Why depend on motherboards when countless horror creations pre-2011 exemplify why special effects should at least have a first layer of practicality under computer graphics? That’s where 1985’s original trumps the 2000s revamp that fell victim to popularized 3D methods now bygone. I’ll forever cherish titles that dare choose practical artistry regarding sharky grins, bleeding wounds, and creature transformations. The Fright Night movies honor cornerstones of vampire cinema but differ in their executions. Vampires, right? They’re sexy, they’re sucky, and they hate the sunlight. Still, I’ll forever honor Gillespie’s on the list of remakes that outshine their masters even by a whisker. Both Holland and Gillespie helped define vampire cinema in their respective genre movements. ![]() Gillespie’s film is magnificently cast, moodily entrancing, and sharpened like a sushi chef’s knife before another dinner rush. It’s never unnecessarily gritty without purpose on the backs of the “torture porn” craze, where horror culture began rounding the corner away from immeasurable grotesqueries for the sake of sensationalism. A period I vocally endorse, no question - but if it sounds like I’m prepping what could be a controversial opinion, your radar’s adequately calibrated.Ĭraig Gillespie‘s 2011 Fright Night remake utilizes the darker, more “serious” tones favored by 2000s horror to embrace all the gothic ferociousness of vampiric lore. ![]() It’s a tale as old as Dracula between eternal lust and pointed fangs that sometimes gets lost in its ’80s haze of synthwave needle drops and “cheesier” dramatics that define an era of horror cinema. There’s an embrace of bloodsucker mythologies in addition to cheeky commentaries about how vamps are perceived in the media (using the character of Peter Vincent). Tom Holland‘s Fright Night has cemented itself as a crucial pillar in ’80s vampire canon.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |