them. The general public either doesn't care or doesn't know and they pay their $10 and that's all that matters since it's a business.

Well - you said it right there, Travis: They often "don't even KNOW they're remakes". So then, how do you figure "remakes are making money because they're remakes"?  Do you see what I mean? The general public just goes to see whatever's new, and they often don't even know they're seeing a remake. So, they're not going to these movies "because Gee, I really like seeing remakes!". They'd be just as apt to see a new horror movie even if it WASN'T a remake. It's no different to them, they just want to see whatever's new, and if remakes are chiefly what's on the main menu, of course that's what they'll have to see.   
 

And not all remakes make money.  

I don't think the public is going to see remakes because they're remakes but the studios have to have a hit so, as has been said before, they're more comfortable with something that already worked. It's like when musicians 'sample' old hit songs in new songs- it worked before, it'll probably work again. Believe me, I'm not saying that this a good thing, I'm just saying that's the way it is.

Of course not all remakes make money but enough do that the remake trend doesn't seem to be going away any time soon.

Count me as another not looking forward to this remake. As already stated above, if there are any films from the 80's that can be considered classics, this would be one. I shudder at the thought of the new casting. Also, where's the Billy Cole character? He had a pretty significant and memorable part in the original. They're just omitting him from the remake? Or, more likely, they're changing the character to a woman to avoid, god forbid, any sort of homosexual vibe from Jerry and Billy living together.

Colin Ferrell as Dandridge? *shudder*  Anton Yelchin as Charley? *shudder* McLovin as Evil Ed? *double shudder and a Yikes!, too*.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR 

but the studios have to have a hit so, as has been said before, they're more comfortable with something that already worked. It's like when musicians 'sample' old hit songs in new songs- it worked before, it'll probably work again. 

But almost always, it doesn't. That is, in the "quality" department, at any rate. The overwhelming majority of modernized rehashes almost always come up zilch in terms of being as good as, let alone better than, their originals. 

If you figure it's not about quality to the studios but rather all about "the box office receipts and making a lot of money", then that goes back to what I initially said... young people are not buying tickets to see these things "specifically BECAUSE they're remakes". So it can't be that they have built-in box office potential all the time, just because they're redo's. In fact, many people are tiring of this "remake-itis" in the last several years, if anything, and are staying away more (when they KNOW they're remakes and are sick of that, I mean). 

Don't even get me started on sampling old songs in new songs. Compared to THAT talent-less ripoff practice, I'd rather see all these new remakes!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi 

 

But almost always, it doesn't. That is, in the "quality" department, at any rate. The overwhelming majority of modernized rehashes almost always come up zilch in terms of being as good as, let alone better than, their originals. 

Yeah, even modern remakes that I've liked such as The Last House On The Left and The Hills Have Eyes, while miles ahead of the originals in terms of technique, can't even come close to recreating the power of the originals for various reasons.

On a similar topic, I enjoy The Thing From Another World, The Fly and The Blob but I do think that their 1980's remakes are better.

9/14/10  Very few people know FRIGHT NIGHT.

10/07/11 People will go see FRIGHT NIGHT making it a hit, learn it is a remake and then check out the original.

If remakes weren't making money then they'd stop making them.

If remakes didn't help the original film then studios wouldn't throw the older movie on every store shelf in America.

I personally see it as a win-win for young and old fans. 

PIRANHA got great reviews when it was released and made Dante a good sized figure in Hollywood.  It got better reviews than FRIGHT NIGHT.

I consider RAGING BULL a classic.  FRIGHT NIGHT is a very good movie but I don't think it crosses the line as being an untouchable.

Just off the top of my head, remakes are the reason why I own the original version of The Stepfather, the uncut version of the original My Bloody Valentine and the original Piranha & first three Friday The 13th movies on Blu-ray. I don't think any of those remakes topped the originals but I'm glad they came out because it ended up in me getting movies that I did want.

Like Bryan H said at the top of the thread, I think it's fair to expect a special edition DVD or a Blu-ray of the original Fright Night when the remake gets released. And even if the remake is the worst movie ever made, fans of the original are going to win just because a remake exists.

I know that not all remakes are trying to bank on the reputation of the original as a great many of the younger audiences today have the film memory of a gnat....but some are definitely banking on the name recognition, to say that it is never the reason is simply not true.  However I also think that another reason for the massive influx of remakes is just the studios being lazy and not wanting to pay a higher dollar for new material......I can only assume that older material is somehow cheaper than paying newer screenwriters for their scripts, it would help make sense of the shear amount of these do-overs as of late.

Anywhoo............Fright Night...........here's one of the things I don't get, The original film's basis is that the kid loves watching creature features like we used to have back in the 70's and 80's (here in St. Louis we had "Saturday Night Shocker" & "Creature Features") and enlists the help of the Host of his favorite horror show "Fright Night" to help wit da Vampire slayin.................but how many of these shows are on anymore, not many that I can think of.  I mean the movie is called Fright Night BECAUSE of the Peter Vincent's spook show....what are they going to change it to?  A comic book store? A video game store?   Kinda looses a bit of it's charm if a comic book store register Jockey is going to help you.......without the show it is just Lost Boys IMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin M 

I mean the movie is called Fright Night BECAUSE of the Peter Vincent's spook show....what are they going to change it to?  A comic book store?

I didn't even occur to me that Peter Vincent's career wouldn't sorta make no sense to kids today. Sadly, I think having him run a comic book store would almost be as foreign or antiquated to the teen/young adult market as a late night horror movie show.

Peter Vincent is a Vegas magician in the remake. I could see his show being called "Fright Night," but I don't know if it is.

...........A Vegas magician.    So kid's today can't identify with let alone even know what a "horror show" is but they are down wit da magicians!!  Yep, that's about what I would expect. 

Oh man..........here's what Peter Vincent (David Tennant) looks like in the remake:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR 

On a similar topic, I enjoy The Thing From Another World, The Fly and The Blob but I do think that their 1980's remakes are better.

But did you ever notice these are always the three few horror/sci-fi films that fans usually cherry pick? But this was way back in the 1980s, not 90s/00s/2010...!  That's three remakes out of hundreds! I'm sure other fans can name a few more, but....

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR 

I didn't even occur to me that Peter Vincent's career wouldn't sorta make no sense to kids today. Sadly, I think having him run a comic book store would almost be as foreign or antiquated to the teen/young adult market as a late night horror movie show.

But the thing is, all older movies should be viewed according to their own time setting. When a kid today watches FRIGHT NIGHT, he should put himself in the frame of mind that "This story takes place in 1985". It's like when you watch an old Western of the 1880s, do people think it's supposed to be occurring in 2010?  Not every friggin' movie people watch should need to take place in 2010.

Even if a kid today can't relate to having his own "Horror Hosts On TV", it doesn't matter. The movie itself sets up the scenario that there's this guy Charlie who watches a TV show called Fright Night, and with a host named Peter Vincent. Just like I didn't live in biblical times, but I can watch and enjoy a film about Romans and arenas, and some guy camed Julius Caesar.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TravisR 

On a similar topic, I enjoy The Thing From Another World, The Fly and The Blob but I do think that their 1980's remakes are better.

I think that Scorsese's Cape Fear was way better than the original, but as others have stated, it's very rare for a remake to be as good or better than the original.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Karlosi 

But the thing is, all older movies should be viewed according to their own time setting. When a kid today watches FRIGHT NIGHT, he should put himself in the frame of mind that "This story takes place in 1985". It's like when you watch an old Western of the 1880s, do people think it's supposed to be occurring in 2010?  Not every friggin' movie people watch should need to take place in 2010.

 

Even if a kid today can't relate to having his own "Horror Hosts On TV", it doesn't matter. The movie itself sets up the scenario that there's this guy Charlie who watches a TV show called Fright Night, and with a host named Peter Vincent. Just like I didn't live in biblical times, but I can watch and enjoy a film about Romans and arenas, and some guy camed Julius Caesar.

I'm not saying that a 15 year old would watch it today and be totally lost. They'd be able to follow the movie but they'd have no point of reference for horror movie hosts (hell, I'm in my early 30's and the only movie hosts that I remember are from USA Up All Night). Presuming that the remake is set 'today', it wouldn't make sense to have a character doing a job that really doesn't exist any more. Just like in the original Fright Night, they wouldn't have had a 1950's-style greaser or a 1960's-style hippie because it would be completely out of place for the time.