Daybreakers
Starring: Ethan Hawke, Sam Neill, Michael Dorman
Directed by: Michael and Peter Spierig
Rating: R for strong, bloody violence, language and nudity.
Running time: 1 hour, 38 minutes.
If you’re into gore (and I mean of the head-bursting, artery-gushing, limb-tearing, blood-everywhere variety), then “Daybreakers” may be for you.
Not that the latest from the Spierig brothers is absolutely overrun with appetite-killing sequences (for the most part), but what there is of them will make those weak at stomach wish for a more tame flick — and a bucket.
“Daybreakers” has a pretty strong and interesting premise. In 2019, a disease pandemic has transformed most humans into vampires (the technicalities of this are, oddly, left fairly vague, leaving it up to the audience to simply go with it). As these vampires used to be human, their worlds and social systems remain largely familiar to us.
Less than 5 percent of the human population — the main food source for the vampires — remains, and the vampires face a total deprivation.
When left without blood for long periods, the vampires turn into “subsiders” that resemble the bat-like, degenerate, wild creatures featured in many horror films.
Ethan Hawke (“Staten Island,” “Lord of War,” “Snow Falling on Cedars”) stars as Edward Dalton, lead hematologist at blood production company Bromley Marks run by Charles Bromley (Sam Neill, who will forever remain to me as Dr. Grant from “Jurassic Park”). Edward is tasked with finding a blood substitute to amend for the loss of humans.
Although Edward works for a company that hunts and “farms” humans, he refuses to drink human blood himself and offers to aid the stray human he comes across; however, Edward’s brother, Frankie (Michael Dorman), is a human hunter who doesn’t understand his brother’s unvampiric ways.
Edward is sought out by Lionel “Elvis” Cormac (a traditionally salty Willem Dafoe) who has discovered something better than a simple blood substitute — he has discovered a cure for vampirism.
The plot itself is freshly exciting and holds undertones of our country’s oil dependency. And the scenes that demonstrated the vampire’s seamless maintenance of our current necessities and enjoyments are wonderful and engaging.
I really loved the idea of this movie, and for the first half, it seemed like the directors did, too. But then they decide that having a good plot wasn’t adequate — they needed to show the audience exactly how much blood is in the human body and how crazy of a mess it can leave when it’s all over the place. In the meantime, they completely forget everything that made the first half an actual decent movie.
Other than the disease’s origin, another overlooked plot point is how the vampires initially took to killing and, in a sense, eating humans. After all, they had been humans, too. Edward’s attitudes hint at this type of remorse, but there’s hardly any philosophical undertones akin to Louis’ in “Interview with the Vampire.”
“Daybreakers” is a promising movie that sadly devolves into a typical gore fest. It’s good for cheap thrills and quick entertainment, but doesn’t hold much lasting potential.
2.5 of 5 stars
No comments:
Post a Comment
Loved it? Hated it? Think I'm off my rocker? Let me know!