#1  
Old 01-03-2010, 10:21 AM
Daybreakers




Daybreakers

Directed By Michael & Peter Spierig

Written By Michael & Peter Spierig

Starring Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, Isabel Lucas, and Sam Neil

Running Time of 98 Minutes

Rated R for strong bloody violence, language, and brief nudity

Releases January 8, 2010




Currently at 100% at RT. (This will obviously change.) It was a big splash at the 2009 Toronto Film Festival, has been called unusually solid for a January release, is supposed to make Vampires badass again, and horror fans have been told they have something to look forward to. Chris B of this site gave it an 8/10 back at TIFF.

I for one am surprised that there's actually something I want to see in January. Thoughts? Reviews?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-03-2010, 10:36 AM

I'll probably get around to seeing this. Looks entertaining.

Plus, the vampires in this actually have fangs and dont sparkle. Thats pretty refreshing.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-03-2010, 01:10 PM
Looks pretty good and the reviews have me pretty intrigued. I'll see it.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-03-2010, 10:12 PM
January may normally be known as dumping ground for studios, but this year, January is an unusually decent looking month. This, The Book of Eli, Edge of Darkness, Legion and Extraordinary Measures are all movies that I'm looking forward to.

Can't wait to see this. Good cast, intriguing premise, awesome trailer. Best of all, an R rating. What's not to love?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-04-2010, 05:09 AM
This looks like fun. I haven't seen an action-horror movie in a while and this fits the bill. I like Hawke, DaFoe and Neil.

Last edited by Cop No. 633; 01-04-2010 at 05:12 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-04-2010, 07:39 AM
This does look pretty interesting, a unique take on the vamp genre with a solid cast. Sam Neil's involvment alone makes me think that this will not only be fun, but smart...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-06-2010, 07:18 PM
I would be more interested in this if I hadn't seen the horsedung called Undead. Maybe the directors have improved since then.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-06-2010, 07:31 PM
Looks interesting, I love when Neil plays a villain.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-06-2010, 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy Boy View Post
I would be more interested in this if I hadn't seen the horsedung called Undead. Maybe the directors have improved since then.
Yeah, I tried watching that but couldn't force myself. But this looks much better than that movie. Hopefully they learned a lot since then.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-06-2010, 08:42 PM
Sam Neil always sparks my interest in pretty much anything he's in. He's stared in a handful of pretty good "genre" (ew!) films as well. In the Mouth of Madness, Jurassic Park 1&3, Event Horizon (well, I dig it), Memoirs of an Invisible Man, and now we can this to the list if it's as good as it looks. Are there any other films I'm missing where Neil plays a villain?

I really like the idea of a vampire community running the world in being the majority--it kind of flips the typical vampire movie setup on its head where vamps are usually the ones in hiding.

Vampires roaming the world in mass has been done before in movies like I Am Legend, but here these undead have an actual organized society and I watched a clip on Bloody-Disgusting a few months back that made me think this movie also has a chance to quite comical at times, with this set up.

My g-unit and myself have been interested in seeing this movie for some time--we'll be there on Friday.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-06-2010, 08:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicPuppet View Post
Yeah, I tried watching that but couldn't force myself. But this looks much better than that movie. Hopefully they learned a lot since then.
Undead was pretty uninteresting from what I recall. I haven't seen an excessive amount of zombie films, but Undead is among the more boring ones I have. With the exception of the foreign flavor added to it, I didn't find anything unique or exciting in Undead. The idea of something falling from space, spreading some bug, and causing zombie hell appeals to me for some reason. I really like it in the original Night of the Living Dead when the news mentions a satellite fell from the sky and we are lead to believe that maybe that caused the whole situation--or maybe it's just madness spun out of control, but I like that kind of "origin" paranoia. I believe Undead started with meteors falling from the sky (been awhile), but I also remember that the filmmakers didn't play around with that idea very much and that there was unsuccessful attempts at slash comedy all over the place.

