dgribble
Posts: 226
Joined: 20/2/2008
|
I never thought I'd say this after seeing previous entries, but the latest Underworld is actually a pretty good movie...probably the best Vampire movie since Blade II. Although it still has some of the franchises problems, it's managed to shed some as well. For starters the muddled and convoluted pacing of the plot in past entries is gone; the plot's simple enough that it only momentarily takes a small % of viewing time, before dispensing onto the slick and stylistic action. i.e. the entertainment (the only reason you've no doubt went to see this) is delivered without being hampered under by poor story pacing. Also praise to the genius that's made the lines delivered, a bit more passable and less cringe worthy. The performances, although not terrible this time round, are kept contained under all the action; and refused from interfering the movie's enjoyment. Let's face we're not here to see who's been to acting class have we? Although points for India Eisley, she does well hamming it up, and looks a bit hot in hybrid mode. As for the 3D, mixed feelings, it doesn't really jar the viewing of the film (unlike some of the trailers) but it was a neat addition, though I doubt I'll miss when I catch this again. All in all, if like me, and you're bored out of your skull on a saturday and need to kill some time; this is ideal for a night out at the cinema when you want to give your brain a rest and be entertained by vampire movie we should have got with the first one. It's miles better than all the twilight films together (although I've only seen one of those and that was enough.) The Underworld franchise has finally shed the TV pilot feel of the first entry, and the murky DVD quality of the last two; this is a film that deserves a theatrical release; and I'm now genuinely interested in checking out the inevitable sequel.
|