Pajiba

But a cure is much less profitable for his employer, Charles Bromley (Sam Neill), who would prefer to find the blood alternative and continue selling human blood for increasingly high amounts (see also: Oil Companies).

See also: Pharmaceutical Companies.

Whew! I just saved twelve bucks. Thanks, Dustin.

Dammit. Dammit. Dammit. This looked like it had lots of potential.

Question: Does Ethan Hawke end up with Bella at the end or does she choose Jacob?

I think you really undersold how bad this movie is. I won tickets to a pre-screening and all I heard from the audience afterwards was, "Thanks god I didn't pay money to see that!"
(SPOILER ALERT)
Almost every thing they do in the movie could have been fantastic, were it given better direction or acting. Even the opening of the little vampire girl committing suicide because she'll never get old could have rocked us to our core, but settled for cheap-looking CGI (...okay so I just watched Avatar and everything looks cheap now) of her burning and a scream sound effect that literally made people cringe and lasted about 10 seconds too long (the audience was audibly complaining). And then, BOO! it's a BAT, in your FACE with another painful sound effect for no discernible reason! Whole theater cracked up, we missed the dialog in the next scene.
(END SPOILER)

The rest is painfully predictable and boring, when not interrupted by inexplicable jump-cuts to bats screaming at us. My favorite part was when they did the bat shot with Willem Dafoe and his reaction was more annoyed frustration than actual surprise or fear. It was pretty much my reaction to the whole movie.

So I was right. The original trailer did show the whole film. Thanks, Dustin. I guess I'll stay in for the weekend to write, read, and watch DVDs.

Melissa B, I hope you feel better after your well written mini-rant, but I gotta say: it's not like Dustin just said: "Don't watch this crap", there was a whole review about the film. People didn't just look at the thumbs up/down and say: "Great, saved my money!" They know not to watch it for a reason. They were convinced in an argument, not influenced by the cognizenti.

I do get your point about supporting genre films though.

/contrary

welldressed-
Thanks for your response. I don't actually feel better after my rant though, because I kind of knew people might take it the wrong way. I understand that there was a whole review of the movie and that folks might not want to watch the movie for a reason. But that reason is really Dustin's reason, isn't it? And that's my whole point. I understand that Dustin found the movie seriously lacking, but when I read people commenting that they were really looking forward to seeing the movie and now they aren't going to bother, it makes me sad. I mean, what's wrong with going to see a movie that someone with similar tastes to your own didn't enjoy? There is no way to know to what in any movie you might have a particular emotional response. And if you see a crappy moive, so what? The worst thing that happened is that you wasted some money and time and saw a crappy movie. The best thing that can happen is that you can experience something that the next person didn't, something unique to yourself. And seeing crappy movies is a small part of what makes great movies so great. If every movie was The Hurt Locker then The Hurt Locker wouldn't be quite as special. My point is not to offend by making everyone think I'm calling them sheep- I don't think that and I wouldn't say that. All I'm saying is that if you were psyched when you saw this preview, why not go see the movie. You might like it.

Melissa B, I thanked Dustin for confirming that I already knew the whole story of the film from the original trailer that was switched out very quicky. I'm a horror fan, but vampires are probably my least favorite subgenre. I wanted this film to be better than all the reviewers I trust say it is (not just Dustin, I don't knee-jerk and bring out or put away the credit card based on one review), and will gladly wait to watch it on TV some day in the future. From what I've read here and elsewhere, for someone like me, who likes a horror film with a unique concept to actually pull all the elements together in an interesting way, I shouldn't go see it. Simple as that. I don't need to waste $12 on a film I have no interest in because people expect me to like it. I learn that lesson every awards season (people, please get over Up in the Air so I don't have to feel like bespeckled wallflower gulping down his inhaler at the school dance) and I'm not falling for it again so soon. It's possible to make an informed decision from reviews and that is what I did here.

