ComicBookMovie.com Start A Fansite!
Home : News : Videos : Pictures : Polls : Contact : Editor's Tools
You are not currently logged in. Login

Kiele Sanchez Will Replace Melissa George In 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days

Bloody Disgusting has the exclusive news on the horror sequel's casting switch. There is also the official plot synopsis.
Principal photography has commenced in Vancouver, Canada for 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days. The movie is being directed by Ben Ketai(replacing David Slade). The cast includes Kiele Sanchez (A Perfect Getaway, Lost), Diora Baird (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning, Wedding Crashers), Rhys Coiro (Entourage, 24 the upcoming Straw Dogs), Mia Kirshner (The L Word, The Black Dahlia), and Harold Perrineau (Oz, Lost, The Matrix Revolutions). Check out the official synopsis below.

"It’s been a year since the Alaskan town of Barrow’s population was decimated by vampires during its annual month long sunset. Riddled with grief over the death of her husband, bound by nightmares and void of all emotions beyond hate and sorrow, Stella (Sanchez replacing George)) has spent the past months traveling the world, trying to convince others that vampires exist. Met with skepticism and laughter, Stella is ready to throw in the towel when a group of lost souls (Coiro, Baird and Perrineau) offers an incredible opportunity: the chance to exact revenge upon Lilith (Kirshner), the vampire queen responsible for the assault on her sleepy Alaskan town. With nothing remaining to live for, and nothing left to fear, Stella joins their mission and ventures into the uncharted underbelly of Los Angeles where she pushes herself to the most extreme limits to stop the evil from striking again."

Well, I'm very disappointed with this news. George is a great actress and I really enjoyed the first movie. I have only seen Sanchez in "Lost," in which she was basically eye candy before being killed off! Hopefully, the switch in director and leading lady will still produce a good movie.

Rhys Coiro, Mia Kirshner, Harold Perrineau, Kiele Sanchez and Diora Baird
0 Yes
4 No
RorMachine
10/23/2009
bloodydisgusting.com

DISCLAIMER: This posting was submitted by a user of the site not from Comic Book Movie editorial staff. All users have acknowledged and agreed that the submission of their content is in compliance with our Terms of Use. For removal of copyrighted material, please contact us HERE.

64 Comments

Damn. She's one of my favorite actresses. I think I'll skip the sequel.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 7:16 AM
Well thats bad news, we've only just had news she was doing the damn sequel??!

Its a pity, shes a talented actress!!

On another note, i hate actors being replaced for no reason, i really think if GEORGE is not back, so should not her character an have all new characters in the movie!
LEEE777 - 10/23/2009, 7:19 AM
This is bad news but the up side is good ol Diora...bless em lol :P
teabag - 10/23/2009, 7:43 AM
Krap! George was awesome in the first one!
Krap and double Krap!

By the way, My JSA Fancast is up in Fanfic!
If anyone wants to check it out? Diora is
amongst my cast! Yes, good ol' Diora!
DDD - 10/23/2009, 7:50 AM
@ LEEE777: I agree 100%. I [frick]ING HATE RECASTING!!!
BmanHall - 10/23/2009, 7:56 AM
@DDD: If you see her, tell her she still owes me a dick Tracey hat from 1st grade :(
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 8:03 AM
vampires vampires vampires... so cliche. what is the fascination with them?

is this the movie also with josh hartnet? if it is... not too crazy about it. =(
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 8:08 AM
KIR@ at least these vamps were not all emo and falling in love :)
teabag - 10/23/2009, 8:15 AM
@teabag: Watch it assh*le, you're getting dangerously close to insulting my Twilight fandom :)

FYI the books. . . not the movie
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 8:18 AM
oh lordy! tell me about it! I HATED that movie. But the vampire lore has been around so long and i just dont get its appeal. I do like however Underworld. That movie was good imho. And Blade. I didnt like Ann Rice Queen of the Damned either much though the book is better than the movie.

that i have to agree... the book is waaay better than the movie for twilight.
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 8:20 AM
@KIR: Have you seen the new clips for NEW MOON? It looks good. I think it'll help quell the distaste for the first movie.

