Daybreakers Review

I wouldn't be surprised if you hadn't heard Michael and Peter Spierig aka The Spierig Brothers. ^{+Pronunciation? Your guess is as good as mine. I'm going to go with "spear-ig".} Of course I've heard of them. I liked them before the were cool. Back in 2003 they released Undead, a zombie flick set in Queensland.^+Represent! It may have had a small budget, but it's solid viewing for fans of the genre and it even picked up the FIPRESCI Prize at the Melbourne International Film Festival. In fact, I think I'll pick myself up a copy next time I'm at JB Hi-Fi. They have all the latest releases at the best price. Guaranteed!^{+Your business here. Ask about our generous advertising packages.} So I was pleasantly surprised to see the Spearig brothers listed in the opening credits as I sat to watch Daybreakers. I later found out, via the stone tablet that is Wikipedia, that Daybreakers was filmed right here in Queensland and that the creature effects were handled by our mates across the pond at Weta Workshop. If you don't know who they are, I have one word for you: Precioussssss!

Story time: The year is 2019 and it's been a decade since a plague turned almost all of the world’s population into vampires. The origin of the "disease", shall we say, is not explicitly stated, but I think you'll agree that it's most likely the direct result of prolonged exposure to American capitalism.^{+That or the centuries of inbreeding in America's deep south. Either way, it's America's fault.} But it's not all midnight strolls and virgin's necks, oh no. It would seem that after thousands of years of successful farming, mankind (now vampire-kind) have forgotten how to maintain a sustainable food supply and are about to run out of tasty human blood. "But can't the vampeople just eat each other like those creatures did in Pitch Black?", I hear you ask. To that, I say: Pitch Black is a stupid movie and you are stupid for binging it up. Besides, it turns out that a vampire drinking another vampire's blood would be the same as human drinking another person's urine; Exhilaration, but of no nutritional value. (This is inappropriate. Please come up with a less offensive analogy before this goes live. Ed) Huh?

Apart from everyone dying, another ill effect of the blood-drought is the fast approaching demise of Bromley Marks. Bromley Marks is a pharmaceutical company that supplies the majority of America's blood. I imagine this would be thanks to a lucrative deal made with McDonald's to replace Coca-cola as their sole beverage supplier.

Enter our protagonist, Edward Dalton. Edward is a haematologist in the employ of Bromley Marks and is tasked with developing a nifty blood substitute that, if successfully synthesised, could save vampire kind. Yay? A blood substitute seems like a step backwards to me. Why go from what could have been, if properly managed, an infinite supply of blood to a synthetic substance that could only ever be, at best, as abundant as human blood was in the first place?

Anywho, Edward is going about his day to day doldrums with a level of enthusiasm that makes Eeyore look like a motivational speaker when lazy writing causes him to come within centimetres of literally running head-on into the leading lady, Audrey Bennett. Audrey is one of the few remaining humans that haven't been rounded up by authorities and she is in the process of escorting some of her comrades to a safe-house when she and Edward cross paths. Being the respectable protagonist that he is, Edward helps the poor frightened humans on their way, thus earning their trust and ours.

Shortly there after, in one of the most backward scenes in the entire movie, Audrey somehow sneaks into Edwards’s house, bypassing security and emerging from the shadows to startle Edward. (This manoeuvre is performed no less than three times by three different parties during the film.) She tells him that the humans need his help and invites him to a covert rendezvous to discuss the details. She hands him a map which he immediately examines. When he looks up from the map, Audrey has vanished into thin air. He even checks around the corner for her. Question: Which one of you is the fucking vampire again?! Vampires appear from and disappear into nowhere. Humans go "Whoa! Where the hell did they go?". The vampires in this movie are even lamer than those in that book series that Mormon chick wrote. You know the series. I wont say its name. Anyway, Audrey disappears into the twilight at which point we expect the movie to get more exciting, but it never does.

Edward Dalton is such a ho-hum character if it weren't for the one decent scene where he argues with his brother, you could probably get away with removing him from the script altogether. It's as if he's only there so that the other characters can spew exposition without having to look directly at the camera. Neo was much the same in The Matrix, but at least he busted out the Kung Fu every now and then. That said, there's nothing really to dislike about Edward and Ethan Hawk manages not to mess up this most basic of roles.

Audrey Bennett is another understated character, but in this case it's a good thing. She managed to land somewhere between over powered heroine and damsel in distress. I got the impression that this is how an actual woman would behave if she had to man up and fight for her survival. There were probably plenty of screaming wrecks in the early days of the outbreak, but they would have been picked off until only those who actually had some survival instinct remained. As for the all important sex appeal of the leading lass: I feel the same level of attraction towards Claudia Karvan as I imagine I would for my sister. During one scene, she was bra-less in an apparently cold room. Instead of sexual interest all I felt was mild embarrassment for her.