As for Daybreakers not being hip enough for Pajiba: get over yourself. The style and concept had me interested in this film months ago. I thought it was a fresh take on a very stale genre, what some might refer to as hip. And, as many reviews have pointed out, that's one of the strengths: it's a different kind of film. Or it least it could have been if everything came together to match the strength of the screenplay. You are aware that this site has a pretty vocal majority that hates films like Juno and May, right? For being too hip, quirky, and different?

superasente-
Well said. Point taken. But if a movie is worth seeing, why not see it as it's meant to be seen? I know everybody's trying to save money these days, but unless it is out of the question financially why not go sit in the dark with some strangers and share an experience? I have a boss set-up here at home base, but I would really miss seeing movies the way they were meant to be seen. And there are certain shots in this movie that were almost epic in their ultraviolent beauty- I mean, you could almost hear everyone in the theater kind of holding their breath during one particular slow-mo scene towards the end. My whole rant was fueled by that shot, actually. I thought, "That was fucking cool". Then I thought, "Too bad Pajiba is going to think this sucks". I don't mean to belabor a point but it seems to me that Dustin had lots of great things to say about the movie, but for him the problem was that it didn't speak to him emotionally so he found it boring. Emotional responses to art of any kind are so very subjective that sometimes you just have to see it for yourself. It's one thing to say a movie had unrealistic dialogue, or bad lighting, or an offensive or stupid premise. But if there are plenty of positives in a movie's favor, and the major negative is the reviewer's emotional response to the movie- why not spend the time and money to see if your emotional response is different? Especially if it's a movie you were actually looking forward to seeing?

You wrote, "I just don't think that [media criticism] should take the place of forming your own opinion."

Part of how people's reactions are formed is by observing other people's reactions (think the puking scene from "Stand By Me"). It's even more defined by observing someone you respect.

I respect the reviewers on this site; and not always, but much of the time I agree with and/or enjoy their reviews (this isn't the first site I've frequented. There were maybe a half dozen before Pajiba that I explored, commented on and eventually abandonded for one reason or another -- mostly I felt hungry for more after reading the reviews). The big reason I've stuck around here is that I respect the reviewers. We share similar tastes. I trust them. Ergo, part of how I formulate my movie opinions is by observing media (pajiba) criticism.

I would bet that's why we all come here.

Should it take the place of forming your own opinion? No way. Is it a good way to develop your own opinion and to guide your actions? Hells yes.

"Should it take the place of forming your own opinion? No way."
That's exactly my point. I am saying that, for me, media criticism is a great way to gauge whether or not to see a movie based on more of the objective criticisms of a film (dialogue is not representative of how carbon-based lifeforms actually speak to one another, lighting was bad- couldn't see how fat Russell Crowe is getting, premise was absurd, etc.) and less on the subjective ones (boring, emotionally bland, Clive Owen not gorgeous enough). I absolutely value criticism of any kind, and I understand its merit and its purpose. And I fully appreciate Pajiba for being the best example of relevant and useful media criticism. But it felt to me that some commenters in the past have let Pajiba's opinion override an instinctive part of themselves that reached out to a particular film, and I would simply say that those individuals might not want to let more subjective criticisms keep them from seeing that film.

What a shame. Your description of the premise is really interesting, and the cast is decent.

"But different people find different things that speaks to you."

> not "you", "them" :P Bad grammar.

I was hoping from the previews that it would treat the human race as meat puppets and it would be an awesome bloody battle where vampires duke it out with supervampires.

but it sounds like they went and tried to add a plot and made the hero another emo bloodsucker. When does the next zombie movie come out again?

Also Yocean, I think the point Melissa was trying to make is that you should value the OBJECTIVE criticism in a review and entirely dismiss the SUBJECTIVE criticism. Subjectivity is unique to the individual and you shouldn't base your decisions and opinions on the subjectivity of anyone else -- even respected reviewers.

Yocean, don't bother trying to correct your grammer

This is truly not meant to be snotty and provoke hurt feelings (as there's been a lot of that around the site the last week or so), but this makes me laugh.

Also, ruminating is a word, the correct word even. Its origin is from "ruminant", as in a cow chewing over its cud. (Chewing over and over and over...)

Yes, my mother is an English teacher. Why do you ask?

Melissa B., I think your rant is valid and appreciate it. The only part that stings a little is "Pajiba wouldn't like it". Pajiba is not one person. Yes, there are large contingents of reviewers and commenters who fall in line with each other some 75-99% of the time, but it's really a Venn diagram with a huge overlapping middle section and tons of outliers in a million different directions.

