If imitation is the sincerest form of Hollywood, then DreamWorks' and Aussie director Craig Gillespie's fondly devoted remake FRIGHT NIGHT flatters the original 1980s bloodsucking tale but fails to expand on it to successfully justify this revamped effort. Some of its departures from the source movie work well — an engaging cast and contemporary Las Vegas suburb setting make unique marks on this revision — while other basic components like the monstrous transformations and bloody battles are subpar for today's stake-of-the-art vampires in films and TV.

For those uninitiated to Tom Holland's comic, slightly campy 1985 source of inspiration at work, this 2011 remake follows the same plot: FRIGHT NIGHT finds high school senior Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) struggling in the hinterlands of peer popularity and the transient, sun-seared society just outside Vegas. While Charley copes with his divorced mother Jane (Toni Collette) and keeps up with his popular girlfriend Amy (Imogen Poots), teen life gets even more complicated when a mysterious newcomer Jerry (Colin Ferrell) moves in next door. Things really begin to bite when Charley's nerdish pal Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) claims Jerry is a vampire slowly devouring the local population including their absent classmates.

"Evil" Ed, who is more Pathetic than Evil this time around, convinces Charley to expose Jerry as an actual murderous vampire in their midst and get help to defeat him. Despite his public image as a master of the occult, Vegas stage magician and goth-costumed illusionist Peter Vincent (daffy David Tennant) proves to be very little help in Charley's mission at first. A staggering, booze-infused illusion himself, Vincent's entertainment persona hides his human faults as a egotistic loser cashing in on the sex and show biz side of the supernatural. Think illusionist Criss Angel crossbred with Brit comic Russell Brand and you have Peter Vincent for 2011. Real life holds no appeal to the loner, and a teen begging him to kill a real vampire prompts elicits nothing more from Vincent than a call for security and another swig of Midori.

It is the fundamental changes of Ed and Peter's characters where this FRIGHT NIGHT goes dramatically awry, especially for anyone who knows (in some cases, reveres) Holland's original story: where Marti Noxon's sometimes wicked and witty script remasters these characters for the 3D cineplex world of today, it also drains the compassion and conflict from the story. Granted, Gillespie and Noxon are feeding us their R-rated version of Holland's more innocent, occasionally childish tale of the 1980s, but their graphically violent touches of horror would have been more effective if we cared more for Charley, Amy and Jane trying to escape Jerry's undead wrath.  In the original film, "Evil" Ed was as troubling as he was misunderstood: a nerdish outcast ill-equipped to handle the social horrors of high school who became one of its many social fringe-dwellers. Charley's friendly tolerance of Ed's misfit behavior and a shared affinity for all things monstrous showed Charley had a good heart, which made their eventual falling out at a critical moment all the more heartbreaking for both. In this update, Yelchin's Charley has, in his own words, simply become "a dick" in his casual discarding of Ed from his life, ignoring and finally shunning Ed after his attempts to socially blackmail Charley with YouTube videos of their role-playing, ubergeek past. Noxon's revision gives us little reason to like Ed from the start, little reason to yearn for Charley not to abandon him as a friend, and thus little compassion when Ed finally falls under Jerry's vampire curse.  When Ed returns (after being absent from the screen for the length of a Bible), he's not justifiably seeking revenge against his betrayer, he's just the same pissed-off jerk he was in life while cutting his baby fangs as Jerry's minion. The corruption of this friendship undercuts Charley's dramatic relevance in both opening and later acts of FRIGHT NIGHT to very disappointing effect.

Likewise the leather pants and wash-off tattoo alterations of Peter Vincent throw the monster-hunting side of the equation out of balance as well. Per Holland's original film, Vincent was written as a has-been horror movie star from the Hammer Films tradition now reduced to hosting (and admiring) his own movies as a television movie host — a pop culture shadow of his former self keeping his notoriety alive in the twilight of his career. The role was humorously but sensitively portrayed by Roddy McDowell in 1985 when such TV horror hosts were quite alive on late night airwaves, so his character and persona had immediate relevance to the film's creature feature-loving audience. Again Noxon's script deconstructs Vincent as a modern day exploiter of goth culture and fashion, a smarmy Vegas stage performer whose only professional allegiance is devoted to making dollars appear in his bank account to fill his sheltered life with booze and bimbos. Tennant, having stripped off his DOCTOR WHO frock for skin-tight leather and spirit-gummed goatee, plays this much more shallow Vincent with comedic aplomb but cannot mine the thin character for depth never built into it. Thus the sudden emergence of his true supernatural chops and knowledge arises in the neck-nick of time, just like the plot convenience that it is. Once Charley and Jerry face off in the finale, Vincent lingers quite uselessly in the last act, devoid of McDowell-Vincent's battle to renew his faith against evil after exploiting it for entertainment.

