Daybreakers Bluray

Posted In: Legion

Kiesha Connel says...

DAYBREAKERS



You know vampires have become a huge thing again which I guess makes me happy since I love them. The thing is, for the most part it is not the vampires I like, today's vampires seem to be all in love and twinkle in the sunlight. What ever happened to the guys that were evil and would um let's say burn in the sunlight. Well let me stop being so one dimensional since I tend to think I am all for something new. With that said there is finally something new in the vampire world that I like, this wonderful film and even better DVD.



It was not that long ago we were watching this in the theaters and absolutely loved it and just like I hoped the DVD release was great. But we will get to that later, let's talk about the film. The film is set in the not to distant future, ten years or something like that, and the entire population is made up of vampires. Yes you read that right and there are only about 5% of humans left to feed on. The crazy thing is that all of them were at one point human and were turned because of a virus, a pandemic. With such a low percentile left the food supply for the vampires is dwindling , so an alternative is being worked on by the top researchers the population has. One of those vampires is Edward Dalton [Ethan Hawke] who is sympathetic towards the humans, in fact he wants to be one. He has his military little brother to thank for changing him, I guess they don't get along much.



There is also another problem out there, if they don't get enough blood in them they start to mutate into creatures called subsiders. These vampires resemble bats and are very vicious, even attacking and killing "normal" vampires in order to survive. Naturally that puts pressure on the company he works for Bromley Marks and its owner Charles Bromley (Sam Neill), who puts pressure on him. But it is after a chance encounter with a group of humans that Edward realizes he must do more for them. Well actually it is when they show up at his place asking him for help. It is after this he meets a human named Elvis [Willem Dafoe], who once was a vampire himself. Turns out after some exposure to sunlight while being thrown from his car into water he was cured of the disease.



So they team together to find a way to duplicate the effects in a controlled environment, were Edward eventually cures himself. During all of this the vampire's military is still hunting down humans for the harvest. The company still makes most of its money by the blood harvesting they do. But when Edward returns to let his boss in on the cure it turns out Bromley is not interested. He likes things the way they are and wants vampires to continue to rule over the world. What is a former vampire to do in such a situation?



Written and directed by Michael and Peter Spierig who previously made the independent film "Undead" did a masterful job with this film. The idea to the story all the way to the actual script was great in my opinion. Plus the look of the film is great with a lot of interesting characters to fill in this world. Depending on your taste you probably either loved or hated their first film "Undead" but either way I am sure you could see the potential these two had. I think they are realizing that potential very quickly with such a great film like this, can't wait to see what they next.



With such great characters you have to have actors to bring them to life, and we have that here. Ethan Hawke who when I first had seen the trailers for this seemed out of place for this type of film really surprised me. He did an excellent and was really the right choice to play our lead in this film, in fact the more I think about it he didn't seem out of place I was just in a bad place at that time. He is the right type of person to play the sympathetic character in this, so well done. On the flip side Sam Neill was perfect as the business man that is all about just that, business. He is one of those types who likes his business because business is good, you know that type. And of course you know the great Willem Dafoe is perfect in this and I really love his back story here a lot. Over all the entire cast did an excellent job on this, really they did.



Now if there is any flaw to this film it is that the subsiders are not explored enough, there is so much more there. I found these creatures to be highly interesting and felt they need to be explored more, but perhaps a sequel is what we need. Maybe as the world is being brought back to normal these subsiders need to be rounded up and exterminated. Also add in that all those who want to remain vampires will eventually turn so they are also still a threat. Still the fact that this is the world we live in were the economy and jobs and everything is still an ongoing thing it makes it more realistic, and that helps take away from the flaw.