I still think Daybreakers looks very interesting, hopefully they accomplished more with this work.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-06-2010, 11:54 PM
Sam Neill hasn't been in anything good since JP3. But it's great to see him back in a mainstream movie.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-08-2010, 09:52 AM
I'm checking this out in a bit, start off my 2010 movie viewings.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireCaptain4 View Post
Sam Neil always sparks my interest in pretty much anything he's in. He's stared in a handful of pretty good "genre" (ew!) films as well . . . Are there any other films I'm missing where Neil plays a villain?
I don't know if you have seen this already and consider it a "pretty bad 'genre' film," but Sam Neill played grown up Damien Thorn in "Omen III: The Final Conflict" in 1981. He becomes England's U.S. Ambassador, there's something about the second coming of Christ to potentially get in his way, etc. You might like it.

Oh, and you're not alone on "Event Horizon" and "Jurassic Park III." "Event Horizon" is loved by many around here, including myself. And for all its pros and cons, I consider "Jurassic Park III" underrated.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-08-2010, 01:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Nukem View Post
I don't know if you have seen this already and consider it a "pretty bad 'genre' film," but Sam Neill played grown up Damien Thorn in "Omen III: The Final Conflict" in 1981. He becomes England's U.S. Ambassador, there's something about the second coming of Christ to potentially get in his way, etc. You might like it.

Oh, and you're not alone on "Event Horizon" and "Jurassic Park III." "Event Horizon" is loved by many around here, including myself. And for all its pros and cons, I consider "Jurassic Park III" underrated.
I had no idea Neill was in Omen III. I've never checked out any of the sequels. Thanks!

Don't mind the "genre" comment, I wasn't being snobbish. I just threw that term around because I hear it a lot when others discuss anything sci-fi or horror or action related.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-08-2010, 04:39 PM
I’m always a sucker for a quality vampire film. I’m also a sucker for stupid puns, apparently. Either way, give me a violent, smart, and vicious vampire movie over those Twilight movies, which are definitely not my bag. So, consider me interested when a vampire movie known as Daybreakers, one of the first movies of 2010, comes along with an “I am Legend” vibe that I really dug in the trailers. Yet, for the movie as a whole, the whole premise is great; it’s where the execution comes along near the end that kind of lost its luster for me.

The movie is in the year 2019, and an epidemic has caused just about the entire population to be vampires. The remaining n humans are kidnapped and farmed for blood, maintaining the need for subsistence. However, when the supply begins to dwindle, a blood researcher named Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke) leads a search for a blood replacement in order to feed the vampire population. For Charles Bromley (Sam Neil), the director of the company that leads the farming of humans, this can lead to an increased profit for the remaining blood that is left. However, a faction of humans comes to Dalton with a cure to vampirism, leading to a race to save humankind from utter extinction.

The vampire world that surrounds Daybreakers is great, with buildings and subway stations that housed the people from sunlight, the cars that have sunlight protection, to the propaganda that is strewn throughout the city; encouraging the citizens to turn in humans. There are other aspects of vampirism that I also enjoyed, but feel it’s definitely better if you see it for yourself. The acting is solid across the board, with Ethan Hawke as the solid lead; playing the vampire blood researcher who is doing everything he can do stop the extinction of the human race. Sam Neil plays his corporate character with a slimy edge, and you love every second of it. In terms of the human characters, Willem Dafoe is a hoot as the southern man trying to survive, as well as Claudia Karvan as the other humans who asks Edward for help.

The Spierig Brothers seem to enjoy the world that they created, but while I did enjoy most of the world, the plot seemed a bit rushed, as well as some silly things that drive the story to its conclusion. Add to the fact that the ending seems a bit of a mess, the characters and things that happen to it are still mildly entertaining. One thing that really bothers me was the same cheap scares that inhabit certain scenes. I’m not going to lie, it got the first time, but every other time just made me roll my eyes, especially considering how unneeded it was as well.

So, overall, if you want a pleasant dark vampire movie, I would definitely check it out. It’s nothing extraordinary, but if it gives us more films that don’t follow the same themes of the Twilight films*, then I’m definitely on board.

6/10

*: I’m not ragging on Twilight, it just isn't my bag. Hell, I’m going to actually watch the first one when it premieres on Showtime just to see what the big deal is. You can't knock it if you don't try it.

Last edited by Mr.HyDe807; 01-13-2010 at 11:06 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-08-2010, 07:34 PM
.

Last edited by FireCaptain4; 04-10-2010 at 05:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-08-2010, 08:37 PM
daybreakers review

I saw this movie and was pretty disappointed. The movie is set in 2019, but for some reason the writers decided a good way to get the hero in trouble was to have someone literally walk in his back door ~ twice!! It insulted my intelligence too much.

Check out my Sci-Fi themed blog for my review.

http://moviealien.wordpress.com/2010...ined-my-night/
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-08-2010, 08:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireCaptain4 View Post
I had no idea Neill was in Omen III. I've never checked out any of the sequels. Thanks!

Don't mind the "genre" comment, I wasn't being snobbish. I just threw that term around because I hear it a lot when others discuss anything sci-fi or horror or action related.
You're welcome. Oh, and don't worry, I was never bothered by the "genre" comment at all. I didn't know if you had seen "Omen III," so I spun your words around. Whatever you were saying or not saying went right over my head.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-08-2010, 09:02 PM
6.5/10

I really loved the trailers for this flick, and I was expecting a stylized fast-paced vamp movie. The movie fell flat for me, and I left the movie scratching my head and not sure what it was that had turned me off so much. Maybe it was the lack of chemistry between the actors, the romantic interest that seemed thrown in as an afterthought (hey it is a movie, you must have a romance in there... no, they'd have been better off without) or the rushed and forced ending.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-08-2010, 09:44 PM
I loved this movie. It's a breath of fresh air as far as vampire movies are concerned. A great premise that is well utilized. Stylish direction, an outstanding production design, awesome action and a first-rate cast. Ethan Hawke is his usually solid self. Sam Neill is always great and this is no exception. Willem Dafoe is mucho badass. Infact, my only real complaint about this movie is that Dafoe doesn't get nearly as much to do as I would have liked. His back story is great and more character development on him and the Audrey character would have been appreciated. But it's a minor complaint to an otherwise terrific little movie. A real treat and what a great way to start the new year. Compulsively watchable, endlessly compelling and ultimately very satisfying.

7/10
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-08-2010, 10:52 PM
I just loved how balls out this movie was. Dismemberments for the win.

8/10
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-09-2010, 11:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericdraven View Post
I just loved how balls out this movie was. Dismemberments for the win.

8/10
Spoiler:
Sam Neill's death and the death of the first vampire hobo (what were those things called? I can't recall) left me smiling with glee.


I then noticed a small group of nine and ten year old kids in theater in front of me with no parent guardians in sight...
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-09-2010, 12:13 PM
For those that have seen this, who is the one that steals the show?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-09-2010, 01:18 PM
Unfortunately, an awesome premise and cool visuals collapse beneath a never-ending horde of cliches and unoriginality. Every plot element was recycled, every relationship a rehash, and you could see the outcome from a mile away. Instead of making an intelligent film, they went the "jump scare" route, seemingly tacking on the story as an afterthought. I was hoping to get much more out of my first cinema trip of 2010.

5/10
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-09-2010, 01:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
For those that have seen this, who is the one that steals the show?
I thought the acting all across the board was solid but if there is one person who steals scenes it would definitely Willem Dafoe. Infact, I wish we had seen more of a him. But he's more of a supporting character.

That said, Ethan Hawke was very good in the movie nonetheless. The movie without a doubt belongs to him.

I also liked the actress who plays Audrey. Don't know her name.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-09-2010, 02:32 PM
I want to check this movie out but I'm not sure if it's worth the extra money What's your opinion?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-10-2010, 02:42 AM
this movie is badass 8.5/10!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-10-2010, 11:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbunn10 View Post
Unfortunately, an awesome premise and cool visuals collapse beneath a never-ending horde of cliches and unoriginality. Every plot element was recycled, every relationship a rehash, and you could see the outcome from a mile away. Instead of making an intelligent film, they went the "jump scare" route, seemingly tacking on the story as an afterthought. I was hoping to get much more out of my first cinema trip of 2010.

5/10
You typed the words out of my mouth. This movie was simply boring. It didn't even have an ending either. It's like the directors just got lazy and said, "Fuck it, let's just keep going until it's about two hours and we'll throw in a voice over bit and the movie's done. Maybe we'll get a shot of the sky."

