“If “Frightnight” didn’t have to carry the memory of a significantly better film, it would have been better for it.”

I spent my Thanksgiving with my family in Connecticut, where–besides drinking and trying to ignore the almost constant noise generated by my niece and nephew–I watched a lot of cable.  Among everything that I watched it’s worth mentioning that I caught two horror film reboots, Marcus Nispel’s “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (much better than I expected it to be) and Craig Gillespie’s “Frightnight” (not as entertaining as I thought it would be).

The “Frightnight” reboot is problematic because if it were just a vampire film, without the connection to the original “Fright Night,” it would probably have been much better than it was.

As things stand, I was constantly comparing it to the original, which in most instances was far superior.  There are a lot of changes in the reboot beyond the title, most of them better served in an original film.

Tom Holland’s original came out in 1985, and was more representative of its time than the remake, which has an oddly disposable quality to it.  Part of it is due to the story,which while inspired by the 1985 film, has changes added that feel as if they are there not for any reason other than to differentiate it from the first film.

And as I have said earlier, if “Frightnight” didn’t have to carry the memory of a significantly better film, it would have been the better for it.