***DISCLAIMER*** The following review is entirely my opinion. If you comment (which I encourage you to do) be respectful. If you don't agree with my opinion, that's fine. To each their own. I am just sharing my opinions and perspective. Finally, the reviews are given on a scale of 1-5. 1, of course, being terrible. 2, being not great. 3, being okay. 4, being good and 5, being epic!
Fright Night Part II - 3 out of 5
The first film was fantastic fun. As far as vampire fiction goes, it was a great piece of work--especially when you consider most films about vampires are weak. This 1988 sequel is far better than a majority of vampire stories put out there and utterly destroys crap like Twilight.
William Ragsdale returns to portray Charley who, at this point, has convinced himself that the vampire neighbor and the events that took place in the first one didn't occur. However, Charley seems to be a vampire magnet as he is once again is thrown into a mix where he must take on the undead with the help of Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall reprising his role as well). However, unlike the first film (and something typical of sequels), this film is not as fun as the last installment.
First off, Roddy McDowall really phoned in his acting in this one and it seems clear he only took part for a paycheck but the worst thing about this film is the villains. In the first film, Chris Sarandon was so amazing as the vampire Jerry Dandrige that it was nearly impossible to replace him so the filmmakers put Charley and Peter against not one but four vampires. The problem is that even combined, these four bad guys can't even hold a candle to Sarandon's performance. However, there is one thing that makes this movie worth of viewing--and that is the special effects. For 1988, the practical and make-up effects are amazing and hold up tremendously well (unlike the pathetic bat on a string in the first one). While the story and antagonists aren't the greatest, the special effects alone make this worth viewing.