30 Days of Night (2007)

30 DAYS OF NIGHT

-Note to the reader: minor spoilers included

Introduction

Horror films are usually a disappointment. If I had to choose a horror film to watch, I’d probably take the vampire sub-genre (due to historical interests). However, vampire films are often problematic, and along with the horror genre, they seem to be getting worse. Also, there are a few thousand vampire films to sort through, and only a couple dozen actually worth viewing.

Problematic? Indeed.

Its history began in the 1920’s with F.W. Murnau’s classic Nosferatu (1922), quickly followed by films such as Drakula (or Dracula’s Death, now a lost 1923 Hungarian film), and London After Midnight (also a lost 1927 film, starring Lon Chaney, Sr.). The genre’s place in cinema was immortalized in 1931 with the release of Tod Browning’s masterpiece, Dracula—teaching the cinematic world how a vampire should look, talk, and act.

The 1930’s and 1940’s continued the genre with such films as Mark of the Vampire (a 1935 remake of the lost film London After Midnight), Dracula’s Daughter (a 1936 sequel to Browning’s Dracula), and Son of Dracula (a 1943 film starring Lon Chaney, Jr.). Vampires also met monsters and werewolves with a variety of team-up films (House of Frankenstein- 1944, House of Dracula- 1945, Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein- 1945).

During the 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s, Hammer Film Productions took advantage of the rise of colorized motion pictures. By fusing together color, blood, and ridiculous amounts of cleavage, Hammer Films released a slew of films to new, eager audiences—Christopher Lee’s Dracula saga (spanning from 1958-1974), The Brides of Dracula (1960), The Kiss of the Vampire (1964), Countess Dracula (1970), and Twins of Evil (1971).

The 1970’s also saw several vampire films and television shows produced. Dracula (a 1973 made for TV film, starring Jack Palance), Count Dracula (the highly underrated 1977 BBC production, starring Louis Jourdan), Nosferatu the Vampire (the effective 1979 remake of Nosferatu, starring Klaus Kinski), Dracula (the 1979 adaption of the stage play of Hamilton Dean and John L. Balderston, starring Frank Langella), Love At First Bite (the 1979 satire starring George Hamilton), and ‘Salem’s Lot (the 1979 TV miniseries) let loose a virtual overdose of vampiric motion pictures for fans.

Fast forwarding to the present day, we’ve seen spoofs and comedies (The Monster Squad-1987, Innocent Blood- 1992, Dracula: Dead and Loving It- 1995), quality films (Bram Stoker’s Dracula- 1992), underrated films (Dracula 2000- 2000), cult classics (The Lost Boys- 1987), total pieces of garbage force-fed by horrible directors (Van Helsing- 2004), and some of the worst films in the history of time (Dracula 3000- 2004).

The point of this somewhat exhaustive history?

Vampire films have been done to death (pun both intended and unintended) in the 85 year run. Vampires have been toys, in books (Anne Rice’s vampire series), comics (Morbius: The Living Vampire, Tomb of Dracula), infused in music, on the silver screen, in television programming (Forever Knight, Buffy: The Vampire Slayer), and even animated (Hellsing). If you’re a horror fan, you’ve probably seen at least a dozen different versions. So it begs to ask: why make another vampire film? Haven’t we seen enough?

Yet the influence is still strong. If not, why the gothic subculture? Why continue to make such movies? Vampires are imitated, even worshipped. Thousands still hunger for the immortal bloodsuckers and all forms of their artificial production. Much like an Alzheimer’s patient, we shell out the dollars, grab our tickets, and run our grubby paws on a visage of immortality… all while knowing full well exactly what we are getting ourselves into. Fast forward to: October 2007. David Slade (Hard Candy) takes upon the difficult task of reviving the genre by way of the popular Steve Niles graphic novel (2002).

The set-up is seemingly fail-safe. Portions of Alaska go dark for a month. Enter the sharks, living solely by darkness. The trick is for the townspeople of Barrow, Alaska to survive… survive the cold, survive the oncoming plague of destruction, and survive the lack of supplies and contact with the outside world. The thought of it is rather disturbing.

Four questions need to be asked before addressing the review and contemplating the decision to spend out your hard-earned dollars.

1. This movie stars Josh Hartnett, who isn’t exactly Christian Bale or Liam Neeson. Can he portray a believable lead (or at least, a somewhat effective one)?

2. 30 Days of Night is another comic-to-film attempt. Comic films generally come in three forms—1. Batman Begins and V For Vendetta (excellent), 2. Spider-Man 3 and Superman Returns (good, but sloppy), and 3. The Hulk and Catwoman (downright shitty and insulting). Which one is it?

3. There have been more vampire movies more than bad politicians and greedy preachers. Is there anything new that Slade brings that we haven’t seen?

4. Should audiences see this movie? And if so, why?

The Review

Direction: David Slade has two very beneficial things going for him in this film—atmosphere and mood. The frame is lovingly set, and a paradoxical sense of claustrophobia in the Alaskan setting is delightful. The film is well thought out, though minor flaws may irk some critics. I have some problems with the dialogue, but that’s for later. Slade does a good, but not great job. Slade does justify himself from the performances he gets from his lead actors. Score: 7.5.

