I have tried very hard to remain positive about the impending remake of Fright Night. I really like the original, but it’s no holy text; while I don’t really understand what’s to be gained by returning to that well, I also don’t see what’s the harm. Maybe you could even have some fun with it.
But now the latest casting news has stopped me in my tracks and convinced me this movie is mostly going to be a waste of time. And that’s saying something, since I pretty much rolled with the reveal that the Peter Vincent character had been changed from aging horror host to young Criss Angel-esque magician, but this latest stuff is too much for me.
David Tennant is playing the Criss Angel character, and frankly who cares. I’m sure there are people who are very enamored of Dr. Who who will be ecstatic, but to me he’s just the guy who I keep thinking is the dude from Pet Shop Boys. No, the casting that has pushed me over the edge into downright negativity is Christopher Mintz-Plasse as Evil Ed.
Look, I know that the internet is full of armchair casting directors. I know that I don’t really know Craig Gillespie’s vision for this remake (if there is one) is. Maybe I’ll understand this casting in context. But to me it proves that this film utterly misses the glory of Evil Ed.
Stephen Geoffreys didn’t play Evil Ed as just another geek; there’s something weirder and darker and maybe more pervy to him. And that’s not taking his gay porn future into account; I think that there’s a connection between Evil Ed and the chronic masturbator that Geoffreys played in the underseen classic Heaven Help Us (also a 1985 film, like Fright Night). Geoffreys brings the same sweaty, twisted sexuality to Evil Ed.
Mintz-Plasse doesn’t have that. There’s no danger to him; even at the end of Kick-Ass he’s sort of goofy. What made Evil Ed an iconic character is that he didn’t conform to standard nerd tropes, and that he’s edgier and more manic than what has become the nerd stereotype these days. His casting in this film makes me think they’re leaning more towards making Evil Ed harmless (and that’s only aided by the PG-13 they’re going for), while the original Evil Ed felt like maybe getting bit by Jerry was the greatest thing that ever happened to him. And not just because it was a nerd power fantasy but because it allowed him to open up something darker inside of himself.
Again, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe writer Marti Noxon has a firm grasp on Evil Ed. It’s just hard to see one of the more unique characters in horror history getting on the path for what is essentially gentrification – they’re softening him up to make him more lovable to the norms.
I’d love to be wrong about this one, but so far nothing is showing me that Fright Night 21st Century edition will be worth sitting through.
50 comments
I dont care who gets cast as what, PG-13 ensures I will never watch this.
I'm guessing the association of David to the pet shop boys means that you aren't really aware of David's work? He is brilliiant versatile actor, and will be more than capable of fulfilling the role of Peter brilliantly.
Ann, maybe your fantasies are getting the better of you on this one. Your statement doesn't seem so "brilliant."
Devin, you're articles are always more enjoyable and just plain better when your being positive and about something and talking about GOOD things that are happening in the industry or things to get excited about. More and more you're becoming the grumpy old man of the movie critic industry.
I was quite pleased when I heard who got Charlie Brewster's role, but it almost feels like Yelchin would be a better candidate to play Evil Ed.
Your assessment of the original Evil Ed character is spot on. I will fuck this remake six ways to Sunday in honor of the awesomeness that was Stephen Geoffreys.
Yes my dear friend Tommy Bahamy, you're right, maybe my fantasies are getting th best of me. i must have a very good imagination to have dreamt up David Tennant performing as the Danish Prince Hamlet, or as the quiet thinker Arthur Eddington, or as the brain-damaged Alan in Recovery, or as evil Brendon in Secret Smile, or as the anti-hero Peter Carlisle in Blackpool, or as a manic depressive (not many people can act act manic depressive without ending up being patronising, but he got it to the T) in Takin over the Asylum, or as the cheeky and charming yet naive hero in Cassanova, or as the very geeky Chris in Learners, or maybe as the ultimate clever/sharp/dark/funny/ruthless/vulnerable/egositic Tenth Doctor?
Like him or loathe him as the Doctor, but to say that he isn't versatile (despite all the different roles he has done, and been critically accliamed too) is to be blind to the truth, my dear friend. I'm sure playing Peter in Fright Night will not be the hardest challenge for him.
I don't really care either way about this remake, but I can at least understand the change in the aging horror host character. That concept was pretty well out of fashion in 1985, and completely irrelevant in 2010. But still, who would turn to Criss Angel when faced with vampires? Anyway, hope they keep Evil Ed's teeth the same.
Who the fuck wrote this, Harry Knowles?
Yeah, Devin forget about Doctor Who. Tennant proved his worth with Hamlet last year. Brilliant.
So this means Christopher Mintz-Plasse is gonna do gay porn too?
