'Daybreakers' puts unique twist on vampire genre

[1 Comment(s)]

By Kayla Falgoust

Grade: B 

Wouldn't it be pretty great to be a vampire in the 21st century? With today's technology, we would be able to enjoy all the perks of being a vampire (i.e. immortality, sharp fangs) without all the hassles (i.e. no reflection, can't stand the sun). That's because in this day and age, vampires could check out their milky complexions in high-tech mirrors and move about in daylight via covered walkways and sun-proofed cars.  

In "Daybreakers," it is 2019 and vampirism is the norm. This came about because of a plague that transformed most of the human population into vampires. Sounds cool enough until you consider that this new race of blood suckers has decided to continue acting like normal humans - which is a pretty lame way to live if you are immortal. They wear human clothing, work at capitalistic corporations, and stand in line at the local coffee shop for a quick pick me up (of blood). 

While these futuristic blood suckers have used technology to their benefit, they still have one rather large problem: The human blood supply is running low and their whole race is on the brink of starvation. Enter Ethan Hawke as vampire Edward Dalton, a hematologist on a mission to discover a blood substitute. 

Dalton works for Bromley Marks, a pharmaceutical corporation that hunts down humans and harvests their blood to supply the vampire population. The problem is, however, the humans are becoming hard to find, and when vampires are deprived of a healthy diet of human blood, they become these insanely dangerous "sub-siders," driven solely by their desire to feed. 

In short, and without saying too much, Dalton meets this group of humans (led by Willem Dafoe) and decides to help them, and by doing so, he gains some unwanted attention from his boss at Bromley Marks (Sam Neill) and his vampire-hunting brother (Michael Dorman), who want to capture these humans to farm their blood. 

Despite its unique take on the vampire thriller, there are a few places in the movie's plot that are a bit weak creatively. After coming up with such an interesting premise, "Daybreakers" fails to follow through in the second half of the movie - especially with the ending. While the ending seems to fit the general direction the film is headed, it doesn't seem complete and leaves you with a few questions.  

Visually, the film is a bit dark and monochromatic at times, and it's also a little gory, but this is a vampire movie, after all.

 Nevertheless, between the surprising plot turns and blood-riddled scenes, the movie attempts to send a message about the value of humanity, as Dalton struggles with being a vampire and initially refuses to drink pure human blood - even to his own detriment. In this way, "Daybreakers" forces its audience to ponder whether the price of being a vampire is worth all of its benefits - whether it is better to be vampire or to be human.     

As far as the acting goes, there are some pretty notable names in this movie: Dafoe, Hawk, and even Sam Neill (a.k.a Dr. Alan Grant of "Jurassic Park" fame).  

Hawke is right at home playing the mopey, woe-is-me vampire, who ultimately prefers being human. Dafoe's character is a little weird with his Thunderbird, but that's just Dafoe. Thanks to their solid acting chops, it is easier to stomach some of the more puzzling choices that the movie makes and to really feel like theirs is a cause worth fighting for. 

As for Sam Neill, he is as good as it gets at evil, creepy vampire CEO. 

Overall, "Daybreakers" is a solid vampire thriller that brings something new to the genre, so go see it before it leaves local theaters.

Originally Published: Issue 863 - February 3, 2010

Share on Facebook

Back to the top