Great premise, spoiled with mediocrity.

Rating: 5/10 (24 October 2007)

This film tried too hard to be too many things without settling with one or two good ones. I didn't love this flick but particularly hate it either. I loved the premise of 30 days of night straight. It was a shame that this film couldn't make up it's mind on what it wanted to be. At times it seemed to take itself very seriously and other times it seemed to cartoony in it's presentation. I thought a lot of the set pieces were excellent, most of the casting was pretty believable, (except for Josh Hartnett, not his fault, just the wrong man for the job) some of the camera work wasn't bad, but at other times it was plain sloppy. I personally am sick of the shaky-cam phase plaguing good (could be even better) movies these days. I understand that some people like the shaky-cam, but whenever I see it I think it's either because they are trying to hide something, or they don't know any other way to shoot the scene. I don't know if it's just me but I blame the overabundance of the shaky-cam epidemic on the overrated garbage "Blair Witch Project." I'm sure it was there before, but it seems to be around more and more, and it just won't go away. Now I don't always hate it, I just think it is used way too much. Can we tell them that it is going to be almost a decade since "Blair Witch" came out. Let's get back to less shakiness and back to some good old fashioned camera shots. I also despised the way "30 days" ended, because for anyone that has seen "Blade 2," well you've seen it before, and better. I love Vampire movies, but I felt this great premise of a film was wasted with a terrible script and very little character development. I loved the overall look of the film and would recommend it as far as that is concerned, but for just a decent vampire movie well that is going to be in the eye of the beholder.