This movie was great! Very scary and gruesome, there's not much sex or profanity but still it's considered to be an R-rated film i myself liked it very much, so if you got kids age 15 or above and they want this film, be sure to talk to them first about it or watch it first.

Extremely intense and bloody, it is still a fascinating movie. If your teens like horror, they will love this movie.

I saw this on cable and was surprised that it was pretty good. The issue is the repeted gore throughout the movie. Up there with Hostle and Saw.I'm not bothered by that stuff but this movie almost goes overboard.If you like that kind of flick you will like this.

i think you would my probaly have to be my age to see this movie NO KIDS

This movie is very gross and graphic.But it's thrilling and exciting!Please don't let the children watch it however.

Garbage.

Great movie. Scared me. Don't let young children see this.

I'd like to get one piece of content out of the way-- violence. Yes, the film was quite gory, though not in the splat-pack sense or extreme (splat-pack is the term used to describe movies such as Hostel and Saw.) But the film didn't really reach gratuity with its gore until the movie hit the half-way point-- until then, most of the violence actually occurred off-screen, and we only saw the aftermath. One scene took place completely under a house, so we couldn't see the violence at all, and were left to use our imagination-- something that moviemakers are starting to realize is better. However, this positive trend was eventually dashed, and as much as I'd like to defend the movie, I concede that the gore quotient got out of hand the nearer the movie reached its climax. Outside of that though, there was your basic level of R-worthy profanity, but not anything constant like in Good Will Hunting or Platoon. And as CSM said, there was some interplay bewtween two vampires, but nothing actually physical or sexual, just an eerieness which was meant to show the humanity of vampires, and also add a level of tension that comes from weird scenes. Outside of content, the movie wasn't really the reinvention of the vampire genre like 28 Days and 28 Weeks Later did for the zombie film (CSM gave 28 Weeks Later two stars, but I highly disagree with this, as do just about all the critics.) Despite this, I still found plenty of innovation in the interaction between vampires and plot points (the concept aloneof being stranded in 30 days of darkness with vampires was good enough to warrant curiousity). Things such as vampires having their own language-- which makes sense, as they are, in a sense, their own race of creatures, and wouldn't be talking in plain English the whole movie-- add levels of not neccessarily depth, but reality or believability to the movie, and made for a more entertaining experience. In a way, I still consider this probably one of the better vampire flicks I've seen (really a 3 and 1/2 star movie, but I don't have that option), and it is a modernization of the genre, it just wasn't up to the mark that it seemed it would reach. I reccommend this to anyone who thinks they're interested-- because with this sort of movie, you're either going to see it, or you won't-- you're not going to be convinced otherwise.And no, this had nothing to do with Stephen King, it was based on a graphic novel-- I'm not sure where the below reviewer got his information.

All this movie really is, is gore galore!! I saw this movie with my mom and my boyfriend. My mom thought it was a dumb, pointless movie that ended bad, my boyfriend liked it because he likes vampire movies and I didn't like it so much. I thought the storyline was good and it all made sense and was played out well, but I didn't like all the blood and gore because im not into that sorta stuff. Honestly, I spent most of the movie with my head burried in my boyfriend's shoulder terrified...which I'm sure he didn't have a problem with. lol