Friday, September 2, 2011

Practical

So we saw the Fright Night remake a few nights ago. Went in with an open mind and really enjoyed most of it. The first third of the film was the best, with some really chilling moments. Colin Farrell was excellent. The Evil Ed character was a throw-away character, as was Peter Vincent for the most part. Tom Holland, the director of the original Fright Night, has stated that he had the concept for his film floating around for a year as a rough idea, but that it had only come together and truly worked when he conceived the character of Peter Vincent. This film missed that point, making Vincent a profanity spouting alcoholic who was only there to almost help Charley, but the film really didn't need him. And that's too bad because making him a Las Vegas act was actually pretty appropriate and a very cool idea.

Then there's the CG. I long for the old days of practical effects. I get that it's expensive and that movies are made so quickly now that there's just no time in the production schedule (the same goes for the massive symphonic scores of the past) [so much of what I've grown up on and loved is dying]. But the CG - I'd rate it up there with the computer generated effects seen on ANY of those disposable SyFy tv movies, the ones with giant fish or a creature-of-the-week. Yeah, it was THAT bad. In fact, the finale featured effects which I am still recovering from.

So here's to the old timers - the Rob Bottins and Sam Winstons and Rick Bakers and Tom Savinis.

My heroes.

"Wait. I wonder if I could do all of this on the computer."


And while I'm at it, go to Hell, George Lucas.



15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Same reasons I didn't like it. It's a shame, too, because the original had practical effects that really scared me when I was a kid! The giant bat - yeeesh! All the 'horror' movies these days use CGI and it kills them for me. The Thing prequel coming up will probably be more of the same. I read that they wanted to go 'mostly practical' but then I read a set visit where they're talking about a giant tentacle they'll add later in post-production. Nothing is sacred anymore.

Chad said...

I still haven't seen the new Fright Night yet, so I'm glad to hear your review. That's also a bummer about Ed... was my favorite line "Dinner's in the oven!!" in there? I suppose it doesn't make that much difference since it was all in Stephen Geoffreys' delivery. :)

Speaking of practical fx, did you catch the pilot episode of Death Valley? I'm assuming, like me, MTV doesn't find it's way onto your tv at all but they've really done a great job with this one. There are some cg blood spatters but almost all of their monsters are practical make-up and fx. You can watch it online here: http://www.mtv.com/shows/death_valley/series.jhtml

Rot said...

Haven't seen that show.
I'll check that out.

Joel said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D6pKNOmGRI&NR=1

Look at that thing. A truly gorgeous piece of effects work. These animals were never topped, in my opinion. CGI admittedly has a myriad of uses that today are considered irreplaceable, but I contend that most viewers can still almost always tell, especially in the case of human and human-like characters (which I'm assuming were the bulk of CGI in the Fright Night remake.)

Jon said...

"And while I'm at it, go to Hell, George Lucas."

Seconded.

Sorry this movie bummed you out, man. I feel sort of guilty for recommending it. I really did enjoy it (though Colin Farrell did pretty much carry it).

Rot said...

Don't feel bad...I really wanted to see how they remade a fave of mine.

pensive said...

ROTFLMAO! George Lucas! LOL!

*Spoilers, just so you know*

Hubby and I did a remake double feature on opening night, with Conan. The CGI in Fright Night was terrible, but I try not to knock it just because I could never do better. My biggest issue though (sadly) was the fact that Colin's giant eyebrows suddenly disappeared from the CGI. Shouldn't it resemble his human face in some way? Isn't that an interesting part about all this Pixar stuff?

And I totally disagree about Peter Vincent. It was different, yes, but the scene where he was stripping away the persona and becoming the guy was so phenomenal I will buy it just to watch that over and over. Loved that.

Sara said...

LOL, *cheers*!!

Marrow said...

Yep. Fright Night is my fav movie, and I'm a little terrified to watch the remake. Afraid of what I'll see.

When I saw 'The Haunted Mansion' at age six I wanted to become Rick Baker when I grew up. There are some pretty incredible practical-effects zombies in that movie (though Eddie Murphy ruined the whole thing).

Watch the first three minutes of this video (don't bother with the rest).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go97RkGpMg8

K.O. said...

AMEN! Long live Rob Bottin, genius mastermind. We just watched The Thing again last weekend, during the hurricane.
We saw the Fright Night remake too, and I agree with your review. I was so disappointed in the Peter V. character! Overall I enjoyed the movie though; it was fun.

Mantan Calaveras said...

hear, hear

A toast, to practical effects. May latex rubber and corn syrup enjoy a long and fruitful life.

Paul said...

Testify brother!

Shani said...

I was afraid of that with this remake. We'd still like to see it though. I agree about the CGI...used way too much and for things that could be accomplished with some good old fashioned elbow grease. Ex: the Lycans in Underworld..to me they were terrifying because they weren't CGI. *sigh*

MorbidMariah said...

Yep, CGI is overused and unwhelming. Blech. Boring.

NecroBones said...

I'm with you on the practical effects thing. If the CG is done well, it works. But there are a lot of times where the practical effects simply worked better or felt more visceral.

I look forward to seeing this remake. I'm still trying to get my fiancee to sit down and watch the original with me too.