Underworld: Evolution (2006)

If you're a fan of the 1st flick, you know it leaves us with a few juicy cliffhangers. 1) What happens to Kraven? 2) What's the deal with this mysterious Marcus character waking up? and 3) Do vampires have sex, because I didn't really get a good look in the 1st movie?All of these are addressed in basically the first 10 minutes. From there it's just sort of a new story altogether. But as I implied in the title of this review, the eye candy alone justifies this film's existence."Underworld: Evolution" is a sleek & stylish extension of the 1st movie, literally picking up exactly where the 1st ends. It has the same dark, gothy vibe and awesome wardrobe choices, but don't expect all the clever twists & elements that we saw in the 1st. This is more straightforward action.The themes of emotional betrayal, unexpected role reversal and moral plot twists that made the 1st movie so challenging aren't really here, since all the main characters are already defined. So this film is more of a linear, good vs bad story in search of the McGuffin (a term Alfred Hitchcock coined meaning the "thingamabob" everyone's fighting over). I'll forewarn you to strap your suspension of disbelief on tight because things get a little wacky. (Quick side note to the story writers of this movie as well as "Jaws 2" and a few forgettable Arnold Schwarzenegger flicks: a 300 lb. person, or shark, can't jump up and yank a helicopter out of the sky, no matter how cool it looks.) There are a few questionable items on the story/timeline, some which will give you minor pause and others which will make you say, "Wait but didn't that person just DIE?" But if you can overlook these it can be a fun ride."Underworld: Evolution" takes the first movie and adds more action, more blood, more cool gadgets, a little more sex, and takes away a few brain cells. But honestly it's still a fun flick. And like I said, how can you go wrong with KB's badass goth attire & the male cast having their shirts off for half the flick. A couple people's heads blow up too, so.

Underworld is a melodramatic franchise about warring vampires and wolves, in which people of different species fall in love. The blue-gray aesthetics are bludgeoning, the script is convoluted and convenient, and the lore is incredibly unwieldy. I constantly found myself checking Wikipedia just to keep up. It's definitely not good, even with moments of ridiculous fun in the action and a surprising sense of care in the filmmaking

Looking at Underworld Evolution as a mindless action adventure, it's not all that bad. It doesn't take itself too seriously, there are some well-directed action sequences, and the characters are far more realized than they were the first time around.Let's just be honest, the first Underworld is garbage. There's no two ways about it. The dialogue is horrible, the performances are over the top, and the visual effects are dated. But with the three years in between the first and the second, something must have clicked within the writer's room. Evolution is about 30 minutes shorter and much less convoluted than the first entry. When there are exposition-heavy scenes, they add to the story, instead of making things more confusing. I've already spent a couple hours with Selene & company, so I was prepared with the lore and character history. Plus, wasn't it nice getting Kraven out of the way early on in the film? Horrible character.Len Wiseman isn't the most talented director in Hollywood, or the smartest (considering he wants to make a Die Hard prequel), but I think he knows what people want out of these movies. Kate Beckinsale and some cool vampire-werewolf action are the primary reason these movies make money. While the main villains are set up nicely through flashbacks in the opening scene, they end up having little differences to Bill Nighy's first film villain.Part of the appeal of this particular Underworld entry is that it's in many ways, a fantasy-horror-western. Sure, it doesn't take place in the wild west, but the way the story is set up is very much similar to that of typical westerns. Selene and Michael spend the entire film on the run and in search of a mystical artifact linked to the past of their species. At the same time, this film suffers from the same problems as most vampire flicks do, the untouchable nature of vampires contributes to a less visceral experience if you know they will ultimately survive whenever they die. In all, it's hard to think I would ever watch this film again, but it's entertaining enough for me to give it a positive review.+Solid action+Characters are more realized+Western-Villains are weak-So.. are they untouchable?6.0/10

Computer-generated fur and fangs. Not fun to watch. Read something like that. Valid points. Movie looks like it has been filmed inside a freezer. That is the whole point, of course, but that ghastly monochromatic hue affects everything, the world doesn't look like this at all. Thankful!Two things. It's awe-inspiring x1000. There is no denying that. And Kate Beckinsale is amazingly beautiful, the fragile vulnerability of her delicately chiseled face, paired with those ice-blue eyes, offset by the raging tornado inside the character. These two things nobody could argue.The movie suffers from being just as inhuman and cold as its predecessor. As a character, the viewer had no feelings for Selene or Michael. There is no character involvement, they do not make themselves likable, they are coldly distanced from us, we see that they act like heroes, and prefer them to that other horrible lot, of course, but that doesn't make them likable.A third thing to mention, as for 'the king of vampires' in that scene with the truck - learned on the DVD commentary that the scene was considered as something to be thrown out, too expensive for the budget. Glad they didn't, that scene is magnificent!The bleakest magnum opus ever!