Ror Reviews: 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days

Ror Reviews: 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days

With a new actress in the lead role of Stella, a new director and a much smaller budget, how did this straight to DVD sequel to the impressive 30 Days Of Night hold up?

Review Opinion
By MarkCassidy - Sep 24, 2010 04:09 AM EST
Filed Under: Horror

I really enjoyed 30 Days Of Night. Sure it had some problems, a pretty big plot hole in which several days go unaccounted for being one of them. But I thought director David Slade provided a nice sense of dread and it was nice to see vampires be REAL vampires again after so many films go the tortured/emo route with them. So when I heard a sequel was in the works I was looking forward to it. But then news leaked that Susan George was being replaced and the dreaded words "straight to DVD" lessened by enthusiasm somewhat.

The sequel begins with a flashback to the end of the last movie as we see Stella Oleson(now played by Lost's Kiele Sanchez) sit holding her now vampiric husband Eben(played in the original by Josh Hartnett) as he allows the sun to rise and destroy him. Flashforward a year and Stella is now relocated to LA where she holds seminars in an attempt to tell the truth about what happened in Barrow. After being continually met with scepticism and threats from "Bug Eaters"(Vampire wannabes) she is about to pack in it and go home when she is contacted by a team of vampire hunters who offer her a chance at revenge by killing the vampire queen Lilith, who planned the attack on Barrow. The team consists of Paul(Rhys Coiro), Amber(Diora Baird), Todd(Harold Perrineauas) and Dane(Ben Cotton), a "good" vampire. She agrees to join up and they set about their plan to take out the queen who sleeps deep beneath the city.

The plot is pretty basic and unoriginal. And the Vamps seem to have lost some of their bite. What made the first film so fresh was the ferocity and animalistic nature of the vampires and the gimmick of the sun staying down fore a month. This film has neither.
The vamps still look as freaky, with their black eyes and rows of shark like teeth, but they just seem more subdued and human in this. But, although there are no real surprises with the story its still pretty entertaining. The script is solid, even if there is the occasional eye roller, and new director Ben Ketai manages to squeeze a few moments of tension and handles the action well. There are also quite a few innovative gore scenes to keep the splatter fans happy. A vampire slowly pulling a tooth out so she can kiss/drink and a bug eater tearing out a human's throat in graphic detail are highlights. But where the film really falls flat is the handling of the characters. Aside from Stella and to a lesser extent Paul, nobody is developed much at all. Its particularly frustrating that by far the most interesting of the group, Dane, is hardly touched upon. And, as is so often the case with films like this the climax is rushed and a bit unsatisfying. The performances though are all fine. Sanchez in particular doing a great job. Perrineauas is as reliable as ever, if also criminally underused and Diora Baird shows some chops(although she is cruelly covered up in loose fitting cloths;). The weak link is Rhys Coiro as Paul. He's not bad exactly, he's just saddled with the tortured, "hunky", potential love interest role and the attempts to make us sympathise with him by giving us his back story just seem to make him even more uninteresting!

Basically, this is a solid horror/action flick. If I had gone to see it in the cinema I would probably have been disappointed , but you won't go wrong giving it a rent. Its not a patch on the first one but far exceeds something like Daybreakers or any of the Underworld movies imo.

You could do a lot worse than giving it a watch when it hits DVD and Blu-ray October 5th.







SCREAMBOAT And PETER PAN'S NEVERLAND NIGHTMARE Horror Trailers Are Here To Ruin Your Childhoods
Related:

SCREAMBOAT And PETER PAN'S NEVERLAND NIGHTMARE Horror Trailers Are Here To Ruin Your Childhoods

THE TOXIC AVENGER: Peter Dinklage Doesn't Sound Overly Confident About The Movie's Chances Of Being Released
Recommended For You:

THE TOXIC AVENGER: Peter Dinklage Doesn't Sound Overly Confident About The Movie's Chances Of Being Released

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

MatchesMalone
MatchesMalone - 9/24/2010, 5:41 AM
Thanks for reviewing this Ror. Sounds like this movie is about what I expected. I'll probably buy it because I have this terrible sickness to be a completist when it comes to owning movies and their sequels.
frigidgiantinthe716
frigidgiantinthe716 - 9/24/2010, 5:54 AM
Better than daybreakers... I can see that, but better than underworld? Come on!
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 9/24/2010, 5:56 AM
Well considering I thought Daybreakers was better than Underworld..yeah!