The character of Evil Ed from the original Fright Night always struck me as a kid who was very confused, already messed up, and yet vulnerable in his need for someone like Jerry Dandridge to empower him. The transformed Ed was a dagger in Charley's side, knowing that he not only led Jerry to him but that Ed likely took Jerry's"gift" willingly. Sure, there were homo-erotic overtones, and I'm wondering how much of that has anything to do with the questionable casting of Colin Farrell. But I think that, if they let him loose with the script, Christopher Mintz-Plasse could be every bit as tortured and even more dangerous than Ed turned out to be. As for David Tennant as a Criss Angel type character, it depends on the angle: Peter Vincent was a failed horror host (of which there are few left) but Tennant could play a failed formerly-incredible magician, one who's lost personal faith but who Charley still believes in. Vincent saw himself as a fraud, merely an actor playing a grand part, but it's Charley that empowers him to play his part for real. The potential for this remake is still 50-50 for me, but make no mistake: I'll certainly be first in line to throw it on the fire if they piss it away.
I love how Devin thinks he's anything but an ''armchair casting director'' himself. Perhaps prefacing your argument with this and an admission of not knowing anything about the film suggests you should– GASP! hold your judgment?
I'm with you, Devin, except I'd have jumped ship at the street magician if I'd known about it. You'd think with all the man-children this generation has produced, Hollywood wouldn't be so hamfisted at trying to appeal to younger demographics anymore. (And regarding the street magician crap, I don't think it can be argued that TV horror hosts aren't relevant to this generation, because they weren't relevant to me in the '80s, either.)
This film has exactly one thing working for it: Marti Noxon, who is a decent writer. Everything else is working against it.
I really wish that Christopher Mintz-Plass would have just hung it up after Superbad. Same thing with the guy that played Napoleon Dynamite. They were good for what they were, but please go away now.
I love the original and the sequel – saw them 1000 times growing up. But as far as remakes go the casting for this is really interesting – Give it a chance!
Sometimes you gotta go into remakes with an open mind – as long as the film makers honour the spirit of the original and make it their own – what’s the worst that can happen – you still get to have the original!
The title of the article had me fearing it was Joey Lawrence *whew*. Also, if they weren't going to go with a horror TV host, I think it would have been cool to go with a "ghost hunter" kind of character, since there are a million of those shows on nowadays.
I don't give a good God damn about McLovin being miscast here- Noxon, and the Farrell +Yelchin dynamic are what's gonna make this flick fun.
Devin, when you're right, you're right, and you're 100% right on this Evil Ed casting news. There's something seething and black, even Klebold-and-Harris-esque, about Geoffreys' unsettling performance. It's one of the things that makes "Fright Night" so memorable. Why are they even bothering to remake this? Just make a new goddamn vampire movie. It can't be THAT hard, and it's not like the kids today actually give a shit about the original "Fright Night."
To be honest I hadn't heard that Tennant had been cast and that has actually raised my interest a little. I liked him as the Doctor a lot but really thought he was tremendous in Blackpool and Einstein and Eddington. It's a shame that they're getting rid of the aging horror host angle but as that was done so brilliantly by McDowell I'm kind of curious to see how the new character is handled.
I was expected something a lot worse. And what's wrong with David Tennant?
Mcglovin as evil ed? Can Mintz-Plasse even do evil? Is there going to be LARPing involved in this version?
Come on, Devin! Tennant was one of the best Doctors ever, and had a fine (if brief) role as Barty Crouch, Jr. in Goblet of Fire. You of all people should know this! I just wish they were bringing him back for Deathly Hallows.
Swearingen that's stupid. You take out the titties and the original could be PG-13.
Shit Sandwich.
*gasp* Oh no. Perhaps the unbeaten streak of horror remakes bettering the originals will end with Fright Night 2011.
Devin, that's probably more thought anyone has given to Evil Ed since they made the original, but damn it if you're not 100% RIGHT!
They can do PG-13 right. Just ask Sam Raimi and Drag Me to Hell.
Fisrt of all, the folks moaning about the PG-13 rating…rewatch the original. If it were released today as is, it would easily get a PG-13. It's very tame compared to what gets an R rating these days, and FRIGHT NIGHT was never a hardcore gorefest to begin with.
Second, the casting is solid (Mintz-Plasse being the only one that gives me concern.) Yelchin, Farrell, Colette and Tennant are all pretty good choices. I had my doubts about "Peter Vincent as Criss Angel", but David Tennant could make this work.
And while I completely agree on the McLovin/Stephen Geoffreys comparison, Devin,you might want to take a look at Tennant's body of work before dismissing him. After all, he was in a couple of your beloved Harry Potter films, so you should know better than to play stupid.
