Movie Review: Daybreakers

Perhaps the most prevalent and popular form of writing today is the kind we see in movies. While many people simply "hate books," nearly everybody watches movies. Since the rise of Netflix and Hulu, I for one find myself watching quite a few more movies than I used to, mostly because I can do it via Netflix Instant, which I love dearly.

The best way for a person to really digest a movie is to take it apart and think about it, and that's just what I intend to do. Today I'm examining Daybreakers, a movie from 2009 that earned an only-alright 67% from Rotten Tomatoes.



While it initially seems like the movie is trying to jump on the "vampires are awesome" bandwagon that so many others are trying to get on, this movie actually what one reviewer called "a non-sparkly vampire movie." In fact, it's so far removed from the romanticized vampires of today that it comes off more like a zombie movie or the old black-and-white Dracula films. Vampires aren't good, and this movie goes to great lengths to show that it's not something you should aspire to be.

"Is there any way that you could fry that bag of blood?"

Be warned; if you're planning on watching this, I'm telling you now that I'm gonna spoil pretty much everything.

This movie was written and directed by two Australian guys, Michael and Peter Spierig. As a result, the movie has (perhaps) a slightly different feel than regular American movies, though all of the actors are still speaking in American accents.

In case you decided not to watch the trailer at the top of this page, the story goes like this: In the future, the entire world has been transformed into vampires. As a result, humans are used exclusively for their blood; they're put into these (frankly disturbing) farms that collect their blood. Since vampires drink blood exclusively, it's reasonable to assume that the company that harvests the stuff is a little more important than, say, a beef jerky company. The movie follows Ethan Hawke's character Edward Dalton. Holy crap, he's a vampire named Edward. Oh, those crafty Spierig brothers! We also find out shortly after the movie starts that Edward doesn't like drinking human blood, which suggests that vampires can subsist on animal blood, but that's never fleshed out (no pun intended). Edward is a hemotologist, a scientist whose job involves squeezing every last ounce of blood from the blood farm. His other job is to find a suitable substitute for blood, because the vampires are quickly running out.

Sam Neil's next movie? Vampire dinosaurs.

By random happenstance, Edward has a car accident with what turns out to be a van full of humans. He helps them hide in his car so the police don't find them, and eventually gets tangled up with the human resistance.

He soon meets Willem Dafoe, whose character name isn't as interesting as the name Willem Dafoe. It turns out that Dafoe accidentally cured vampirism (because he himself used it have it) via a technique that boils down to vampires being full-on exposed to sunlight then getting dunked in water. Soon, Edward is ed-cured and tries to bring his cure back to the vampires. Many vampires die, but eventually the characters, now cured of their awful affliction, literally ride off into the sunset.
While the movie might be a transparent allegory about the need for alternative fuels in the developed world, I thought it was quite entertaining despite that fact.

It doesn't paint vampires in a good light, which is refreshing. Furthermore, it turns out that when vampires don't consume blood for several weeks, they begin to turn into awful bat-human creatures that look like the orcs from Lord of the Rings. This was an interesting twist, as it makes the vampires almost relatable (but still monstrous). At one point, the Love Interest Girl actually gives Edward some of her blood simply because she "wants him to stay focused." There's no convoluted love story here; while Edward does travel with Dafoe and Love Interest Girl for most of the movie, never once do they kiss or even touch one another. I was glad to see it, frankly. Not simply because of Twilight's supersaturation in the mainstream today, but because every single movie has a love story. In the case of this movie, there simply wasn't room for one.

Bella doesn't even OWN a crossbow.

Strangely, even though it didn't seem like there was much character development, I think there actually might have been some. Thinking back, I realize that by the end of the movie, I had something of an appreciation for the characters. I wasn't terribly attached to them, but I related to their struggle. After watching the atrocity that is the 1998 remake of Lost in Space, it was kind of nice to care about characters again.

The most interesting thing about the movie was how much thought the Spierig brothers put into the world of vampires. Everything, and I mean everything was considered. Simple things that I wouldn't even think of, like a camera-and-screen inside the car's sun visor. "Duh!" I said, "vampires can't see themselves in mirrors!"

Vehicles have "blackout visors" in every window for when vampires drive in the day, replaced by an array of monitors for each window. You might not be impressed with it, but I thought it was bloody brilliant.

All throughout the movie little ideas crop up that fit perfectly with the vampire theme. Swat teams have these strange welding-helmet-cyclops-masks that block sunlight. There's an underground sidewalk-subway for vampires to walk the city streets during the day! Everything is perfectly crafted to accomodate the vampire's world and it really aids in the suspension of disbelief.