@teabag: Give this movie a chance, trust me







MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 8:24 AM
what no robert patterson? im curious as to why they switched, i wonder if they didnt want her or if she didnt want to do it. just curious. and who was this girls character on lost? i dont remember her.
superdog - 10/23/2009, 8:28 AM
actually yeah i have seen the clips for new moon and it does look more promising than the first movie. It seems to have more action and suspense. Hopefully this story will translate better on the screen than the 1st one did.
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 8:28 AM
Poni..I really don't know what to say, I just don't. Twilight is a blight on the world(the movie, never read the books..but I can't imagine theres much appeal for me there!)..and that sequel is just spreading the disease.

Pooch, she played Nikki. She was in about 5 episodes before her and he boyfriend were poisoned and buried alive.
RorMachine - 10/23/2009, 8:30 AM
superdog: Robert Pattison does come out but mostly in the dream sequence & in the end. The second book focuses more on the werewolves story now, Jacob. Robert will be in the movie though.

KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 8:32 AM
Multi@ so you dont think the giant dodgy CGi werewolved look terrible?

I watched Twilight for the first time 2 nights ago and uuuuughghhhghg, the film was bad and i agree with ror that new moon is spreading the disease lol :p

Question: Do they sparkle in the books cus if they do i cant see it being much better :O
teabag - 10/23/2009, 8:55 AM
@Ror: How can you say that it's a "blight on the world" when you HAVEN'T read the books? That's like saying since Batman & Robin was a sh*t movie, Batman as a character is sh*t.

The Twilight movie was terrible. I didn't like it at all. But I'm not going to write off of a series that I like because of one interpretation. Look at the Punisher films, they've made three and still haven't nailed it.

Open your mind for a bit. If you don't want to read the books, that's fine. But take a chance and watch New Moon. I think you'll be surprised.

If you're looking for action, New Moon has vampires, werewolves and a few big fight scenes. The third part, Eclipse, has a massive vampire/vampire fight scene.

BTW Daniel Cudmore (Colossus - X-Men) and Michael Sheen (Lucius - Underworld) are in it
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 8:56 AM
ror@ i thought that might be her but wasnt sure. that was the biggest [frick]ing waste of an episode ever. bring on these two main characters for one episode, do a whole backstory on them then kill them. stupid.

keepitreal@ ofcourse he'll be in the movie, theyll totally change the plot to keep the famous characters in it. but really, who cares.
superdog - 10/23/2009, 8:56 AM
Freakin hate twilight. Read all the books, and saw the movie, and it just doesn't pull me in. It feels like Degrasi with Vampires. At best, the movie was a chick flick.


Now, back on topic, This 30 days of night sequel is gonna suck. At the very least, if they had the director from the first, i might have had some faith. And recasting sucks. It's mainly why i didn't like the ninja turtles movie sequels all that much. Teenage mutant ninja turtles 1 was the one that always spoke to me
supermarioworldE - 10/23/2009, 9:01 AM
@superdog: they didn't change the plot at all just to accommodate the 'famous character'. In the books, she hears his voice as a hallucination where as in the movie see sees the hallucination. Visually, it makes sense.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 9:02 AM
superdog: He is in the movie because he is in the book not because they changed the plot to keep him in it. he is not the only one who is famous or drawing a crowd with the teeny boppers either. if you dont care why'd you ask? I dont care either. I just know the book and hope for the books sake the movie is better since I hate when crap like that happens.

tea... you mean you dont sparkle? lol :P

supermarioworldE: degrasi twilight! lol! I hate Degrasi!
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 9:04 AM
@teabag: Please, don't ask me to defend anything that was in the first movie, I didn't like it. I'm a fan of the books, and I have hopes for the movie sequels.

