30 Days of Night

This is not a movie without its problems. AS far as suspension of disbelief goes, the movie takes some real liberties with the town of Barrow, Alaska, which in reality is both larger, and not nearly so isolated during the long dark period it endures every year. The movie is not without its cliches, and the pacing is uneven, but one thing about this movie makes up for a lot of that, and that is this film's portrayal of vampires.

Ever since Polidori's novel "The Vampyre" was published in 1819, there has been a trend to represent vampires as suave, sophisticated, aristocratic creatures. Bram Stoker's "Dracula" with its sexual undertones, reinforced this trend and also helped add an element of seductiveness to the monster. Since the vampire came to the silver screen, this trend has only gathered force (and Anne Rice really took this concept and ran with it), until now the typical movie vampire is a charismatic, refined, immortal metrosexual. Somewhere along the way, its as if everyone forgot the vampire was originally supposed to be a MONSTER.

In their folkloric origins, there was nothing refined or seductive about vampires. They were soulless, animated corpses, often described as bloated or ruddy in appearance, with fetid breath and a corpselike stench. They didn't move freely among humans, but preyed on them from outside human society. This movie's vampires represent a partial return to that concept of the vampire, and whether or not that appeals to you, it marks a refreshing change from what has become a rather tedious norm. Instead of a bunch of effete dandies, who occasionally bare their fangs to bite the humans with whom they freely mingle, this movie's vampires are ravenous, blood-hungry predators, whose mouthful of shark-like teeth never disappear, and whose long, talon-like fingernails never magically retract to leave normal looking human hands. These are creatures who must exist on the fringe of human society, never getting too close, as they can't blend in, nor would they have any wish to. They are thoroughly malevolent, and utterly sadistic fiends, and as such, are something movie vampires haven't been in a long time (at least not to me) -- scary.

Lately I've been watching the new series on HBO about Vampires that's titled "True Blood." Those Vampires have been welcomed as members of society since they can survive on an artificial blood formula. Those Vampires can get a little nasty, but in general they're not bad people, for being the walking dead.

The vampires in this movie really come across as the monsters that they are. And even though the movie isn't as scary as your general slasher genre it does make the vampires seem like pure evil with no sense of humanity present at all. In fact these vampires are every bit as creepy as the one in the silent movies years ago. Not only did they seem pure evil, but their teeth were more like shark teeth instead of a couple little fangs.....Very creepy.

I wouldn't let a younger kid see it because I think it would cause a lot of terrible dreams and sleepless nights if you're the parent. But for adults....It's a pretty good freak show...

30 Days of night is what Vampires should be. Not Since John Carpenters Vampires, has the world seen a non sexual side of a truly predatorial beast. Vampires may be romantic to some but essentially there are presonalities and clans such as this film. The vampires here are murderous pigs loose in a 30 day buffet.... I enjoyed every minute of it... until....

the pointless flawed ending. Seriosly folks, they believe we dont' notice this type of mistake in a film and shamlessly release it. What could have been the best vampire film in years. If not for the pointless ending and the impulsive decision of the characters to pointlessly end things they way they did, the film would be better. Reality, no one is perfect but film... film is an art and should be done as well as it could be. and this was grate until the trashy ending. I can't bring myself to watch it again for that reason

Even the euro language they used in the film... Perfection! Why oh why did the director have to choose such a poor ending. I felt the same way about the mist.

First off, I have never read of the comic book series 30 Days Of Night so none of that will be in my review. As for the film, it wasn't half bad, maybe a little far fetched but not that bad. 30 Days of Night takes place in Barrow Alaska where every year they have 30 straight days of night. Really when you think about it, this is an ideal town for a gory vampire horror film seeing as they could basically feast all day and night without the sun interrupting them. I was very interested to see this after hearing that mega factor. The smart residents usually leave around this time to head south.

As the town is settling in for this, a weird stranger comes walking in the town(Ben Foster). His identity is never revealed but he definitely knows exactly what is coming towards the town. He is under the belief that the vampires will make him one of them if he helps sabotage the town before they arrive themselves. The stranger does not hold his tongue when trying to scare the town and they down hesitate to put him away for the night. Sheriff Eben Oleson (Josh Hartnett) takes the stranger to a cell but while there the stranger keeps on talking.

Finally the evil and incredibly odd looking creatures appear massacreing the towns people and they aren't slowing up. Oleson and others band together trying to plan their way out of this gruesome situation but by the looks of it they will not make it past the first night. With extremely cold temperatures it looks very grim especially when the vampires worst enemy is hibernating for the next 30 days.

The best aspect of 30 Days of Night had to be these weird and different vampires. The creators definitely tried to go for something new here. Not the best or scariest vampires but they tried. The story itself was nice, adding the cold and weird Alaskan weather helps add some suspense. The settings and scenarios were great but the acting was so so. I think I mainly take a star from "30 Days of Night" is because I really wanted Ben Foster to be the main villain of the film. His character really had no significance at all and if you ask me that is a waste of talent. Really, that is a waste of a guy who can play a great nutcase ("Hostage" and "3:10 to Yuma") just to name a couple. The best actor in the film has almost nothing to work do and it shows that he was needed. The film was pretty good, heavy horror fans wont be too affected but some of the lightweights may be rocked.

Overall I liked this movie. Although it had a lot of potential, the one thing I think that could've been done better was the behavior of the vampires. At times it was a little cheesy. Definately worth watching, but maybe not twice.