Daybreakers, on reflection, reminds me of a smart kid who fits into the wrong stereotype. Given the movie, I'm going to say the guy who's great at cricket and rugby and looks like a thug but is destined to get five A's at A2 and swan into Oxford easily - getting a double first and a double blue.
There is a lot of clever story and setting. There is even, although containing lots of special effects, a serious bit of scientific research that is more than just people twiddling with fancy technological doodahs. It might not be the "double first from Oxford" smart but there really is a good story in there that doesn't assume you're daft. And then, particularly in the last five minutes or so, the other side of the character comes out and instead of a good, clever, interesting ending they have a massive fight, lots of people die and they end with that ultimate cliche of driving off into the dawn.
There are several fights in fact. Many of them aren't really central to the plot but they don't detract from the plot, they're just a bit of action to cut between the clever bits. By and large they're nicely worked in and advance the story or provide the equivalent of a cut-away to a different thread with some sort of connection between them. But the last one... argh, destroys the plot and ruins the final line.
All that said, the society is interesting, the story until then is good. There's clearly a commentary in there. I didn't really get it at the time but discussing it afterwards it's probably a commentary on corporate America refusing to change despite the evidence about consuming its own resources and killing the world being clear. That makes sense on reflection and I'm not sure why I wouldn't have caught it at the time, but I didn't.
If you go to see it - and I've fought to avoid spoilers - leave when Ed looks at his brother's mutilated body and invent your own ending. You really won't miss much and you'll invent something smarter. If you do that, you won't have the nasty after-taste that makes this disappointing.
