Yar, you be here: Underworld (Widescreen Edition) > Customer Reviews

Underworld (Widescreen Edition) Customer Reviews (109 - 111 of 127 Reviews)

Could be better, but not unenjoyable.
As an introductory film to hopefully a larger, more epic and expansive series, Underworld fulfills its requirements adequately. There's enough action, blood, and tight latex outfits to satisfy a genre fan's thirst and the execution is decent enough that I look forward to the sequels, but there's the unmistakable sense of promise left unfulfilled.

Set in an unnamed city, the gorgeous Kate Beckinsale stars as Selene, a "Death Dealer," a vampire whose job is to hunt down the remaining Lycans, aka Werewolves. According to vampire history, most of the werewolves should have been wiped out in past wars, but a subway venture reveals there is still a formidable-sized population of werewolves. Against the wishes of her master, Kraven (Shane Brolly), Selene investigates further and discovers that the werewolves are particularly interested in a human named Michael (Scott Speedman).

After an encounter with head werewolf Lucian (Michael Sheen), Michael is bitten but saved by Selene, who grows infatuated with this human. Why, is never made clear, other than the fact that he prevents her from drowning. As Selene pries deeper into the mystery surrounding Michael, she uncovers a conspiracy involving both vampires and werewolves that could tip the balance of the war.

As most people have already said, by far the movie's most memorable image is the sight of Kate Beckinsale in tight latex. For those who find her a hot babe (like me), Underworld might just be worth watching for her alone. Hell, if she'd shown some nudity, I would have even bumped my rating up 1/2. Alas, she's still great eye-candy.

The picture itself is a bit of a mixed bag. On the one hand, there's lots of shootouts and fight scenes that are well-staged and filmed and reasonably exciting. The werewolf effects are excellent and the transformation scenes are some of the slickest, most convincing I've seen on-screen, certainly better than anything seen in The Howling or An American Werewolf in London. Beckinsale, in addition to being a delectable hottie, makes for a kick-ass, first-rate female action hero.

But on the other hand, Underworld is a grim, joyless picture, accentuated by its deadly serious performances and occasionally laughably earnest dialogue. Much like the Blade films, a lot of what the characters have to say is hard to take seriously, the mythology hampered by the fact that it's being juxtaposed with CGI-infested action scenes (though, admittedly, any five minutes of Blade has a much worse problem with this than all of Underworld).

Underworld is neither scary nor suspenseful. Selene never really gets herself into any combative situation she can't get herself out of, usually because most of the opponents she fights aren't nearly as skilled as her. Though there are plentiful werewolf effects, I think I would have preferred more scenes of Lycans skulking around in their hulking bodies rather than watching them in human form.

Undoubtedly, Scott Speedman must be one of the worst examples of a romantic leading man I've seen. He and Beckinsale have no chemistry, and considering it's her affection for him that spurs her to "betray" her own kind, this is a pretty damning flaw. It's also during her scenes with Speedman that Beckinsale is at her least convincing; she won me over as a kick-ass vampiress, but I had a hard time believing she was in love with this bland nobody named Michael.

Directed by first-timer Len Wiseman (who apparently stole Beckinsale's heart on-set, enough that she left Michael Sheen for him), Underworld is slickly-crafted and boasts a strong, pervasive atmosphere. Maybe with more passionate performances, more well-orchestrated thrills, and some bare skin from Kate, the sequel will be an unqualified success.
** 1/2 out of *****

Brings NOTHING to the table.
This production really had a lot going for it. Capable actors, nice-looking production design & costumes, and an interesting concept. Then they made the grave mistake of making the movie that they made. The end result is an uneven, oh-so-serious poseur of an action/horror film that brings in every already-worn-to-death cliche in the book, and then waters it down in order to make it less interesting. Being the most forgiving kind of horror movie fan, I can enjoy a flawed genre picture if it gives the impression of love for its subject or respect for its audience. UNDERWORLD gave me the impression of a movie made on a cash register, throwing every market-tested rerun at me for two hours in its safe ploy to rake in piles of cash. Movies like this display nothing but contempt for their audience (or at best, apathy) and perpetuate the common Hollywood conceit that movie-going audiences aren't intelligent, and are money-spewing fodder for loud, explosive, flashy light shows. Fine, if you and yours are comfortable with being fed non-creative swill by condescending schmucks in suits that think you're brainless cattle, then continue to support tripe movies like this, and then go watch the E! channel celebrity news and tell all your friends how poignant and insightful and discussion-worthy it all is.

Supporting giant-budget mediocrities like UNDERWORLD--and touting them as anything resembling refreshing or creative--is a sure way to guarantee the future of films will bring us instant preview-test-audience classics like TOP GUN 2, PRETTY WOMAN 5, and MORE FASTER AND MOST FURIOUSEST.

I'm not saying that every movie has to be perfect to be enjoyed, but have a little respect for your audience, filmmakers. And audiences, try having a little respect for yourself and not gobble up every loud light show the studios tell you you should like. If that's all you require, just go buy a bunch of bottle rockets and spend some time outdoors...it's less expensive to you, and your money won't line the pockets of those who see you as mindless cattle with wallets.

Go give your money to the filmmakers who're at least ATTEMPTING originality...they're the ones who deserve it and probably have some respect for you as an audience member.

Reinventing vampires and werewolves... into total bores.
Think a film about a war between vampires and werewolves sounds cool? Think again.

The vampires in UNDERWORLD have no supernatural powers to speak of, beyond the fact that they're immortal and have superhuman strength. Instead of using stealth, cunning, and teeth they fight with lots and lots of guns.

The werewolves don't fare much better. In addition to being immortal and having superhuman strength, the werewolves (called "lycans" in the film, short for lycanthropes) have the ability to change their form regardless of whether or not the moon is full. However, the change is little more than cosmetic, as they don't get any stronger. They grow sharp claws and teeth, but can't hold a gun in wolf form so it's pretty much a wash. Their preferred method of fighting is - you guessed it - lots and lots of guns (in human form).

So basically UNDERWORLD takes a really cool concept, removes everything cool about it, and gives us a standard issue post-MATRIX shoot-em-up. Only problem here is we don't know which side to root for as neither side has any agenda regarding the fate of humans - in fact neither side has any use for humans at all (the vampires drink cloned blood in bags, the werewolves just eat whatever). So although we'd like the protagonists to survive, we couldn't care less about whatever cause they're fighting for, if any.

2 stars for impressive effects and Kate Beckinsale in tight leather. Other than that this film earns a big SO WHAT?

Previous Page

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Next Page