Also, Willem DaFoe was given terrible one liners. Terrible.

I will say in the film's defense it was visually great to look at. The cinematographer and the production team did a hell of a job at creating the world and making it believable. At times, it recalled Blade Runner in the interiors but the exteriors were of a much slicker society like in Equilibrium with hardly any colors. But the film's plot is very middle of the road and the characters aren't interesting enough even for a B-movie. Even a film like Slither which wore it's B-movie status with pride had great, fun characters to follow along a been-here,done-that plot. Daybreakers could have done the same but it lacked in both the story and characters for me.

Also... I'm just curious but what the hell was up with that cure? Was I the only one thinking the real cure was the water at the hideout in combination with the sun exposure? I thought the water was toxic looking or at least had something going on with it and then the movie jumps to the conclusion that it's just the sun. It would have been more logical for them to conclude that the water had something to do with it and not just the sun. I felt the movie just took a leap there with that conclusion.

Last edited by Cop No. 633; 01-11-2010 at 03:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-13-2010, 01:31 AM
Daybreakers(2010)-8/10...very cool and surprising horror/action film wriiten and directed by The Spierig Brothers, that takes the age old conflict of humans/vampires, starts off with an interesting premise and then makes it more interesting and compelling with fresh and original ideas. The year is 2019 and the population has been overrun by vampires after a viral outbreak ten years earlier...at just 5% the human race is near extinction, leaving the vampires with a growing problem; a blood shortage. Ethan Hawke plays a hopeful hematologist, who works for a blood-farming company. His research and experiments are designed to find a blood substitute to help solve the growing crisis. A chance encounter with a small band of surviving humans opens his eyes to a new outlook and a new chance for survival. From the very cool opening scene of Daybreakers to the last, this film shows such great inventiveness and originality with its storytelling, ideas and concepts in a genre that has seen it all. It takes all the cliches and accepted lore of vampire movies and turns them on their head...I love the way it used the simple ideas of invisibility in mirrors or the aversion to sunlight to create truly poignant moments or very interesting and cool action scenes. Its also a fun and exciting film to watch...its bloody and action-packed when it needs to be, scary and tense at the right times, but the ideas and themes it conveys throughout is what really sets it apart. Its rare that something like this should come along and inject a much needed dose of originality in a popular genre that has seen little of it lately, and for that it should be commended. A great surprise and a real good start to 2010. Cast also includes Sam Neill, Willem Dafoe and Claudia Karvan.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-13-2010, 01:41 AM
Daybreakers is slickly-shot, well-realized, and at times hilariously violent vampire badassery. The gore factor at times borders on self-parody, particularly in a sequence toward the very end of the film, but manages to stay just outside that border thanks to the production values and the actors' ability to sell this nonsense.

The movie breaks some of the cliches about what a vampire society would be like, while embracing and at the same time challenging standard vampire lore. This starts with little things such as addressing their lack of reflection, which is explained in a single shot as Ethan Hawke checks his complexion via a video camera/screen panel in his car, as the rear view mirror shows only his empty clothing. The classic aversion-to-sunlight becomes a core component in the encompassing dilemma, giving new light (no pun intended) to why it is vampires burn in the daytime.

Hawke plays a hematologist (yes, vamps have their own blood doctors) attempting to develop a suitable blood substitute before the human supply runs out completely, the effect of which inevitably turns ordinary vamps into zombie/bat-mutant creatures called "subsiders" (I guess ZomBatMan just doesn't have the same ring to it at ManBearPig), who are brought to life through some great prosthetic makeup. He meanwhile struggles with his own displeasure being a vampire and guilt toward the seeming eradication of the human race, and while he lets the glowing eyes, furrowed brow and drooping bangs do most of the acting, he's easy enough to like as a protagonist, especially during his emotional battles with his younger brother (Michael Dorman), though perhaps that's because of the success of that character's arc.

By accident (literally), Hawke stumbles upon a human resistance led Willem Dafoe talking in a sweet growling pseudo-drawl. Dafoe is generally awesome, and he's just fun to listen to here with some great one-liners, but for a badass vampire slayer, he doesn't do a whole lot in the way of badass vampire slaying. Sam Neill plays the head of the corporate blood supplier with his own personal agenda played against the search for a blood substitute. Neill as well is typically great to watch in anything, but as the villain of the story he stands around making speeches more than doing anything actually evil.

