121 user reviews
6.5
/10
| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
- 0 |
7.5 4 |
6.7 29 |
5.9 20 |
7 10 |
3.8 6 |
6.3 69 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
7.1 8 |
7 18 |
6.1 15 |
6.2 4 |
7 2 |
6.7 50 |
| Total: Votes: |
- 0 |
7.2 12 |
6.8 47 |
6 36 |
6.8 14 |
4.6 8 |
6.5 121 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
Reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 121)
This movie is crazy wild in a good way. Kept me glued to my seat.
8/10
shazjoao@ - 868 reviews
18.10.2011
Interesting plot, and one of the best vampire movie in a long time. It doesn't necessarily means that it is a great movie (some plot holes, poor dialogue at times, etc) Good overall.
7/10
rocafrank@ - 26 reviews
26.5.2010 - age: 18-25
Not a bad vampire movie. I liked the originality of the story, the concept of where one’s loyalties lie, and the overall darkness of the movie.
7/10
bradshawscott@ - 94 reviews
16.5.2010 - age: 26-35
A dark film that speaks of mankinds self destruction and the few who still fight for hope and redemption.
6/10
paulleslie12@ - 345 reviews
11.5.2010 - age: 36-49
Daybreakers had a lot of potential as seen in the first act of the film... Well, then Defoe's character 'Lionel 'Elvis' Cormac' is introduced (who don't get me wrong is a great actor) Expect ridiculous lines such as "... it's bout as safe as riding bareback with a five dollar whore". Simply put-don't expect a scary Vampire flick as seen in the trailer. It is more like another 'From Dusk Till Dawn' with better cinematography, the only difference is at least the former was tolerable compared this ditty. Two thumbs way down!
3/10
thesdi@ - 3 reviews
5.3.2010 - age: 18-25
The movie was ok, worth seeing, but the concept of the story sucked, and like most of the world, I'm sick of vampires already, although zombies are coming back... and it really gives you a break on "EDWARD I LOVE YOU!!!" and brings out the gory, bloody and sometimes funny side of vampire movies of the past 10 years, so if your like me, and want to see a vamp movie without "EDWARD, BITE ME..." go see the movie or rent it, BUT WATCH IT IF YOUR SICK OF LOVYDOVY VAMPIRES!!!
7/10
kdtracemason9@ - first review
27.2.2010 - age: 13-17
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Could have been a better movie, more realistic characters could have made the bad guys more deceptive... What's with the 'endless space' in everyones 'very dark' porch/landing/entrance way? I mean really. In a time of high tension between vampires and humans... you'd think there'd be a little more security in the home. Just kinda lame. :) I would recommend a rental.
6/10
pyrateparadox@ - 7 reviews
26.2.2010 - age: 26-35
Enjoyable from start to finish. No lame romance angle. Would have liked to have a bit more back story but I guess that's what your imagination is for.
7/10
parker_2@ - 244 reviews
22.2.2010 - age: 36-49
I am speechless, , one of the worst movies I've seen, , do NOT watch.
1/10
klodleka@ - first review
15.2.2010 - age: 26-35
Excellent movie, could have gone a little deeper but all in all good concept.
8/10
kimberleymtl@ - 3 reviews
11.2.2010 - age: 36-49
They tried to pull off a great critic of many societal issues both economic and politic. It went on a bumpy road but an entertaining one although they bargained for too much and ended up in a flawed movies where they could not handle all the political message that they thrown since many of them did not make any sense given the background and premisses of the movie. Of course it is a quite creative anti-capitalist movie; although it has the same cliche anti-capitalist message hidden there, you can still sit down and enjoy a flawed recreation of the 1930 crisis in a quite entertaining vampire setting with all the blood, the shotgun, and the classic 1950-looking vampires.
6/10
patrick_lulin@ - first review
9.2.2010 - age: 18-25
Pretty standard fare in the realm of vampire movies, with a twist in the plot line. It was an okay movie that went through the motions, but it sort of failed to live up to it's own expectations. It tried to be both an action film and a morality tale, but in the end, in trying to do both it botched it up and achieved neither. Still, it's slick looking at times, and I never hated it, so there's that.
5/10
scottmaciver@ - 22 reviews
8.2.2010 - age: 26-35
Despite a few big-name actors, this movie was horrible. Special effects stunk, dialogue was brutal, plot was entirely predictable. Don't bother!
3/10
ebickell@ - 76 reviews
7.2.2010 - age: 26-35
It's Twilight for adults. I liked how they made it watchable as it is mostly in a night time setting. It was a good role for William Dafoe. Ethan Hawke was very believable.
7/10
shaunmorin@ - 38 reviews
7.2.2010 - age: 36-49
I enjoyed this movie it was dark and had a interesting ending making you wonder what might end up happening... Reverse to movies of the same genre. Must see on DVD, worth a see at the theater.
7/10
sheldonbhubert@ - 2 reviews
5.2.2010 - age: 26-35
I was expecting nothing going into the theatre. Just had some times to spend and it was the first movie playing. I was happily surprised! I love vampire movies (and no, NOT Twilight thank you very much)and missed the good old fashion vampires. Well nice contemporain version here! No pretention in the movie, so have none walking in and you will be pleased!
6/10
frenchsapho7@ - 10 reviews
3.2.2010 - age: 26-35
Good vampire movie. Ethan Hawke and guy from platoon make it.
10/10
silverass_69@ - first review
3.2.2010 - age: 18-25
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
The plot was perfect. The acting was well executed. Some of the cinematography was astounding (especially during the very end of the last bloodbath scene with the vampire army-- Seriously pay attention to those seconds!) *sorry to spoil any details!
8/10
dannymccash@ - first review
31.1.2010 - age: 18-25
Daybreakers brings life into the vampire franchise and stands as the best vamp film this decade with the Korean vamprie film Thirst comming up second. ( I think let the Right one in was highly overrated) It also stands as one of the most original movies i've seen in a while as well. The acting is great Ethan Hawk is good, Willam Dafoe is hardcore, and Sam Neil is always tarrific.
10/10
thegodzillaking@ - 92 reviews
30.1.2010 - age: 13-17
Epic!!! This movie was so amazing, a must see sci fi masterpiece.
10/10
damianpulcini@ - first review
30.1.2010 - age: 13-17
An extremely interesting premise and a very cool flick. Not for people who can't handle the blood and gore, but I love that stuff. I found it very entertaining and am grateful for a break from the "good vampire" we so often see. I love that they're monsters instead of romantic fetishes in this film. Excellent.
9/10
tennessee.21@ - 21 reviews
29.1.2010 - age: 13-17
Definitely not a thinking movie. If you like gore then this will give you your fix. I personally liked it. More entertaining than a lot of the crap out there.
7/10
casserly5@ - 129 reviews
29.1.2010 - age: 36-49
First 2010 movie I've seen! WOO HOO. Look, even the ending is bad it reminds me of T2, and even though there are a few moments in the movie where you'll go," ... what? " it is certainly entertaining enough to merit this rating. It's fun and jumpy scary in certain places, although it's not really a horror (but man do some of the last scenes remind me of standard zombie fare), it's more of a thriller I suppose. Some people are calling it sci-fi but that's only cuz it's 2019 in the film, I don't think it's sci-fi really. I don't know why Willem DaFoe is getting so much good press for this tho. PEE-YEW At one point I could have SWORN I saw Ethan Hawke say with his eyes," what am I doing in this pile? " So I can't really recommend (go see something else that's better instead) but it's certainly more than passable for what it is. At least it's does have vampires with glitter for skin for crying out loud.
7/10
patrick.sullivan@ - 216 reviews
28.1.2010 - age: 26-35