Thanks guys. If you like the first one, deffo check it out, just don't expect too much!
TheMyth
TheMyth - 9/24/2010, 6:09 AM
I always enjoy a good review by Ror. I really liked the first one. Most of all the feral features and ferocity of the vamps, "...rows of shark like teeth." is a very good description and are purely frightening while the emptiness of those eyes just puts the creepy factor through the roof. The first one made me cringe the whole way through, and it sounds like the second will still have that effect, even with the faults that come with a straight to DVD release. Can't wait to catch On Demand.
superdog
superdog - 9/24/2010, 6:32 AM
great review ror. i was on the fence about this one but ill check it out now. at the worst its got two ex-losties in it so ill enjoy the nostalgia :)
Shaman
Shaman - 9/24/2010, 6:45 AM
Myth- I totally agree with your opening, i also feel all of Ror's reviews are very enjoyable whether i agree with them or not. Our boy is amazing, isn't he? I'm a proud mommy :P

Ror- On this brilliantly written review, even though i haven't seen this film or it's prequel, i can't agree with some of your views. For the very reason that i never wanted to see this series. You might have enjoyed the "ferocity and animalistic nature of the vampires" in the first film but to me, it's as retarded as Twilight's re-invention. Vampires aren't shark teeth zombies anymore than they are day-walking stone cold porcelain skinned emo light-brights that play baseball with their family. They do degenerate to a feeding frenzy IF they've been without blood for a very long time but it's simply not in their nature to just "beast out" at their prey. They are supposed to be the most attractively mesmerising and mysterious creatures of the night and they enjoy toying with the human psyche far too much to even "want" to be ferociously clumsy meat eaters, like zombies. And since that's the vampire lore that i've always been a fan of, any deviation from that is as ridiculous as an "R" rated Superman film/comic. People that think and produce these "re-inventions" just don't get it. Why re-invent a concept that has never needed it instead of simply inventing a brand new concept? So i just can't bring myself to watch these films, no mater how good they are as "films". So far, the most recent vampire films i've enjoyed that i felt were an accurate and urban take on the lore, were indeed Underworld 1 and Blade 1. Sorry bud, but great review none the less :))
LEEE777
LEEE777 - 9/24/2010, 7:11 AM
Nice one @ ROR!!!

An 3 out of 5 stars is pretty good for a direct to DVD, thought it would be below that (they normally are).

I'll deff check it out, damn still not seen and got around to watching DAYBREAKERS, got it on DVD too!

GR8 stuff @ ROR, thumbs up!
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 9/24/2010, 7:41 AM
Aww thanks guys, your too kind *sniff*.. personally I think this one is a bit short! But I kinda just said all there was to about the film really.

Ah Shaman! hehe, we have had this discussion before. I know this isn't your favourite take on Vamps, but you can't say its not the RIGHT take either. Its all down to individual taste. I mean if its the initial take on vamps you wanna go with your talking Nosferatu..an animal! And even the Dracula of Stokers novel was far more bestial than all of the film interpretations make him out to be. So from that perceptive the attractive, mysterious ones you enjoy are actually the reinvention! I know that they are widely considered the norm, I just got bored of em! Vampire films used to be scary. Salem's Lot, Near Dark..even The Lost Boys when we were kids. They are monsters and belong in horror films, not glossy Matrix wannnabe's like Underworld!

