30 Days of Night on DVD (2007)

1 Day of Night

SLCpunk , 19/11/2007

Ok the vampires, violence and vision of this film were exellent, but there's not much else to it. My main problem is that it could've all happened in one night, the only thing that changed from day 1 to day 30 was Hartnett's beard. At its roots its a survival horror film in the vein of Dawn of the Dead, but 30 days just doesnt ramp up the isolation, starvation and fraying character relations that 'Dawn' does so well.

All the film does to distinguish between days is pop a subtitle on your screen. If they put scratches effects on the screen and badly dubbed dialogue this could be the secret 3rd Grindhouse film because it feels that large sections of the film are missing between these 'day 17', 'day 30' subtitles. I feel a little bad about complaining about this though cos the book that spawned it was about the width of a hair and jumped pretty much from day 1 to day 30 but...

It is a solid horror though with the vampires probably being the best ones ever seen in the movies. The story isnt exactly the same as the book with little things changing to pave the way for set pieces. The violence was very realistic with the censors obviously napping during this one to give it a 15 cert.

With a little bit more focus on the passing time, growing desperation etc this could have been one of THE GREATS! However its just one that grates a little.

Read all reviews

Above Average Gorefest

XXX from Wolverhampton [Highly rated reviewer] , 07/11/2007

British director David Slade's low-budget 'Hard Candy' was a favourite film of mine last year, and I was very keen to see how he'd handle this, his first big-budget, commercial project.

And he's followed up nicely, delivering a slick, well-made monster movie that's clearly a notch above most of the slasher rubbish that's polluted the multiplexes this year.

The action sequences are polished and fun. But just as importantly, there are decent performances from a strong cast. Josh Hartnett, who can often be flat and inexpressive, raises his game. And Melissa George, having featured in some serious turkeys lately, proves she's an engaging actress when given the chance.

As with the earlier movie, David Slade relies a lot on extreme close-ups, and it's a style that works well here.

That said, '30 Days' is by no means perfect. The story hardly breaks new ground. And while a certain demographic will delight in the explicit violence, the rest of us would have preferred a greater build-up of tension and suspense. 'Hard Candy', for example, played mind-games with the viewer, and was a better movie for leaving some things to the imagination.

Still, this is a solid effort, certainly worth the time.

Read all reviews

Better than average

Meako [Highly rated reviewer] , 29/10/2007

Adapted from the graphic novel of the same name, 30 Days of Night covers a month of darkness in a remote Alaskan town besieged by a vampire clan. Sadly the film, which had so much potential, feels more 2 dimensional than the pages of the comic that spawned it.

It is hard to put a finger on exactly what doesn't work well in the film. The cast are a mix of the great (Ben Foster) and the wooden (Josh Harnett). The vampires are a reasonably fresh look, all open mouths and jagged teeth (not to mention messed up eyes), but at the same time seem so stale (not helped by the leader of the clan looking like he just stepped out of a Pet Shop Boys video from the 80s). Perhaps the fact that the town is in the grip of night, and has no power - yetthe streets seem lit up better than day. Or maybe the mix of swift edits to switch away from the blood, then next scene showing the brutality in full. Overall it is just a film that can't quite decide what it wants to be.

The direction fails to create any tension, and it seems that the director was trying to capture the feel of films such as The Thing, but failed.

30 Days isn't a bad film - it is decent enough way to waste a couple of hours. it just doesn't hold a candle in the dark to the comic that inspired it. Shame really.

Read all reviews

Dissapointing

eviljimmyd from Shipley [Highly rated reviewer] , 19/11/2007

I fell asleep, and I don't do that very often in the cinema.

I thought the film started well but then the pace really slowed down to a standstill and It felt like I had been in the cimema for 30 days by the end of the film.

The vampires are a bit rubbish. They were more like zombies than vampires. Modern vampire films have often put a slightly different slant of the traditional vampire - I think this film could have benefitted from a twist on the traditional vampire stereotype. They looked like goths on drugs.

Read all reviews

boss

plumbs from Liverpool , 17/07/2008

keep it basic.... when you watch this give the film time, and trust me it gets really good.

best vampire film seen in ages

Read all highest rated reviews

Expecting more

King1and from South Gloucestershire [Highly rated reviewer] , 19/07/2008

Based on a graphic novel which I'm sure is a good 50% better then this film.

Josh Harnett and Melissa George as the leads do ok, going through the motions with their eyes shut.

Heard a lot of good things about this and wanted to see it because of word of mouth but could have waited until it came on TV.

Would have like to have known where the Vamps came from just to add to the story a bit more but I'm sure that will come in the sequel, (which I'm sure is being thought about).

It's ok, if you want to see a film in the ice and snow that will scare the pants of you, watch, 'The Thing' remake by John Carpenter. Kurt Russell looks cold and scared as you will be when watching.

Read all highest rated reviews