@KIR: I SPARKLE DAMMIT!

@super: Thank you! A well informed answer :) If you read all the books and you're not a fan of the material then you have an educated perspective.

And, yeah, that 30 Days sequel is destined for the discount bin at Walmart.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 9:06 AM
@KIR, Doesn't everybody? lol.
supermarioworldE - 10/23/2009, 9:06 AM
multi... oooooh! sorry..sorry! my bad! :P I forgot.

supermario: i cant believe its been on for so long either!
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 9:09 AM
KIR@ only on weekends or if i see you on here lol :)




Multi@ what do you think of the werwolves tho?
teabag - 10/23/2009, 9:12 AM
Multi, I did establish that I meant the movie and not the books! I just don't see hoe a sequel with the same piss poor cast, director and writing team can be any better. Seriously, Twilight wasn't just bad, it was probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. From the constipated looks to the laugh out load script and vampires that weren't actually vampires. If the sequel does have more action I may watch online..but I can't give a sequel to that abomination of a movie my money.
RorMachine - 10/23/2009, 9:14 AM
@teabag: I think they look like they are supposed to as per the book: giant wolves. They're not afflicted with lycanthropy, they are shape shifters. Besides, the CGI isn't even finished yet and it already looks better than Wolverine's final cut.

And before you ask about all the shirtless guys, it's in the books as well. And it makes sense: The shape shifters 'explode' out of their skin to assume the wolf form. If they are wearing clothes, they get shredded. They only wear shorts so it's easier to carry around after they transform.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you guys to go nuts for this movie. But you should give it a chance. Like I said before, just because Batman & Robin was a terrible movie doesn't mean we would write off another Batman movie. Same goes for Punisher, we would give it a chance.

It sucks that since most of you haven't read the books, the only thing you have to go off of was the first movie. But that movie was set for failure from the get go.

Do you know what Summit did for the sequels though? They LISTENED TO THE FANS! Isn't that what we always bitch about in regards to CBMs?

I'll put a month's paycheck on the fact that New Moon will break every box office record for the year and will gain alot more of a male audience (go ahead tea, insert gay joke here)
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 9:17 AM
awwww tea...you so sweet! (sparkle... but dont tell multi! hehe)

also if i might add multi... the wolves are always hot. There temp always reaches 105 degrees i think it was.
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 9:18 AM
what he said
superdog - 10/23/2009, 9:19 AM
@KIR: 109 actually
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 9:25 AM
KIR@ lol

Multi@ Its Twilight so no need for gay jokes lol

Also im sure all the screaming girls who wanna see Shark Boy naked will make this a box office hit but isnt this a sequel not a reboot?? im just trying to understand the Batman Referance :)

I think il give it a bigger miss than this tho....


teabag - 10/23/2009, 9:32 AM
New Moon looks pretty bad. Just another teen vampire film.
screams - 10/23/2009, 9:34 AM
no, its a teen werewolf film. or i guesse to be correct, teen shapeshifter film
superdog - 10/23/2009, 9:48 AM
I hear its like a male strip club in the woods :)







teabag - 10/23/2009, 10:00 AM
Lol @ Werewolves and Jonas Bros.
screams - 10/23/2009, 10:06 AM
lol ill check the movie out
luffycapri - 10/23/2009, 10:16 AM
the fact that there was only one notable survivor at the end of the first film, to my mind, made it absolutely essential that melissa george return to reprise her role in any sequel. without her there is no continuity, cohesion or connection of any sort other than place names and locations. unfortunately, without a returning star...this movie takes on the basic characteristics of one of those straight to dvd movies that is made to be a stand alone film, but that is re-named to try to cash in on a previous film's quality and/or popularity like 8mm 2. too bad because i thought 30 days of night was an excellent and really quite smart take on the vampire legend. the quality of the creatures being caught between a history of golden aristocratic luxury and the animal bloodlust that drives them was an excellent tension to explore, i think.
inlovewiththeregencyelf - 10/23/2009, 10:29 AM
@teabag: No it's not a re-boot it's a re-imagining, if you will. I'll break it down to two things:

1) If you were not a fan of the Batman character and hated B&R, would you want to give another Batman movie a shot? Probably not. That's why TDK made a faster profit compared to Begins. Begins changed the tempo of the character so when TDK rolled around, people knew what kind of movie to expect. Tracking?

2) Look at Batman & Robin or Punisher War Zone from a cinematic standpoint. What were some of the factors that failed the movies: direction, character interpretations, script, budget. The same factors apply to Twilight. Now, if you keep the same cast for both B&R and PWZ but change just those four factors, you have completely different movies (for better or worse).

Those are the comparisons I'm trying to make.

To top if off, you (and many others on here), are not fans of the Twilight book saga because you never read them. So you really have no vested interest in how well the movie performs on screen. It's not like putting GL or Wolverine up on there where you know what you want to see. You can go into New Moon without any relevant standard except for the hope that it would be better than Twilight. There's really no risk behind going to see it except losing $8.

Did that clear it up?
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 10:32 AM
@inlovewiththeregencyelf: Good man! I'll be looking for this movie on DVD in a Buy 1 Get 2 Free special next year
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 10:33 AM
I agree with Ror.
DarthMulder - 10/23/2009, 10:39 AM
Multi@ i see what your saying but its not starting from scratch..everything fron the first movie happend!!...but like you say im not a fan and i wouldnt knock someone for liking it just wanted to know thats all .....from what i can tell from the trailers not much will change since its bella's character that annoyed me most so i will doubt il even look for it in the DVD bin lol :P
teabag - 10/23/2009, 10:45 AM
But the thing is Poni, with the exact same writing team and director,,as well as cast on board, why are you expecting any more from the sequel? There is really no comparison in my mind. What Nolan's Bat movies are to Shtmackers BnR is completely different to what New Moon will be to Twilight..Its a direct sequel! Its like giving Shitmacker another chance on a sequel to BnR.
RorMachine - 10/23/2009, 10:47 AM
@teabag: I never said it was a reboot, I said re-imagining. As in: using a better all around crew to tell the story with more depth. They are not starting from scratch because Twilight grossed over 300 million dollars worldwide. Why would they chance a complete reboot when all it needed was a makeover?

@Ror: No it's not. New Moon has a different director, script treatment, a stronger supporting cast and a larger budget.

The studio produced and marketed Twilight as an indie style movie. New Moon is being treated as a full studio picture with all the trimmings. That doesn't make a difference in production?

Just like you said "There is no comparison in my mind", it shows your opinion is already set in stone and nothing will ever change it. I've given you actual comparisons that you chose to ignore. If you actually read my comments above with an OPEN MIND you will understand the sense behind it. But at this point I don't expect that from you. FIN

@all: I'm not trying to convince you guys to be fans of the series, just to have an open mind to the positive changes the studio has made to give the fans the movie they want to see. Isn't that what any fan of a franchise what's, a studio and director to put pride aside and make a film based on fan input? Many of you guys have done the same to me regarding other movie properties and I've listened to your points, why is it so hard to listen to my perspective? If you're the kind of person that will forever be jaded by this franchise, don't ask for a valid argument from me.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 11:00 AM
Multi@ I was just saying your batman referance doesnt hold up as its not a reboot of the first , wasnt talking about how much it made and what they should do...thats all buddy :)

As for giving it a chance.....its still the same writers if not director but for you i will wait for it to be reviewed before i decide to visit the bargain bin lol
teabag - 10/23/2009, 11:12 AM
@teabag: You're still not getting it, I never said it was a reboot. Read this again:

"If you were not a fan of the Batman character and hated B&R, would you want to give another Batman movie a shot? Probably not. That's why TDK made a faster profit compared to Begins. Begins changed the tempo of the character so when TDK rolled around, people knew what kind of movie to expect."