chopfer15
chopfer15 - 9/24/2010, 7:46 AM
@roe- dude great review, one suggestion. Read the comic on this one. Film will have a little better context. Stellas motivation will be better, and you'll really love Dane in it. Another great comic, that if just given the 300 treatment (copied damn near word for word) would have made a crapload of money. I will definitely be renting this one now, thanks to your review.
@
chopfer15
chopfer15 - 9/24/2010, 7:53 AM
Oh, and if you liked these vampires, you'll love the ones in the new book series by Del Toro. It's called "the strain" and "the fall". Great, fresh new take on them. Not to mention the book reads like a movie.
@shaman - dude, while you're untitled to your opinion. I'd have to disagree with it. Vampires are fictional characters. They have been reinvented multiple times over the years. That is a strength of theirs over other movie monsters. Keeps them fresh. So, no interpretation is wrong...well exexcept twilight emo vamps
selinakyle
selinakyle - 9/24/2010, 8:11 AM
Is it online yet?
Nice review Ror.
Shaman
Shaman - 9/24/2010, 8:43 AM
You guys are right, t'is only my opinion. And IMO, when they revamped the vampire to be those "attractively mesmerising and mysterious creatures of the night", they improved on the concept and made it iconic. Just like they did with Superman. The first run of his sucked IMO. When they made him what he's been for decades now, they improved on the source to a point where i don't see anymore changes to be "improvements". Blue/Red electricity Superman anyone? Making him an "R" rated concept wouldn't be improving on the source and i just don't see the recent changes in the vampire concept as improvements either. Zombies are Zmobies and we've had them for years. I always hated zombies and making Vampires to be like Zombies is an insult to me. I also wasn't too keen on the "monster" vampires in Lost Boys. I remember complaining on how they looked back when i was in my teens LOL. The film was entertaining though. ;)
preacher
preacher - 9/24/2010, 8:51 AM
And, in my opinion, Daybreakers was a refreshing new take on the vampire genre. Very suspensful, the vamps were downright scary, when they "devolved" and the gore was plentiful.
Shaman
Shaman - 9/24/2010, 9:18 AM
preacher- Haven't seen Daybreakers yet. But you can bet your sweet patoody i'll be picking it up when the dvd lowers in price :))
MarkCassidy
MarkCassidy - 9/24/2010, 9:36 AM
Daybreakers was really good for about the first 40 mins or so but it decended ito crap I thought..those bat vamps were scary though no doubt.

Shaman I think you misunderstand the 30 Days vamps, they are not mindless like zombies. They are very clever and do toy with their victims, its just that they aren't interested in romancing or hypnotizing and when they kill its frenzied and terrifying(or at least it was in the first one). They look at humans as food, thats it. You should watch the first one sometime, I think you might be pleasantly surprised!

Gusto, no boobs, some ass, and Sanchez gets a right good seeing to!:)
Shaman
Shaman - 9/24/2010, 9:44 AM
Ror- Well... said in that way actually doesn't sound that bad. I might pick it up whenever it gets down to the 2/10$ bins. Who knows, i might enjoy it as much as Lost Boys :) But i wouldn't pay a dime more for a damn Hartnet film.
MatchesMalone
MatchesMalone - 9/24/2010, 9:54 AM
@Shaman- You should read the comic as well if you haven't yet. I thought the movie was a really well done adaptation, but the book has a little bit more of a fleshed out plot. I guarantee if you read the book, you'll want to see the movie.
Shaman
Shaman - 9/24/2010, 11:16 AM
Stop twisting my nipples, guys! Cause it just might work ;P
JayTopStix
JayTopStix - 9/24/2010, 11:20 AM
October 5th haha. Already watched it one week ago.
MatchesMalone
MatchesMalone - 9/24/2010, 11:20 AM
Oh you like it! :)
Gmoney84
Gmoney84 - 9/24/2010, 1:30 PM
Agreed, the first film is great.
Shawlong23
Shawlong23 - 9/24/2010, 6:17 PM
3 stars for a shitty movie like this? I watched this yesterday and thought it was horrible(low-budget and horrible storyline). Basically, everything about it was horrible. The first 30 days of night derserves a 3, not this crap. People shouldn't take your reviews seriously. Shows how much you know about quality if you thought this movie was solid. If you're going to see it, just download it and save your money.
AverageCitizen99
AverageCitizen99 - 9/24/2010, 8:33 PM
As always, awesome review Ror! :)

The first one was very well made. It really brought the vampires their balls back. Brought something fresh to the genre, it needed some riling back up from it's recent, and somewhat current, sullen state. The vampires were especially a terrifying force of nature. Almost abortions of nature and God himself really. There were some flaws with the first but overall it was a sweet and scary vampire film that I'm sure plenty were itching for.

It's a shame Melissa George couldn't come back though. I remember in an interview that Steve Niles stated that the reason for her absence from this film was because of scheduling conflicts. She would've been great here, especially after having seen her in season 1 of In Treatment. Oh well though.
Smallville4Ever
Smallville4Ever - 9/25/2010, 12:34 AM
@shawlong, how about you NOT insult people, not EVERYONE thinks the movie was crap, I admit i get a bit rowdy sometimes but I respect peoples opinions as well, I thought the first was great and Im gonna see the 2nd one as well. Great Review Ror, i loved it.
View Recorder