30 Days of Night

David Slade's
adaptation of Steve Niles and Ben Templesmith's
cult series of horror comics is a curiosity, a
film that is certainly uneven, but also a film
that swings from cliché-riddled fare to
moderately enjoyable shtick. The opening shots,
which convey the epic setting of Alaska in the
most alluring fashion, instantly remind one of
John Carpenter's fantastic remake of
The Thing,
and provide the hope that Slade can make the
most of the snow-kissed environment, just as
Carpenter did twenty-five years ago.
It's simply unfortunate that the film is so
fickle by its own nature - the protagonist, Eben
Oleson (Harnett), is the morally unambiguous
Sherriff of the Alaskan town in question, a man
far too certain of his own prissy ideals to
invite any interest whatsoever. It's not as
though one is asking for an anti-hero character
either, as that would be just as unsatisfying,
but Harnett's character (as well as most of the
other characters) lacks depth, and we never
really get to know (and therefore empathise
with) him. If the "goody-two-shoes" ploy wasn't
repugnant enough, Harnett's rather alienating,
uninspired acting only reflects how wooden his
character is.
As a band of vampires descend upon the quaint
town, 30 Days of Night
becomes a tiresome
exponent of horror film stock elements - the
fake-out scares, the red herrings, the strained
love story - it's all there in great, despicable
abundance. To further ridicule the viewer, the
trite love story is interspersed amongst the
painfully-slow moving plot. Even as the first
human is slaughtered by the vamps, viewers, and
moreover, gore-hounds, are cheated out of any
excitement through hackneyed editing and
antagonists shrouded in darkness. Hell, Slade
even threw the "let's have the enemy pace past
the foreground whilst our protagonist, in the
background, fails to notice" technique in there.
It isn't long before Ben Foster (simply credited
as "the stranger") appears on the scene, and is,
in a wildly preposterous scene, promptly
arrested for attempting to order some fish, of
all things. Regardless of how much Foster
impressed in 3:10 to Yuma, he, and the lines
he's given, are guffaw-inducing, and he even
spouts a classic crazy-loon bad omen for good,
cheesy measure.
Things eventually do get moving, and what Slade
captures best perhaps is the sense of community
among the residents of the town, although hasn't
the time to dwell on it before the beasts begin
slaughtering the town, again, rather
frustratingly disguised by deceptive lighting
and cinematography. That said, the score is
appropriately loud and brash, and certainly adds
to the erratic and frenetic atmosphere of the
action scenes. As negative as this review
appears, the film is full of subtle touches such
as this, including deciding to have the vampires
speak in their native tongue, subtitling their
verbiage - it's something different, and it
works.
Scenes of rancid dialogue and cutaway deaths
fill a large portion of the middle of the film,
accompanied by a largely disinteresting survival
story that, when it's not tiresome, borders on
ludicrous, such as our protagonist's encounter
with an infected child. Furthermore, the film
seems to take large leaps in its chronology, and
before we know it, it's the eighteenth day of
the thirty-day blackout, when I hadn't a clue
that they'd moved past the third. Ah, yes, the
most logical explanation is that this is a
Grindhouse
film and it's that dreaded missing
reel gimmick again...No? Shucks.
One must return to Harnett's character - the man
is a walking cliché - for instance, as another
character seeks to take on the vampires in a
last stand, Harnett prohibits him, insisting
that he do it instead. Throw in a sacrificial
death and one of the surviving members becoming
infected and you've got what's nothing more than
a bog-standard monster flick.
Only in the final third of the film does
anything really hit home - the action pieces
become more elaborate, and the violence more
graphic. In fact, I felt genuine surprise and
disgust as one poor individual had his neck
dented in by an axe, with Slade down-right
refusing to cut away.
As both sides prepare for their last stands amid
a fire-fuelled finale, our heroes comes to the
chilling realisation of the gravity of their
situation, and both this, as well as the epic
imagery of the fire and snow, is a nice hark
back to Carpenter's aforementioned film.
Naturally, the finesse of that film isn't
present here, but it's not a bad attempt.
The real kicker for 30 Days of Night comes with
its ending - in one sense, it's completely
ridiculous, and will invite collective sighs
among many cinemagoers. The subsequent payoff,
however, is a smart, counter-Hollywood move
that, as someone who hasn't read the comics,
genuinely surprised and entertained me, and
raised my opinion of the picture by a
considerable amount.
30 Days of Night is a deeply flawed, unoriginal
film, but manages to rectify a sizable portion
of its foibles in the final third of the film.
At first, the antagonists are cheaply cloaked
from our view, their vicious attacks shown only
in brief, yet as the film progresses, Slade
ratchets both the action and graphic violence
up, and despite the disinteresting and
two-dimensional characters, delivers some
surprises along the way. Slade's film does
little to shake up the horror genre, but is
purportedly faithful to the comics, and that
should be enough for fans of both the source
material and the genre in general.
** 1/2 (out of five)
