Last night, I Redboxed a copy of the 2009 sci-fi, vampire movie Daybreakers. It was a casual viewing experience meaning I didn’t take notes, didn’t plan to write a review, and didn’t really expect the film to be any good, but the movie caused me to realize some things about the sci-fi genre.

Set in 2019, a decade or so after a nasty virus started turning the human race into vampires, humans are on the verge of extinction. The politicians are vampires, the talk show heads are vampires, the doctors are vampires, and they all like blood in their coffee. The vamps have to maintain a steady diet of blood to survive because their hearts lie still in their chests. So, the remaining humans are hunted and farmed for their precious blood.

The directors, brothers Michael and Peter Spierig, work very hard to make this unique setting believable because they know that is their only job. This is the epiphany I experienced, that in the sci-fi genre, setting is king. The plot is a secondary vehicle to drive the audience through an imaginary universe. Insomuch as the setting is consistent, original, thought-provoking, and visually interesting, a science fiction film succeeds. Why else did Avatar capture the hearts and imaginations of so many? The plot of Avatar is familiar, resembling that of several previous films such as Pocahontas and Ferngully. The dialogue and acting are adequate but not amazing. But the setting is awe-inspiring, immersive, and unique. Big win for sci-fi.

Daybreakers gets a 60 out of 100 thanks to great atmospere and original story. The acting is occasionally weak and the dialogue is occasionally lame, but that’s not really the point.

Warning: Don’t watch Daybreakers unless you have a stomach for buckets of blood and brains and typical vampiric mayhem. It is gratuitously gory but that comes with the territory.