Seeing the 10th Doctor strut around swearing in naught but leather pants also provides many kicks. He's fabulous to watch - creepy, predatory, reptilian, transformed, in every action just a little bit wrong. In an effort to save himself, his girl, his mother (Toni Collette) and scores more, Charley goes into battle, enlisting self-styled vampire hunter Peter Vincent (David Tennant), really a cowardly Vegas illusionist of a Russell Brand-esque disposition, to help. Now he's desperate to avoid the uncool antics of former best friend and terminal dweeb Ed (Chistopher Mintz-Plasse), who's trying to convince him that next door lives a murderous vampire, in the form of husky night construction worker Jerry (Colin Farrell).īy the time Charley realises the truth and barricades his house with garlic, Jerry has him in his ruthless, creatively barbaric sights.
#David tennant vampire funter skin#
Here, local teenager Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) has had the good fortune of moving up the social ladder when his skin cleared and high school alpha female Amy (Imogen Poots) showed interest. The city is already otherworldly, comes alive at night, is normally populated by temporary workers and blow-ins, and contains the creepiest thing of all, manufactured suburban compounds in the middle of nowhere. Put this baby - here, 1985's Fright Night - in the good hands of screenwriter Marti Noxon (veteran of that other landmark vampire franchise, Buffy the Vampire Slayer) and Australian film director Craig Gillespie ( Lars and the Real Girl, United States of Tara), who clearly has some affinity for the weird, and we'll be properly excited.įright Night (2011) has the great vampire-story setting of Las Vegas.
#David tennant vampire funter full#
His Charley is a world away from William Ragsdale's original annoying without saving grace, charmless, an empty vessel to lead a film full of nothing-much-noticeable.Give us a film to which we attach some pleasant nostalgia yet not enough critical status to warrant preciousness, and we may be up for the remake.
Lead Anton Yelchin too seems far too happy to spout this guff and you have to wonder quite how much of this rests, at least partially on his shoulders. Someone actually says 'you know this is a trap right?' (reply: 'I'm counting on it') as the script continues to plough a furrow looking, presumably, for a Holy-water-well in which to drown itself. The problems though, despite the success of the vampire and the vampire hunter, continue to stack up. That these two share but a handful of scenes is in-keeping with the original's plot but hey, this is remake territory and when you've got two game A-listers, giving it significant ham-like oration, why not manipulate them together a little more? The successes of the film are almost purely down to its heavyweights Farrell and, in a genius bit of casting, David Tennant, who shines as the obnoxious Las Vegas-showman with a penchant for vampire history only hidden beneath his crippling cowardice. Gone though are that show's sharp one-liners and comebacks, in their place everyone seems to think that 'really?', asked with a helping of condescending snark, is a veritable choice for comic put down of the year. Marti Noxon has form for this under-written drivel ( I Am Number Four) but the evidence of Buffy on his C.V. If the subtext gets us off to a bad start during our two hours in the company of Colin Farrell's vampire - serving Holy Water as an aperitif, perhaps - then the script is positively the faux pas equivalent of plonking your main course down with a kebab stake running right through it. One of those ideas is, well, sexy, slightly dangerous, something that fits into the Horror genre.
In Gillespie's, it's about the fear of growing out of spotty teenage pursuits and drifting away from your changing friends. 'everyone seems to think that 'really?', asked with a helping of condescending snark, is a veritable choice for comic put down of the year'Ī particularly disappointing remake, the failures of Craig Gillespie's rehash of Tom Holland's original Fright Night can be summed up by examining the differences in the subtext in Holland's film, it was all about sex.
0 kommentar(er)
