Mr. Frights' Spoiler Free Review of Fright Night 2011 (by justin-298)
By now everyone has vented their frustrations about remake hell that all movies, especially horror movies, are going through. It's no secret that most people seem to hate the idea that FRIGHT NIGHT even got remade at all. I'm a genuine big fan of the original as Mr. Frights was actually inspired by my boyhood love for the character of PETER VINCENT. I on the other hand, am always willing to give something the benefit of the doubt before decrying how terrible it might be.I was very much looking forward to this movie. It has some of my favorite actors in it. It looked like fun in the <more>
trailers and the Comic Con teaser video. It is horror. And I have a strong fondness for the original film and it's sequel. I loved Roddy McDowall and I love David Tennant from Dr. Who. When I got passes I was pretty excited. I tried to get a bunch of friends to go, but no one was interested. THAT RIGHT THERE BLOWS!! If you can't get people interested in seeing a film for FREE, what kind of chance does it have at being a success if it's any good, and what kind of chance will horror films from here out have if they keep posting crappy box office stats? I say complain if you want, but if you're a horror fan, if you're a fan of the original Fright Night film or any of the other stuff I just mentioned, then your ass should be in a theater seat watching this movie! So, are you curious yet? Do you want to know how bad the movie was? Well, you pre-screening critics will be disappointed to know it was FREAKING AWESOME!!! I don't think there was a time in my life where a remake took me so by surprise and body slammed all my expectations producing such an amazing film. And you can quote me on that and on everything I say from here on in this review.I went in thinking that it might be fun but that's about it and left absolutely raving mad about the movie. The people who made this put together a genuinely terrifying leap from the original film to a brand new story that happened to have some characters named the same, in the same sort of situations, but completely different from the original. In that way, I can't honestly say it was a remake. There is no shot for shot anything, the characters are all different in a big way, there are more characters to consider, the things that go down are not the same from the 80's movie, and the differences don't stop there. Oh and don't be worried because every change that was made WORKED!! The story goes that CHARLEY BREWSTER lives in Vegas and that infamous vampire neighbor moves in next door and so Charley boy has to figure out how to kill him. That's the basics. He still has his girl Amy, his buddy 'Evil Ed' and a host of other characters as well as the great PETER VINCENT who is a Las Vegas magician act the likes of Criss Angel.There are even some surprises to be had as the movie progresses that I really want to leave alone because if your reaction is anything like my reaction then you'll appreciate it more having me not spoil it for you.Colin Farrell is brilliant as Jerry the vampire. As I had hoped, David Tennant is brilliant as Peter Vincent, but does his own thing with it, not at all trying to take over anything from Roddy. Anton Yelchin, from Star Trek he played Checkov , was really good too as was the rest of the cast.The creators behind this new film Craig Gillespie; Marti Noxon; & of course Tom Holland took a lot of risks and put a lot more horror into this film. While still delivering on some well placed laughs, the movie is way more intense than the original. There's not as much hokey to it which serves it well to set it apart from Fright Night of the 80's. I have to say that at parts, this movie actually scared me and it's been forever since I've seen a horror film that could do that! This movie is a refreshing departure from remake hell even though it is based on another film and has the same sort of characters. I was really impressed with this production and it was even more impressive in 3D which I advise everyone to check it out that way. I mean horror movies are why 3D was created man!!! Don't miss out on that. Seriously. The kills alone, the deaths of the vamps alone is worth the 3D.I want to rave on more about how awesome and brilliant and amazing this new movie is, but I can't give anything away. All I can do is tell you guys how wonderful this thing turned out to be and plead with you all to give it a chance and go see it! If there was EVER a horror film that deserved support and big box office numbers in recent years, it's this one. Mr. Frights would not steer you wrong, trust in me horror peeps, if you miss this in theaters you'll be spanking your own hams for it for a long long time. I'm already overly, excitedly, anticipating the DVD release.Hell, if I had the time I'd go see it three more times.Mr. Frights http://about.me/mrfrights
I had the privilege of seeing this film at the UK premiere last night, and i think the other 500 people that saw it with me will agree it was money well spent. The idea of a film that mixes comedy with horror has been done so many times before the scary movie franchise, scream but not quite like this. It wasn't stupid humour that got the laughs in the cinema although there was some of it , it was clever one liners and funny characters. I think it was a good selection of actors that were chosen to be in this film - Colin Farrel was sufficiently creepy, Anton Yelchin took on the starring <more>
role brilliantly. And there was, of course, comedic characters - but somehow these still had depth. for instance, 'Evil' Ed, played by Chris Mintz-Plasse, although responsible for most of the hysterics and applause in the theatre, also had a dark, meaningful side that the audience can connect with. And then there's David Tennant, who portrays the drunk, messed-up Vegas performer perfectly. All in all, the message I got from the people around me, and what I certainly felt, is that the movie was very well received and I personally definitely enjoyed it. I'm deducting two points purely for the film itself - the acting, script and special effects were great, but no teenage vampire comedy is ever set out to make it into the wall of fame, is it?
