With their debut feature, Undead, the Spierig brothers established their ability to present a film bursting with style, subtle nuanced directorial touches, and an apparent appreciation for the genre. However, that film was derailed in its last third and didn't cash in on its promise. Seven years later they've returned with Daybreakers, which yet again shows they're really strong visually but still struggle in the scriptwriting department. It's a similar problem I have with Rob Zombie's films, though I'd rather watch a Spierig effort any day of the week over what actor-turned-musician Zombie thinks horror should be.

The premise itself shows quite a bit of originality as we're introduced to a future 2019 where vampires have taken over society and are on the brink of a human blood shortage. At the head of the efforts to come up with a synthetic substitute is Charles Bromley (Sam Neill) the head of Bromley Marks Pharmaceuticals and his chief hematologist Edward Dalton (Ethan Hawke). But all's not well within the company as they're also using a gigantic machine, that reminded me of 1978's Coma in execution, that's bleeding humans to feed the wealthy - and leading to many of the less fortunate reverting to a bat-like mutant creature.

After being attacked by one of the mutants, Edward begins to realize the people he works for don't really have the World's best interests at heart and, after an encounter with some crossbow sporting humans, he ends-up joining their rebel forces (lead by the rockabilly like "Elvis", played with aplomb by Willem Dafoe) in order to try and find a cure for vampirism leading to a whole slew of action sequences that felt inspired by the hyperactivity and stylization of the Blade movies and a finale that stumbles to try and tie things up bringing back characters who have been throwaway at best up to that point.

Which is probably my biggest complaint about Daybreakers: it's characters. While Hawke does make an acceptable protagonist and is given more than able support from Dafoe, I didn't enjoy Neill's performance as the villain and felt like I've seen him do the exact same role in a handful of other movies. He just doesn't come across as malicious as they're trying to make him with proof coming when the fate of his daughter, who is woefully underdeveloped, comes into play. Overall, though, most of the actors are competent here but, as mentioned before, there are too many characters in the mix and some of them aren't given as much play as you'd expect them to.

What's most striking about this sophomore effort by the Spierig's is their visual flair. The opening moments of the film that are establishing the futuristic setting looks great and feels like a mix between "big brother" and an old fashioned film noir - a look that made me think of 2002's Perfect Creature. It's balanced out well by the clinical looking areas owned by Bromley Marks and the untouched countryside. They also do a good job moving their camera around, setting up interesting to look at shots, and making a fine use of editing. Even if this won't go down as one of the best horror flicks of the year, it's sure to be one of the best looking of the bunch.

When I was walking out of the theatre, a girl close to me said to her friend, "That was disgusting, it was beyond disgusting", so I have to give credit to the effects team for piling in enough of the red stuff, and in plenty of gruesome ways, to earn it's Restricted rating (especially a scene in the final moments that goes completely over-the-top and made me chuckle at its ridiculousness). Daybreakers does make for an entertaining 98 minutes and does show definite growth by the Spierig's giving me hope they can continue to improve with their next effort and if you're willing to cut the script a little bit of flack, you should get enough enjoyment out of what's here to come away reasonably pleased. (Chris Hartley, 1/10/10)

Directed By: Michael Spierig, Peter Spierig.
Written By: Michael Spierig, Peter Spierig.

Starring: Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, Claudia Karvan, Sam Neill.