Production: Sam Raimi had his hand in this project as well. Fortunately, no actors were glaring directly into the camera (see my review for Spider-Man 3). The budget was good, and the sets enhanced the mood. Also note the subtle influence by the works of Lord Byron and Mary Shelley. Score: 9.

Cinematography: From the opening frame, the screen caught my attention. If ever carnage and devastation were beautiful, this film would be it. The darkened reds, grays, and blacks make this chunk of eye candy even the more spectacular. Well done, and I could find no error. Score: 10.

Editing: The editing of 30 Days of Night comes in three portions—the beginning (boring), the middle (outrageous), and the end (heart stopping). It’s almost as if the production switched editors after Plot Point 1 (twenty minutes past the opening titles). Bonus points for the tightly cut, well-woven scenes of violence. Score: 8.

Costuming/Art Direction: The townspeople and the lead actors are well dressed. The sharks are a bit cliché, using black and white—an off-beat influence from Gerard Butler in Dracula 2000. This may be personal preference. The art, however, is out of this world. Score: 7.5.

Script/Story: The story is very good. 30 Days of Night has a predictable beginning, an efficient and truly disturbing middle, and a bit of a surprising end. For a vampire film, the story is excellent. However, I’ve got some problems with the dialogue. Minor spoiler here: The sharks speak in another self-created language, something along the lines of the Dracs in Enemy Mine. Enter subtitles, which I didn’t feel gelled with the rest of the smooth story. Score: 7.

Special Effects: The special effects are surprisingly low for such a venture, much to my delight. The CGI is kept to a minimum, while the created blood was plentifully spilled. Vampires running amuck with editing tricks also made me quite happy. Score: 9.

Score/ Soundtrack: Effective or terrible, vampire films usually benefit from a good music (Wojciech Kilar in Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Marco Beltrami for Dracula 2000, etc.). There is a significant change, in that the music does not drive the film (such as in Dracula- 1979). Instead, the effective use of silence compensates of the lack of musical score. Me being a fan of great scores, I could have used a bit more of a sensationalized score. But, it works. Score: 8.5.

Primary Cast: Josh Hartnett does a very good job, much to my utter surprise. Slade seems to have done good work here. Furthermore, while the dialogue is disappointing with some of the supporting cast, it fits Hartnett to the core. Melissa George is a pleasure to watch (and no, she didn’t show her boobs… she’d FREEZE). Score: 9.5.

Supporting Cast: Ben Foster and Marc Boone, Jr., fresh from their respective comic book roles (X-Men: The Last Stand and Batman Begins), step out and make for extremely effective performers in the midst of Slade’s vision. Some truly touching moments happen amongst the supporting cast, even through some of the silly dialogue.

The Vampires: You may have noticed that I call the vampires “sharks.” This is intentional, as the nosferatu draw very much from the behavior and actions of the oceanic predators. As sharks rule the seas, the vampires rule Barrow, Alaska. They are cunning, merciless, and deadly efficient killers. As such, I have a rather high standard for whom may run these beasts. Unfortunately, Danny Huston is a bit miscast as Marlow, the leader of the pack. Huston didn’t intimidate me in the least, and some of his associates fall into the same vein. Their numbers were what impressed me, but I expected a lot more from individual performance. Score: 6.

Conclusion

1. This movie stars Josh Hartnett, who isn’t exactly Christian Bale or Liam Neeson. Can he portray a believable lead (or at least, a somewhat effective one)? YES. This is Hartnett’s best role, and he is a perfect fit for the director, his film, and the story. 2. 30 Days of Night is another comic-to-film attempt. Comic films generally come in three forms—1. Batman Begins and V For Vendetta (excellent), 2. Spider-Man 3 and Superman Returns (good, but sloppy), and 3. The Hulk and Catwoman (downright shitty and insulting). Which one is it? Somewhere in the middle of 1 and 2. It is a good movie, but a much tighter film than those in the “sloppy” category. Dialogue problems and lack of individual presence from the vampires keep this film from being excellent. 3. There have been more vampire movies more than bad politicians and greedy preachers. Is there anything new that Slade brings that we haven’t seen? Slade does not portray his monsters are romantic beings, but raptors… sharks… beasts. The atmosphere… the need of the townspeople to survive works extremely well. By staying in Barrow, Alaska, these townspeople have signed their own executions. 4. Should audiences see this movie? And if so, why? Yes. See this film for the filthy atmosphere, some genuinely disturbing moments, and Josh Hartnett’s emergence as an actual actor.

This is perhaps the most atmospheric film of 2007, topping even Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. 30 Days of Night should not be viewed as a vampire film. This is a film about survival, in all its forms and guises, and a gut-wrenching reality check for those amongst the month-long winter.

Enjoy.

Total Points: 82, Final Score: 8, Grade: B