|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Jul 9, 2004 15:17:20 GMT -5
I feel as though I'm alone on this, but I just want to make sure. I felt Underworld was EXCELLENT. I was intrigued to see it, because it looked like a "Matrix with vampires". I love the Matrix, I love vampires. What I saw was nothing like the Matrix, aside from the bullet time fighting, cinematography, and leather outfits. What I DID get was a story of love, trust, betrayal, sacrifice, revenge, and redemption. Some complain that the story was weak. I didn't think so. The mythology behind it was great, and let's face it, the fight scenes are incredibly nice. I'm looking forward to the sequel, and would really like to see the director's cut.
And even if you DIDN'T like it, you must admit, it was better than Van Helsing.
|
|
|
|
Post by LivingDeadGirl on Jul 9, 2004 17:27:34 GMT -5
I didn't think it was excellent, but I do think it was very underrated. Don't get me wrong, I really liked the movie but it's not the best vampire movie I've seen. I'm more of a fan of the 'classic' vampire stories. But I did like the concept & the fight scenes were great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Jul 11, 2004 2:49:37 GMT -5
Haven't seen it yet but - as usual - I will, soon. Let's see if it can beat Van Helsing...  |
|
|
|
Post by ZapRowsdower on Jul 11, 2004 3:18:01 GMT -5
Oh, it beats Van Helsing, alright... That's like comparing Battlefield Earth to Equilibrium.
|
|
|
|
Post by Termination on Jul 11, 2004 8:47:20 GMT -5
Its very good, I wouldn't go as far to say its excellent. The Cgi is very good, the acting is very good & the story is pretty damn good. I bought the Director's cut a few months after the theatrical. Have yet to see the Director's cut, but I bet its pretty damn good also.  |
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Aug 17, 2004 1:09:03 GMT -5
I just watched it and I'd give it a *** GOOD. It didn't blow me away, but it was better than I anticipated. The story may not have been like THE MATRIX, but it still had that "Matrixey" feel to it, ie: all the guns, leather outfits, "bullet time", Wire-Fu fighting & techno rock score. Like LDG said, "I'm more of a fan of the 'classic' vampire stories." This was more like a Vampire & Werewolf superhero comic book movie. Overall though, I was pretty entertained. It was a cool idea, the F/X were good, the acting wasn't bad and the werewolf transformations looked pretty sweet. Not to mention, Kate Beckinsale looks just fine running around in tight black leather. What I wasn't crazy about: The whole thing was sooo slick, it looked like a music video crossed with an "Obsession" commercial. Does almost everybody in the cast, male & female, have to look and dress like a model? Instead of vampires vs. werewolves, it felt more like Goths vs. Metalheads. ie: The vampires were all brooding and dressed in black and the Lycans were grungier. You just know that in between battles, the Vampires were listening to The Cure and the Lycans were rocking out to Megadeth. IMHO, it wasn't as good as the BLADE movies, which have similar themes, and ironically, are based on comic books, but seem a little more grounded, not to mention, darker, but it was definitely better than VAN HELSING which was all lame dialogue, embarrassing acting and ridiculous action scenes. 6.5/10 On a side note: The DVD sounded excellent! Lots of action going on in the rear speakers and subwoofer. |
|
|
|
Post by Bartwald on Aug 17, 2004 9:09:03 GMT -5
Hmmm... I didn't think you would end up liking it, Heineken. But maybe that's because Underworld seems to me to be not only similar to The Matrix but also to the more-than-hated-by-you Van Helsing?
Still have to see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heineken Skywalker on Aug 17, 2004 11:07:22 GMT -5
"But maybe that's because Underworld seems to me to be... similar to... the more-than-hated-by-you Van Helsing?"
Same reason I was apprehensive to see it.
Like I said, not great, but I was pleasantly surprised.
Like VAN HELSING they used unbelievable high-tech weaponry and everybody dressed way too cool, but the main difference is that UNDERWORLD takes place in the present where it's all a little easier to swallow. VAN HELSING is supposed to be a "period piece", but it never feels like it, which constantly pulls me out of the film. Also, unlike VH, there isn't always a handy chain or rope for the characters to grab a hold of and swing away with. In VH, even the humans seemed like superheroes, not just the creatures they were battling.
Also, UNDERWORLD doesn't suffer from the CGI overkill that was way too prevailant in VH. There was definitely CGI in UW, but not to the extent that it made the whole film look like a cartoon. The acting, script, story & direction were all better in UW.
|
|
