Though it's not the scariest movie you'll ever see, Fright Night is not only a solid update of an '80s cult classic, it's an enjoyable modern horror film in its own right. The new Fright Night follows the same basic plot as the original, but director Craig Gillespie has added a few updates to better suit the material to a modern audience. As such, there's plenty of action, a few good scares and enough laughs sprinkled throughout to keep today's audience entertained.

Anton Yelchin (Star Trek) stars as Charley Brewster, a guy whose life is just starting to look up when a vampire named Jerry (Colin Farrell) moves in next door. Charley's finally got the girl of his dreams (Imogen Poots) and is in with the popular crowd, but things go south quickly after Jerry starts terrorizing his small Las Vegas suburb.

Charley's friend Ed (Superbad's Christopher Mintz-Plasse) tells him that not only is Jerry the killer, but he's also a mythical bloodsucker — though the fact that the movie never explains how Ed knows all this is particularly irritating. Charley scoffs at this crazy theory, but then Ed also disappears, and Charley does some snooping of his own and finds out that he should have been listening to his friend all along.

Charley tries to get help from Peter Vincent (David Tennant, from the BBC series Doctor Who), a vampire enthusiast and the star of "Fright Night," a vampire-themed Vegas stage show. Unlike in the original Fright Night (where he was kind of a has-been), Vincent is a successful Criss Angel-type character — complete with suspect greasy black hair, black eyeliner and leather pants. Although he isn't very helpful when Charley first comes calling, Vincent ends up being integral to fighting Jerry.

Colin Farrell is pretty hot here, playing a much less suave and quicker-to-action vampire than Chris Sarandon's original take. Also of note is that, unlike many flicks this summer, Fright Night's use of 3D actually works to the movie's advantage. Although I'm not particularly fond of things flying (seemingly) directly at my face, seeing a movie where the 3D is actually effective — as opposed to just a pointless gimmick — is refreshing. —Katy Williamson

One Day is a sad excuse for a cinematic romance; a movie so clichéd, half-assed and manipulative, you'd think the screenplay was written by a 12-year-old. The irony is that a film this pedantic is attempting to examine the hard lessons of growing up and becoming a responsible adult.

One Day's main selling point is its unusual structure: We follow potential lovers Dexter (Jim Sturgess) and Emma (Anne Hathaway) every July 15 (St. Swithin's Day in the UK) for nearly 20 years. They meet the night of their college gradation ceremony in 1988. Dexter is the privileged rich kid and Emma a lower-class book nerd. They try and fail at a one-night-stand, but a strong friendship grows.

Jump exactly a year later, to July 15, 1989. Emma is getting a flat in London and has ambitions of becoming a bestselling author, while Dexter is around to help her move but can't stay as he is flying to India the very same day. They both seem like they will miss each other. Exactly one year later Emma is a waitress at a horrid Tex-Mex restaurant, her dreams of being a great writer crushed. Dexter is moving up in the television world and sleeping with supermodels in Paris, but he's unfulfilled and lonely. As they talk on the phone they both seem to miss each other.

Exactly one year later … well, you get the picture. Part of the problem is that One Day tries so hard not to confuse the audience that it quickly becomes annoying. The actors are forced to recite a Cliff's Notes version of their lives in every scene, with all the big events (new jobs, relationships, divorces, etc.) explained by the characters every time the movie jumps ahead a year. If the filmmakers had kept the audience guessing about the relationship, the final product might have been engaging. Instead, One Day tells rather than shows, and fails miserably in the process.

Added to the structural problems, One Day lacks any sense that these characters are really changing year to year (other then a new hairstyle). It doesn't help matters that the relationship decisions Emma and Dexter make are dominated by every romantic comedy cliché imaginable. The film's attempts at comedy are pathetic, and range from ridiculous slapstick (a wrestling game Dexter plays with his in-laws), to the social-awkwardness of a struggling comedian Emma dates for a while. (These scenes go on forever.)

One Day is being sold as a romantic film for adults, and there's an unusually large amount of partial nudity for a PG-13 movie, yet I can't imagine anyone over 18 not rolling their eyes throughout. The film is an adaptation of a bestseller of the same name by David Nicholls (Starter for 10). The book is apparently well-loved (by adults), but the screenplay adaptation (by Nicholls himself) makes it seem like a British Nicholas Sparks imitation.

There's also the issue of a wildly miscast Anne Hathaway. It's not that she's bad, exactly, but she's so distinctly American that it's impossible to buy her as a Brit. Imagine Doris Day or Marilyn Monroe with a cockney accent and you'll get what I mean.

There's a little good: The costumes are '90s-tastic and the European locales are pretty. Director Lone Scherfig (An Education, Italian For Beginners) does a fine job in re-creating the era, and supporting player Patricia Clarkson has a few strong scenes as Dexter's mother. But the assembled talent is ultimately no match for a tepid and cheesy screenplay. —Anthony Nicholas