Still it is the EXCELLENT special features that this release has that makes it a step above others coming out. There are all kinds of features to watch, trailers and even a great commentary by the Brother filmmakers. But it is the highly interesting, entertaining, and very in depth informative making of that is great. Honestly it is one of the best making of features I have ever seen, and it is not your average10 to 15 minute behind the scenes look. It goes all the way back to when the brothers scraped money together to make "Undead" and how that lead into this. From writing it to pitching it to scouting and casting, it has a very in depth look at pre production, VERY in depth look at the production , and of course in depth post production. It even goes all the way to the premiere of the film. Were you might give this a four star rating on the film if that was all you have seen, then know that a five star rating is the least you can give the DVD/Blu-Ray if reviewed.



Also I have heard people talk about the ending, myself if asked would say it was perfect. plus who could hate one of the goriest endings ever.

Posted on April 27, 2011

Patria Raner says...

Daybreakers is a breath of fresh, garlic and blood scented air, that steers clear of the recent abomination of sparkly vampires, and holds true to the genre's rich history while still managing an infusion of originality.



When a shortage of blood causes widespread hunger and panic amongst the predominant vampire population of the world, global blood banks - the primary one is run by sinister Bromley Marks (Sam Neill) - begin to ration for survival and plan for a synthetic substitute, headed by Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), a vampire who shows great empathy for his most likely food source.Meanwhile, the remaining humans scurry about in the dark like field-mice, hoping to avoid the keen night-vision of the vampire hunters who wish to capture the humans for harvesting.When Edward runs into crossbow-toting, former vampire Elvis (Willem Dafoe), he takes the steps towards discovering, testing, and implementing a cure.



An accessible plot and adequate direction by the Speirig brothers makes Daybreakers enjoyable, but not overbearing.With interlaced social commentary (substitute blood for today's oil crises) and similarities to previous vampire movies - most notably the cinematographic stylings of the Blade Collection and the cure for a "disease" from I Am Legend - the film is intelligent without unnecessary comedic aspects (although I found the concept of exploding vampire animals causing forest fires to be quite hilarious).Special effects are a mix of CGI and old-school, with almost enough to satisfy a gore-hound.Add in an homage to the classic look of Nosferatu vampires and the result is an entertaining addition to the vampire genre, with just enough action and storyline to make up for a lack of character development.



Highly recommended for horror and sci-fi fans.Not recommended for fans of glittery, emo vampires.

Posted on April 29, 2011

Tomiko Vaz says...

Daybreakers is a breath of fresh air in the world of vampire cinema that currently consists of the Twilight series of films. I have nothing against these films, I just prefer my vampires to be badass and blood-thirsty, while maintaining that aura of supernatural coolness

Posted on April 29, 2011

Leandra Skoff says...

After the massive success of the "Twilight" movies and books, and their apparent stranglehold over many moviegoers and Hollywood in general; I was beginning to wonder if we would ever get to see a traditional vampire movie. You know, one that abides by the commonly accepted rules of the vampire legends, unlike the aforementioned that ignores most of them whenever possible.



I for one just want to see vampires get a movie that does them justice. Not another one of these overly romantic pieces of drivel that we've been subjected to over the last couple of years. Finally, it seemed the wait was over with the recently released "Daybreakers" returning vampires to their customary status of predators of the night. But, was this a proper return to the fearsome creatures we once knew or has all the romance robbed them of their bite?



"Daybreakers" is set in a world where the majority of the populace has been turned into vampires. For the longest time the vampires have hunted and captured the remnants of humanity for use in their massive blood farming operation; however, because of their insatiable thirst, humanity's numbers have dwindled significantly. As their food source becomes more and more scarce; one vampire scientist, Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke), is working vigorously to develop an alternative sustenance for his brethren before they all begin turning on each other. However, a small batch of human resistance, led by a former vampire (Willem Dafoe) seeks to cure Edward of his curse and in turn show him the way to save the world.



Despite being intrigued by the trailers, the end result of "Daybreakers" left me extremely disappointed by the lack of anything interesting or refreshing being brought to the table. The movie, written and directed by The Spierig Brothers ("Undead"), is a hodge-podge of thinly developed stock characters, predictability, a few borrowed ideas, and an inability to ultimately decide to which genre it belonged.



