Jamie Kennedy's favorite movie review site
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Awesome: 3.23%
Worth A Look45.16%
Just Average: 16.13%
Pretty Crappy: 32.26%
Sucks: 3.23%

3 reviews, 13 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Lion King, The (2019) by Peter Sobczynski

Stare by Jay Seaver

DreadOut by Jay Seaver

S He by Jay Seaver

We Are Little Zombies by Jay Seaver

Lion King, The (2019) by alejandroariera

Darlin' by Jay Seaver

Astronaut (2019) by Jay Seaver

White Storm 2: Drug Lords, The by Jay Seaver

Vivarium by Jay Seaver

subscribe to this feed

[AllPosters.com] Buy posters from this movie
by Rob Gonsalves

2 stars

Here’s an example of an interesting premise without much of a movie to put it in.

Daybreakers posits a world, nine years in our future, in which vampires have become the dominant life form. They go about their lives, guarding against the sun and drinking their coffee with a dash of human blood. Problem is, the vamps are running out of humans, so their scientists — including vamp hematologist Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke) — are working on a substitute for blood. Edward is one of the nicer vampires; he was turned into one against his will, so he still has some compassion for humans, which will get him in trouble.

As I said: cool premise, with a touch of allegory. But Daybreakers is a dreary-looking and sluggish narrative that doesn’t go anywhere special. This is the overdue second feature by the twin brothers Michael and Peter Spierig, whose 2003 debut was the antic but derivative Undead. The new film is equally derivative but nowhere near as lively; the look is consistently blue and gloomy, and only Willem Dafoe as a rebel human who calls himself Elvis supplies any levity whatsoever. The existence that the vampires want so desperately to maintain seems awfully drab.

Daybreakers has been praised for the details of its world-building, but in truth the Spierigs don’t go much beyond a few broad strokes. Which wouldn’t be as much of a problem if any of the human characters had a little humanity (other than Dafoe) and any of the vampires were even a little exotic. As it is, the vampires are essentially just people who need to drink blood and have fangs and amber-colored eyes. There’s another interesting idea — a subculture of homeless vampires who can’t get blood regularly and turn into horrific bat-like creatures called “subsiders.” But not a whole lot is done with them, either. They’re brought in at intervals, as if to remind us this is a horror movie.

Except it isn’t. It’s more of a science-fiction dystopia borrowing heavily from Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend, with a side order of Gattaca. We also get the expected action-movie beats; at least twice, a villain gets the drop on a hero, only to be dispatched by an offscreen savior who has arrived just in time. The Spierigs clearly put more thought into the premise than into the script, which proposes a laughable cure for vampirism and includes a corporate character (Sam Neill, who manages to be suave when he isn’t spattered with blood) who makes no sense at all.

The best vampire movie in recent years remains 2008’s Let the Right One In, which didn’t bother much with the whys and wherefores of vampirism — in short, the nerdy stuff — and focused on the relationship between the human and the inhuman. The Twilight movies, goofball as they are, work the same side of the street. Daybreakers doesn’t deal with relationship stuff at all, other than a barely sketched-in conflict between Edward and his soldier brother. I’m not saying a vampire movie has to be heavy on the drama, but Daybreakers offers virtually nothing in its place. As with Undead, it seems to have been made so that the Spierigs could include a scene of a bad-ass hero slaying monsters with his cool modified gun (in this case, a crossbow/shotgun).

Maybe the Spierigs should go into weapons design. It seems to be what’s closest to their hearts.

link directly to this review at http://www.hollywoodbitchslap.com/review.php?movie=18369&reviewer=416
originally posted: 01/10/10 18:12:37
[printer] printer-friendly format  
OFFICIAL SELECTION: 2009 Toronto International Film Festival For more in the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival series, click here.
OFFICIAL SELECTION: Fantastic Fest 2009 For more in the Fantastic Fest 2009 series, click here.

User Comments

9/14/17 morris campbell decent no more no less 3 stars
6/22/13 The Big D Somewhere up in heaven Bela Lugosi is wearing a paper bag over his head! 1 stars
1/01/11 mr.mike The earth did not move for me. 2.5 stars 3 stars
10/24/10 CMrok93 Surprisingly good movie. Only 98 minutes and to the point. Very interesting take on vampire 3 stars
5/18/10 gc A clever premise for a vampire movie 3 stars
5/16/10 JK Great premise, terrible execution, empty characters, no suspense. Wasted potential.. 2 stars
3/12/10 Never An awful film. Although I do have to agree that the premise was rather good. 2 stars
2/21/10 Ero Definitely a guarentee for a good time! 5 stars
1/24/10 ravenmad Different. Didn't make sense. Bad ending. 2 stars
1/21/10 Ming I love this film.. lots of great vampire scenes 4 stars
1/19/10 Mike Finally, vampires in a horror/suspense movie instead of a teen/romance movie. 4 stars
1/15/10 othree sosovamps bad, humans good, predictable Neill Dafoe 1 line lamerific, prob better story 2 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum

  08-Jan-2010 (R)
  DVD: 11-May-2010

  06-Jan-2010 (15)

  04-Feb-2010 (MA)
  DVD: 11-May-2010

[trailer] Trailer

Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 
Privacy Policy | | HBS Inc. |   
All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast