Wednesday April 29, 2009 - 1:07 PM
great flick. i enjoyed the work they put in filming. considering the the movie was filmed mostly during the day, in the desert.
Monday April 27, 2009 - 2:35 PM
i looooved it, i thought it was really well done.
Thursday November 06, 2008 - 6:50 AM
terrible movie dont go see it waste of time
Wednesday November 05, 2008 - 11:57 PM
Horrible Movie waste of my time!
Monday November 03, 2008 - 10:24 PM
While i admire change to a classic genre, i didn't like this take on vampires.
Vampires are commonly beautiful and seductive, how else are they going to lure you, and get close enough to suck your neck. Vampires are supposed to have 2-4 fangs, not a whole mouth full. and so on.
But the Alaskan darkness was a nice move, i generally liked the film.
Thursday October 02, 2008 - 6:51 PM
All in all I enjoyed it, sure ok it was a tad bit predictable, what movies these days aren't? especially with a theme as done in as vampires....which is a theme I enjoy....
best vampire movie ever? nimho, that title is still bestowed upon Dusk till Dawn....comon Cheech as a vamp, how can that not be classic
the gore was good, the acting mediocre, I actually really liked the fact that it was as dark as it was and yeah the vamps in this film were well portrayed
Thursday October 02, 2008 - 4:22 PM
I'm not a big Josh Hartnett fan, maybe because all the girlies think he's a heart throb. You know what throbed in this movie for me? My eagerness for more light.
Monday September 29, 2008 - 9:46 PM
personally i thought it was good..i walked on and it was just on my tv it looked interesting so i watched it..not sure why you would hate it but then again everyone has the right to their own opinion.
Monday September 29, 2008 - 8:43 PM
Monday September 29, 2008 - 5:00 PM
Hated this movie! The only thing entertaining about going to see this movie was the black guy who keep screaming and jumping in front of me.
Wednesday June 11, 2008 - 11:59 PM
Decent movie... Good twist to the Vampire theme... Acting was very good on the Vampires part as well as the crazy guy.
'God?' *looks up* 'No God.'
Monday June 09, 2008 - 11:47 PM
The film was decent, but the graphic novels were way better. The charecter development was greater, the vampire's more defined, and the general feel of things more greatly in tune with what the ideas were.
Saturday May 31, 2008 - 3:03 AM
josh hartnet is famous for his looks not his acting, obviously.
the graphics and computerization was stupid.
it was predictable... and i only watched like 40minutes before giving up.
Sunday April 13, 2008 - 6:51 PM
this movie sucked ass. the plot is horrible, the character development is extremely predictable, the vampires were stupidly exaggerated, and the progression of the story is generally horrifying.
in a not-so-good way, i mean.
in other words, dont waste your time. im glad the copy i got to watch had massive amounts of scratches on it so that a good chunk of the film got skipped over. it wasted less of my life.
in a nut shell, dont even bother with this shitty vampire flick. its about as good as an episode of sesame street with fangs an unnecessarily gory violence.
if you want to watch an excellent and impeccable vampire movie, watch "interview with the vampire".
Sunday April 13, 2008 - 9:34 AM
I thought this was actually a very interesting twist on the whole vampire lore. Excellent movie.
Monday November 26, 2007 - 6:03 AM
It was cool to a certain extent. But i was super lots dissapointed.
Saturday November 24, 2007 - 9:34 PM
if half a star was an option i would go for that, hyped up lack luster movie with a bunch of stupid ppl running and hiding, no real story and over all thrown together movie not worth your time.
Sunday November 18, 2007 - 5:52 PM
I think this is the best vampire movie ever made... The whole idea of vampires terrorizing a town that spends 30 days in darkness made my skin tingle... After the 7:15, I wanted to go see the 9:30, but I didn't have the cash
Sunday November 18, 2007 - 6:26 AM
best vampire movie !!
i hate the pritty boy vamps i like that they had feral vamps made them cool to me again
i don't know why it has been getting such low reviews here
wheres the plot? : ...umm they are vampires they cam to feed that's the motive to survive
why the one on one fight in the end of the movie? : didn't you notice that the vampires where acting very much like a wolf pack? compleate with an alpha male and an alpha female
if the alpha male is challenged and bested in a fight the challenger is the new alpha male
and least explosive dynamite!!??? wtf don't you know what road flares look like?
Monday November 05, 2007 - 5:03 PM
This was possibly the best movie I've ever seen. Amazing gore, and realistic too
I don't know what everyone else here was on when they saw this movie, but it was fucking awesome
crappy quality but oh wellll
Monday November 05, 2007 - 4:20 PM
waste of time and money
it just didn't do justice like a vampire movie should
Monday November 05, 2007 - 2:44 PM
contrary to previous reviews, i thought this movie was pretty good.
the beginning was kinda drawn out, and for me the movie was a bit slow at times, but honestly, the gore more than makes up for the movie being slow to start and pick up.
i wasn't a fan of the look of the vampires, i'm more into the pretty sexy vampires, not the crone-like ugly ones. but their look worked for the movie.
but the gore was by far the thing that made the movie for me. the dummy heads were great, seamless. the overhead shot was perfect. i loved the total carnage and chaos, and the blood! it was great. the only part that really didn't fly with me was the stupid way the vamps bit their victims. nothing like a bloody raspberry to scare the crap out of the crowd... -.-; that really was the only thing i could find wrong with it. i would have rather seen some lunging and have someone rip their throats out or something. and the ending, as romantic as it is, wasn't great. i'm not a real romantic, so it wasn't a real catcher, but overall, the movie was good. good enough for 4 stars.
and as for syphon coming to the conclusion that the vampires only just figured out that it's dark all the time in the arctic during a specific time of year, if they had of been paying attention to the movie, instead of looking for things to give a bad critique on, they would have remembered the part where the head vamp mentioned that it took them ages to convince humans that they were only bad dreams. and another, lower vamp had mentioned during feeding that it had been ages since they had been there. also mentioned later were previous events where previous towns, further north, had been totally ripped apart, and were just chalked up to people going crazy while there was no sunlight.
i'm all for people having an opinion, and stating said opinion, but pay attention to the movie if your gonna rip it apart. and get your facts straight.