Leading the roster of under-developed characters is actor Ethan Hawke ("Taking Lives"). Personally, I've never really been a big fan of Ethan Hawke or the majority of his movies. He always seems pretentious in every role he plays, and this one is no different. That aside, he does an adequate job as Edward, the film's protagonist, who just so happens to be one of the only vampires that despises being a vampire. His character should have been someone the audience could relate to and root for; however, I for one, could not get interested in anything he was doing over the course of the movie. His character arc is far too slow and meandering, not to mention Hawke brings his typical arrogance to the role which of course didn't help matters.



Fighting alongside Ethan Hawke's character is Wilem Dafoe ("Spider-Man") as a former vampire turned human. Typically, you can count on Wilem to deliver an entertaining performance to say the least. Beyond that he's hit-and-miss as to whether he's handing in a solid, believable performance or another over-the-top, borderline caricature of the character he was supposed to play. With his portrayal here he keeps his eccentricity in check, resulting in his character coming across as flat and boring. There were some brief moments of entertaining dialogue and/or actions that his character had to do, but for the most part this was one of those times where he should have gone overboard and the character would have been better suited. It's like I said though, he can be hit-and-miss.



The ever-reliable Sam Neill ("Jurassic Park") takes on the role of the film's primary antagonist and apparent leader of the vampires. While he certainly brings a dignified presence and sense of authority to the role, plus an undeniably malevolent streak; in the end, it's still not enough. The problems arise from his character being of stock quality and simply generic in nature; thus, leaving Sam's talents wasted in the role. Perhaps if the writing/directing team had crafted a more uniquely developed character for Sam, and the other actors as well, to really sink their teeth into, then the outcome could have been so much better than the mediocrity on display.



Speaking of the story, the writer/director team of The Spierig Brothers ("Undead") seemed to have a decent template for a good vampire movie with "Daybreakers". However, like so many other writers and directors have discovered, a good idea does not always pan out as one had hoped, especially when it embraces unoriginality.



The problems with the movie's story begin early on with that troublesome plight of predictability being ever-present. For roughly 75% of the movie I had a fairly accurate idea of where the story was going and what the characters would end up doing. When this occurs, it's a relatively safe bet that the movie is not going to come close to being satisfactory no matter the talent involved. Another cause for the story's predictability was some of the borrowed ideas from movies such as, "The Matrix", "Mad Max", and even fellow vampire movie "Blade 2".



Whenever a movie is too easy to predict based solely on its screenplay, throwing in borrowed ideas only makes the problem all the more evident. Maybe before the Spierig Brothers hatch another movie, they should take the time to really nail down their ideas and do so without stealing from other, more superior movies.



Now I will say that the final 25% of the movie was somewhat less predictable than everything that preceded it. With that being said, while I didn't anticipate some of the events that occurred in the closing moments, I also wasn't pleased with it either. The reason being is that the previous chunk of the movie, although borderline boring to me with its unoriginality, was at least striving to be more of a supernatural thriller rather than a horror film (not a typical genre for vampire movies). That all changed in the movie's final 20 minutes though.



My guess is that the Spierig Brothers remembered they were making a vampire movie, and what's a vampire movie without tons of blood and guts being spilt? So, after over an hour of minimal gore on display, suddenly the screen erupts into chaotic grisly violence and everything in view is now crimson. I'm typically not one to dismiss a movie simply because it's a blood-soaked member of the horror genre; however, when the majority of the movie is relatively tame, such an abrupt switch into horror mode is quite jarring. My opinion is that a movie needs to find a genre and stay in it, be it horror, thriller or whatever, but don't switch at the last minute to meet some blood-spilling quota for vampire movies.



