30 Days of Night

The esteemed British gentleman of the theater Danny Huston in the role of a vampire leader in a classically written horror movie? Sam Raimi is a strong and resourceful producer. From the introductory shots, it is clear that this is not a B-movie. David Slade can shake hands with Zack Snyder. He is a master of spookiness and proves that even something as hackneyed as vampires can serve as material for an impressive horror movie. Too bad the film delivers some time-worn genre scenes, which we recently enjoyed – after a very long time – in Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead (the turned girl and the identical scene with having to kill an infected buddy). It’s also a pity that the vampires from the main group didn’t get more space as individuals (as Guillermo del Toro would have given them). Otherwise, it’s amazing. (11/26/2007)

I liked Hard Candy, but 30 Days of Night almost took my breath away. Why almost? Because the ending was not very believable and the last scene doesn’t fit the film at all. But I have no complaints about the first half: perfect atmosphere, terrifying vampires, effective jump-scares, sharp axe… One of the best horror films of the year and a well deserved 85%. (12/24/2007)

By coincidence, I read the original comic book today (I came across it unexpectedly in the bookshelf yesterday) and I must say that the movie is even better. An excellent atmosphere. I already knew that Slade was talented, based on his Hard Candy and 30 Days of Night just goes to prove it. The plot is simple, clever and reminds me of old, straight forward horrors that are all about survival. Hartnett rocks. Like, really. When I think back to when I was younger, I didn’t use like that kid. I can’t believe that now. Oh, and that sunset… (02/07/2008)

David Slade high-fives Sam Raimi, takes a compelling comic book premise, makes us forget about his tragic first film, and serves up arguably the most impressive "A" horror hit of the season. After the ridiculous attempts over the last few years, when vampires were put into latex, etc., predators finally appear on the screen, finally giving us sheer terror. The work with the initial tension and the subsequent massacre is a perfect example of how to effectively build up not only the scene but the film as a whole. The two-hour runtime perhaps deserved more careful script treatment (the occasional lapse in logic or plot deafness), but the unpleasant chills make up for it. Josh Hartnett has finally become a man, the citizens of the backwoods throw out a sharp catchphrase here and there, and the ride with the milling machine is now part of the golden fund. And although horror history won't be radically rewritten via this film, a good few lines of it are sure to be memorable. If only for the fact that most of the people sitting in the movie theater only started eating their popcorn as they were leaving. (11/07/2007)

An incredibly effective and bloody carnage, but narratively meaningless and rather empty. We actually don't find out anything substantial. Where the vampires came from, how they survive, where they hide, who was their envoy, how did he suddenly appear out of nowhere just a stone's throw away from the town, which had no living soul within 100 kilometers, and many other questions that are hard to find an answer to (and definitely not between the lines). The monsters are mindless roaring freaks, only scary thanks to the good timing of scenes and captivating snowy atmosphere. But we should appreciate the R-rating, the brutal Hartnett, and the quite solid pace. Otherwise, it's primarily a showcase of bloody effects and severed limbs. (08/13/2008)