Ignore the haters. This movie deserves all the positive reviews that it's earned. Solid writing, direction, and acting. Thoroughly satisfying and entertaining.As a die-hard fan of the original, my initial reaction upon hearing of the impending remake was disgust. Then, I found out Marti Noxon was writing the screenplay, and I started to hope. I hoped that it would be a respectful adaptation of the original, and join the ranks of Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead 2004 and 2003's Texas Chainsaw Massacre as one of the very few Remakes That Don't Suck...and it did. Not only did it <more>
not disappoint, it lived up to all my expectations.What made the original awesome is that it had charm. A vampire moves next door to you, and when he finds out that you found out what he is, he offers you a choice; you be cool & he'll be cool. I would've been cool, but the original Charlie wouldn't stand for a bloodsucker wasting beautiful women within view of his bedroom window, and a great movie ensued. Roddy MacDowall's Peter Vincent alone made it worthy of repeat viewings, and Chris Sarandon's underplaying made Jerry Dandridge THE most relatable fanged villain to date. The remake differs in many aspects, yet complements the 1985 classic. Whereas the original's vampire next door seeks to blend in suburbia, Colin Farrell's "vampire Jerry" couldn't care less who finds out what he is, because he plans on having everyone for dinner anyway. No brooding. No 'Twlilight' b.s. He's more of an apathetic predator than his predecessor, and it works for this adaptation. Since late-night local horror flick hosts are a long-lost remnant of the 80's, it wouldn't have made sense to try to fashion the updated Peter Vincent the same way. Like Roddy MacDowall's performance, David Tennant's Vegas illusionist Peter Vincent alone is worth the price of the tickets AND the extra charge for 3D, which wasn't the least bit annoying, for once . As a bonus, it was especially amusing for me to watch Doctor Who drop f-bombs.Anyway, this film's as clever, charming, and all-around awesome as the original, and should be doing better at the box office than it did opening weekend. Check it out while there's still time & send a message to Hollywood that good writing, direction, and acting MATTER.
A Memorably Exceptional Horror Remake the First of its Kind (by emailjnm)
Remaining in the same vein as many recent horror outings, "Fright Night" is more of an eerie action comedy than a straight-out scare fest. Good. That's my favorite type, especially considering scares in and of themselves hardly garner a pull anymore. Also, with a title like "Fright Night," we have an understanding with the filmmakers that we're getting one of those throwback horror flicks. You know, the ones that gave the horror genre that fun movie-going reputation it had in the 80′s before tasteless gore and tiresome predictability defiled the genre? This film <more>
succeeds on that promise, quickly turning itself into the quintessential "fun" horror flick perfect for Friday night.Styled after Alfred Hitchcock's "Rear Window" which inspired its own modern retelling, "Disturbia" with a suave vampire living next-door instead of a mysterious stranger, this plot is very similar to its original. Charley Brewster Anton Yelchin; "Star Trek" is a ex-nerd who has joined 'the cool crowd,' dropping his oldest friend "Evil" Ed Christopher Mintz-Plasse; "Kick-Ass" for a hot cheerleader girlfriend Imogen Poots; "28 Weeks Later" . Things are looking oh-so-grand for the little flake I mean, come on, any guy who hurtfully tells his friend "the day my life got better was the day I stopped hanging with you" is well a douche , he gets a new next-door neighbor that his mom Toni Collette; "The Sixth Sense" takes a liking to: Jerry Dandrige Colin Farrell; "Horrible Bosses" . Now Jerry seems like a cool guy, but as we all know, you don't cast Colin Farrell to be your average next-door neighbor. Ed's attempts to convince Charley that Jerry is actually a vampire fail, but when Ed himself goes missing and Jerry shows proof of what he is, Charley goes to the only person who might have the answer: Peter Vincent David Tennant; "Doctor Who" , the Las Vegas magician who boasts of supernatural knowledge on how to kill vampires.The choice to modernize the original 1985 "Fright Night" doesn't like that bright an idea considering the current rule that all horror remakes suck, but somehow this became a unique effort due to diligent actors, a reliable director, and successful laugh and scare gags. It is, without exaggeration, the first great entry in the long line of atrocious horror remakes. It takes what we liked about the original and comes up some clever changes that update the story 26 years to the present.From an ingenious kill method at the end to wickedly suspenseful chase scenes, "Fright Night" boasts some surprisingly memorable scenes – some of which are incredibly suspenseful considering we think we should know what to expect from a vampire thriller. The opening is a startling 3D shot through dark thunderclouds that ends in an impeccably-executed family massacre. With Craig Gillespie's the outstanding director of "Lars and the Real Girl" imaginative direction and Ramin Djawadi's scorer of "Iron Man" and "Mr. Brooks" jarringly effective and wholly memorable musical score, the film hits all the beats it strives for with manic zeal.The all-star cast deliver a gratifying romp of suspense and chuckles, but the movie belongs to its villain and its anti-hero, Colin Farrell and David Tennant. The rest give solid performances especially Mintz-Plasse , but they pale compared to the main act.Colin Farrell, when given the opportunity, revels in the grittiness of villainy whenever he can. For Jerry Dandrige, Farrell is at an all-time evil high and unchains his dark side. Part Hannibal Lector in his charming menace and part Buffalo Bill in his vicious brutality, Farrell carves himself a sweetly unpredictable part filled with great moments from his menacing way of asking for a six-pack of beer to his ultimate way of overstepping house invitation rules to a great moment where his decision to do absolutely nothing produces far worse results .The fascinating part about Jerry is he isn't like regular vampires. He seems more inspired by the worst of modern serial killers than mythical killing machines, with his secret torture rooms and closet full of dozens of uniforms signifying authority from firemen to the post office to the police . He's modern without being "Twilight." He's a ominous hulking mass. Those characteristics mixed together with his bizarre personality create a rather unique Hollywood vampire. Due to this, I wish the "transformation" to full-on vampire face was never included, as it is poor CGI and takes away from Farrell's menace.David Tennant, who I will admit I adore as the 10th Doctor Who, is a cinematic gem. His acting style has always been that of a Shakespearean extremist, and I can't think of a better role that has such obvious wicked glee in allowing him to let loose. There is something strangely mesmerizing in Tennant's scenes as the vulgar magician-turned-vampire-killer, especially in his first big scene where his vehemence and wide-eyed enthusiasm is outstandingly exaggerated. Also, seeing him acting with a giant shotgun is way more fun than I expected it to be. He's about as entertaining – if not more so – than the performance given by Roddy McDowall.In the end, what really matters about this movie? Is the movie suspenseful and thrilling? Yes, especially when Jerry really is allowed to let loose his menacing charm and kill with the same love of general violence of a "Reservoir Dogs" character. Is the movie funny when it tries to be? Absolutely. The pop culture references – especially in a crack on "Twilight" and comparing Jerry to the shark from "Jaws" – work particularly well. This is a huge amount of fun. So if you walk into this expecting the right kind of movie, "Fright Night" is that perfect Friday night scare.
