Thursday, August 25, 2011

Underworld: Awakening gets a trailer. Won't be seeing this one either...

After a detour into 'new director' and 'new star' prequel land, it appears that the Underworld series is returning to its.. uh... roots?  Anyway, Kate Beckensale and director Len Wiseman are back, for those of you who care about such things.  I will say that I saw this trailer before Fright Night and the 3D work was pretty solid, and the images were suitably brightened up so you could actually see what was going on (unlike Fright Night, which was like watching a VHS copy-of-a-copy taped off of an antenna-feed UHF airing).  The film also looks like it has been shot with the brightest blue filter ever created for cinema.  I had not seen any of the Underworld films until just a couple months ago.  How bad is the first Underworld?  Well, not only is it an insanely long 134 minutes, it was so dull and uninspired that I have thus far resisted my OCD-completest urge to rent the rest of the franchise.  It's hard, strolling through Blockbuster with my mail-order DVD/Blu Ray rental... with the other two films in the franchise just sitting there on the shelf.  I have thus far resisted, and hopefully I can stay strong.  If you've seen any of the sequels, are they worse than the original?  Anyway, this one comes out January 20th, 2012.  As always, we'll see.  Well, you're see.  I certainly will not see.

Scott Mendelson


corysims said...

The theatrical cut is better but it's not available on Blu Ray.

Yeah, it's my guilty pleasure series. I love Underworld and Underworld Evolution. Rise of the Lycans is completely unnecessary because the backstory was told in the first film so you really don't have to watch that one.

I'm there on January 20th.

corysims said...

As for Evolution, it's gorier than the first film. It plays up the horror elements more, even though it's still an action picture. The Selene character evolves to an interesting conclusion, even if it's ripped from a similar franchise. A new wrinkle is added to the mix in a certain character played by Derek Jacobi.

Is it better than Underworld? I can't pick because I just like those two pictures. It's more polished and more streamlined that the first.

My one problem with the film is the opening text, which pretty much gives away the twist that's explained in the middle of the film. It deals with the history of the vampires and the lycans.

Again, I love the series so I'm completely 100% bias about it. I like, from this trailer and the synopsis, where the Selene character is going and where the world is when she wakes.

Liam_Ho said...

I'm not ashamed to admit that I really enjoyed the 1st Underworld movie, I know there are pretty bad elements in it but I was still highly entertained and enjoy it for what it was.

The 2nd Underworld you will not like since you disliked the 1st one so much, I even dislike that one. It was an interesting idea but the story is badly told in the movie.
The prequel maybe unnecessary since we already know how the war was started but it just goes into full detail. It's still fun to watch because Sheen and Nighy always give it their all into these characters and just ham it up; its like their doing Shakespeare. They're certainly far better than the material but I love that they're just having fun.

I have very littler interest in this 4th movie because jumping 12 years into the future with her waking up from being frozen sounds so Resident Evil to me. Plus going up against humans sounds so dull to watch. However, Beckinsale still looks great and her screaming 'Michael' in the trailer gives me hope the story isn't completely uninspired.

Franco Asmaeil said...

Part II is better than I and III. I watched them while traveling around in foreign countries. Good mindless hostel fodder.

Bibbyroo said...

dont believe them scott, all three of them are terrible!


Related Posts with Thumbnails