Scary vampires, back from the dead
Marlow: ‘It’s taken us centuries to convince them that we don’t exist.’
Young director David Slade is fast emerging as a leading light in genre flicks that take you places you really don’t want to go – check out Hard Candy (2005), which could take Lolita’s Revenge as a sub-head, if you don’t believe me.
And, talking about places you don’t want to go, Barrow in Alaska should properly be topping the list. Not just because, once every 12 months, the township is plunged into the titular darkness because of its position on the globe, but there’s also the small matter of the massed ranks of the nosferatu who have decided to pay a visit this year. No sunshine, plus around 150 souls from which to drink? As one of the undead remarks early on (in their own ancient language, an inspired innovation), delivering what is perhaps the film’s only outright gag: “We should have come here ages ago.”
Don’t make the mistake, as I nearly did, of judging this film by its comic-book cover – nor should you be put off by the young cast, which includes Josh Hartnett as Sheriff Eben Oleson and Melissa George as his estranged wife Stella, who are forced to lead the revolt against the vampires, led by a simply marvellous Marlow (Danny Huston), in the fight for survival that will last until the sun rises once again, 30 long days hence.
And, whatever you do, don’t arrive with expectations of love-lorn blood-sucking nobility, as in Coppola’s rubbish Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992). The monsters (for that is what they are) in 30 Days… take their lineage directly from Max Schreck’s vulpine, hideous vampire in F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu (1922) – feral, snarling, flight-of-foot creatures who don’t so much suck as feast on the living and, in so doing, restore the vampire to its rightful place among the truly terrifying creatures of the night.
Scriptwriters Steve Niles (adapting from his own comic book), Stuart Beattie and Brian Nelson draw on a wide range of horror reference points, with Romero’s claustrophobic Night Of The Living Dead (1968) at the forefront – this time, the survivors of the apocalyptic massacre that overtakes the town hole up in a (temporarily) overlooked attic, a situation that deteriorates with predictable rapidity.
What really makes the thing swing, however, is the speed at which the characters are forced to accept the reality of their situation – when the conversation first turns to the undead, the initial ‘vampires don’t exist’ reaction is quickly superseded by ‘whatever they are, we have to kill them’, a sleight-of-hand that forces the viewer to suspend disbelief and hop on for the ride. This is helped enormously by the practical nature of the beasts – no reference is made as to whether a crucifix has any effect but, in the words of Marlow: ‘God? No God.’ Their condition is infectious (passed by blood) and the manner of their disposal is restricted to decapitation or their bodies’ complete destruction, with no time for stakes through hearts. And, probably because of the Sam Raimi influence (the director of The Evil Dead (1982) is producer here), there are no easy decisions to be made in the nightmare that follows, with a happy ending looking an increasingly unlikely prospect.
Hooray, say I – if you consider that the last decent attempt to make vampires frightening was probably Tobe Hooper’s Salem’s Lot (1978), the sub-genre’s resurrection is long overdue. Make no mistake – this is the best new blood for generations.
113 mins.


I don’t know, I think our reviewer must have forgotten Near Dark. They were also deeply unpleasant and unlovable, even in a homo-erotic way – although the word ‘vampire’ was never mentioned in that film (let’s just assume they were). Naturally, I shall be vigorously questioning him about this omission. I haven’t seen 30 Days… myself yet but will certainly be among the first in the queue for the popcorn when it comes out.
I agree with Colin that Near Dark was probably the last great vampire movie, although not scary in the way that Salem’s Lot was.
Personally, I’m not a huge fan of vampire movies, too many associations with teenage goth types, although in London recently, I was pleased to see a statue dedicated to Henry Irving, the original inspiration for Count Dracula in Stoker’s novel.
Anyway, for me there is only one truly great screen vampire. That man is, of course, George Hamilton.
CD, how could I have overlooked the monumental work of terror cinema that was Love At First Bite (1979)? Thanks so much for keeping me on the straight and narrow…
SPOILERS AHEAD
I thought 30 Days of Night was passable entertainment.
I don’t think we need to go so far back as Salem’s Lot to find feral vampires stalking the night – Blade 2 – Del Toro’s underrated sequel – put the vermin back in vampirism with his hideous ‘Reapers’.
What’s more, 30 Days…‘s ending seems to have been lifted straight from del Toro’s movie, with the unhappy lovers spending their last moments together as the sun rises and one of them disintegrates.
Movies can of course refer to other movies, so the above isn’t criticism, necessarily. Nevertheless, this was not so much the revival of vampires as diseased monsters as a continuation of what has been seen in 28 Days/Weeks later, The Descent and Blade 2.
A creaky old man in a smart suit seducing Ms. George might have injected some originality here…
Chris, thanks very much for the comment. To my shame, I have not yet seen Blade 2, despite your hearty recommendation some time ago, so hence the lacunae in my review on that score.
Not quite sure if I agree with you that the monsters in the truly excellent The Descent were meant to be vampires as such, but I can see where you’re coming from (but only a bit
) with the 28 Days/Weeks films.
Anyway, I liked it, so there…