Cinema Verdict Review: Fright Night 3D

Fright Night 3D

OPENING: 08/19/2011

STUDIO: Dreamworks Studios

RUN TIME: 106 min

ACCOMPLICES:
, Official Site

The Charge
You can’t run from evil when it lives next door

Opening Statement
Fright Night 3D is one of those horror remakes that probably didn’t need to happen. Regardless, it’s fun, creepy motion picture entertainment boasting a strong performance from Colin Farrell and some fairly nifty special FX. The 3D ain’t bad either.

Facts of the Case
Charlie Brewster (Anton Yelchin) lives with his mother (Toni Collette) in a quiet suburban town just outside Las Vegas. Seemingly on the verge of escaping his geaked-out past playing superheroes with the school nerd (Christopher Mintz-Plasse), and preparing to dive head first into his red hot girlfriend’s (Imogen Poots) pants, Charlie’s life takes an unexpected detour when Jerry (Farrell) moves in next door and turns out to be, of all things, a vampire.

Charlie must enlist the aid of crazy magician Peter Vincent (David Tennant) in order to ensure his friends survive the blood sucker’s wrath.

The Evidence
Fright Night 3D taught me many things. One, that Hollywood will never grow tired producing vampire flicks, regardless of box office. Two, actor Anton Yelchin must know somebody fairly high up, hence Hollywood’s insistence on throwing him into every high caliber, potential blockbuster series, despite his obvious lack of cinematic presence. And three, Colin Farrell should’ve been on the A-list many years ago.

The talented veteran has retreated to starring in many little-seen films, namely the terrific In Bruges and London Boulevard, after flopping in early attempts to attain leading man status – see American Outlaws, Hart’s War, The Recruit, and Daredevil. Fright Night 3D gives him the freedom to play loosey goosey in a throwaway roll (reminiscent of his early bit in Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report), mainly because there’s not much else to the production. It’s as if the producers knew a remake of Tom Holland’s nifty 1985 cult classic was a bad idea, but realized Farrell was in it for more than just the paycheck and decided to let him run away with the show.

Good move.

Farrell instills life into an otherwise stilted film. His performance, comprised of slight twitches and snakely motions that even Voldemort would envy, carries Fright Night 3D above the annals of average cinema into a chasm above decent and below “actually quite good.” I was reminded of Heath Ledger’s Joker from The Dark Knight, and Johnny Depp’s Jack Sparrow in the first Pirates film (remember, when he was actually cool?). It’s one of those performances that can turn an average film into a good one, or a good film into a great one. Without him, Fright Night 3D would line Target discount shelves for years to come. With him, the damned thing might just find redemption…time will tell.

Of course, that doesn’t excuse the remaining film. What is it about modern horror films that keeps them from being scary? Is it the CGI FX, which pale in comparison to those grotesque, imaginative schlocky ’80s make-up FX? Or the need to lean heavily on pop culture to connect with audiences (Twilight is mentioned several times)? Or is it the glossy look caked over the production, making everything too neat, too perfect? Tellingly, I didn’t mind some of the CGI in this film, and felt Craig Gillespie (Lars and the Real Girl) did a fairly good job with the gore. It’s still not utterly grotesque, but at least a few people in my audience expelled grossed out reactions to the proceedings. (Some of his scare tactics were quite effective as well.)

However, what bugs me about modern cinema is the digital look all films seem to carry. Remember the old days when films like Tobe Hooper’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre had dust particles splashed across its images? Remember the murky, unprofessional lighting in the original Friday the 13th? Hell, even Sam Raimi’s Evil Dead films, while inherently low budget (and cheesy), still scared the crap out of you with its muddy, over-the-top happenings.

Maybe the problem is that all films these days receive a budget north of $100 million. With that kind of money, directors don’t have to be creative (unless you’re James Cameron, and must make imaginative cuts in order to ensure your film comes within its $300 million price tag); they simply point and click. Thus each shot is carefully laid out; everything looks and feels artificial because the creativity that carried on behind the scenes lacked emotional investment. Imagine if Gillespie was told to remake Fright Night 3D on a $10 million budget. Don’t you think a better film would emerge? One filled to the brim with creativity?

That’s why films like Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project work so well: they require imagination. Everything looks and feels low budget and so the audience is never sure how far the director can go. The scares stem from utter surprise at a director’s ability to achieve the impossible in a film that costs less than a pack of chewing gum. When a production carries an enormous price tag and throws buckets of CGI blood in your face, shock and awe go out the window. By then, it’s not a matter of what the producers can’t do, but what they won’t do.

Perhaps I’m just fickle. In truth, I enjoyed Fright Night 3D for its offbeat humor, and Poots’ dooey eyed charm. Yelchin bores me. And I’ve grown tired of Mintz-Plasse’s foul mouthed MacLovin charade. At least David Tennant injects some much needed energy into the film’s latter half, even if he comes across as a bit too eager for laughs.

In truth, remakes never are necessary unless you can add something to counter the original (see True Grit). Fright Night circa 1985 never was a perennial classic, per se, but it was one hell of a freaky movie; one that gave me nightmares as a kid. Fright Night 3D won’t give you nightmares, but Farrell’s performance will give you chills.

Closing Statement
With Colin Farrell in fine form, Fright Night 3D becomes watchable horror fluff, even if it never truly frightens.

The Verdict
7/10

• “”>