December 8, 2015

To me, the key to a truly great “remake” of a pre-existing horror film is simple. Would the new update make a good double feature with the original movie? When it comes to programming a double bill, the goal is to find two movies with a similar theme that would complement each other. And there’s no better test to see if a remake works than by watching it back to back with its inspiration and seeing if it respects its source material and tells a similar enough story, yet does its own thing. Each week, we’re going to pair up two horror films – its original and its remake as a double feature and see if it makes for a great double bill. Welcome to Double Take!

This week, I paired up the original 1985 cult vampire classic FRIGHT NIGHT with its 2011 remake. And not only was this the first Double Take that I recruited some friends to partake in with me, but we made sure to watch the 3D version of FRIGHT NIGHT 2011 since that’s the way it was released! And I was pleasantly surprised by how well these two films worked together.

It’s always difficult approaching any remake with no bias when you’re so, so familiar with the original film. The first time I’m viewing an update of any material, I can’t help but compare it to what has already been established. As an audience, we’re wondering when they’re going to hit certain story beats. We’re curious how each new actor is going to portray a character you’re already so well versed with. And because of all that, the first time sitting down to a remake is always distracting. It’s the second time where I can really appreciate a remake as its own entity.

The original FRIGHT NIGHT is one of those comfort horror movies; a movie you remember from heavy cable rotation or its trademark creepy box art or just something you rented on a regular basis from the video store. And while writer/ director Tom Holland has made plenty of well regarded films within the horror genre, in particular CHILD’S PLAY and a few adaptations of Stephen King novels, FRIGHT NIGHT is very obviously the one that’s straight from his heart. His love and genuine enthusiasm for the story and these characters shines through in every frame.

Taking a note from Alfred Hitchcock’s REAR WINDOW, FRIGHT NIGHT tells the story of Charlie Brewster (William Ragsdale), a young good natured kid whose just trying to get to third base with his girlfriend Amy (Amanda Bearse) when he suddenly gets distracted by his new next door neighbor. After a bit of spying, he catches girls going into his house and never coming back out. One night, he gets a full on glimpse of Jerry Dandrige (Chris Sarandon) sinking his teeth into a young nubile gal and sees his pointy fingernails and fangs. That’s it. He’s convinced a vampire has moved in next door. From there, he’s obsessed with proving it and getting help from his friends, all of whom think he’s nuts.

But when Jerry threatens him and everyone he loves, Charlie turns to Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall), the great vampire killer of the silver screen and late night television horror host, who in actuality is nothing more than an actor. At first he refuses to help the young boy, but Amy & Charlie’s best friend Evil Ed (Stephen Geoffreys) hire Peter Vincent to convince him that Jerry is not a vampire. And during the course of the “test” to defraud Charlie’s claims, Peter learns the truth and retreats like a cowardly lion. It isn’t until Evil Ed is converted to a vampire and Amy is held captive that Jerry insists Charlie and Peter come face him and duke it out to the death!

FRIGHT NIGHT works for a lot of reasons. It implements horror and humor, but never makes fun of the material. The humor comes from the absurdity of the situation and yet, there’s still some cool, creepy, unique creature designs courtesy of Richard Edlund and his crew fresh off of GHOSTBUSTERS. Also, every actor across the board is terrific and perfect in their respective roles, hence making it rather difficult to imagine anyone else inhibating these characters.

It took years for Dreamworks Pictures to come up with a take on the remake that made sense. For some reason, there were several years where it was rumored the FRIGHT NIGHT update would take place in an amusement park, because at the time when you’d google “fright night,” theme parks are what would come up. But thankfully after many false starts, they did what they should’ve done from the get-go. Go back to the source material.

Structurally, the narrative is very loosely the same, but seeing these back to back made me realize the remake employs a lot of interesting ideas, set pieces and concepts that are unique to this film and yet hearken back as a tip of the hat to the original. After a violent opening confrontation where we see a vicious vampire kill a kid and his family, we meet Charlie Brewster (Anton Yelchin), a fairly popular kid in high school with a really hot girlfriend Amy (Imogen Poots) and a past steeped in total nerdom. His friend Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) begs him to investigate the disappearance of their childhood buddy Adam, but Charlie, for fear of tampering with his new-found status as a “cool” kid doesn’t want to be bothered.

