Movie Review: "Fright Night 3-D", or This Is Not the Kind of Total Immersion Therapy I Had In Mind

Fright Night
2011, Rated R
Written by Marti Noxon (Screenplay) and Tom Holland (Story and 1985 Screenplay)
Directed by Craig Gillespie
Starring Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrel, Imogen Poots, David Tennant, and Toni Collette

The first thing you need to know is that my wife is terrified of vampires. The second is that it's all the fault of the 1985 horror/comedy Fright Night. She will argue with you to this day that it is the scariest movie ever made, and, flying in the face of all reason and common sense, she is completely serious.

Vampires are a mixed bag for me. As a kid, the first proper horror movie I ever saw was 1987's The Lost Boys, and it was love at first sight. That movie had it all: rock star vampires; motorcycles; comics; surf nazis; Grandpa; the sweetest mullet to ever grace the big screen; and not one, but two Coreys. From that moment on, I thought vampires were the coolest monsters on earth. Until I grew up, that is.

I blame Ann Rice. Sure, I liked Interview With the Vampire, but let's face it, whatever tough guy cool vampires had, she managed to dress up in drag and parade down main street, confusing the hell out of everybody. I'm sorry if it comes off as homophobic, but Ann Rice's vampires belong in a gay pride parade, not a horror con, and the worst part is that they were hugely popular. It was all downhill from there. Despite the occasional bright spot (From Dusk til Dawn, John Carpenter's Vampires, and 30 Days of Night come to mind) within a decade, vampires had degenerated to the level of Twilight. Need I say more?

Taking both my and my wife's attitude on vampires into consideration, I wasn't quite sure what to think when she came home last Friday with a copy of the 2011 remake of Fright Night under her arm, saying she got it for us to watch together this weekend. On top of our mutual distrust of modern vampire flicks, neither my wife nor I are huge fans of remakes (quite the opposite, in fact). And with her fear of the source material and my fear of subjecting myself to another Lost Boys: The Tribe, of all the horror remakes Hollywood has vomited out since Michael Bay remade The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Fright Night is the one I never figured would put in an appearance at my house. All of this begged the question, Why?

Maybe for her it's one of those radical, lock-yourself-in-a-box-with-the-thing-you're-most-afraid-of-so-you-can-overcome-your-fear-of-it forms of therapy. Maybe for me it was supposed to be one of those lock-yourself-in-a-box-with-the-thing-you're-most-prejudiced-against-so-you-can-overcome-your-fear-of-it forms of therapy. I'm still not sure, but I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the result.

When I saw the previews for Fright Night, I was anything but hopeful. The original Fright Night was and is a beloved piece of horror history, and rather than the campy fun of that film, it looked like the filmmakers had gone the post-Scream-trying-too-hard-to-recapture-the-glory-of-the-old-days-and-completely-missing-what-made-them-great-in-the-first-place route. (Once again, see Lost Boys: The Tribe if you have any questions. Actually, don't. Just take my word for it: It sucks. And not in a good way.) Colin Farrel looked completely miscast and Anton Yelchin is anything but my idea of a leading man - or a leading teen, for that matter. Tack onto that the tired old 3-D-gimmicks-flying-at-the-screen factor, and you can count me out, thank you so very, very much indeedee.

Imagine my surprise when the movie was actually watchable! Not just watchable, but pretty good, even! I'm not going to go so far as to say it was great, or even to say I strongly recommend it, but if you - like me - have been pining for a good, old-fashioned vampire flick to come along and kick things back onto the right track, this might just be your movie.

I will say this much against it: 3-D gimmickry is dead to me.

I like the new 3-D. I plan on getting a 3-D TV as soon as I can (which, at my current rate of saving, should be some time shortly before I retire), but I hate those "3-D shots" they shoehorn in just to justify using the technology. I hate them because they're not there to serve the story. They're there to sell the technology, and nothing more. That type of William Castle-esque audience condescension, I have no use for.

3-D is fun technology, and serves the magic of cinema just fine without having to slap us in the face. "3-D shots" only serve to ruin a movie by breaking the 4th wall and screaming at us, "Hey, dummy! You're watching a movie in 3-D! Remember?" This effect is only amplified when you're not watching the move in 3-D, and these nonsensical shots of things flying at the screen appear, thrusting you back, out of the world of the movie. I hate this. Do you get my point, or am I not being clear? Maybe I could have it jump out at you in 3-D!

So, techno-schlockery aside, Fright Night really did win me over. I was a doubter, and was pleasantly surprised to have my doubts allayed. It's not a perfect movie. Jerry's (Colin Farrel) behavior is certainly erratic and at times defies rationality. But the truth is that, as far as the bar has fallen, any vampire movie that can show me a good time - plenty of thrills, a few laughs, and characters whose deaths I don't pray for from their first moments onscreen - is pretty much a winner in my book. Will I watch it again? Despite all expectations to the contrary, yeah. I will.

So I guess the therapy worked. Well, for my part at least.

I stay up and do a little writing when the movie is over. By the time I finally roll into bed, it's well after midnight. The bedside lamp is on, and I reach over to turn it off.

"Don't," says my wife, grabbing my arm. "I had a nightmare. Leave it on."

Maybe immersion therapy wasn't the right choice for her. Look on the bright side, honey: At least the terrifying monsters weren't JUMPING OUT AT YOU in THREE-DEE!!!