Critics HATED This Vampire Movie, But Fans Still Love It!

by

30 Days of Night, which is now regarded as a horror classic, didn’t appear so at its initial release. Back in 2007, the genre of vampire movies was not particularly thriving. The Blade series had met its demise with Trinity (2004), Dracula 2000 was a disappointment, and although Underworld was successful, it was often criticized. The unique concept of 30 Days of Night, where vampires invade an Alaskan town during their month-long polar night, had a strong selling point on its own.

As a devoted movie buff, I can’t help but sing praises for the underestimated gem, “30 Days of Night.” Despite its box office triumph with earnings of $80 million against a production cost of just $30 million (as reported by The Numbers), this vampire flick has somehow flown under the radar.

What truly set it apart from its contemporaries was its portrayal of vampires as genuinely terrifying creatures. Unlike their more sedate counterparts, these bloodsuckers reveled in tormenting their prey, turning the hunt into a chilling game. Their razor-sharp teeth, reminiscent of a shark’s, resulted in scenes of brutal, gory deaths that were as unsettling as they were captivating.

In essence, “30 Days of Night” is one of the rare vampire movies that treats its vampires as genuine monsters. However, its grim tone and graphic violence left some critics with a sour taste, perhaps explaining why it’s not more widely recognized for its unique take on the genre.

30 Days Of Night Was Not Popular With Many Critics

“FANGS FOR NOTHING” says the New York Post

30 Days of Night, currently holds a 50% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, and surprisingly, the audience score isn’t significantly higher at 56%. Critics found several aspects to criticize, ranging from the story’s abrupt jumps through extensive time periods to its scarcity in humor and excessive graphic violence. One of the harshest reviews about the film came from The New York Post, titled “FANGS FOR NOTHING,” which concludes with the statement “If your movie is unfunny, at least strive to be intentionally amusing.

Roger Ebert, who sadly passed away, had a mixed opinion about it. He openly confessed that he was tired of the vampire theme, yet he acknowledged the movie by granting it two and a half stars, appreciating its quality production, cinematography, and convincing acting. It’s fascinating to revisit the diverse opinions on the film 30 Days of Night, taking into account the state of the vampire genre at that time. Interestingly enough, while many critics criticized contemporary vampire films for being too childish, 30 Days of Night received criticism for being excessively serious instead.

While it’s important to note that not everyone appreciated 30 Days of Night, James Dyer from Empire magazine was a fan. He praised the film, stating that “This sleek and gooey horror is the most impressive take on vampire folklore since Near Dark.” However, Dyer also highlighted an issue that sparked debate among both critics and viewers: the disconcerting timeline. Once more, the movie jumps over significant periods without offering much insight into what transpired during those gaps, which weakens the core idea that the survivors must endure for a full month.

In Retrospect, 30 Days Of Night Is A Great Modern Vampire Movie

30 Days of Night is one of the 2000s’ best vampire flicks

30 Days of Night, which was quite successful in 2007, seems to have been somewhat overlooked over time. Although it has a dedicated fanbase, it’s not often discussed as one of the top vampire movies from the 2000s. This is unfortunate, as it’s an underrated gem that deserves more recognition. It boasts a talented cast (Josh Hartnett, Ben Foster, and character actor MVP Mark Boone Junior, among others), and its dark and intense tone, coupled with Danny Huston’s chilling portrayal of the villainous vampire Marlow, make it a standout film in the genre.

Vampires, being the most renowned monsters across all literature, often face ridicule but are challenging to portray in a unique and frightening way. However, the film “30 Days of Night” manages to pull it off brilliantly by offering something new and inducing fear. Unlike traditional representations of vampires with pale faces and capes, these creatures are more akin to sharks disguised as humans. They regard their victims as nothing more than mobile blood sources to be ruthlessly torn open and devoured.

30 Days of Night isn’t just a catchy tagline; it’s a gripping, chilling survival horror narrative that doesn’t shy away from its serious themes. It avoids being overly playful or using humorous gimmicks, and the vampires it portrays are truly unsettling. Unfortunately, the film didn’t start a theatrical series, but it did get two miniseries sequels named Blood Trails and Dust to Dust, as well as an STV follow-up titled Dark Days.

Read More

2025-05-18 18:59