Fright Night is based off the 1985 film of the same name. Personally, I didn't particularly care about the original. It was okay but I didn't think it was anything special. The mix of horror and comedy has given it a dedicated following over the years. I've never seen the sequel, but everything I've heard says it's pretty bad. Now, remakes and reboots are all the rage, especially if they are a movie from the 80s. Many of these remakes have been merely okay at best, and most are pointless. So how does this remake stand up? Incredibly well, in fact.In the great pantheon of <more>
film remakes, Fright Night stands alongside greats like The Thing, The Blob '88, Invasion of the Body Snatchers '78 for one simple reason: the story remains true to the original while making enough differences to be their own movie. The story is basically the same, so there's no real surprises for fans of the original. But it isn't just a shot-for-shot remake like Psycho or what seems like a rehash like The Karate Kid. It may have the same run time but the pacing is different, events are rearranged, and people do the same thing for different reasons.It's these subtle differences that really make the movie stand out. For one, the movie is been updated with contemporary themes. Instead of large Gothic mansions set in some anonymous suburb, this is set in regular homes near Las Vegas. There's a lot played with the last decade's housing boom and subsequent crash. Real life problems such as foreclosures and abandoned houses put a modern twist on classic vampire lore. This makes this version much more relatable to modern audiences. And, much like Invasion '78, a simple change of location provides much thematic differences from the original. The in famous Vegas nightlife and spectacle shows play a big role in the film and compliment vampire lore in a modern way perfectly.The cast is good all around. No one falls short. Anton Yelchin handles being the center of the movie well. But the two standouts are David Tennan as Peter Vincent and Colin Farrell as Jerry Dandrige. Tennan follows Roddy McDowall in an equally impressive role. He's clearly bringing some of Russell Brand into his version and makes a fun and interesting role that is his own. Though it's Ferrell who steals the movie as the villain. He's incredibly creepy but almost charming. There's an intelligence that comes through his performance in a Bela Lugosi's Dracula kind of way. This is an intelligent villain who isn't intimidated by the heroes.The tone of the film maintains what made the original so memorable. It's true to the spirit of the original by maintaining the clever mix of fun comedy and suspenseful scares. As stated, Jerry is like the shark from Jaws and when he's on the hunt you never really know how it's going to end. And when he finally does get going the action doesn't stop. Then the movie will pull out some joke that lightens the mood. Like at one point, Jerry attacks someone then immediately talks to onlookers like he's going out for beers with them later. It's little things like this that make the movie entertaining throughout.There's only one black spot on the movie, and that deals with "Evil" Ed. First, Christopher Mintz-Plasse plays the same exact character he's played in Superbad and Kick-Ass. That same goofy, bumbling character who's trying to be more than he really is. I'm beginning to wonder if he can play any other kind of character. Luckily, he only has a few scenes in the movie. Second, Ed is pretty much wasted in the movie. There's a backstory between Ed and Charley that ends up not having much to do with the story, and their relationship isn't finished well. Ed seemed more like an afterthought, as though they didn't know how to adapt the character properly and he seems forced into this story.On another note, I saw the movie in 3D and it's wasted. The opening titles look good and there's an interesting long shot set in the car, but that's about it. And unfortunately, there's a lot of gimmicky stuff that pop out at the screen. Things like hands, balls, spikes, etc popping out at the audience was silly back in the 50s and remains that way to this day. Stuff like that draws attention to itself and takes the audience out of the movie-watching experience.Fright Night is one of those remakes that easily equals, and quite possibly surpasses, the original. It wisely uses the original as merely a frame to craft its own story. Fans of the original should appreciate the modern twist, and it should be entertaining enough to draw in new fans. This is the kind of remake that movie fans wait for. Let's just hope that the sequel, if and when, is better than the original sequel.
First time a movie is better than the original one ?? (by Cinema_Love)
I saw this film on a Friday fright night and it was freaky !!! Seriously, i was thinking i was watching just like the previous ones, a comedy with bit of horror. From the start to the end, the entire movie has been revisited... it's too bad it's a box-office flop, it's truly what a vampires movie should be... A bad vampire that looks really bad thanks to Colin Farrell genius, he's amazing in his hunk vampire role ... Anton Yelchin is good, well not as good as the young dude in the 1985 movie, but one thing i hated is Evil Ed, here's played by Christopher Mint-Please that <more>
overcast dude from Superbad and Kick-Ass ... well not a bad actor but he's not good here, quite frankly, when he dies, it's the best part of it... he's there for the first 20 minutes and then a 5 minutes here to be a victim ! But all in all, a fun 110 minutes horror flick with a nice cameo by Chris Sarandon. Don't miss it !!