Sunday November 04, 2007 - 8:40 AM
scary movies suck anymore... period.
Saturday November 03, 2007 - 8:52 PM
aha this movie sucked.
it was good at times, but it didn't have me hanging of the edge of my seat.
fuckin' billy bob wasn't even in it, aha i only went to see him! fuckin' lying pricks.
anyways, vampire movies suck, and so does the ending of this movie.
and fuck josh hartnett, fuckin goof
Friday November 02, 2007 - 10:17 AM
Wow, did this movie ever suck.
First off, for immortal creatures, they're not exactly the brightest of people are they. It took them how long to figure out the Arctic gets o sunlight. Secondly, since when does the high-arctic have "30 days of night" and then suddenly it's all back to normal one fine spring morning?
So maybe I'm picky, but I think I prefer my vampires to be rational, thinking characters rather than mindless, bloodthirsty animals. Yo could have taken the vampires right out of this movie and dropped in, oh, I don't know: Zombies, Mummies, Velociraptors, Leprechauns, ANYTHING!
As cheesy horror flicks go, it wasn't horrible. I mean, if you go in with the expectation of story and character development, then I guess you're about as mindless as the vampires. If you watch it cause it's goig to suck, but there will be some funny ways people get killed, then I suppose it does all it needs to.
Finally, I can't recall another movie with quite as much eye-acting. Creepy music on, shifty, nervous eyes... wait... wait... vampire attack.
Also, the guy with the tractor had the right idea, but why did he bring the least explosive dynamite in creation?
Thursday November 01, 2007 - 5:01 PM
not the worst movie but really stupid random speaches, or w/e betwean the husband and wife, in the most random situtions. vampires were pretty cool.
Thursday November 01, 2007 - 12:25 AM
It was only good because you get to watch josh for a few hours
Wednesday October 31, 2007 - 6:46 PM
My friend Jeff made me see it...Freaked the living shit out of me...
I know have to seek revenge for my lack of sleep.
Wednesday October 31, 2007 - 11:03 AM
it was soo scary i couldnt get over it ... i watched like the whole movie but only half of it cause i closed my eyes half the time!!!
Wednesday October 31, 2007 - 7:56 AM
this is one of the best vampire movies that i have seen in a long while.
Wednesday October 31, 2007 - 12:49 AM
Have to say I loved this movie, it was intense the whole way through, I jumped about 10 times..
Monday October 29, 2007 - 9:25 AM
Vampires = sex.
Good movie, but the ending should have been a bit better..
Thursday October 25, 2007 - 8:23 AM
didn't hate it and was entertained. the ending of the film is very non-HWood which surprised since much of the fim was VERY.
Hartnett is an AWFUL actor and i'm continually surprised he's casted in films for theatrical release. in fact just about everyone was poor with the exception of Ben Foster who did what he could though the script and direction was limited.
speaking of which, didn't this eminate from the same person who did 'hard candy' wtf happened here?
there was gem moments in the feature and it did hold my attention while i was seated. the script is really loose, the story not complete and as an adaptation or companion to the graphic novel to which it is based on-it fails.
how studio's continually muck up properties shock me. there's no end to material to be sourced but once it is, that project becomes 'in-name-only'. look out for 'wanted' with A.Jolie and crew, truly a film that throughout preproduction has been spat on by the online community. Sin City and Batman Begins still rest as champions of properly sourced material converted to film.
Thursday October 25, 2007 - 2:13 AM
i'll give it 4 stars, i thought it was quite well done. good makeup and effects. the story was good, had holes in it but it was still good. really gorey and jumpy and freaky, good movie in my books. worth buying i think!
all these people who are like "zomg these vampires aren't the vampires i want"
WELL BOO FUCKIN' HOO!!
get over it. you went to see a new vampire flick, stop trying to pick the damn thing apart and just fuckin' enjoy it.
half of the people here giving bad reviews can't even spell properly
Wednesday October 24, 2007 - 4:20 PM
It was more then what i was expecting it to be. It was gory as all hell.
Tuesday October 23, 2007 - 11:50 PM
honestly the worst move ive seen in a long time.
if you're a fan of the vampire genre, don't waste your 10bucks.
don't say i didn't warn you.
Tuesday October 23, 2007 - 10:09 PM
Just got home from seeing this movie. It's pretty good. The beginning kinda drags on a bit but then it picks up. The ending could have used some work, but I have a feeling they did that for a sequel or a prequel. But all in all it is defiantly one of the better vampire movies as of late. It's worth the 10 bucks to see it.
Tuesday October 23, 2007 - 9:37 PM
Whacky, I did a review for this and now it disappeared.
However I'm not in the mood to write everything I wrote again.
In a nutshell, movie was good, ending could have used some work.
Saturday October 20, 2007 - 12:57 PM
so far one of the better vampire movies i've seen, great effects overall, however the ending lacked something. good storyline though, in comparison to the graphic novel it was based on, i think that they did an alright job.