30 Days of Night

Isolated in the cold, dark northernmost city of Barrow, Alaska for 30 days during the winter, a group of 150 people prepare for the annual attack of the elements, but they never anticipate being attacked by vampires. The premise arouses more than one nostalgic thought of John Carpenter's brilliant 1982 remake of The Thing. Based on a graphic novel, this valiant attempt at a modern classic is directed by David Slade, a music video veteran whose only other feature length film was Hard Candy (which was actually very entertaining).

On the last day before the annual 30 day winter of darkness, a stranger comes upon this small Alaska town and strange things begin happening; Sled dogs are slaughtered, cell phones are stolen and burned, and the town's only helicopter is destroyed. Hmm, kind of seems like someone wants to cut off the means of escape and communication. Fortunately many of the townfolk have made their way south for the duration, so the population drops dramatically, but once the last plane leaves, the rest of the townies are stranded. Where the film admittedly succeeds is in the pacing. There is not a lot of time wasted getting to know characters who are obviously going to meet their end in a nasty if not highly entertaining way. The events begin unfolding, and carnage ensues.

This is when the pacing dies and the story becomes absurd. Most of the town is wiped out by the intelligent, strong and bloodthirsty vampires, and a small group bands together and finds a hiding place. All of a sudden, it is 17 days later. The problem with this scenario is that it is a very small town of a few dozen homes and shops. There are dozens of vampires ravaging the town, and with their super sense of smell, wouldn't they search for and find the hiding individuals? Or would they just move on to another town in the middle of nowhere? Apologies for ruining an otherwise entertaining horror flick. These vampires hang around for 30 days feeding on stragglers, and the stragglers continue to make bad decisions that lead to mostly disappointing and uninteresting deaths.

I've got to give Slade proper credit, he tried his best. But vampire flicks are a tough one. You can't make it too cheesy, and you can't take it too seriously. There are the typical rules to follow, and Slade did fine by that. He even succeeded in creating some pretty grizzly visual effects including decapitations, various dismemberments, burning, and the staple of what I believe to be a good fright flick - possessed children. The whole concept of a horror flick is to scare the viewer, and the characters make obviously bad decisions that lead to their debatable deserved fates. However, I have a hard time stepping out of the objective "what would I do" role and accepting that these people are simply fodder for my entertainment. Knowing that without that entertainment, it would simply be a boring film is what makes it so diametrically opposed to conventional wisdom. Stepping outside of that conventional wisdom, this film was mediocre.

One thing that was never addressed was the looming questions where did they come from, how do they survive, and where will they go when the feasting is over? Although the answers may detract from vision of the graphic novel and subsequently the film, they remain nonetheless. I appreciated the strength of the ending, although the ambiguity was a bit unsettling. This genre is becoming more and more difficult to create quality works, and I have to give kudos for the effort. It was however, a less than satisfying film. 5/10.