It has occurred to me that when people refer to a new "reimagining" of a beloved film, they use the term "unnecessary remake." I've been guilty of that myself. I really tend to think, however, that technically any remake is unnecessary. No one "needs" to be told what is basically the same story in most cases twice. I've also heard the argument that bad films are the ones that should be remade, not good ones. I can understand that to an extent, but do people really want to sit through a new version of something they hated the first time? No remake is <more>
going to make everyone happy; it's just not possible. Unless of course, you haven't SEEN the original.So, just how should a remake be judged? As a stand-alone film, or how it compares to a previous one we love so much? And I do love writer-director Tom Holland's 1985 vampire flick FRIGHT NIGHT. It is just the right mix of comedy, terror, suspense, terrific performances, and an affection for old-fashioned scares. Many others have fond memories of it as well, so I relate to the "why"s and the "oh don't screw it up"s, and the "leave it alone"s. After all, beloved films are dumped on all the time by would-be filmmakers out to make a quick buck for the safe Hollywood studios.Most of the central story is intact: Anton Yelchin leads the cast as Charley Brewster, a used-to-be high-school misfit who comes to the realization, thanks to childhood buddy Ed Christopher Mintz-Plasse that his new neighbor Jerry Colin Farrell is a vampire. It isn't long before he's convinced his single mother Toni Collette and his girlfriend Imogen Poots of this discovery...at which point all sorts of bloody hell breaks loose.Screenwriter Marti Noxon has infused a basic story whose plot points and situations weren't always very believable with some new smarts, including adding more depth to the central characters. And the setting has changed to a cookie-cutter suburb of Las Vegas, where people sleep during the day, work at night, and are much more transient. Another interesting change is the character of Peter Vincent. In the original, Roddy McDowall played a hammy horror host and actor: Peter Vincent, the Great Vampire Killer. Here, David Tennant assumes the role, but Vincent has become an elaborate Vegas magician who performs vampire-killing antics on the stage. In both versions, they are recruited by our hero to help slay the bloodsucker. It's an ultra- modern twist, but within the location context, works beautifully.During the first hour or so of 2011's new incarnation, I was shocked to think that I may end up liking this remake even more than the original. But after some hair-raising moments in the first half, culminating in a dark, desert car chase, the film threatens to go off the rails in a sequence that's a bit hokey, over the top, and unfortunately timed. And there are a few iffy CGI instances as well. Luckily, things get back on track with a climax that's executed with a uniquely creepy wit, and a few good shocks and surprises. Director Craig Gillespie LARS AND THE REAL GIRL, "United States of Tara" earns respect for pulling off for him an unfamiliar genre; he also pays homage to a few memorable scenes in the original without trying to copy or disrespect them.Most of the performances are engaging and authentic aside from Mintz-Plasse in his later moments , with Tennant's wry turn a real treat, and the ever-wonderful Collette's naturally grounding presence adding a needed weight of normalcy. It is Farrell, however, who is the real deal; he absolutely nails this role no, he won't make you forget the original's suave Chris Sarandon, but in fairness, Jerry is written much differently in this update . Farrell combines sexiness and utter menace to the fullest: this vamp means business! Some of the best work of his admittedly spotty career is on display, including the film's most brilliant moment, where Jerry's fidgety impatience with being invited into the Brewster home is both hilarious and nerve-wracking.FRIGHT NIGHT is a solid film in its own right; if there's not enough love from the original's fans to spread out to its remake, that's unfortunate.
The original Fright Night was already a cult classic which makes this remake unnecessary. But since all vampires these days are less scary and like what Evil Ed said "Love Sick", it can be necessary for some reason. Bringing back the true vampire camp. Although it's not as scary as the original but Colin Farrel's performance improves the vampire villain. This Fright Night is endlessly watchable and fun. This may sound strange but I think this version is better than the original.The original have the disturbing schlocky masks but this version actually has the vampire danger <more>
and thrills. The credit goes to Colin Farrel. He gives a lot of vigor and terror to the evil vampire. David Tennant has his own Peter Vincent. His charisma and delight shines through all of his scenes. Just like Roddy McDowall, David Tennant nearly steals the show. But Farrel really owns this show.It's a welcome back, actually. It's not a cash in remake. It's the returning of the vampire horror to our cinemas. Our vampire movies these days are just tired and relies to nothing but the senseless violence. And some of them are in love with a bland girl and sparkle in sunlight. But the biggest thing that is missing in most modern vampire movies is how scary these monsters are. They are not only bloodsuckers. They can be terrifying for somehow.The filmmaking is obviously good but some of the CGI tones the scares down a little bit but it works though. The score sounds nothing like the score of the original but it's true to its vampire genre. The movie is shot in 3D but most of the film is dark and 3D usually dims the aspect of a film but if you are in for some blood and sparks coming out of the screen then try it. Not quite recommending though.Overall, Fright Night is enjoyable. Maybe the biggest mistake they made is the jump scares since Fright Night isn't really fond to that trend. Well, this is definitely better than all the unnecessary horror remakes we usually get every year. Colin Farrel made a lot of things better. Vampires are evil again. It has plenty of joys and thrills. Fright Night is recommendable by bringing back the true elements of the genre.
