30 Days of Night

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. (13/08/2008)

"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. (25/06/2014)

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% (02/09/2012)

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. (07/11/2007)

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... (01/11/2007)