But let's get down to the good stuff: as in, how fucking bloody is this business? If you'll forgive the following disgusting analogy, Daybreakers is bloody as your worst horror movie nightmare wrapped in a funhouse of death that's having a period. I'm not just talking vampire bites, which do gush a good shade. I'm talking dismemberments, long shots of detached body parts...the first test of Hawke's blood substitute fails in spectacular fashion, and the result is shocking and gross and best left to be witnessed on screen. And as I stated, some of the gore is downright funny for how disgusting it is. It's like the Spierig Brothers sat down at their first creative meeting and asked, "Okay...how many motherfuckers can we eviscerate in this flick?", and after this touchy-feely crap the Twilight crowd has thrown at us (the success of which will surely not be overshadowed by this movie, sadly) that's a refreshing thing to experience.

In fact, that's my one-line review: Daybreakers is a great big middle finger to wussy vampire flicks everywhere. Compared to other recent efforts, I'd call it the best "alternative" vamp film I've seen since 30 Days of Night (I've still yet to see Let The Right One In; it's on my Netflix queue). See it, and bring a plastic sheet, 'cause it's Gallagher time, bitches.

Last edited by Weapon X; 01-13-2010 at 01:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-14-2010, 09:44 AM
I agree that anything with Dafoe in it raises the bar. Reading him discuss the vampire mythos and metaphor impressed me more.
http://blogs.amctv.com/movie-news/20...-interview.php
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-20-2010, 10:26 AM
bump
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-02-2010, 10:46 PM
Daybreakers

I loved what "Daybreakers" did with the mythology of vampires. I spent the first 20-30 minutes completely intrigued by the world this film created. The gore was many times surprising and almost always grade A. There were a few things that I thought was stupid, but overall this was an entertaining film that had my attention.

My Rating: 7/10
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-03-2010, 01:18 AM
I really enjoyed it. It was like Near Dark meets Underworld. Some of the violence and gore was pretty shocking - but effective. I like just about everything they did with the movie, well, except for the stupid jump-scares with the really loud bat sound effects. That was just dumb.

Also, any movie that showcases the most bad ass car ever made is a movie that's a-okay with me (that would be the Trans Am, in case you thought I meant the Mustang).
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-20-2010, 03:13 PM
i'm gonna watch it NOW!!!
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-10-2010, 02:06 AM
I rather liked it. It was a entertaining. The vampire world was very well planned. And I'm glad that they didn't sacrifice vampire tech for future tech and vice versa. They implemented both vampire and futuristic designs so that we could see what it really could be like if everyone was a vampire. Everyone was really well cast and did a great job at their roles. The only real problems with the performances was that because they were under written the actors just didnt' have much to work with. Which is why it was entertaining that Willem Dafoe was just off the rails for the little time he had on screen.
Ethan Hawke did very well as the straight man. It wasn't a role with much nuance or anything particularly interesting about it, but his relationship with Michael Dorman and Sam Neil was more than compelling.
There was very little action, but what was there was so....different. Naturally movies like this end with a big action set piece. But rather than that we got some "action" that was entirely necessary to serve the plot and what the characters had been developing for the duration of the movie. The big nasty scene at the end was an example of what these characters had achieved. And that is so much better than just another car chase or shootout.

I really dug the convoy action scene in the middle of the movie, it was so well done. I just wish there was more to it. The way in which they 'reveal' whats on either side of the cars was just so inventive and yet I can't help but think why I haven't seen it happen in a vampire movie before.
Spoiler:

I like the fact that the ending was hopeful and not entirely conclusive. But I can't help but think that if they aren't moving the blood substitute ahead and they aren't going to cure everyone. Then a lot of people are going to die before or of these things goes global. Meanwhile the characters that know how to cure people are just driving along a road feeling as if they achieved something. Kinda silly, but I can deal with it.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-10-2010, 11:59 AM
It was worth the rental. The actors tried and it was better than I expected.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-11-2010, 09:46 PM
Pretty good from what i watched. Ethan Hawkes car is awesome.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump