30 Days of Night

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... (11/01/2007)

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)

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% (09/02/2012)

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)

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)