Imogen's Amy is the most successful update of the cast as she comes off both true to the temperament and innocent allure of the original role while fitting today's view of the good-but-realistic high school girl and girlfriend. Toni Collette does equally well as a 21st century suburban single mom which is much more realistic than the rather satiric parody of a parent seen in 1985. Yet again both characters are hampered by another shocking deletion in Jerry's character profile: while Colin Ferrell looks the part of a 2011 hunky stud in his sleeveless shirts and slicked-back hair, Jerry exudes virtually no sex appeal which is de rigueur in today's pantheon of pop culture vampires, ranging from the sublime (TRUE BLOOD) to the ridiculous (TWILIGHT). Both polar-opposite interpretations of the modern vampire can at least agree on the mythological icon's romantic appeal as these Nosferatu have shed their aristocratic Old World manners for a set of pale pecs and six-pack abs to attract the ladies (and men). Holland's 1980s Jerry borrowed much of the stately pretense of ancient vampire grandeur while he and actor Chris Sarandon (appearing in a brief cameo in this remake) ensured he was a real lady killer in both the social and sinister meaning of the term. Ferrell's role as Jerry, through no fault of his own as an actor, utterly lacks the sexual allure which endangered both Amy and Charley's mom in Holland's original film, and so seriously reduces the dramatic conflict in this update. While Jerry unleashed Amy's desire for physical satisfaction when he turned her to the Dark Side in 1985, today Amy becomes just another of Jerry's sun-shunning victims who never forces Charley to choose between wanting his girlfriend's body or saving her soul. These cumulative effects on Ed, Peter Vincent, Amy and Jerry all take their toll on the depth and sympathy audiences will feel for Charley's unholy challenge this weekend.

Of course, if many in today's generation have never seen Tom Holland's original version (though they should), they may well not give a flying bat about comparing notes with yesteryear — they'll just want vamps and violence, bodies exploding in 3D showers of CG blood, and FRIGHT NIGHT will deliver. If Gillespie and Noxon's goal was to abandon Charley's rite of passage between monster-loving boyhood and amp up the vamp grotesquery for more raw horror, then mission accomplished. Should FRIGHT NIGHT succeed at box offices this weekend and beyond, those less clever but more palpable qualities will keep money flowing into DreamWorks' coffers for a few weeks — though probably not into the true Halloween season. The visual and creature effects are next-generation advancements over the ghoulish makeup and animatronic demons seen in 1985, disappointingly the remake breaks no new frontiers in vampiredom. Jerry's grimacing appearance, ghoulish transformations or several gut-busting deaths barely compare to what viewers can see on HBO's hit vamp series each week. The 3D dimensional effect tends to throw more gore in the audience's face, but this won't truly increase the scare factor considering how overused the film format has become. Expect more pop-up surprises and splattering goo than actual moments of fright in this NIGHT.

A good dose of well-time laughs peppered throughout, anchored by an ambitious but predictable car chase sequence, give this remake some topical top spin, but overall FRIGHT NIGHT suffers from a lack of vision to make its own indelible stamp on audiences. The original and remake are different enough to stand on their own, and far worse remakes have marred movie screens lately, but just don't hold the two examples side-by-side for comparison. Buy a ticket to FRIGHT NIGHT for a quick cheap thrill this weekend, but do yourself a favor and (re)discover Tom Holland's 1985 original vampire flick for some truly delicious dark comedy.  FilmEdge donates 2 1/2 pints for this occasionally anemic remake and expects it to make a mild splash in the late-summer box office doldrums.

NOTE: The 3D screening FilmEdge saw for FRIGHT NIGHT was one of the darkest, dullest presentations in memory. Granted such a horror flick tends to be shadowy, but even the daylight scenes were severely dimmed and the color desaturated. Granted the 3D is part of this remake's calling card, but expect some visual downgrade in the projected image unless your theater gooses it up with a brighter bulb.