Underworld: Evolution

I did take one star off, but only because it didn't bring anything new compared to the first installment. Then again, the things I liked about the first one didn't get spoiled by the second one, so I had a pretty good time again while mostly switching my brain off. I was just puzzled by the combination of Russian-speaking policemen driving cars with Hungarian signs. (17/04/2017)

The sequel boasts a bigger budget, resulting in better effects and an overall improved visual experience. However, I was a bit taken aback by the story, where the quality dropped, and it's quite noticeable in the final result. The mythology surrounding the world of vampires and werewolves wasn’t presented as convincingly. What makes up for it is the much faster pace—you truly can’t get bored because something is always happening on screen, keeping you on your toes. Flying Marcus was a bit laughable to me, as I couldn’t quite believe his appearance; it felt rather cheap. The atmosphere was well-executed again, and the darker tone worked for the second time. The absence of Bill Nighy’s vampire character was a real downside. I really liked his character, and Marcus couldn’t fully replace him. All eyes were once again on Kate Beckinsale, who took on the lead role with boldness, and she’s slowly becoming an iconic vampire in the film world. The final fight was effective, with the scene involving the propeller being the crowning moment. It’s a film where the execution and entertainment take precedence over the story, but it will keep you entertained. I give it 68%. (16/08/2017)

Len Wiseman is not a good screenwriter by any stretch of the imagination (I was convinced of this unfortunate fact when I saw the first film) and he is definitely not a good director (which I somehow, strangely accepted last time). Underworld: Evolution amounts to a bunch of awkward dialogues that are supposed to be interludes between the frantic action, which the director used excessively. But according to the motto "too much of everything is bad," Underworld is an overly noisy, flashing, and frenetically edited spectacle that glues together boring dead weight from the plot. For some reason, they strangely cut out the werewolves and the film more or less revolves around strange vampire "politics" that are laughable. The Speedman-Beckinsale duo starts off with a nice sex scene, which is where their pros in the film end. Underworld: Evolution is nothing more than a popcorn movie trying to be something more. It's not enough just to have perfect technical aspects (sound, cinematography, CGI) and dirty-looking sets to add to the film's rawness. It lacks a plot with more sense and maybe a little bit of directorial inventiveness. Perhaps that's why I'm skeptical about the idea of a trilogy. (09/04/2006)

Underworld: Evolution is a solid sequel to the first part, completing the rest of the puzzle and a fairly well thought out vampire-Lycanian mythology. I liked the concept of the first immortal and his sons, the founders of two houses that have been hunting and killing each other since time immemorial. I also have to mention the good connection to the first film and the flashbacks to the past, which broke up the time plane of the story so the plot didn't feel so monotonous. Similarly to the first one, the biggest weakness was the poorer script in places and some scenes that were made for effect without being logical. Despite this, though, and perhaps because of it, I like this series for its action-packed, purposefully goofy (which I mean no disrespect) look. A sequel comparable to the first one, which certainly doesn't put the series to shame and even stands out slightly from the pack thanks to its many flashbacks. (04/09/2016)

Better action, meaningful mythology, and the ever more attractive Kate Beckinsale still aren't enough for at least a solid film. The Underworld series will forever remain an unfinished great idea for me. Evolution, although aiming relatively high, is brought down by the tiresome crucial battle and trivial conclusion. (07/03/2006)