Tell your sister, you were riiiiiiiiiiight.
Last Updated: Jan 23, 2012
Daybreakers
| Welcome to the How It Should Have Ended Forum. |
| You will have to register before you can post: click the Register/Sign In link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
Submitted by Tina on Mon, 01/11/2010 - 18:02
Forums:
This is not a film for anyone with a weak stomach, but it's an intriguing watch. Mostly due to its originality, Daybreakers gets 4 out of 5 stars. FULL REVIEW
Comments:
Word. I enjoyed the
Word. I enjoyed the unnecessary level of creativity in Daybreakers. There were enough new ideas for at least two movies.And yeah, the sparing of the main character's face was pretty blatant. I can accept that killing vampires with sunlight took less time because the film makers just didn't want the dramatic shots to take the full minute (or whatever) that it would take for the vampire to burn up. But The guy who was first cured of vampirism was covered in scars! He had to actually burn enough to scar to be healed. So when the main character is fully engulfed in flames and stays a vampire that's okay because vampires heal. But when he's on fire and then ends up a human (without the ability to heal) he doesn't look like a guy who was just on fire.Aside from that the only thing that I had an issue with was the blood lust of the vampire SWAT teams. These are the guys who are sent out to hunt down humans. So, when there is obviously a blood shortage, and normal vampires are feeling the pinch, these guys are sent out to capture even more humans. Since a vampire in the throws of withdrawl can't help himself from tearing a human apart to get at the blood, those SWAT teams must have been the first ones to get a full ration of blood! If they didn't, they'd be killing the humans as soon as they laid eyes on them and they'd never get them into one of the blood banks. So, at the end of the movie, they should have been the last vampires to lose control. Not only would they not have been doing without they'd probably have been hoarding some blood for a rainy day. They should have been totally calm and in control. It's not a major point. . .but I think it's worth mentioning.
Like.
Like. u said I enjoyed the unnecessary level of creativity in Daybreakers. indeed, it is totally unnecessary; but, don't we all yearning for that when watching a movie?
Good point.
That's interesting about the SWAT teams over the top blood lust. I hadn't thought about it. In the end, it was just an excuse for absurd blood bath footage. Perhaps the blood had gotten so rare that now they are a little starved for it? And a little starved to them was extreme because they hadn't yet dealt with being deprived? I don't know, but good point. :)You and I seem to be the only people in the world who saw this movie! Ha.Welcome to the forum by the way, I really enjoyed your comments.
Thanks. For some reason
Thanks.For some reason people don't seem to be interested in vampires unless they're prancing/moping around being gender innappropriate. These days male vampires act like little goth girls and female vampires act like Jack Bauer. I wanted to see Daybreakers specifically beause the preview made it look like an original take on the vampire idea, rather than a self-indulgent slog through a tween's poetry.I think the movie did a really good job of illustrating exactly why vampires will always be stuck in the margins of society (metaphorically). They are a nearly perfect personification of teen angst. Vampires, literally, exist only in response to normal people. They can't survive on their own; they need the presence of other people to survive. Metaphorically, this is exactly the same thing as adolecents defining themselves as the opposite of whatever their parents are. That kind of definition can't survive independent of of parents to give it meaning. Daybreakers takes the idea to its logical conclusion.What if vampires (angsty teens) actually did get to run the world? Well, first they wouldn't do anything different. They'd be just as obsessed with power and wealth as anyone else. Second, they would eventually exhaust the supply of things to suck the life out of (rebel against). Third, the only way to return to a self-sustaining state of being (human) is to suffer through a period of intense pain (in this case beign on fire could be a metaphor for introspection and self-awareness). And finally, once someone had been a vampire and gone through the transition back to human, if another vampire tries to suck the life out of them they become human too. That works as a metaphor for the way an ex-angsty-teen knows exactly what to say to an angsty-teen to sort of "force" self-awareness and a spontaneous transformation back to something that isn't retarded. On a side note, if an angsty teen goes too far, and totally embraces their rebelling against anything philosophy despite the fact that there's nothing to rebel against (no blood), they turn into a hopeless, self-destructive monster (the crazy bat-things).I don't know if any of that was intended, but it worked for me. I think that's why the movie didn't turn out to be as popular as it could have been. People don't generally go to (vampire) movies looking to be accused of being stupid, blood-sucking children. They go to (vampire) movies so that they can watch absurd, 1-dimensional characters live through more drama than happens in a dozen life-times while being pale and misunderstood.
wow that was good i liked
wow that was goodi liked it :)
Disappointing Compared to Trailer but Not 1/2 Bad
I saw the trailer and said 'holy crap I am so watching that.'Let me just clarify that I am someone who typically boycotts/rejects/hates all things vampire. I'm sure it was an original concept in the days of Bram Stoker, but it's been used and abused so much that now it's typically crap. *cough* Twilight *cough*This on the other hand, very refreshing. I liked the concept, however like the reviewer I wasn't so crazy about the solution or the slo-mo carnage ending. It was cool for about 5 seconds and then I just sort of like "really? Really?" Another thing I wasn't too crazy about was how Edward was semi veggie vamp ala Twilight. In the beginning of the movie it's clear that he's not a fan of drinking human blood. Yeck. If you're a vamp be a vamp!Other then that though? Pretty awesome movie. They explored their concept pretty well since it's not supposed to be a sci-fi drama. Go rent/watch it if you want some semi-intellectual fun. I guess you can compare it to a Bond flick: lots of complicated stuff. Hero. Explosions (of blood) and a nice solution at the end.
Edward not burning up
Well, I believe he didn't burn quickly because they had water over him, they kept soaking the towel or blanket with water, and then they'd let the sun in, so that he wouldn't burn quickly enough to kill him. I believe the others were burned so quickly because they had direct sun, without any water. (Willem Dafoe's character was thrown into the water when he got into the car accident, turning him human)
Phenix raise from ash, vampire rebirth from sun
i watched Daybreakers in a boring sunday morning in STARMOVIES, it never come to our cinema in HK since this is not from big studio and no well-know star to HK audience. it caught my attention because i like vampire movies. especially those with new ideas. adopting the Phenix-raise-from-ashes idea to transform vampire back to human, it is out of the common logic but oddy refreshing.
other than this, it reminds me a lot of an aussi sci-fi Tank Girl, enterprice control water, the life suriving element, in the world and built army to hunt and kill for it. relatively low-tech but with crazy new idea in it... worth to watch.