Horror remakes seem to becoming a trend these days, and they seem to cause ill feelings for followers of the originals.
I have my favorite films and there are plenty that I wouldn't mind seeing remade as long as they are remade well!
I recently went to see Fright Night August last year, and enjoyed the film because it didn't simply rewrite the original. It took the key characters of the original, such as Jerry - the vampire next door, as well as the fictional vampire killer Peter Vincent, and of course Charlie, Amy and Ed, except the story didn't follow the original game plan of the 1985 classic and took the viewer on a different track.
This time Jerry lives alone without his protector, and Charlie is a geek, turned popular kid overnight, by his new girlfriend Amy.
Peter Vincent is an over confident, and cocky illusionist, and fictional vampire hunter, with a history, and Ed is a geek who falls short of Charlie and his new friends and is turned a lot sooner than in the original.
The film does start with the old plot of Charlie trying to convince his girlfriend and mum that Jerry is a vampire, as well as snitching to the police, for them to only make mockery of the accusation.
Once Jerry is found out by Charlie, his girlfriend and mum the story starts to unfold in a much different way to the original, but it stays roughly with the chain of events from the original.
The final parts of the film see Charlie tracking down Amy in Jerry's house, but the scene is rather different to what happened in the old film, and Peter Vincent manages to fend off his fears and drop by to help Charlie bring down Jerry and get Amy back.
The original is a different film, and staying faithful to it, i have to say that it just beats the remake, but only just. I feel that horror films made during the 80s were something very different from the horror films that are released today. Its hard to say exactly why i feel this way, but one thing that i cannot stand in new films is the overuse of CGI effects.
When i look back to the work that was carried out in such films as Dawn of the Dead and The Burning (Tom Savini) i really do respect the work and effort that was made in creating such gore from make up and props. You cant fault it, and you take it more seriously.
The scene where Jerry's protector is killed in the original. It was disgusting watching him melt away, and even if not realistic, its more believable than watching Jerry, and his victims in the new film burn up and turn to ash.
The overall rating for the new Fright Night has to be a 7/10 due to its story, and action, but the original has to clock up a good 9/10 for its story and realistic killing scenes (all be it if Jerry's death is a little far fetched).
I have my favorite films and there are plenty that I wouldn't mind seeing remade as long as they are remade well!
I recently went to see Fright Night August last year, and enjoyed the film because it didn't simply rewrite the original. It took the key characters of the original, such as Jerry - the vampire next door, as well as the fictional vampire killer Peter Vincent, and of course Charlie, Amy and Ed, except the story didn't follow the original game plan of the 1985 classic and took the viewer on a different track.
This time Jerry lives alone without his protector, and Charlie is a geek, turned popular kid overnight, by his new girlfriend Amy.
Peter Vincent is an over confident, and cocky illusionist, and fictional vampire hunter, with a history, and Ed is a geek who falls short of Charlie and his new friends and is turned a lot sooner than in the original.
The film does start with the old plot of Charlie trying to convince his girlfriend and mum that Jerry is a vampire, as well as snitching to the police, for them to only make mockery of the accusation.
Once Jerry is found out by Charlie, his girlfriend and mum the story starts to unfold in a much different way to the original, but it stays roughly with the chain of events from the original.
The final parts of the film see Charlie tracking down Amy in Jerry's house, but the scene is rather different to what happened in the old film, and Peter Vincent manages to fend off his fears and drop by to help Charlie bring down Jerry and get Amy back.
The original is a different film, and staying faithful to it, i have to say that it just beats the remake, but only just. I feel that horror films made during the 80s were something very different from the horror films that are released today. Its hard to say exactly why i feel this way, but one thing that i cannot stand in new films is the overuse of CGI effects.
When i look back to the work that was carried out in such films as Dawn of the Dead and The Burning (Tom Savini) i really do respect the work and effort that was made in creating such gore from make up and props. You cant fault it, and you take it more seriously.
The scene where Jerry's protector is killed in the original. It was disgusting watching him melt away, and even if not realistic, its more believable than watching Jerry, and his victims in the new film burn up and turn to ash.
The overall rating for the new Fright Night has to be a 7/10 due to its story, and action, but the original has to clock up a good 9/10 for its story and realistic killing scenes (all be it if Jerry's death is a little far fetched).