Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Fright Night (2011) vs Fright Night (1985)

Mr. Scot

By Mr. Scot,
in Huddle Lounge

Recommended Posts

Sapper Explorer

Sapper

Posted
Posted

I loved the first Fright Night (soundtrack easily wins over the 2) and made the mistake of watching the 2nd one in 3D which was way too dark with the glasses.

Acting in the remake was better though IMO. Overall though (being a big horror fan) I thought the 2nd stacked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Inimicus Mentor

Inimicus

Posted
Posted

I loved the original. One of my all time favorite movies.

That said I thought the second one was different enough that comparisons of the two were like trying to compare Tim Burton's Batman to Chris Nolan's Batman.

I very much enjoyed the new Fright Night and was quite pleased to see Mr Sarandon make an appearance.

Even though I would put the first one higher on my all time favorites list, its mainly for nostalgic reasons. The second one is a better movie I think when judged by the metrics you list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XClown1986 Proficient

XClown1986

Posted
Posted

Love the original Fright Night. The remake had its moments but ultimately ended up like the Friday the 13th remake, almost too modern and lacked a good flowing story. Lots of flash, but nothing that sticks with you.

Also I hated the way they handled Evil Ed's character in the remake. He is easily the most interesting and sympathetic character in the original film and could have been so in the remake but the film got lazy. *Spoilers* I hated that Charlie just killed Ed, like flat out staked the guy knowing that he could turn him back like everyone else. Instead he burned his friend again (after ditching him to be more popular) without much of a sense of remorse. Made the Charlie character less likeable in my opinion, because unlike the original film, he isn't a true dynamic character. I did like the new take on Jerry Dandridge (Colin Farrell is surprising me with his range lately with Horrible Bosses and now this).

All in all I am biased. The original kicks ass, even if some of the acting is kind of cheesy. The remake is good for a once over, but not multiple viewings in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Scot Grand Master

Mr. Scot

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think I actually like the new one better overall.

The leads look way more like actual teenagers than the original did.

Colin Farrell's subtle creepiness is a better take than the original characterization.

Evil Ed looks more like a real kid rather than a cartoon character.

The ending is way more badass in this one.

And, much as I like Roddy McDowall, I actually think David (Doctor Who) Tennant's constant F-bomb dropping Peter Vincent was a better character than McDowall's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • TD alt
      C Mc. Gotta love this guy!!

      By TD alt · Posted

      In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • TD alt
      Scourton isn't signed (& apparently it's a thing)

      By TD alt · Posted

      Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • jfra78
      Are all veterinarians this greedy ?

      By jfra78 · Posted

      Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...