30 Days of Night

I'll admit this upfront: I never really liked the comic. It was beautifully drawn, but the story was disorganized. The art, though pretty, actually did more to muddle the story than to clarify it. But apparently it was hugely popular, and has spawned many sequels (most superior to the original). And as these things go, what becomes popular in the comic world inevitably becomes a movie.

The movie, like the comic, is pretty. Damn pretty. In fact, I'll say that it contains what I believe to be the best overhead-tracking shot in film history (you'll know the one when you see it). It is also blisteringly intense. Things happen fast, and by the end of the film's 111 minutes, it has become an outright exhausting experience. And it's a good thing, because if the film moved any slower, I might start realizing that I don't give a shit about any of the characters. And why should I? It's not like the movie took any time to develop them into a person worth caring for.

As a lifelong fan of horror films, I've had to accept certain truths about my preferred genre. All things being equal, characterization and story will always take a backseat to gore and special effects. I expect this whenever I lay down money for a horror film. When a movie fails to give me decent characters, I am disappointed, but never surprised. The best I can hope for is that the director is competent and the gore is plentiful. By this measure, "30 Days of Night" is a rousing success. In fact, it even goes the extra mile and gives unique twist to the story (which is essentially "Night of the Living Dead," but with vampires in place of zombies), and greatly improves upon the story in the comic. And the acting is better than usual for this type of movie.

I want so badly to love this film, and I did enjoy it immensely. But I just didn't give a damn about what was happening, and so I can't say it was a good movie. If the movie wasn't good, but also isn't bad, I suppose I'll just have to say that it was entertaining.