morgana-31 I watched this last night, as it was on a DVD with something else I could have survived without seeing. The first thing that came to mind was 1984. Bleak and miserable settings; people doing manual labor that you'd suspect they wouldn't be doing if they had a choice; and being urged to report on one another - all for their own good of course. And then, for some strange reason, the old Gregory Harrison TV series, Logan's Run, popped up - what they told you you'd get and what you actually got were two different things. Add just a tiny pinch of Brave New World, and WELCOME TO YOUR FUTURE.Of course, having not seen this until 2006, it all seems a bit far fetched now. When AIDS first appeared on the scene in the early 80s, far from introducing strict quarantine, there were calls for homosexuality to be legalized. And Political Correctness has now determined that illness - instead of making you a candidate for extermination - will more likely ensure that you'll never be found guilty of committing a crime. My illness made me do it! So a conceivable future? NOT IN MY LIFETIME.But love still was able to bloom, in this unlikely nightmare world, between a young freedom fighter and a new recruit to the cause. Perhaps the total abandon with which Blue conducted her sex life is indicative of how the disease got to be so rampant in the first place? Be warned, kiddies! Get it on before you get it off. Add a betrayal and then assistance from an unexpected source......Well at least it was something to do while I was waiting for my cat to come home.

Robert Brockway A few of the people making earlier comments missed the point of this film. The disease described wasn't AIDS-like, it was AIDS. I suspect a few viewers may be too young to remember the near hysteria of the mid to late 1980s that had otherwise rational people calling for all HIV positive people to be permanently interned.Clearly the writer(s) of Daybreak wanted to illustrate one possible future in which fear was allowed to win out. This has a strong message to send us in 2005 too.The love story was central to the movie as a chain is created from Ellen to Torch to Blue. Ellen was passionate about saving people. Neither Torch nor Blue started that way but took up the cause when the one they loved fell to the all powerful authorities. The lack of decisive ending, other than the continuation of the resistance, shows that not all problems are easily solved and can be nearly wrapped up in a 1.5 hour movie.

SamRag Being a big fan of Sci-fi films I expected a much better film. The storyline sounded like heroes would be saving the world in a futuristic "not-so-good" city. However, starting well with good time spend on the lead women, and making it interesting enough for you to sit and watch, it died out as it went along. It's very strange, it's like the first hour of the film is preparing you for some action, like they are building the story line up for some big scene at the end. But the film dies out and leaves you completely hanging, not knowing anything more as to what happens to the main characters, or even what they were fighting for most of the time. I recommend that people stay well away from this one, as Cuba Gooding Jr. has sooooo much more to offer.

mo-80 I, too, thought that this was an excellent film; the first time i saw it I was on the verge of turning the TV off for lack of anything good. Although it's genre is listed as sci-fi it's not immediately apparent that it's sci-fi, which allows you to concentrate a little more on the people and production design. The grittiness is very well done, much like Max Headroom, and the characters are very thoroughly developed throughout the first two thirds of the film. The ending is particularly good - the viewer feels genuine empathy for both Moira and Cuba's characters and is left with the feeling that these are real people in an imperfect future.