I mean, look, Figgy doesn't like Firefly. Can you believe that shit?!?!?!!1!! I certainly can't. Burn her at the stake! Or give her a job doing the EE, one of the two.

Pajiba really does allow for differences of opinion. REALLY.

On a personal note, I just like to read the reviews (and comments) on here because they amuse me. I already know which movies I'm going to see in theaters, bad or good. The only thing Pajiba reviews tell me is whether I should be really excited because something's actually good, or whether I should temper my expectations and prepare for disappointment.

Figgy doesn't like Firefly? *gasp!* My hubby doesn't like Firefly and that's the closest we've come to divorce.

Anyway...the above arguments don't really apply to me since I'm a busy mom and I almost never go to the movies anyway. That's probably weird for a devoted Pajiba reader. I'm kind of embarrassed to admit it. (I think I'd go more if the cheap hubby was willing to spend the money.) Once in a while I'll get a special date with the hubby and go to see something (like The Dark Knight).

I was curious about this movie and vaguely interested (but had never planned to see it in the theater anyway). It doesn't sound as promising as I'd hoped. I think I can trust Dustin enough to tell me that much.

Melissa B, you made some great points, but I think a review like Dustins' can be useful because it gives the viewer an idea of what they can expect. This benefits the film-makers because it reduces the chances of people getting disappointed.
Just say Dustin kept his review to the paragraph where he describes the basic plot. No opinion, just description, so everybody can make up their own mind. Great, right?
Only one reader might interpret that description with extra emphasis on the the philosophical angle, and another might focus on the rioting vampires and the running-out-of-time thing.
There's no mention of the tone in that paragraph, which is, ironically, what Dustin was most concerned with in this movie. I'm not less interested because of his review (actually, I'm more interested in it, since I'm involved in developing drugs, and this is playing into all my concerns about the pharmaceutical industry). But now I know, that despite it being a vampire 'adventure' movie, I'm going to enjoy it a lot more if I see it in a contemplative mood, rather than an 'entertain me' mood.

And, very gently, it's not a good idea to lump every commenter/reviewer connected to this site into the one 'Pajiba' category. It's like using absolute terms (eg always or never) in an argument, it makes you look like a bit of a jerk for generalising, and everybody else feel defensive.

I wanted to see this movie so bad but I just couldn’t stomach looking at Ethan Hawke with that who me expression that he displays in every movie he’s in (even in the picture at the top of this review he looks like a douche). Well what do you know, I though Willem Dafoe died a couple of years back.

superasent said: "It's even more defined by observing someone you respect."

Who the fuck said we respected anyone around here? Don't put your left wing sentiments in our mouths. I don't let Pajiba movie reviews dictate what movies I'm going to watch. I enjoy reading said reviews, and the banter that ensues, but prefer my own opinions over other peoples.

What do you mean, "YOU people"?

Trolls are a race? I learn something new on Pajiba everyday.

sounds like an excellent concept for a movie. i'm not exactly sure why dustin disproved of it... the review kinda sounded like a whiny pajiban who couldn't get off his high horse while spewing baseless criticism (I guess we can just call that the art of reviewing movies)

just playin. great review, but i'm still going to see it. I'm a little suspicious when a reviewer tells me a film is about the end of humanity (evolution of, perhaps) and it has no emotional appeal or "life force" as was put so elegantly. Or that there is no "sympathetic character" when, from what i've gathered from the review, Hawke (a vampire scientist) risks his life to save a group of humans - heroically led by Dafoe - from vampires. but then again i didn't see the movie. I'll wait til' after i do to form an opinion.

Another example of why coming to Pajiba to read the reviews AND the comments is worthwhile.

dr. pisaster, thanks for sharing your opinion as someone who has seen the movie. I too loved Equilibrium. Lots of style, a soupcon of substance/idea, no real need for an emotional connection because it's all so pretty. So I'll probably like this.

My top 10 reasons to see this movie again:

1-The everyday signs that you have to read within 0.5 seconds indicating 'School Crossing 2am - 3am' (for vampire children), 'Daytime service Available', 'Now with 5% Blood'.

2-Sub-WALKS for vamps going around during the day.

3-Smug, self-important, fabulously dressed vampires of all nationalities and ages coolly chain smoking in the opening scenes while waiting for the subway. When it passes, the screen goes black and all their eyes glow gold.