It's hard to really examine the writing of a movie compared to that of a book. You can't see the prose or style in the same ways. It's easier to think of it in terms of how many times I had to stop and think, "wait, that's stupid." In the case of Daybreakers, I didn't ever point out some awful dialogue or nonsensical thing like, "zoom in and enhance." Stylistically the movie's writing succeeded. The characters weren't completely developed, but then again, they were written well enough for the purpose of the movie. This wasn't a J.J. Abrams character picture; this was more like a Twilight Zone. Just a strange set of circumstance and some characters to explore exactly how bizarre everything is. Then again, Twilight Zone usually had really strong characters.

Everybody has crossbows in the future!

Although the movie is rated R mostly for violence and language, I can't help but feel like it might've worked as a PG-13. There were only a few F-words, but they didn't seem necessary; the characters were articulated and intelligent enough to get themselves across without needing to speak that way. After the insane-but-sensical rambling of Norman Osborne, hearing Dafoe swear seemed like an intellectual step down. Then again, I've never seen Boondock Saints, and I'm sure there's more Dafoe F-bombs in there than in Daybreakers.
When it comes to violence, though, I think the Spierig twins decided to please a certain subset of movie-goers, and that happens to be the "gorier the better" crowd. I've seen enough horror movies to know that people actually complain if there's not enough blood and guts. Weirdly, this movie didn't feel very much like a horror movie half the time. It was about Edward trying to redeem himself and humanity.

I should also mention that this movie had some of the sharpest, prettiest lighting I've ever seen in a movie. I'm not typically one to notice such things, but damn.

I guess I've reached the part where people usually give the movie a score or something. I wasn't planning on doing that, but I'll give it a shot.

The good:
Good, logical writing in regard to plot and pacing
Acceptable dialogue
Amazing attention to detail
Fantastic set lighting and general movie "look"

The bad:
Slightly tedious sub-story involving Edward's brother, a sort of human-catcher
Sam Neil's daughter's death (crispy vampire)
It seems kinda like humanity lost anyway, despite the happy ending

Overall: 4/5

All Of It

Hopefully this is the start of a new type of update I just invented. If I had a story idea (or even just a general thought) that I think is interesting, I'm gonna throw it up here (not to be confused with throw up) for my one remaining reader (myself) to read.

Today's idea comes from my biology textbook. Like all science textbooks I've had, it begins with the basic baby-step kind of information that I've come to expect. After making it through the not-so-subtle jabs at the other branches of science (usually Psychology, the scrawny kid brother of the other sciences), and the ferocious, belligerent sentiments on Creationism, I reached the bit that actually involved some science. A few pages later and it hit me that there's quite a bit of science in the world. This seems obvious, but I found it to be a rather novel idea. I know there's a lot of science because it seems like no matter how many classes one takes on science, biology, anatomy, chemistry, psychology, and the literally jillions of other sub-sub-sub-branches of sciences both big small, real and make-believe, there is always more science to learn. It's like trying to touch every drop of water in the ocean.

"This is it! The final science!"

Here's my idea: What if, one day, someone finished all science. Just think on it for a moment. What would a world look like where everyone knows everything about the natural world? Everything about quantum physics, theories about strings, black holes, worm loops, dilithium crystals and FTL drives?

We've never seen anything like this in movies or television (as far as I know). Even in those Star series (Wars, Trek, Gate and Battle), even the most advanced civilizations seem like they're working toward better technology. Nobody has reached the Third Tier of technology (I'm putting it in Starcraft terms) where there's nothing else to do except build armies and zerg the enemy's base.

Or those silly scientists could stop trying to create a Big
Bang and start building us this amazing bike!

Personally I don't believe it's possible for anyone to know everything there is to know about everything (except, you know, that one Guy). Frankly it would make for a boring existence. Scientists would hold cardboard signs in the street. Research institutes would have to turn into colleges ("gross," thought professor Xavier), and the large Hadron Collider would have to be sold for scrap parts or turned into a really amazing roller coaster.

The point is, the world as we know it wouldn't resemble this Science Complete world even a little. It would be a place of magic-like technology, endless energy supplies, super food and other inventions that heretofore are thought to be impossible.

Like faster-than-light drives or a portal gun. Like from Portal. I know it's bad grammar. I just want my darn portal gun.

Chances are that we humans would be mostly the same, though. To put it in modern terms, the internet is amazing; and we use it to send each other videos of cats farting. We'd probably use the portal gun to deliver food directly to our mouths. We'd be like those unitard-clad fatties from Wall-E.

Did I really just get all of this text from a wandering thought I had while reading about cellular reproduction? Maybe I should read my textbook more often.

Maybe we ALL should read our textbooks, fellow students. That's right, this blog was all a clever ruse to get kids to pay attention in school. Take THAT, Magic School Bus.

I'm Still Here, Chief

Although there hasn't been an update in a while, don't lose hope! I'm actually taking some of my own writing advice and reading (and writing). In the future, I might put up some of this content for your reading pleasure (or displeasure, if you hate fun).

Photograph unrelated, but still cool.

~William