Welcome To Fright Night....For Real!!! (by eytand94)
Tom Holland's 1985 vampire romp "Fright Night" was a fun, campy little horror flick that had some good laughs, good scares, and some pretty awesome effects. Soon enough, the movie developed its cult fan base. In the end, I find the original "Fright Night" to be one of the most underrated horror films of the 80's.Frankly, I was actually quite excited for this remake, knowing that it had a great cast and Marti Noxon who commonly wrote for "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" was at the helm of the script. I personally don't mind remakes. Some people take them <more>
way too seriously. Of course, there are some that fail, but a lot of them work really well. The 2011 edition of "Fright Night" works! Set in a beautiful suburban area of Las Vegas, the movie introduces us to Charley Brewster, a nerdy but charismatic teenager who we find out has given up his relationship with his friend "Evil" Ed to be with the cooler kids, including his hot new girlfriend Amy. Then he meets Jerry Dandrige, a buff, sweet new neighbor that Charley's mom and Amy take a liking to. When Ed tries to warn Charley of Jerry's hidden, and gruesome, intentions, things take a turn for the worse. More people wind up missing, and it becomes evident to Charley that Jerry is a vampire. Nobody believes him before it's too late, and it's up to him and Hard Rock celebrity Peter Vincent to kill this sucker pun intended once and for all.While it pays so much respect to the original movie, "Fright Night" also adds a few new elements that elevate it above other remakes. There are some scenes that are lifted right from the original, even two of the original's most classic lines, but the movie breaks several horror movie rules and invents new ones, like whether or not a vampire can come into another person's house.The CGI effects in this remake are surprisingly quite good. I didn't see the film in 3D which I heard doesn't do much for the movie , but in its 2D format, the geysers of blood shoot out magnificently without going over the top, and the makeup is true to the original vampire look in the 1985 film."Fright Night" boasts a fantastic cast of well-known actors. Anton Yelchin, as always, does a great job and fits the role of Charley perfectly. Toni Collette stands out as Charley's mother, and Imogen Poots is terrific as Amy. Unlike other horror blonds, the script allows Amy to be smart, and at times brave enough to try to take down Jerry herself. Also, Ms. Poots is an awesome screamer. Christopher Mintz- Plasse is great for the role of "Evil" Ed, and he was born to play that role in this remake. He gets some pretty funny lines and an enjoyable amount of screen time. David Tennant, known for starring in the recent TV revival of "Doctor Who," takes over from Roddy McDowall as Peter Vincent, and makes for a funny vision of the character.And then there's Colin Farrell as Jerry. Don't get me wrong. The cast is wonderful. But Farrell eats his role up and nearly steals the show. Sometimes, he doesn't have to do anything, and he still creeps you out. One particular scene in which he has a conversation with Charley sets the character up to be quite fearful. This is not a "Twilight" vampire that Farrell creates. This is a "rip your throat out with no regrets" monster that is impossible not to be freaked out by. Basically, Colin Farrell bathes in his role like the character bathes in human blood.Marti Noxon's script is clever, funny, and smart, and by the looks of other recent horror outings, it's a script that's better than it should be.I'll just say that "Fright Night" is not particularly scary. But it's all about the entertainment here. The movie doesn't need to be scary. It's a horror-comedy that allows some good shocks with some great laughs. The original was always on the border of becoming too funny, but it stayed on its feet and kept the horror going. The remake does just that. It's carefully made and done with love for its source material. But otherwise, you can tell that director Craig Gillespie "Lars and the Real Girl" , his cast, and his screenwriter had a ball making this movie. The nostalgia factor is high here, bringing us a combination of both 80's and 90's horror. If you loved "The Lost Boys" and the original 1985 flick, you will surprisingly love 2011's "Fright Night." I welcome it with open arms, and I'm glad I got to see it. Welcome to Fright Night...FOR REAL! P.S. For those of you who saw the original, you get an unbelievable cameo.