
30 Days Of Night is the newest among the high budget horror flicks coming out this year, and much like the previously released (and reviewed here) Halloween, is disappointing.
30 Days Of Night is directed by David Slade whose previous work includes Hard Candy. Hard Candy was a great indie psychological horror film that I think any horror buff should check out. Having seen this previous work and hearing that the original comic writer demanded Slade I figured it was a safe bet to assume this would be a great flick. I was wrong.
The film is about a small community in norther Alaska that experiences 30 days of night in their winter season. This is of course perfect for vampires and their natural aversion to sun. A great premise but poorly executed here.
We meet the town sheriff, the local hero, and his estranged wife. The two of them as well as a band of lucky non-eaten townspeople devise a plan to try and survive the 30 days.
The problem here is that first of all the vampires are silly. They squawk like birds and act like goofy goth kids in high school proudly showing their fangs and looking "creepy." This is not effective or entertaining, it just becomes laughable and finally irritating. The only vampire that is believable (and i can't believe I'm talking about a believable vampire) is the leader. He acts with much more subtly and restraint. Too bad the other guys didn't get the memo.
During these 30 days there is significant time lapses that are only shown by the growing of stubble and that's about it. No growing tensions between the characters, no crisis involving food supply or cabin fever. Nope apparently these guys are content to starve and sit in a cramped attic for more then a week in perpetual fear.
The other problem is that after about 20 days the vampires have not found them or a few other survivors that are hiding in even less convincing locations. So what were the vampires doing during that time? Just hanging out talking about being vampires? We have no idea why they didn't find some very obvious prey or what the hell they were doing. Beer pong maybe? I suppose the film makers wanted a restricted narrative so we would have sympathy for the characters that we were supposed to get to know and eventually care about rather then show some vampire interaction but i don't give a damn about the characters. Who are these vampires, where did they come from, how did they get there, the questions go on and on.
And for horror fans the biggest problem is that the film either A) was heavily edited by the MPAA or B) the director chose to not film totally perfect gore sequences that are obviously set up but never show within the film. In the end the film isn't really scary and is more of an action survival film. Being that i could have at least heaped on the gore. Instead we get a few near misses and a couple of pretty good gore scenes that don't make up for the fact that the film is unbelievable and poorly structured.
In the end the decision to have such a restrictive narrative hurt the film because lets face it, between a half hearted love story and crazy vampires, which is more interesting? The choice to this fan is obvious.
Gore - mild to medium
Nudity - none
Overall - 5/10