Inframundo

Don't know why I never got around to watching this. Good solid fantasy about the war between Vampires and Werewolves. The feel of the movie is great, Dark and Gothic, good music, and the cast is superb led by a very sexy Kate Beckinsale. Looking forward to seeing the rest.

"Underworld" is no ordinary horror movie. It tells the tale of a secret war between vampires and werewolves (or as they're called here, lycans). Kate Beckinsale stars as Selene, a lethal assassin on the vampire side. Scott Speedman plays Michael Corvin, a man who finds himself wrapped up in this brutal war. This movie is rather well done, despite all the blood and graphic violence. The look of the movie is dark, Gothic and brooding, which fits very well with the story. The script is interesting, using science to bring the vampire and werewolf legends into the modern age (such as saying the lycans are allergic to silver). The story of the bitter rivalry between to two mythic characters would make a fascinating prequel, and the sequel should follow "Underworld" with real impact as well.

Beneath the surface, in the shadows, a dark sphere; two hostile factions, scythe and rip, and claw and shear; a battle born of ages, a perpetual war rages, without forgiveness, without compassion, just hate sincere.

A warring vampire makes a link to treachery, this wolf assassin's stalked Lycans for centuries, hidden secrets are revealed, open wounds that never healed, genes are diced and spliced to halt adversaries.

It's only downhill from now on, as the franchise ruptures, the bloods gone, not quite knowing when to stop, perpetually draining a good plot, leaving a husk, a shallow spectre of what was.

As soon as I saw the preview to this film I wrote it off as a silly Matrix rip-off trying to attack a subject that is so tired (vampires/werewolves). I really never had any intention of seeing Underworld until my girlfriend, who saw it in theaters, repeatedly suggested I watch it. After watching the DVD just now I must say that I enjoyed it a lot. I was completely into the story, which is surprisingly rich and engaging. One would have to be a bit naïve not to admit that Underworld does indeed borrow from a variety of action films, most notably The Matrix. It should be obvious to any free-thinking person that none of the ideas present in Underworld are original, but what this film does well is take ideas that were established in the past and build on them more. This is by no means a carbon copy of any of the films from which it borrows from. Slow motion gun battles didn't originate with the Matrix films. The most refreshing aspect of this movie is the story, which surprisingly has many layers and puts a totally fresh new spin on the vampire/werewolf stories. This aspect, along with the excellent visual effects makes Underworld an enjoyable experience. A sequel for this is inevitable, and I must say that I'm really looking forward to it. Underworld was a very pleasant surprise.

*** out of **** stars

The "Underworld" sequel will soon be out so now is a good time to revisit the original. Personally I enjoyed this film more than any high budget "mainstream movie" I have seen in years years. But I can see many of the problems others have pointed out. Although the small action scenes work very well, the more elaborate scenes are disjointed, confused, and somewhat silly. If you compare the opening subway sequence to the train station sequence in "The Untouchables", you see an illustration of why less is better; and "Underworld" expends more ammo for less effect than anything this side of a "Godzilla" film.

Along with too much aggressive confusion is the silliest head-splitting in cinema history. Similar to the way Tarentino dispatched Lucy Lie in "Kill Bill Vol.1" (i.e. a delay in the actual detachment-I don't know which film did it first but Tarentine did it way better), the effects editor overlooked the need to show a slice in the head before it topples off. Surely this was just simple incompetence and not deliberate, because there are ways to show this (i.e. a line) that would still make it a relatively shocking scene.

The story itself breaks too many horror genre conventions and fails to generate much real suspense (although the climax is somewhat surprising). But ultimately these problems did not interfere with my enjoyment of the movie.

This was because it is first and foremost a Kate Beckensale's vehicle, as emphasized by recent trailer for the sequel. It is likely that your feeling about the film will depend on your impression of Beckensale. She has never looked better and I'm just talking about her face which I could watch in closeup for two hours without the slightest complaint. She is increasingly an absolute ringer for a 1940-ish Loretta Young. An earlier comment noted that: "This 30 year old has the figure and face of a magazine model, with the bored flat expression to match. Pour this tight little body into a rubber suit with especially reflective pants and you have something to anchor your movie". All this is very true but add intelligence, subtlety and nuance not seen since Diana Rigg was playing Mrs. Peel. The film does not demonstrate her range (you have to watch "Alice Through the Looking Glass" for the best evidence of that) but it is one of those rare cases where you can't imagine anyone but her in the role.

The production design, lighting, and cinematography are all excellent and the DVD has some great features explaining these aspects of the production.

The film has a nice consistent look that fits very well with the story. I don't understand the comments that are negative overall, or what films these people are unfavorably comparing it to, can't be the garbage films that have been coming to mainstream theaters over the past few years. Bottom line, if you like the genre, appreciate stylish production design, and think highly of Ms. Beckensale you should make it a point to see this movie.