Oh, God, this movie, Fright Night Part 2 (or II as some sources say) was a mess.
From the already pointed out mismanaging of the sequel #, to lame and irrelevant bowling jokes, to the once awesome Peter Vincent reversing his belief in vampires only to remember at the appropriate time, to the lame excuse to get (SOME of) the original stars back this movie was a tragedy to those who loved part one. Like me.
When I was a kid, I loved the original Fright Night and didn't really get into going to see as many movies as I could, on my own and mostly at the dollar theatre, until I was about 15ish. And coincidentally, both my movie-outing and this film were in 1989. Surprisingly, I wasn't as much a critic back then: I loved going to the movies, action and horror were my favorite, didn't matter about plot, depth or characterizations – I just loved entertainment. And still I hated this movie.
Really quickly, let's explore the wonderful plot: Charley Brewster has moved on from his encounter with his neighbor/vampire of years past through therapy and college. He's got a new girlfriend and the infamous Peter Vincent friend he ignores. Well, SHOCKING, Peter's new neighbors are vampires and maybe a werewolf, though that's not really explored. This time around, Charley is slowly – and weirdly – becoming one of the undead. Too much a spoiler on why, but the reason is just as boring as this slow paced, barely recognizable sequel, is.
Yeah, I'm aware they produced countless horror films in the 1980s and multiple that by five for the number of horror sequels. A lot hit, mostly miss. This is the latter. There's absolutely no reason to see this follow-up. The first classic is simply sufficient.
From the already pointed out mismanaging of the sequel #, to lame and irrelevant bowling jokes, to the once awesome Peter Vincent reversing his belief in vampires only to remember at the appropriate time, to the lame excuse to get (SOME of) the original stars back this movie was a tragedy to those who loved part one. Like me.
When I was a kid, I loved the original Fright Night and didn't really get into going to see as many movies as I could, on my own and mostly at the dollar theatre, until I was about 15ish. And coincidentally, both my movie-outing and this film were in 1989. Surprisingly, I wasn't as much a critic back then: I loved going to the movies, action and horror were my favorite, didn't matter about plot, depth or characterizations – I just loved entertainment. And still I hated this movie.
Really quickly, let's explore the wonderful plot: Charley Brewster has moved on from his encounter with his neighbor/vampire of years past through therapy and college. He's got a new girlfriend and the infamous Peter Vincent friend he ignores. Well, SHOCKING, Peter's new neighbors are vampires and maybe a werewolf, though that's not really explored. This time around, Charley is slowly – and weirdly – becoming one of the undead. Too much a spoiler on why, but the reason is just as boring as this slow paced, barely recognizable sequel, is.
Yeah, I'm aware they produced countless horror films in the 1980s and multiple that by five for the number of horror sequels. A lot hit, mostly miss. This is the latter. There's absolutely no reason to see this follow-up. The first classic is simply sufficient.