30 Days of Night

In its ever-present advertising over the past few weeks, 30 DAYS OF NIGHT promised a terrifying new vision of the vampire. But what detracts from the norm is not always new, nor is a vampire always terrifying. Both appear to be the case in this film, which does make an attempt to depart from films similar to it. Unfortunately, the most intriguing (perhaps terrifying) aspects of the story are left unexplored, leaving the audience with nothing but a few mildly effective jump scares sandwiched between long chunks of uninteresting character and plot development.

The action is set in the northernmost point of the United States: a small, isolated town in Alaska that is plunged into 30 days of night every year, due to the angle and rotation of the Earth. The last day of sunlight proves an unusual one for the town’s sheriff (Josh Hartnett); a pile of cell phones has been gathered and burned on the edge of town, a resident’s dogs have been ruthlessly slaughtered, and a mysterious and unsettling stranger (Ben Foster) appears in town, telling of a great evil that is to come. When the night finally falls on the town, the evil unleashes itself. A group of violent, unforgiving and gruesome vampires descend on the town, attacking anyone and everyone in sight. The town is slowly whittled down to a small group of survivors, including the sheriff’s estranged wife (Melissa George), who must fight to survive until the sun rises.

These vampires are indeed different from the usual breed; there are no flowing capes, no intense vampiric stares. These creatures are more animalistic predators than anything else. However, the film uses these animal-like behaviors as the main crutch of its suspense sequences, making nearly every potential scare a jump scare that is completely expected. Only in the typical and clichéd finale does the film try a different kind of suspense, but the viewer has long since lost interest. Instead, most of the action is devoted to the small group of survivors moving from hiding place to hiding place, asking “how can this happen?” and “why are they doing this?” while keeping each other from running away. Of course, this kind of talk is obligatory in a horror film, but there’s simply too much of it here.

There are a few strengths, however. The film is ably acted by its leads, with Hartnett, George and Danny Huston (unrecognizable as the head vampire) delivering solid performances with precious little to work with. However, Ben Foster as the comic relief (or so I assume, since his performance elicited so much laughter from the audience) gives the exact same performance he gave earlier this year in 3:10 TO YUMA. Pretty much the same accent as well, curiously enough. Director David Slade (2005’s HARD CANDY) imbues the film with a sophisticated visual style, much more defined than the average horror film. If only the film’s level of terror matched the director’s eye, we would have a film worthy of its story. As it is, the five minute sequences of quick cuts and gore aren’t nearly thrilling or shocking enough to balance out the ten minutes of banal exposition surrounding them. It takes an interesting premise and only begins to scratch the surface of its possibilities. Still, it’s October, so it will doubtless provide a momentary diversion for thrill seekers. And by the looks of it, that’s all the filmmakers were really aiming for.

*