Do you know what the mainstream audience probably thought a Batman reboot meant? A new cast. That's it. It wasn't the new cast in Begins that removed the bad taste from B&R, it was the overall FEEL and TONE of the movie. Hence a "re-imagining" of the characters. That's the comparison I'm making. It doesn't have to do with the cast, it's all the factors surrounding the actors.

As for the writer, she was handpicked by the author of the novels. After the fan backlash from Twilight she redid the New Moon script to use more of the source material.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 11:20 AM
Multi@ I never said you did lol hehe please read my posts again and you will see that lol!!! IT WAS a brand new start with Begins wether people knew it or not....fact is they may be changing the tempo but New Moon is NOT starting the franchise again with a new take on the begining like Begins did so again i do not see the comparisan for the general public..........when they saw the begins trailers i think it was obvious that apart from the cast things were differant.....nothing from New Moon looks diffrant except for less clothes :)

I see what your meaning but i think your loosing my point also .....simply that idk about the movie just the comparisan......lol :)
teabag - 10/23/2009, 11:29 AM
Oh i didn't realize it had a new director. That could make a big difference. But as for the rest of your post, why the hell would i need an open mind to understand a comparison that makes absolutely no sense?

" Hey, did you hear? Crank 2 is coming out..i probably wont see it because I didn't like the first one at all."

"Dude, thats so closed minded! What about King Arthur? You really like that didn't you? But not Excalibur! Open your mind man!"

Pretty much sums up your argument to me. But maybe I'm just missing something because I'm being closed minded;) I do get what your saying about the bigger budget etc, but like you I said, the characters just don't interest me. Idf they had made more of an effort on the first movie to make the characters likable, then I may be interested in seeing their sequel. Books? They could be [frick]ing literary masterpieces for all I know..I;m just talking about the movies.
RorMachine - 10/23/2009, 11:29 AM
oh my... whats a brewing?

multi...yes.. 109... knew it was something like that. ;) they keep very warm. Who do you like best? the vamps or the wolves? i dislike the part the wolves played in the last book when everyone was witnessing. you?

People have made up their minds. Its why when they make a movie they should keep to the source of the book for people who havent read it. Cuz now you cant get anyone to read the book since the 1st movie sucked. hopefully it can be redeemed with new moon.

You say they made twilight in the indie style and now they are going all out with the trimmings in the second. Do you think, iyo, that would have helped some for the 1st movie if they had taken that same approach? Cant help but wonder... gg..
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 11:31 AM
@KIR: It definitely would have made a difference. But the cast would have been completely different as well and I think they found the right actors for the roles the first time around.

Summit's original idea for the Twilight saga was to film the first three movies back to back with an option to produce the fourth. They wanted to budget $80 mil per movie and cast popular actors. Since they had two consecutive years of net losses, they chose to make ony the first one and so the story goes. It was only after the error of their ways that they realized what they should have done.

BTW, did you know that Henry Cavill was the #1 contender to play Edward? He was the novelist's first choice and he wanted to play the role as well. Due to scheduling conflicts it never panned out.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 11:44 AM
lordy... henry cavil would have been LOADS BETTER! imho. I wish it would have been him. What happened? was he busy with Tudors? I didnt care for the cast at all. it was wrong for me. except one or two maybe.

Like Alice was supposed to be small. I would have imagined someone like say 4'11 or 5' or something. 5'5 is not short to me. its about average height actually for a woman. im 5'3 so she's tall actually imho. Though to be fair i think she played the role well.

Rosalie was supposed to exceptionally beautiful and again imho this actress was not. Her beauty didnt come across to me. She didnt fit the description.

Emmett was mehhh... he was alright... but the other brother... it just didnt click for me.

I would have been huge if they did do twilight that way...more so that what it is now. They missed the chance to win alot of people over who didnt read the book. At least they have the opportunity to make it right with new moon. its either love it or hate it i suppose.
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 12:08 PM
@KIR: They're projecting New Moon will make $70 mil opening weekend with an overall gross of $550 mil. I think it'll be somewhere around there.

