Daybreakers

The vampires themselves are portrayed in a manner highly consonant with Christian theology. The Eastern tradition places high emphasis on theosis, basically a more holistic and fuller version of Protestant understandings of sanctification: God wills that mankind should become conformed to the likeness of Christ and granted to be sons of God. Note how the New Testament applies the terms “sons of God” and “saints” to Christians which normally denoted angels in the Old Testament.

The inverse also follows: a life given over to wickedness and depravity runs the risk of losing its humanity and becoming something else altogether (ghosts or demons in the ancient understanding). This describes the vampires in “Daybreakers” precisely. Vampires’ sole reason for living is to feed. While the popular image of the vampire is one of aristocratic hedonism, Daybreakers shows all strata of the social order. Certainly, the upper classes conform to the hedonistic trope, but the lower classes do not, but both seek blood. Blood is required lest the vampire begin changing into a horrid bestial demon. Evidently, any blood (except vampire blood) will do. But human blood is a savoured luxury. The vampires of all social stations also represent the absolute worst of humanity. The upper classes are cruel and exploitative, having come close to exhausting the blood supply and driving human and animal life to the brink of extinction. The upper classes drink bottles of vintage bloods like wine and take it in their coffee like cream, while the lower classes settle for blood bars on the street or resort to crimes of assault and robbery as well as self-destruction and auto-cannibalism to satisfy their needs. Significantly, traditional literature suggests blood is required for ghosts to manifest in a form able to communicate with men (perhaps best known is the account of Tiresias’ ghost in Homer’s Odyssey). Blood sacrifices to pagan gods are also related.

Again, the vampires in “Daybreakers” are striking, with some very notable theological themes. While their setting and interpretation of the lore are novel, they have deep roots and are some of the most compelling I’ve seen. A few “good” vampires exist who lobby for human rights. These are viewed with suspicion for their refusal to imbibe in human blood and are seen as aberrant. Comparisons to Nicodemus coming to the Lord Jesus at night should not be made; not everything requires a 1:1 parallel.

The healing experienced by Dafoe’s character Elvis is suggestive of baptism and dying to oneself and being raised into newness of life. Interestingly, one of Elvis” cars has the phoenix (a Medieval symbol for Christ) emblazoned on its hood. Hawke’s character, protagonist Edward’s healing takes a similar form, though this time he dons a poncho not unlike a baptismal gown. His healing recalls three types of baptism in biblical and Christian tradition: blood, fire, and water. The difference between humans and vampires follows somewhat the difference between the glorified saints and the shades in C. S. Lewis” The Great Divorce; in Daybreakers, the humans are glowing, solid, and substantive in reference to the gray, dull, and dead vampires. Some became vampires because they feared death, which reinforces the comparison of living and dead and invites comparisons to suicide among those who feel they cannot go on. Thus, the picture of vampires is not altogether one of disgust, the fact that some revel in their depravity does not negate the reality that some fell into this way through despair, desperation, and sadness. Viewing vampires as those given over to the works of Satan and slaves of sin, we see an illustration of how sin runs contrary to nature and that mankind is supposed to be something else. As Christians are called to have hearts grieving for those walking contrary to the ways of the Lord, the viewer is invited to feel sympathy and sadness for the deplorable plight of some of the vampires and support the humans’ mission to save them.

But what I described above isn’t the normal cure for vampirism in “Daybreakers.” Those familiar with vampire lore are already well acquainted with the understanding of the vampire’s act as being an anti-Eucharist. This film reorients this theological aspect and applies it to the cure; to wit, the only way a vampire can be saved is to consume the blood of a cured vampire. It was difficult to see some of the scenes of vampires feeding on cured vampires without mentally juxtaposing images of martyrdom and the words of the Lord Jesus: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:53f., RSV) Cured-vampire blood, once ingested, causes a sort of death before the human rises.

The film is a mild R; violence, I suppose, goes without saying. The profanity, while certainly less than in many films, is still present and still offensive. Nonsexualised nudity is shown briefly in a Matrix-like blood-harvesting facility.

Should you watch “Daybreakers”? Only you can answer that. But should you watch it, I hope I have presented some points for consideration. I’m far from the only one, but I don’t have a lot of company as someone who enjoys watching horror films for their theological value (though I should stress this is **not** a horror film). Its appeal for Christians may be limited, but, as a Christian, I did find a great deal to admire in this film.