Cautiously optimistic…
Only good news about this remake is that we'll get the original on Blu.
Love the original, but I think the casting is the ONLY reason I'm interested in this remake.
Farrel is going to be bringing so much homo-eroticism to this that they need Minz-Plasse as a kind of sexual heat-sink to cool off the rising stink of penis love coming from Devin's shorts.
Bitching about someone "not getting" the character of Evil fucking Ed from Fright Night is even worse than bitching about flames on Optimus Prime. It's Evil fucking Ed from Fright fucking Night. Somehow I think the world can stand a different take on this classic cinematic creation.
Man, Devin, normally I chastise you for being a cynical grump (among many, MANY other things), but I'm right there with you for this one. Evil Ed is a tragic character. He's not just a goofball; he's a goofball because nobody likes him. He takes the vampire's hand because he promises him that no one will make fun of him anymore, or something to that effect. There's more to him than just wackiness and humor, and I'm with you, I love Mintz-Plasse, but I don't know if he can pull that off.
Who knows how it will pan out as casting, but it's a smart career move for CMP — dude's trying to prove he can do darker stuff and this might give him an opportunity.
Devin – what's with all the hate for McLovin'? He seems kind of harmless and you seem to have it in for him a little. It's not like he's playing Hamlet..
Wow Devin, you really like to write things to rustle feathers don't you? "David Tennant is playing the Criss Angel character, and frankly who cares." A lot people apparently.
Devin,
This IS good casting. It's Fright Night for god's sake?! It's not Star Trek.
Damn.
Rob
I had heard at one point that Chris Sarandon was in line for the Peter Vincent role. That, to me, was brilliance. Once that proved to be untrue I stopped giving a shit. I always liked Fright Night 2 better anyhow.
On point, Dev.
Ann, you misread me. Most Americans don't much about Tennant aside from a handful of Who eps and his weird snake tongue thing in harry Potter Quattro.
I was mostly picking up (very lightly, I may add) on your overuse of the word 'brilliant' in one sentance.
I watched about 20 minutes of Fright Night a couple weeks ago before turning it off. I don't really care about the new movie, except that I'm a Colin Farrell apologist, and a full on Anton Yelchin fan, so I'll probably see it. But oh my god I hate seeing Christopher Mintz-Plasse in shit. He was well cast in Superbad as a worthless peice of shit, he was the worst part of Year One which was a terrible fucking movie, and the son of a bitch actually kinda ruined Kick-Ass for me. That movie had everything else going for it. Why the fuck does this guy have a career? Fuck that kid.
This is totally grump-worthy. I get pissed whenever Firefly gets bitched about without provoking, but this remake is fucking unnecessary. And now its taken a turn for ass hole.
If McLovin had played this role before Superbad, it might have worked.
I could give a shit less if there are tits or not in the remake. 99% of PG-13 horror films are garbage. Even though Drag Me to Hell was great, imagine how batshit crazy it could have been with an R rating?
Wow! Devin dissing someone who was in Potter?
OK, what remake is necessary? If the movie was good (Halloween) then the remake will be bad. If the original was bad, the remake will be even worse (The Fog). And you know what else grinds my gears? When someone remaking a movie constantly drops hits that it is a remake. Look at the new Elm st., Texas Chainsaw, Halloween, Dawn of the Dead, etc How many instances are there of referencing scenes from the original films? If anything, I hope Fright Night, just takes the concept and goes with it instead of trying to shoehorn Marcy (what's-her-face-from-Married-With-Children) into some role as a police detective, or a psychic, or a reporter, or whatever. And it's a fun concept, a kid having to convince the people around him that there is a vampire next door. The only reason people are getting bent out of shape the the *ahem* classic, Fright Night, is getting remade is because we all watched it on cable growing up. I mean, get a life, its not like someone's remaking Dazed and Confused. Maybe I shouldn't have said that out loud.
Geoffreys was terrible as Evil Ed. Just watched the movie for the first time, and he is painfully annoying. I think a lot of you are overthinking it. Honestly, I thought Jorma Taccone would have been perfect.
I agree! It doesn't seem right to cast Plasse. Stephen did have a certain something. Evil was goofy and such, but beneath it there was more. I believe he was picked on and there was a darker side that he needed to fulfill. Evil Ed is my favorite movie character and Geoffreys my favorite actor of all time!!! The remake will suck!
Two words explain this travesty of casting: MARTI-fucking-NOXON, the bitch who ruined season 6 of Buffy The Vampire Slayer. This is yet one more reason for me to want this years X-Mas present to be Marti Noxon's bloody severed head on a pike in my front lawn…
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.