I feel the same way about Rosalie, that was the worst casting in the movie and it's all due to the director. She worked with Nicky Reed before in her movie Thirteen and she specifically wanted her for the Twilight part. Just goes to show when a director makes a film for her/himself as apposed to for the fans.
MultiPurposePoni - 10/23/2009, 12:13 PM
holy cow $550 mil... not bad...How much did Batman make? or Titanic? $578 or something. Do you think the record could be broken? hmmm there's alot of teeny boppers out there hooked on twilight.

I wouldnt have minded it if she worked with nicky before if she just fit the description. She was just all wrong for Rosalie across the board. I wish they would just think of the fans. When will they get that?!

but wht do you think of the postition the wolves took in the last book? was it something you could see happening? or do you think it should have played out differently? It was too easy for me and I didnt agree with it.
KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 12:25 PM
wHO THE HELL IS Rosalie? Either way part one blew chimp choad!
@Ror-01 i just saw Crank 2 and i didnt like one so i waited like , well till now.... But Crank 2 turned out to be pretty frickin cool .
shibazz - 10/23/2009, 4:17 PM
..... a blight on the world. that was so perfect. I have been chuckling about that to myself all day.

DarthMulder - 10/23/2009, 5:11 PM
@Shib..really? I actually thought Crank 1 was ok! haha, I only used it as an example.

Its not too harsh is it Darth? I don't think so!
RorMachine - 10/23/2009, 5:31 PM
giggle...giggle...giggle! hahaha!

KeepItReal - 10/23/2009, 6:19 PM
poni- new moon looks good cant wait to see it when it comes out with girl

flames809 - 10/23/2009, 7:48 PM
@ Ror.. no sir not a bit. It's actually perfectly apt.
DarthMulder - 10/23/2009, 8:56 PM
i for one really, really, really enjoyed this movie. the people who put it together seemed to really care about what they were creating here and bravo to them. i say if you cant get the original director, cinematographer, score, grips, best boy, cast....blah blah blah, then keep away from the f@#$%ing thing before it becomes HIGHLADER 2-THE QUICKENING. for me do it right or stay the f@#$k away from it. keep it faithful to the first. anyone remember RESIDENT EVIL 2-APOCOLYPSE... ATTENTION! BACK AWAY FROM THE SEQUEL!!
gaikinger - 10/23/2009, 10:43 PM
I dont see New Moon making that kinda money...if it does il never have faith in the world ever again lol :P
teabag - 10/24/2009, 4:00 AM
It probably will. I wont be a bit surprised. The first one made a packet too despite being so bad I wasn't even sure if it was supposed to be a comedy at times. There are a lot of teenage girls in the world that just love a good 10 minute scene of two woeful actors staring at each other in meadows.
RorMachine - 10/24/2009, 6:28 AM
@ Multi...actually one of the other reasons they are shirtless and wear less clothing is because once they reach the stage of them being able to transform...their body temp rises and that's why they cut their hair shorter and are shirtless most of the time too. Your reason for being able to carry the shorts around is true too...i like the books and hope the sequels do well, my only complaint is how Steph Meyer took away the sunlight weakness...i.e. dying...not sparkling...but other than that...the books were good. Kristen Stewart can't act for shhhh...t....lol...ashley greene is hot and perfect as alice.
TheREALHumanTorch - 10/24/2009, 8:53 AM
Are there any female werewolves???? cus il be happy with the topless excuse then lol :P
teabag - 10/24/2009, 10:02 AM
I am really getting tired of this twilight mess how many more years do we have with this junk...........bring the real vamps of buffy and angel now that was a phenomenon not this fake vampire mess with feelings. Now think about it .......if you where a vampire why would you be running around with a chick like bella she is not the hottest thing in the world and the diamonds are stupid
Justin Anthony - 10/24/2009, 5:00 PM

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.