30 Days of Night
30 Days of Night
Directed by:
David SladeCinematography:
Jo WillemsComposer:
Brian ReitzellCast:
Josh Hartnett, Melissa George, Danny Huston, Ben Foster, Mark Boone Junior, Mark Rendall, Amber Sainsbury, Manu Bennett, Joel Tobeck, Elizabeth Hawthorne (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
In a small Alaskan town, thirty days of night is a natural phenomenon. Very few outsiders visit, until a band of bloodthirsty, deathly pale vampires mark their arrival by savagely attacking sled dogs. But soon they find there are much more satisfying thirst-quenchers about: human beings. One by one, the townspeople succumb to a living nightmare, but a small group survives - at least for now. The vampires use the dark to their advantage, and surviving this cold hell is a game of cat and mouse - and screams. (Columbia Pictures US)
(more)Reviews (11)
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.
()
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%.
()
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.
()
It was the tenth of January, just about the time most folks are learning to live comfortably with all the New Year's resolutions they broke, and there was one hell of a northeaster blowing outside. Six inches had come down before dark and it had been going hard and heavy since then... Thus begins King's phenomenal vampire story One for the Road. And why am I quoting it? Because it fully captures the atmosphere that abounds in Thirty Days of Night. In the first few shots. Slade made it quite raw and atmospheric. Moreover, the Saw-like cheapness in terms of the violence depicted is simple and all the more impressive because of it. It looks good and the whole introduction until the city is taken over (the bird's eye view scenes - you will understand when you see it) is absolutely perfect. But after that, the creators are no longer able to resist the shortcomings that stem from the mediocre comic book source, which managed to attract attention perhaps only because of its unconventional imagery. These are mainly plot faux-pas: excessive abbreviation, inconsistency of fragmented narration, and utter ignorance of the psychological impact of the situation on individual characters. The closer the movie draws to the end, the lower down the ladder the quality becomes. The only thing keeping it within the bounds of a decent film, are Josh Harnett and Slade's efforts to embellish it with some juicy scenes here and there. Overall, it is undoubtedly a solid achievement, which benefits quite a bit from the fact that we haven’t seen anything this in a long time. As much as Thirty looks alright, and is enjoyable in its own way, it cannot escape the stigma of simplicity and the dull mediocrity of the comic book despite all its efforts...
()
Winter and snow favor the freezing atmosphere, a severed city at the literal end of the world offers some surprises, but when it comes to the creatures of the night, the percentage of interest begins to dangerously decrease. Vampires are not vampires, but a pack of hungry zombies, clichés with suddenly agitated survivors get on your nerves and even uncompromising bloodthirstiness eventually becomes almost annoying. The weak third star is saved for the town of Barrow by a likable central duo and a surprisingly stylish ending. 50%
()
The comic book of the same name became a literary event of the year in its genre, not thanks to its average script that relies on a single clever idea, but thanks to the blurred original artwork of Ben Templesmith, which elevated the work to art. His graphic style is economical, and surrealistic, relying on readers' imagination and focusing on striking, unpleasant details that evoke a sense of hopelessness and cruelty. I have the comic book at home, and it is one of my favorites. I was curious about how its film adaptation would turn out, especially since the book can be read almost like a film script and has great film potential. Thus, my disappointment was even greater when I saw the result. True, a certain visual resemblance can be traced between the film vampires and the ones from the comics, as well as the original idea and basic story being adopted. However, while the comic monsters exude sinister majesty and demonic characteristics, the film ones resemble sick creatures infected with Ebola and rabies at the same time. The villains from the comic can be brutal murderers in one second, only to transform into polished companions in the next moment, who perversely play with their next victim with an elegant smile on their faces. The film versions emit only inhuman screams and evoke pity. Increasing tension, fear of the unknown, and isolation emanate from each comic panel, later followed by the brutality of a brutal massacre and the hopelessness of the survivors. Comics can advance the plot and evoke a lot of emotions with just one full-page image of a snowstorm - it is impossible not to think of the long shots of a snowy landscape in Carpenter's cult classic The Thing, which, along with a simple musical motif, managed to create unpleasant tension. The film lacks what made the comic famous - atmosphere. Atmosphere is is what is originality in a film, as well as accurate work with sound, cleverly shot scenes, and visually impressive camera shots. Because David Slade lacks aesthetic sensitivity and especially a sense of composition, he tries to create an impression only with techniques typical of music videos - that is, masks, fast cuts, and frantic camera movements. This may be enough for those who grew up with music videos and video games, but probably not for connoisseurs familiar with the film classics. I don't mind that Slade's film lacks artistic depth. That happens very rarely, and most viewers don't expect it or need it to be satisfied. What bothers me is that 30 Days of Night has stupid, unimpressive filmmaking that can satisfy only fans of B-movie horror and splatterpunk in this form. I saw the film only on a poor pirate copy (thank God, because I would have regretted spending money on such a thing in the movie theater for a long time), but even so, it was clear that not a single interesting and memorable scene appeared in it. I don't need to turn to film legends, for example, in the unambitious and purely television "Kingesque" film The Night Flier, I can recall five of them... In this context, the film Alien is worth mentioning. Before it, dozens, if not hundreds, of bad films about bloodthirsty creatures from space were made, which damaged the genre and majorly discredited this prop. Then one clever director came along, along with one original artist, and they proved that there are no "noble" and "debased" genres, only good and bad movies. Alien became a film event, but I highly doubt that 30 Days of Night can claim the same. Overall impression: 35%.
()
(less)
(more)
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…
()
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.
()
I've always been terribly sceptical of vampire horror movies, and I can't recall a single one that has captivated me in any significant way. 30 Days of Night is the exception that proves the rule. What I mean by this is that if a good director and producer come together, concoct a spectacular and imaginative story, and surround everything with the tried and tested setting of a peaceful Nordic town, even an almost empty genre barrel can yield a great load of modern horror action. The film is not without a few unavoidable clichés and some scenes feel like a reunion with an old friend with a penchant for brutal violence, but otherwise David Slade has handled the premise really masterfully and this is definitely not a routine B-movie. Most of the credit, however, goes to the hideously looking vampires, who are truly frightening and probably one of the most successful horror villains since Snyder's Dawn of the Dead. The great romantic ending just underscores everything... 80%
()
"30 Days of Night" is a film that captivated me with its intimate atmosphere, a relatively simple yet powerfully developed story, and scenes that have engraved themselves in my memory. It doesn't matter how many times you see a similarly terrifying little girl, it always gets to you. At least that's how it works for me. Within the realm of action horror movies, this film consistently stands out as exceptional, thanks in part to its genuine ability to be considered a horror film.
()
Fabulous. Making a solid horror movie where the negative characters aren't mostly laughable doesn't happen very often these days. In producer Sam Raimi and director David Slade's film, not only are the negative characters (vampires) not laughable, but what's more, they're incredibly charismatic and believable. I absolutely loved Slade's approach – working with the environment, using every possible space (even on a psychological level), and "evening out" the two groups in terms of their involvement in the story. I can't say that I was rooting for the murderous group, but David Slade managed to make them very interesting and charismatic characters (which is highly admirable given the minimal dialogue in the strange language). 30 Days of Night is a modernly conceived horror film that manages to live up to its potential.
()