It's disappointing that a movie with decent star power (even with the despicable Ethan Hawke's presence), was hindered by a flimsily conceived story, eliminating any possible hope of entertaining this viewer, at least. It's really too bad, because I was hoping that this would be the movie to redeem the vampire sub-genre from the depths it had sunk too with this whole "Twilight" phenomenon. Oh well, there's always next time.



"Daybreakers" is rated R for violence, language, and gore.

Posted on April 29, 2011

Odell Fusilier says...

A futuristic Earth populated entirely by vampires, and the efforts made by the creatures to ensure that their food supply doesn't run out as humankind is faced with extinction. The year is 2017, and a vampire plague has turned most of the planet's human population into bloodsucking ghouls. As the population of mortals fast begins to dwindle, a vampiric corporation sets out to capture and farm every remaining human while simultaneously researching a consumable blood substitute, headed by undead hematologist Edward Dalton.



A good vampire movie and a good storyline. It adds a few very interesting ideas to the vampire mythos. Great gore too, for those that are true horror fans.

Posted on April 30, 2011

Lorilee Mcgilvray says...

To be entertained. And that's what this movie does- it ensures your entertainment for its runtime.



A good vampire movie is almost a rarity these days. Err, that's an understatment. A good vampire ANYTHING is a rarity these days. Ever since the Twihard movement exploded we've beem getting tons of OC-With-Wampires things. It is rather sad; I love vampires as much as the next guy and I'll be honest when I say that I began to lose that love when Twilight came out. And I almost CRINGED seeing the trailer- I thought it looked cool but just like a poor man's Blade Runner with vampires.



Well when I saw this movie, I found out how wrong I was.



Right now this movie has a love it or hate it thing- I like that. It shows that movies don't have to be for everyone. That they have audiences of their own.



Edward (not Cullen) is a vampire who works for a blood farming company. His brother is a police officer hellbent for finding humans. There are very few humans left- and a very small amount of blood. Blood is running low. Companies are now reducing the amount of blood they offer with certain products.



However, Edward doesn't like being a vampire. He doesn't like the fact that he has to drink the blood of people to keep his belly full. And he misses being able to experience the sun. After coming across a group of humans one night, he takes interest in them and eventually has a meeting set up with former vampire Lionel (played by Willem Dafoe), a human, and together he and the humans plan to turn vampires back to humans.



This is why we go to the cinema- so we can be entertained. This movie did just that. For 100 minutes, it provided some nice scares, gore, and action to add to the fun, not to mention it had a well placed amount of humor. Sure the CG effects are a bit cheesy, and it's definitely no Avatar when it comes to SFX- but that is the point. But the overall look of the film is very gorgeous- it was a total doozie in the theater. The tinted blue looks gorgeous and the night scenes are crisp, and nice to watch.



Also, the political aspect is also a brilliant factor. Vampires being a metaphor for politics. Blood being a metaphor for OIL. This movie is very symbolic of how the government is greedy as hell when it comes to oil. And also, the best part is the last 15 minutes- they fed their greed, and as a result, their greed cost them dearly.



In short, this movie is a near perfect vamp flick. It wastes no time getting straight to the point, it just gives us what we came to see. If you like vampire movies, this is a must for sure.

Posted on May 1, 2011

Darwin Jubyna says...

I don't scare at movies easily but after seeing this one I stay away from street gutters.

But seriously, it's hard to find anything to gripe about with Daybreakers.This movie is has a lot of class in a time where tons of vamp movies are coming out, and though many of them I enjoy on a campy level, few can be considered quality.Daybreakers pretty much has it all, action, spooks, gore, sci-fi, original concept, great performances, tight script and it stays always a little ahead of you. It's great to see Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe and Sam Neil doing such a fun and successful project together.Bravo to all.

Posted on May 1, 2011

Tameika Galinski says...

Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke) is a reluctant vampire in a world where humans have become rare.It's a clever idea: if there really were vampires and they could spread like a virus, why wouldn't they soon run the world rather than slink around in shadows?It turns out this film shows exactly why, if they're smart, vampires would stay out of sight and wouldn't want to spread.Vampires do rule the world in this film, and human beings are the ones who have to creep about during the day, hidden as best they can from their refined and powerful predators.The problem is that the vampires are running out of humans to harvest, and without human blood they gradually devolve into something darker and more demonic, Nosferatu-style bat-like beasts with no trace of remaining humanity.



The basic plot is simple enough, and should be familiar to those who remember Dances with Wolves or Pocahontas, or the much more recent Avatar: Ethan Hawke plays the outsider from a conquering race who comes to sympathize with and eventually fight alongside the conquered race, in part because his first encounter is with a beautiful woman he falls for.



The execution is not perfect.The dialogue is full of cliches, and the final solution is all too convenient. It's a bit somber, and almost entirely lacking in the kind of dark humor or wit of a film like Near Dark. There's nothing all that memorable about the cinematography or editing, and I found myself thinking it might be more fitting in a television series.In fact there were several elements of the story that were overly compressed or unexplained, and that might have been fleshed out in a miniseries, and might have been more interesting in that medium.As it is, this is a moderately entertaining vampire flick that's different enough to be worth watching for fans of the genre and engaging and accessible enough to be a decent way for the rest of us (at least those who aren't overly squeamish) to kill a couple hours. Nothing profound or unique here, but decent bloody entertainment.

Posted on May 2, 2011

Hye Pfotenhauer says...

DAYBREAKERS is a fresh take on the average vampire horror tale, bordering on camp, but definitely original. Quite unexpectedly, my husband and I really enjoyed this film. In DAYBREAKERS, we find that the human race was nearly destroyed by a plague, but vampires gave them a way out.Now vampires are the dominant species on earth, night and day are reversed, vampires are going about their normal "nightly" routines, and the remaining humans are hunted fugitives. There are so few humans remaining that a blood shortage is causing the vampires to panic, and the vampires have initiated a massive R&D effort to create a synthetic substitute.if they don't find it, the vampires will mutate horribly and die.But there may be an alternative.One that will change the world of the vampires forever.



If, like me, you find vampire horror films (not teen angst films) to be a guilty pleasure, then I think you will enjoy DAYBREAKERS.Part I Am Legend, part Buffy, part Blade (but all with a twist), DAYBREAKERS brings a unique and creative story to the average vampire flick.The plot is intriguing, and the ending is surprising.The special effects appropriately scary and interesting, the blood and gore as to be expected, and lore within the film is consistent.The acting is not the best I have seen, but it is not the worst either.



For a fresh take on an old genre, give DAYBREAKERS a try.You might be glad you did.

Posted on May 2, 2011

Lakia Pendola says...

Directed by The Spierig Brothers, who also helmed 2003's dreadfully underrated zombie mash Undead, Daybreakers doesn't break a whole mess of new ground, but it is a breath of fresh air into the stale vampire genre.This breath of fresh air may consist of ultra-violent acts of blood-letting and some horrifying-looking vampires (as opposed to the teen emo kind found in Twilight), so in that regard, there really isn't much room to complain with what you get here.With that out of the way, Daybreakers takes place in the not too-distant future where nearly every human on the planet has been transformed into a vampire, and the race as a whole is faced with the imminent reality that their blood supply is dwindling, along with the small human population as well.Vampire hematologist Edward (Ethan Hawke) works for evil vamp head honcho Bromley Marks (Sam Neill) and is trying to find a solution for an alternate feeding source, until he comes into contact with a human named Elvis (Willem Dafoe) who has somehow been cured of his vampirism.As said before, Daybreakers doesn't break any new ground, nor does it try to either.What it does do is feature some interesting ideas, a surprisingly great cast, and some just plain awesome effects work as well.All in all, Daybreakers isn't a perfect vampire film, but it is a more than fine alternative to the vampire-laden drivel that seems to be clogging theaters these days.

Posted on May 3, 2011