Marina 26.2 Old To New
In this report the difference between the reboot and original horror, ‘Fright Night’ will be discussed. The well-known vampire horror ‘Fright Night had been rebooted from its original in 1985, and remade in 2011. The original had been directed by Tom Holland, who based the film on the ‘Fright Night’ novel. Holland “was born July 11, 1943 in Poughkeepsie, New York,[6] to Lee and Tom Holland. he attended Ossining Public High School in Ossining, New York before transferring to Worcester Academy, where he graduated in 1962.” (Source 9). Tom Holland’s “directorial debut came in 1985 with the vampire horror film Fright Night. Holland first conceived of the premise during the writing of Cloak & Dagger,[25] of a horror film fan who learns that his neighbour is a vampire.” (Source 10). On the other hand, the director of the remake in 2011, called Craig Gillespie. He was “Born and raised in Sydney, Gillespie moved to New York City at the age of nineteen[1] to study illustration, graphic design and advertising at Manhattan's School of Visual Arts”. (Source 11). Later in life, “he moved into directing in 1995. Based on the strength of his spec reel and agency experience, he gained representation by production company Fahrenheit Films in late 1995”. (Source 12).
In this report the budget of both movies will now be discussed. Holland’s film, ‘Fright Night’ from 1985 showcases the true horror of vampires that is portrayed in the actual written novel. Therefore, allowing this film to scare the audience more, whilst also being ahead of its time with the use of special FX makeup to exaggerate the monstrosity in the vampire characters. Furthermore, this could allow the film to be seen as one of many classic horror films of the 80’s especially as the release of this film had been three years after the original ‘Poltergeist’ film which had made history in films of horror, this is because ‘Fright Night’ had gained a massive profit when comparing its 24.9-million-dollar box office to the 9-million-dollar budget. This significant profit arguably could be due to the film’s higher reach to its primary target audience of teenagers due the teenage narrative in the actual film with a focus at the secondary audience of horror lovers from all ages above the certified age rate for the film of the age 18. Thus, allowing a higher reach for a mass audience to provide a whopping box office of 24.9 million dollars.
Whereas, Gillespie’s remake of the original 1985 horror ‘Fright Night’ has more of a light-hearted twist to the story which enables the film to intertwine both the original dark sense of horror with a modern show of vampire gore providing innovation for the audience with a sense of nostalgia from the similar concepts of the original film conveyed throughout the movie, producing a sense of audience gratification due to the visceral effect this creates for its viewers. As there is no sequel to the original horror ‘Fright Night’ the remake allows the original film to gain more recognition through reaching a newer generation in its younger audience in a new millennial era, allowing them to have interest in the original film after enjoying the 2011 remake with a 26-year difference in the horror genre all together. Thus, allowing the audience and fans of the original to increase their liking in both films due to their different concepts on the narrative as a remembrance of the 1985 ‘Fright Night’ is created. However, Gillespie’s 2011 remake made a huge box office of 41 million dollars, the budget on the film was 30 million, thus producing a profit of only 11 million. Whereas, Holland’s original ‘Fright Night’ earned much less in box office it had a profit of 15.5 million dollars.
Based upon technology of both films, the original film produced by Tom Holland stays true to horror conventions of the time as it has high usage of special FX makeup for the vampires. As this was highly common for most horrors at the time, especially horror films that wished to achieve a gruesome factor for a form of visceral effect as the audience is left being stuck between the dilemma of looking away from the screen or watching the gruesome gore created by the special FX. Also, as there had been a fair amount of special FX makeup in the 1985 horror-hit, this could have been a major factor in increase of budgeting for the actual film itself, thus possibly being a downside but still allowing Holland to achieve his intention of grossing out the audience for a boost in
visceral effect and gratification.
(Sources 1 and 2).
On the other hand, the 2011 remake featured more usage of CGI when discussing the technology of the film. This is due to the newer time of release where now most films use CGI as it is a more convincing form of reality when it comes to the result of production for the audience creating usage of escapism as the film can then capture and engage the audience more. Due to the realism of the effects through CGI the audience gets the same visceral effect that the previous audience of the original film in 1985 had created through the use of special FX makeup.
(Source 6).
(Source 7).
Both films have an American cultural background and follow the stereotypes of a horror teen narrative with the main young male characters having a female partner to provide hints of sexual innuendos throughout the movie as another form of visceral effect for the audience. Thus, being another reason why both the original and remake of ‘Fright Night’ fall highly into the horror genre. However, the original film conveys more usage of stereotypes and iconography of vampire horror films, such as the crucifix and vampire weaponry shown in the film. This could be as overtime the stereotypes of vampire films have had a change to keep their audience in suspense with innovative ideas of vampires shown in newer vampire horror’s, as shown in the remake. Furthermore, the 80’s would have still been a time to follow more conventions of a usual vampire film as it was still quite new at the time of release for the film.
(Sources 3 and 4).
Furthermore, this report will disclose upon the production and funding of the film and its distribution. Based upon production, the original and reboot are of Hollywood production and are mainstream films due to their mass audiences, which allowed the remake to receive more recognition as the original had been a hit for horror fans. In addition to this, the 2011 reboot had been produced by the “Michael De Luca Productions” and distributed to the UK by the “Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures”, as the movie rights were held by “DreamWorks Pictures” who have helped distribute many well-known films to this day, as shown in the source below.
(Source 5).
Overall, both the old and new Hollywood horrors, ‘Fright Night’ have conventional stereotypes portrayed for vampires, these conventions are also portrayed through the iconography used for both movies, however the original ‘Fright Night’ from 1985 follow more of these conventions thus progressing vampire stereotypes. The original movie from 2011 features special FX makeup that was much ahead of its time, which could be an arguable reason for its higher ratings received when compared to the reboot from 2011. The original film features the hybrid genre of thriller/teen; however, the reboot is a hybrid genre of comedy/horror. But on one hand, the duration of the reboot is slightly longer, whilst on the other hand this could be due to the reasoning that both films have different directors therefore express different perceptions of the ‘Fright Night’ novel.
(Source 8).
Bibliography:
Comments
Post a Comment