adonis98-743-186503 By day Gerri Dandridge is a sexy professor, but by night she transforms into a real-life vampire with an unquenchable thirst for human blood. So when a group of high school students travel abroad to study in Romania, they find themselves ensnared in Gerri's chilling web of lust and terror. Fright Night 2 makes Fright Night Part II from 1988 look like The Godfather compared to this. The acting was awful, the storyline was awful and pretty much the entire movie was forgettable, bland and just a waste of time and money. Just stick with the original and skip everything else that came after it. (0/10) (F)

kdhbi42 I agree that this movie is a waste of Jaime Murray. The first Fright Night remake was OK and had enough star power to get by, but this one just didn't pull me in. They should have paid for at least one more recognizable face for Peter Vincent's role. The fact that they turned him into a ghost hunting whoremonger instead of a goofy late night movie host doesn't help either. If you watch horror movies for blood and random nudity then you won't be completely disappointed. I can usually handle bad movies with unlikeable casts, but this movie has horrible camera effects. Anytime something is supposed to be scary the screen flashes for a ridiculous amount of time and it gave me a migraine.

Paul Zink I had already seen and enjoyed the previous two "Fright Night" movies (the Roddy MacDowell original and the Peter Tennant remake— I keep track by the actors who play the Peter Vincent character), and judging by the reviews here I didn't have high hopes for this reboot. The fact that I watched it to the bitter end is a testament to the compelling allure of the beguiling Jaime Murray ("Hustle"), who is as lovely as ever and more than seductive as the head vampire in this film. I am not going to pick apart the film on particular details, as that would take too long and involve various spoilers. And I will grant the following positives: the effects were extremely good, the acting ranged from acceptable to not half bad; the actors looked the part, the locations were authentic looking (shot in Romania), the cinematography was quite good, the music was professional, appropriate and effective, and the generous female nudity (and false hope of more to come—no nude Jaime Murray) kept me watching long past the time I should have stopped. If the film had simply copied any number of similar tried-and-true vampire plots and used (geez, stolen!) the same or similar dialog, it would have been perfectly fine for what it was -- which was not a remake of the original concept but merely the use of the characters. Yet after a very few scenes, it became clear that the screenwriter must have gone on a long "Lost Weekend bender with the continuity girl, because this movie had more plot gaps, inconsistencies, leaps of logic, internal contradictions and "WTF?" dialog bits than a drunken Sarah Palin speech. E.g.,"You must kill _______!" "And if I refuse?" "Then he...will...die!" Umm, ah... A notable failure was the almost non-existent use of the Peter Vincent character, played by a competent actor who could have made something of the role had he been given more than a couple dozen lines. The production values of this movie are far too high for it ever to appear on some future version of "Mystery Science Theater"; too bad, since the script alone would guarantee this film a Razzie award.

insomniac_rod The worst horror movie of 2013. Let's get things straight. How could you remake a remake and expect it to be good? "Fright Night 2" remakes the 2011 remake and tries to add a new sub-plot that fails miserably because it reminds us (the die hard fans) of the plot of the 1988 sequel to the 1985 classic. Therefore, you can guess the outcome of this one... Oh, it's bad. The cast is atrocious except for the super sexy Jaime Murray who delivers an extremely sexy scene where she is in lingerie and making out with another woman. That alone, worths your money ;)I could not stand the new Charlie or Peter Vincent, but Evil Ed steals the show as the worst character in the franchise. The settings are nice because the Director shows the beauty of Bucarest, which is an amazing place (also known as the Little Paris) and some interesting settings near the ending. However, the Direct to Video production values are very poor and you can say this is almost a student film. Avoid it at all costs. It damaged the reputation of our beloved franchise.