DAYBREAKERS REVIEW: What $20M SHOULD Look Like.


When young filmmakers with $20 million dollars decide to take on the vampire AND the science fiction genres at the same time, you really shouldn’t expect much. Which is why Daybreakers blew us away. Well conceived, imaginative, original and above all well done, this kind of film would have cost millions more if Hollywood decided to do something similar, and probably wouldn’t have turned out to be nearly as enjoyable!

~Matt + Nat

4 Responses to “DAYBREAKERS REVIEW: What $20M SHOULD Look Like.”

  1. fuzzy_panda Says:

    omg mat n nat! cant believe this video’s already been blocked on youtube! sometimes these copyright ppl go too far…

  2. Half-off Says:

    Kudos, totally agree! Sam Neil was haunting and believable, only wish he would have had a moment of remorse for his daughter at the last second, albeit just too late to save her. I especially liked that the senator did NOT betray the humans, as would have been predictable, and thought that Hawke’s character was very well written and acted.

    I was hoping that in the last scene we would get a shot of a fledgling subsider/human revolution, as Hawke & co lead the newly ‘reborn’ humans out of the sewers and into the light for the first time in who knows how long. For all we know, once it’s known that there’s a cure, who’s to say that the major blood companies won’t simply continue to farm people. Lots of potential there.

  3. Half-off Says:

    Also: Though it was mentioned that the main character’s name was ‘Ed,’ I didn’t put 1 and 1 together until they said Hawke’s character’s full name, ‘Edward,’ at which point the whole theater started cracking up.

  4. Meg Auplods Says:

    I actually thought Daybreakers was terrible..

Leave a Reply