4-Contrasted by the stark terror of the bruised looking older vampire couple and the young red headed girl with mottled skin and bloody nose nervously hiding their impending mutations under wide-brimmed hats as they watch the Sub-siders being executed (knowing all the while that they are next).

5-The 'stupid' domestic and wild animals (that have been turned by even more stupid human vamps) running out during the day and causing wild fires in the forests.

6-The fact that the disaster was caused by a wholesale willingness of the population to assimilate instead of fight (long before humans became a minority).

7-Only Ethan Hawke's clothing appeared in his rear view mirror in his opening scene.
-Cause of this, I noticed that all televisions are grainy Black and White. No more color. (I think it indicates the use of Ultrasound devices to capture the Vampires' images. (like Bat sonar) Otherwise you'd be seeing rooms full of empty clothes moving around on the televisions).

8-The Daughter's story line. We DO live in a world full of sheep. Her story's been playing in my mind for the last 24 hours- I hope that I would go out like her if faced with that choice!

9-The pitiful Sub-sider calmly approaching their blackened apartment window to stare up at the military plane flying off in the midday sun. (Seemed like he/she was trying to hold onto their intelligence).

10-We return to the supremely elegant incidental characters (who were standing on the subway in the beginning),towards the end of the film and they're starting to look bat-sh*t crazy.

This movie was a labor of love, if not brilliance. The attention to detail and implied personal histories of the unnamed vampires and humans alone was worth my $15 bucks.

HOWEVER, my 2 personal WTF moments were:

1- The human refugees traveling with bright lights blaring in the middle of nowhere at NIGHT.

2- The Roman Centurion attack formation of the fight scene at the end. Who in the Hell in that situation would sit back and watch everyone else eat if they were in a frenzied state?

However, if I saw all these thought provoking things the first time, I will probably see even more to think about the second time!

So I would definitely see it again!

But that's just me and MY opinion!

LOL

The problem, unfortunately, is that it’s the wrong vision, or more correctly, the entire movie strikes the wrong tone. It’s too muffled; the pace is too slow; and, more than anything, it suffocates under the directors’ punishing restraint. It’s lifeless and cold. It fails to make an emotional connection. It’s inert. It’s just not a very much fun or a particularly entertaining film.

I saw this yesterday and this pretty much sums up my feelings about it. It should have been a really entertaining film, but it did feel really slow and, well, boring. Something about it was off. I've already forgotten how it ended. Blah. I think half the problem is Ethan Hawke, for me anyway, he's just not a particularly inspiring actor. He has one expression. Blank.

I typically love and agree with the reviews on this site, but every once in awhile there's a review that makes me say "What?!!" And I say that is a shocked and appalled voice because I was so certain the Pajiba reviewer's take on the movie would be like mine. (And secretly it makes me say to myself "ooooh, goody, maybe I'm in on a secret joke because I get it! neener neener neener")

I was actually dreading this movie because of the previews. I went to see it because of my tween son. So granted, it could be because I was expecting something totally different and terrible that I was easily impressed. But I absolutely loved the movie! From the weird slant of the previews, I was expecting a low-budget jump-scare suck your blook slasher type flick. But in actuality, it is more of an intense thriller than any type of horror movie. In fact, the places where they inserted a bat flying across the screen as a cheap jump-scare effect seem tacked on as some sort of appeasement to a genre that this movie is not a part of. (that would be my main complaint about the movie, also)

Right away from the beginning, I was impressed with all of the little details that they included to really set the scene of a revamped society (heh- get it? revamped? ...sorry), a society that had to make a number of changes to support vampire life. Some of the touches strongly reminded me of Starship Troopers and their "want to know more?" clips: the newspaper headlines, tv reports, computerized settings on their homes and vehicles, etc. But I thought all of these little things made a very thorough and layered set. I loved it.

True, it wasn't hard to see where the plot was headed. Even from the beginning. But watching it play out was pleasant. For me, how everything came together made it enjoyable from start to finish. All of those little details and the parallels to current society ills were fun to think through as I watched the movie. Even if the plot wasn't too original (main character, fights against who he is to take a moral stand, etc.), I thought it was a fresh take on the vampire society story. A definite win in my book!