Underworld

I'm not saying it's a masterpiece, but in concept and treatment, Underworld certainly doesn't fall into the category of a purely "B" film: The sets, the art direction, the music, and the excellent action are the main pluses of this film, which otherwise flounders on its script. Underworld is far from being a sophisticated and intelligent vampire saga, but I was not bored, quite the opposite – I had a great time. A weaker 4 stars. (26/07/2009)

This was alright. Kate in the corset and latex is decent at least. The purposefully colorized black-and-blue-and-white film is pleasing to the eye, but that's about all there is to say about it. Dramatically, it’s too straightforward, so the only films it can beat on points in its genre are the infamous Twilight saga films. (31/07/2012)

How to put it best... I really like the topic of vampirism and I don't mind the pop culture mutation of “Vampire: The Masquerade". I am more bothered when there is too much of the same thing in Hollywood, which is exactly the case of Underworld. I quite liked the atmosphere of some of the shots, and I also liked the vampire guru Viktor and his counterpart, the Lycan "Pepa Vojtek" Lucius. Otherwise, the characters lack motivation and, what’s worse, they are played tragically (particularly Barbi Kate is dismal). The biggest loser, however, is director Len Wiseman... the film might be stupid but also attractive, but in its current form it is only stupid. I would forgive the completely obvious and non-artificial copying of the visual style of the Wachowski brothers, but it is very difficult to forgive the totally chaotic and choreographically-weak action scenes, which culminate at the end with a confusing swarm of uncles in black coats... Trying to figure out who is who in the cannonade of cuts is useless, and this characterizes the entire film. Underworld lacks strong conflict and drama bearers, a clearly defined storyline, and mastered choreography. In some places the film does not lack decent action momentum, but the mentioned chaos and dialogues conducted in a ridiculously ceremonial spirit undermine the film and make it weaker. (04/01/2006)

We are in the 21st century, gone are the days of individualists with two fangs, now we have whole families of vampires and lycans who organize themselves almost like political parties and wage wars among themselves like mafiosi. Vampires with electronic equipment and a massive arsenal of weaponry are nothing like the pleasantly decadent vampires from, for example, Jordan's Interview with the Vampire. Sorry, Director Wiseman, I prefer the decadent ones, or the posh Count Dracula, who with all nonchalance digs his fangs into an artery and needs no laptops or liquid silver bullets to do it. For a ridiculously low budget of 20 million I was treated to some very impressive images in places, but that’s not everything, script-wise it was as scratchy as Kate's tight leather outfit while walking, the war between lycans and vampires full of machine gun shots didn't entertain me at all, nor did the plot around the blood mixing. Basically, there was nobody to root for. A lot of silly fun, really. (13/07/2004)

A film that is the biggest disappointment of the year for me personally. The fact that the touted story of Romeo and Juliet in the world of vampires and werewolves never happens wouldn't matter so much, but an action horror film with entirely unimaginative and static action and without a single thrilling moment is already a problem. On top of that, the acting is mediocre, the make-up effects are crap, the script, besides being pretty simple, has tons of logical errors and the direction is very subpar. It's a shame, because with its premise it could have been so much more. (05/12/2003)