Daybreakers

[finn]

This is an Aussie film, just out on DVD, the second effort of the Spierig Brothers, set in the US with a solid cast and a slightly different take on the genre. Mankind is almost extinct having fallen prey to vampires that have (through some machinations of a virus) killed or captured most of the remaining humans and farming blood as a last resort.

The movie centres around a conflicted vampire (Ethan Hawke) who wants to prevent the extinction of the human race not just to prevent vampire famine but on ethical and moral grounds. There are a number of other parties with other agendas like the corporate magnate wanting to corner a market (Sam Neill), the scientist who wants to see the benefits of his discovery and the soldier who is a better vampire than he was a human.

As a romp and a different slant on vampires (worth a look perhaps Zahir) it is OK but don't expect too much. It has been reviewed well in Australia, but then you could make something as awful as Jaws 4 here and they'd say it was great only because it was Australian (sorry Montresor ...but they would!).

The other thing about the movie is its allegory; you can't escape the oil and overfishing and even a bit of the Spice from Dune. But its played out as an observation and there doesn't seem to be a particular message that goes with the allegory; tho' I'm sure there are some here who will find one...!

If you see the DVD check out the additional material for a short film that's worth the five minutes to watch regardless of its ending

[SerScot]

finn,

I saw this last week. It had a lot of potential. It was a nice twist on the normal Vampire story. I thought it suffered because it attempted to shove too much story into too short a period of time.

They should have focused on one character developed that character well and run with that story. It was trying to be a character peice with an action veneer. It failed because none of the characters were developed enough for the viewer to care or understand their angst.

[finn]

Yeah, I agree I think the budget allowed for the hour and a half but no more and they hoped the strength of the cast woud carry them through. I read a review which said that it was 20 minutes too short and I think the consequence was the lack of character development and probably a truncated storyline towards the end where it should have played out with more fanfare.

But as you say a different angle on the regular vampire plot.

[deer of the dawn]

I actually loved the film, and I'm not a big vampire fan (I think the only one I really liked was Interview With a Vampire). A little gross with ripping heads off, stuff like that.

I agree a longer film would have let the characters develop more. DeFoe and Hawke were awesome, though, and I'm a Sam Neill fan (ever since the 1996 Merlin). They worked the few minutes they had, hard. And the script was true to human nature.

[Loredoctor]

I purchased the dvd last week and am looking forward to watching it soon.