Living in 2020 makes it hard to believe anyone would go this far to try and stop a disease. We can't even make people wear masks and stay home... But that doesn't mean it's not plausible for fear to win. It has in the past. The fact this was supposed to be in the near future doesn't exactly age well either but if you can get past that, it's a good movie. Definitely reminiscent of the times back then.
It's a nice story and kept me interested till the end. I enjoyed the ending too. The growth of all the characters. The story still being far from over. It's focus on Blue's journey as she starts a new chapter in her life. It's far from being a masterpiece of the decade but it's worth passing the time with.
Daybreak
1993
Action / Drama / Romance / Sci-Fi
Daybreak
1993
Action / Drama / Romance / Sci-Fi
Plot summary
When a substantial portion of the nation's populace falls victim to a deadly plague, the tyrannical government quarantines them in camps, offering no alternative except death. But a gutsy rebel named Torch sets out to help the afflicted by leading an underground effort to spirit the victims to humane sanctuary.
Uploaded by: FREEMAN
March 13, 2020 at 12:23 AM
Director
Tech specs
720p.WEB 1080p.WEBMovie Reviews
Not sure it aged well but it's a good movie
A Low-Budget Dystopia with a Pretty Good Martha Plimpton
This 1993 movie is one of a long line of dystopian (also called "awful warning") stories. In this case one of the key ideas that make dystopias interesting--a fascist government using paranoia to keep the masses in line--is swamped by the romance between Cuba Gooding and Moira Kelly. Of course there is a place for love in such a story--remember Winston Smith and Julia in Nineteen Eight-Four--but in Daybreak the love story eventually overwhelms everything else, and ideas go out the window.
The treatment of the disease that is supposedly rampant in this near-future world is ambiguous. No, the disease doesn't seem like AIDS, but it's unclear just what it is, how much of the population is afflicted by it, and whether or not it is really deadly. At times, you get the sense that the government invented the disease to spread fear among the people, but, then again, clearly some of the people in the movie are sick. It's all sort of confusing.
Cuba Gooding's character is one-dimensional. At first he's very angry and refuses to have anything to do with Moira Kelly. Then, aw shucks, he is forced to admit he really loves her. Moira Kelly's character is semi-believable. To me, however, the really interesting character is that played by Martha Plimpton, who makes the character come alive and has a very interesting face in the bargain.
Somewhere in this movie is a good idea that never manages to break free.
Better Films Out There
If you're looking for a late 1980's-early 1990's feel, this movie fits that bill somewhat, but there are way better films about virus conspiracy (THE CRAZIES, or ULTRAVIOLET, for example), or viruses (ANDROMEDA STRAIN, or TRAIN TO BUSAN, or most David Cronenberg nuttiness, for example), or government conspiracy (X-FILES, or THEY LIVE, for example), or government brutality in the streets (SOYLENT GREEN, or 1984, for example), and so forth. BUT..
if you want melodrama, and mixed-race relations, as the front-starter for your virus outbreak, I guess this is the one for you. In that respect, it tries to show how black and white (and I guess red, yellow, and brown) can get sucked into being part of a fascist state.
I did find the acting wooden, the writing coercive, and the direction listless, so that made the film seem arrogant, as if I have to like it based on content and not film-making. It's an HBO TV movie, so you get reduced production. Also, Cuba Gooding is not prime here, and Moira Kelly is not sexy, sorry.
As for content, this is probably about AIDS because of the time period, and the idea of sins, and the use of the word "f a g g o t". It's ham-fisted morality mixed with libertarianism which feels out-of-place in our world of mandated masks for COVID. The film at the time was probably seen as "liberal" but in today's environment it would probably be seen as "irresponsible." HOWEVER, since we live in a hypocritical society also, perhaps this particular virus/disease would be forgiven due to what it is, versus those "terrible people" who don't wear masks.
The film is not terrible, I just wouldn't want to see it again.