When Ed ends up missing too, he starts to suspect that maybe his new next door neighbor Jerry Dandrige isn’t what he seems. On the surface, he’s this sharp, extremely good-looking and charming guy, but can he also be the predatory “Jaws”-like vampire that Ed was talking about? As Charlie begins investigating, it becomes apparent that Jerry is far more dangerous (and creepy) than he could’ve imagined. He attempts to enlist the help of Las Vegas magician and self-professed vampire hunter Peter Vincent (David Tenant) to fight Jerry, but at first he refuses. Much like in the original, eventually Peter changes his mind and both him and Charlie go into the den of their enemy to stop him once and for all.

I liked the remake just fine when I saw it back upon its initial release, but I found myself enjoying it much, much more now with a little bit of distance. And also watching it immediately after the original made it a stronger movie. It really is different, and while we have the same characters here, they’re all totally different versions of these characters. In fact, the few moments that are lifted from the original are my least favorite moments in the remake. (The club scene, Amy’s teeth nod to the original’s poster.)

Let’s compare. In the original, Charlie is for the most part a good natured kid, oblivious to the dangers of the world around him until he comes into contact with Jerry. Had he minded his business, he might have just avoided the whole thing all together, but he really is the instigator and goes tapping the hornet’s nest. It’s sheer coincidence (or perhaps fate) that Charlie’s girlfriend Amy also shares a resemblance with Jerry’s long lost love of another era. This Jerry makes it very clear that he doesn’t have a choice in this life. This is who he is and this is what he has to do to survive. And once Amy enters the picture, there is a desire for him to re-capture some of his humanity with this girl that reminds him of a long gone love.

In the update, Charlie is a bit of a selfish kid, initially, that eventually sees the error in his ways. He’s a little embarrassed of his childhood and thanks his lucky stars that he has a beautiful girlfriend and is considered the “cool” kid at school. It’s tough enough without his dad in the picture, but he’s making do. His regret starts to set in when his former best friend Ed turns to him for help, he ignores him, and Ed ends up missing. Here, Charlie is again the instigator, but this Jerry is not a romantic from another era. Colin Farrell’s portrayal is a cold blooded killer that loves and relishes what he is. There’s no hint of romance, besides Farrell’s appearance, which is how he attracts his victims. He kills, feeds and loves it. And setting it in the transient community in Vegas is a brilliant stroke. That’s where a vampire would hide out and look for victims. In a place where most people work nights and sleep all day anyways, and tons of people go missing regularly.

The approach with Peter Vincent is also interesting. I’ve grown to love David Tenant, the former Dr. Who and most recently seen in Marvel’s Jessica Jones series. When we first meet him, he’s got the long hair and leather coat and Criss Angel-esque appearance. It turns out to all be a fraud. He’s wearing a wig, fake hair on his face, even fake piercings. He does believe in the occult however because of a traumatic experience as a child, but he’s lost in the gimmick of his alternate persona. Tenant is great as the modern day Peter Vincent, but I really, really wish he kept the long hair and gothic-y appearance. I thought it would’ve been much funnier had this not all been an act.

Regarding Charlie, at least in the remake he has a legitimate character arc, as does Peter Vincent. They both transform over the course of the movie from non-believers into vampire hunters. Other fun twists, Colin Farrell blowing up the house when the Brewster’s won’t invite him in. “Don’t need an invitation if there’s no house.” I’ve come to love Farrell’s version of this character. The cast all around, including Toni Collette as Mrs. Brewster are all great, and there’s a fun Chris Sarandon cameo thrown in for good measure. The only questionable part of the whole movie is when Charlie first breaks into Jerry’s place for the first time. It’s all a little too convenient. First finding the “key” hidden in a rock out in his backyard? (Really?) And then hiding in a closet, which (ta-da!) happens to be the secret door to Dandrige’s underground liar? Getting past that, the rest of the movie is fun and surprising. And although we watched it in 3D, that format doesn’t seem necessary. Best bits were seeing vampires explode and the fiery ashes floating on screen.

Do both FRIGHT NIGHT’s work as a double feature? Hell yes they do. In fact, if you’ve been on the fence about revisiting the remake, I think this is the perfect way to give it another shot. They’re both different enough and offer enough thrills to work as a great, and, most importantly, fun vampire double bill.