17 response about Underworld 3 Trailer »

1. 

   Two words: Rhona Mitra

   The only reason I’d even entertain this dog. Perhaps I’ll cut together my own version of her screen time only. The rest is going to be a yawn-fest. No doubt about that at all in my mind.

   Comment by Mike Browne — August 12, 2008
2. 

   When you cut up that version, make sure to let us know. I have a feeling Andrew would pay good money for that.

   And thanks for stopping by Mike!

   Comment by Marina Antunes — August 12, 2008
3. 

   Have i ever mentioned how I loathe this franchise? What a wasted genre opportunity. Take a shakespearian riff of Romeo & Juliet with a Vampire vs. Werewolf bent and make it as lifeless and boring as possible, despite the casting of quite solid actors.

   I can’t believe these things still get theatrical releases.

   Comment by Kurt — August 12, 2008
4. 

   “Have i ever mentioned how I loathe this franchise?”

   Not in like…a few weeks.

   They continue to get made because they continue to make money. Pretty simple and straightforward equation there. And who knows, maybe it will be better. I doubt it but one could hope.

   Comment by Marina Antunes — August 12, 2008
5. 

   Gah. You got that right Mike.

   As much as I love Vampres and Ms Mitra, I’ve never been too impressed with this series. Here’s hoping, but I doubt it.

   It’s blue again.

   Comment by Andrew James — August 12, 2008
6. 

   It looks like Lord of the Rings, lol.

   Loved the first one, hated the second. Not paying to see any more!

   Comment by Shannon the Movie Moxie — August 13, 2008
7. 

   For some reason I like these flicks. Good solid entertainment that leaves nothing.

   Comment by swarez — August 13, 2008
8. 

   I’m curious to see it for a few reasons. I do admit to liking the First two (the first more than the second).

   Im not a fan of special effects people directing (take Starship troopers 2 for example). But Patrick Tatopolous directed Underworld 3. I guess he did some second unit on Die Hard 4 too. (And since I’m into Outlander) Patrick designed the creature in outlander, and did all the concept/creature stuff in the first two Underworld films. Just before the writers strike, Patrick got Outlander’s writers (McCain and Blackman) to do a re-write. They’re pretty good at historical epic style stuff and just got hired to write the upcomming Conan movie from Lionsgate. So I’m curious.

   The main things that are negatives though are – the effects guy as director, it being a prequel, and it not having Beckinsale’s Character. The trailer didn’t look horrible but then the quality of the video was so awful it was kind of hard to really see anything about the looks of the movie.

   Comment by AD — August 14, 2008
9. 

   jesus, do you guys not know how to appriciate a film? I mean, look! underworld one weaved a dark and dramatic fairy taale of blood and guts, vampires and werewolfs, villians and good guys. and then theres Evolution. all it was doing was finishing the Elders story arc. with the head vampire, viktor, defeated, they needed to just kill off one more persom – his name was markus. ALL THEY DID WAS CLOSE OFF A STORY ARC! what did they want you to do, imagine a guy trapped underground for eternity, while every oter of his kind was out getting sloughtered? I know you would have hated it more, so lets just give this a freeking rest, okay. its a good movie!

   Comment by jonatan soto — August 27, 2008
10. 

    except its not a good movie.

    visually, very pretty, but the story was nothing new or exciting or engaging.

    Comment by murph — August 27, 2008
11. 

    Agreed Murph, they’re not good movies but I still love to watch them. Surprisingly, the second one has lost all sorts of appeal over the years. I saw that again a few weeks back and didn’t enjoy it nearly as much as the first few times.

    Which reminds me, we need to resurrect our Vampire column. I’m feeling a need to curl up with Coppola’s Dracula.

    Comment by Marina Antunes — August 27, 2008
12. 

    UNDERWORLD is simply boring and uninspired on every level. Stilted acting, poor plotting, uninspired all around.

    Comment by kurt — August 27, 2008
13. 

    You need not to look at how things are played, but how they are written. Underworld is one of the most geniously written movie out there, and you should be happy when you compare this to other recent movies whos writter should really be cleaning mnkey crap.

    Comment by jonatan soto — August 28, 2008
14. 

    Don’t know what to say to that Jonatan_soto. It’s not too many movies that I get genuinely angry at for wasting my time. Underworld was one of them, and I was at a big splashy premiere attended by Les Wiseman, Kate Beckinsale and Scott Speedman. Generally, with a crowd of 1000 in a buzzy premiere, it is easy to be more forgiving of a middle or less-than-middling picture, but not in the case of underworld, I fail to see a single redeeming feature of the film outside of Bill Nighy who manages to be good in everything.

    Comment by Kurt — August 28, 2008
15. 

    “Underworld is one of the most geniously written movie out there”

    what is so genius about it, may i ask? i mean, really. it is okay to like it, but GENIUS??

    Comment by murph — August 28, 2008
16. 

    First one was great. low budget, but great. Political intrigue, a half way interesting love story, themes of slavery and racism, an interesting mix of old world style vampires and modern technology and actual intelligent bad guys with an agenda that wasn’t too ridiculous considering the movie’s reality, setting, and subject matter. Second one was complete garbage. Dumbed down, very little story, no coherent narrative, uninteresting characters. Basically just a vampire action movie. It sucked (I know, I know)

    I only hope they go back to their roots with the 3rd one.

    Comment by Gord — October 17, 2008
17. 

    The trailer instills hope…….but I’ve learned not to get ahead of myself. looks good…….we’ll see

    Comment by Gord — October 17, 2008

Leave a comment