Charles Bromley, Edwards’s boss and top of the food chain at Bromley Marks, is one eerie chap. As the main antagonist, I didn't find his behaviour quite as malicious as I felt I was meant to. What made him "evil" to me was that he took too much pleasure in it all. He oozed a sadistic self-satisfaction that seemed to amplify his selfish actions into dastardly deeds. Sam Neill is well cast as this creepy character, pulling off the "vampire in a suite" bit beautifully.

Frankie Dalton is the most engaging character in the film^{+I will be alternating between the terms "film" and "movie" at random. Don't bother calling me on consistency 'cos I don't care.} and I'd have to put it down to his more believable/relatable display of emotions and behaviour when compared to the rest of the bland cast. Though I did bork at how he went from being quite callous in one scene to compassionate in the next. Sure, there is a significant event that affects his perspective, but his change in attitude is too dramatic making it a bit hard to swallow.

Lionel Cormac aka Elvis deserves a mention since he is played by my favourite vampire, Willem Dafoe.^{+click here to add Shadow of The Vampire to your Must Watch list} A leading member of the human avoidance (they're hardly doing enough resisting to be called a Resistance), Elvis has easily the worst dialogue in the entire movie.^{+See? Told you.} What makes his wince-worthy lines even more frown-inducing is the almost satirical southern accent with which they're delivered. ^{+I may be exaggerating, but I like that sentence too much to change it.} It's not always that bad, but often enough to be a put off. I like Willem Dafoe, but perhaps someone else could have done better here.

I'm sure the musical director would be most insulted, but I don't remember whether the movie even had a soundtrack. However, I do remember enjoying the visceral sound effects. I particularly liked the ferocious screams of the sub-sider that threatens Edward and his brother. The effect resembles a cross between an eagle's screech and a lion's roar.

The movie starts out with a strong film noir feel which I loved, but it seems to ebb away as the film progresses. The style still remains dark, but it loses the retro vibe. There's no questioning that that visual style of this film is contemporary and there is some lovely cinematography. The problem is the clash of the 50's era elements with the near future elements. For example: The many business men in fedora hats and the milk bar getup worn by the coffee shop waitress seem out of place next to the futuristic vampire military uniforms. Others may find this to be a cool blending of styles or they may not even notice it. For me though, these stuck out as inconsistencies and I'd rather the style had gone in one direction or the other.

The special effects, both physical and computer generated, are convincing and highly effective. However, there are a few exceptions here and there. Two that spring to mind are when Audrey cuts her hand and when Bromley gets chompy on some guys neck. You can tell Audrey is just squeezing a bloodied sponge and Bromley has his hand deliberately and awkwardly positioned to obscure the source of the blood his victim is supposedly haemorrhaging. Although it's not what I'd call a horror movie, Daybreakers serves up the gore and is the bloodiest movie I've seen in a long time. The graphic moments seem a little tongue in cheek and over the top, giving them a kind of humorous, almost B movie vibe that works because it's deliberate. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ass there.

Edward asks Audrey about being human and if she is afraid of dying as though the concept is alien to him. This is meant to show up what it is to be human and that railing against death is part of the human condition (I assume). Vampires are heartless, passionless vessels and humans are "real" and admirable. But I find it hard to believe that he doesn't have a fear of death himself considering how easily these vampires can be killed. Simple things like being pierced by wood (it seems it doesn't even have to be in the heart) or finding yourself out in the sun (lost bushwalkers are the number one cause of forest fires and daytime driving is so dangerous, it's a wonder it's legal) can kill these vampires and vampires seem to die quite often. Not to mention the fact that the blood supply has all but run out. It's a wonder this guy doesn't worry about death 24/7. On top of that, we know that he's scared of dying because he shits his pants when he comes face to face with a hostile sub-sider.

Another example of bizarre logic is the origin of the sub-siders. In Daybreakers, vampires who are deprived of blood evolve into grotesque forms that resemble a cross between Nosferatu, a mummy and a bat. As you can imagine, they look awesome. These mindless savages represent a more pure form of vampire that is stronger, faster and can even hang up-side down from shit. The is great and all, but how can a lack of food make you more powerful? Malnutrition does not make you grow up big and strong.

One last complaint is the lack of any effective comic relief. Every movie (that's EVERY movie) should make you raff out roud^{+You raff, you ruse!}. Even The Passion of The Christ had a funny bit, though I can't exactly remember which part is was. I think it was when Jesus turned Peter's wine into pee while he was chugging it. Daybreakers didn't fulfil the minimum lol quota that all films must meet.

There is a solid film here, but I wouldn't be surprised if people came away underwhelmed by it. It just depends on how forgiving you are of it's flaws or if you indeed notice them. I didn't enjoy the film as a package as much as I enjoyed parts of it and I think the less than stellar story has a lot to do with this. I'd have to say the direction, premise, performances and special effects where great, whereas the plot, dialogue and characters where disappointing.

Daybreakers gets a score of three and a half cups of coffee out of five.