?

Log in

 
 
21 January 2006 @ 01:08 am
Underwear:Evolutions  
Underworld:Evolutions blows.
This is typical of the style-over-substance school of filmmaking. The bulking out the 45 minute script with an hour of, well...bulk.
It's like the writer sat down at his laptop one afternoon and decided to write the script for this. Whenever he needed a break whether it be a wiz, a dump or a smoke, he'd just type "insert visuals scene" and it would correspond to his immediate biological imperative. There were bullets and fangs and hooters aplenty so he mustn't be able to sit still for very long.

Can somebody explain to me why the main villian was doing what he was doing? Other than just being a baddie, of course. He ran around and fanged a lot of people, and got his revenge and all, but...

There were a lot of little annoyances, but that helicopter/buzzsaw was just silly.
 
 
Current Mood: pissy
 
 
 
reverend_s on January 21st, 2006 11:21 am (UTC)
Yeah, this is a film that you can tell is going to suck just from the trailers.

Then again, considering your previous calls on films, I'm looking to see this now.

And with that in mind, what are your thoughts on the original Underworld?
binro33binro33 on January 21st, 2006 02:29 pm (UTC)
Then again, considering your previous calls on films, I'm looking to see this now.

I'm not quite sure how to take that statement. Is there a way I can read that and not be mildly insulted? If so, please help me with that. Until then, my revenge will be you wasting your money.
Here's some more movie going advice from your helpful reverse barometer.
Family Stone- sucked big time: You should see it.
Serenity- awesome: You should skip it.
Brokeback Mountain- It blows and sucks (literally): Again, you should see it.
40 Year old Virgin- Mucho funny: You should skip it.

Also, I saw a trailer for X3 which looks awesome, you may want to skip that one as well.

And with that in mind, what are your thoughts on the original Underworld?

It was OK, I was annoyed by a couple of details, but other than that it was OK. I used to play the RPG Vampire:The Masquarade quite a bit, so I had a certain preconceived idea of vampiric/lupine powers and I'm 100% sure that coloured my view of the flick.
Although no one ever answered to my satisfaction, this question about the basic premise: If the werewolves were smarter, and stronger, and better armed, and better organized than the vampires, why were there still vampires?

Come back here after you've seen the movie and we'll debate the various suckinesses of the second flick. Please do it soon while the details are still fresh in my head.
reverend_s on January 26th, 2006 07:09 pm (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to take that statement. Is there a way I can read that and not be mildly insulted? If so, please help me with that.

Um, wow. Your sense of humor called me yesterday to ask for directions. Seems it was lost.
binro33binro33 on January 26th, 2006 07:14 pm (UTC)
Your sense of humor called me yesterday to ask for directions. Seems it was lost.

It called up looking for another sense of humour and nobody was home.
reverend_s on January 26th, 2006 07:34 pm (UTC)
Oh yeah? Well, I'm rubber and your glue! Nyah.
binro33binro33 on February 10th, 2006 05:43 pm (UTC)
Now that's actually funny.
I can see you've been practicing.
reverend_s on February 10th, 2006 06:17 pm (UTC)
Yes, it is true. I find that interacting with the vastly superior intellect and open-minded participation or the Live Journal forums is an excellent way to hone my rapier wit. How nice of you to notice.