According to icons of fright Tom Holland, creator of Fright Night, “is scheduled for a "luncheon" to discuss the FRIGHT NIGHT remake, which apparently has gone through 3 un-usable drafts.”
The question is, does Fright Night need a remake… Probably not, after all it couldn’t be the same without Roddy McDowall. However, I will keep you up to date as I spot any news re the project, and who knows – if it happens – it could surprise us.
The question is, does Fright Night need a remake… Probably not, after all it couldn’t be the same without Roddy McDowall. However, I will keep you up to date as I spot any news re the project, and who knows – if it happens – it could surprise us.
10 comments:
I am undecided about a Fright Night remake. The first one is a classic and will always be one of my favorites. Needless to say that if they do remake it I would give it a try. I was always a fan of Charlie's girlfriend's metamorphosis.
Just wanted to let you know that if you don't know already but there is an official Lost Boys 2 trailer on youtube. I don't know if I would be in the minority but it looks fantastic to me. I'll be really looking forward to watching it.
Hi Swish. I'm the same way re a fright night remake - trepidation meets a need to see it...
Lost Boys 2, didn't know about the trailer, will embed it on the blog. It doesn't look (view wise) that shabby but... was it just me or was it Lost Boys recycled rather than lost boys 2. Again I'll give it a watch.
I'll go on the record saying that I'm not a big fan of the concept of remakes. My stance isn't helped by the recent glut of them on offer.
I much prefer the concept of sequels over remakes, any day.
I also consider Fright Night to be a classic of the vampire film genre. I even like its sequel, Fright Night Part 2 (1988).
That said, one could do worse than go past John Skipp and Craig Spector's novelisation of the original film (New York: Tor, 1985) for source material.
Also, directors like Marcus Nipsel (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, 2003), Zack Snyder (Dawn of the Dead, 2004) and Rob Zombie (Halloween, 2007) have shown that remakes can produce rather interesting results when put in capable hands.
Let's hope one is found for this remake-to-be.
Or, better yet, that it doesn't go ahead, to begin with.
I've just came across another reason why I find remakes to be a waste of time.
I can only hope it's a joke, but here's a news snippet from Dark Horizons:
"Producer Scott Strauss ("Breach"), who was previously attached, apparently wants to take the story in a different direction - one involving an amusement park."
Oh dear.
Anthony, some remakes work but in the main I'd have to agree that it seems a pointless exercise - especially with something that, you rightly point out, is a classic of the genre.
Your second comment made me shudder!
I really must dig out the DVD of Fright Night 2 and review it!
Fright Night Part 2 has been given a bit of a bad rap, but if you view it as a standalone, I reckon it's pretty awesome.
But yeah, it's a bit of a retread.
I first saw it (a while before I saw the first one) when I was starting Grade 6, and it was a major point of development in my interest in vampires.
Anyway, when you get around to writing your review, please don't refer to Jonathan Gries' character, Louie, as a werewolf. I can understand why authors make that mistake, but there are clear pointers as to what he actually is in the film.
But, back to the remake...
Here's a link to the source of Dark Horizon's info on the upcoming remake.
It's from Shock Till You Drop. This is a snippet from the article by Ryan Rotten:
"Our immediate thought is "They're remaking Tobe Hooper's Funhouse and calling it Fright Night." We haven't heard a peep yet regarding how Gems is coming along with the pitch process, but we'll keep you in the loop!"
That said, considering I've heard no actors, screenwriter or director attached to the project, it could just be that the film is lingering in the early stages of "developmental hell".
Hopefully, they'll climb their way out of that morass.
Or, at least change the bloody thing into a sequel.
anthony Hogg said "please don't refer to Jonathan Gries' character, Louie, as a werewolf. I can understand why authors make that mistake, but there are clear pointers as to what he actually is in the film."
Anthony, absolutely right. Whilst he might go for a wolfish form (and let us remember that Evil in the first film turned into a wolf also) the scene with the rose was a dead give away.
That's exactly right, Taliesin. You hit the nail on the head there.
I'm surprised authors overlook this aspect of the character, as I would have thought the scene with the roses was a dead giveaway, too.
We'll also remember that after Alex (Traci Lin) wards Louie off with the roses, Charley (William Ragsdale) says: "If you hadn't of read the book..."
The "book" in question, is a copy of Dracula she was shown reading.
Though, technically, here is what Dracula actually says in regards to the vampiric aversion to roses, as mentioned by Prof. Van Helsing:
"The branch of wild rose on his coffin keep him that he move not from it..." ~ "Mina Harker's Journal, 30 September"
But, back to Louie...
There's other clues in the film too; like Bosworth (Brian Thompson) telling Louie, "You were supposed to bite her [Alex] on the neck" and the bowling alley scene where Louie is clearly shown drinking blood.
Despite all these factors, it is still disappointing to see Louie written off as a werewolf from authors obviously not to versed in vampire - or Fright Night - lore.
Here's some "good" news. In a sort of morbid sense.
It looks light the proposed Fright Night remake has been nixed! Woohoo!
I hope this carries over like a domino effect to other intended remakes, as well.
cheers for the update AV
Post a Comment