Underworld 2 : Évolution

Let's face it. If you're going to see this movie, you probably enjoyed the original and are looking for more. You want high doses of fight scenes, vampire and lycan lore, blood, violence, and Kate Beckinsale wearing leather or less. In short, this movie delivers all of the above in great excess, so if you liked Underworld, you're going to like Underworld: Evolution as much or more.

On the other hand, if you don't like blood, violence, action, mythology, or using a sword in a world full of guns, this movie is not for you, and it's NOT MEANT to be for you, so don't complain about it.

This movie surpasses the original as far as story development. We learn a good bit about each character's past, which helps justify all the extreme violence they engage themselves in. We're also introduced to some new characters and plot lines that add interest and new twists, rather than just rehashing all the familiar faces from Underworld.

This movie fails to get a 10 rating from me for the following reasons:

1) Not quite enough "stuff" to fill the time. Too many shots of Kate Beckinsale "looking intense". The movie could have been 10 minutes shorter if the number of these shots had been reduced from seemingly infinite down to 10 or so. Minor problem.

2) A few glaring continuity errors.

3) Too many flashback/explanation shots from the original Underworld. I suppose this is necessary so as not to alienate viewers who didn't see the original or who forgot it. However, this movie is obviously targeted to people who liked the original and want more, so give us a quick refresher and then hit us with new stuff. No need to keep providing Cliff's notes throughout the movie. Make us think a little!

4) There wasn't a standout power move comparable to the spinning/shooting through the floor in the original Underworld. Let's face it, half the people that went to that movie did so because that shot was in the trailer. This movie had lots of power moves, but none that stood out as the winner.

Just imagine if your brother was lupine, while you devoured blood, like it was claret wine, he loved to howl and bark, you just loved being in the dark, a psychotic and neurotic frater line.

Selene is being hunted for her blood, batty Marcus needs to find where William's stood, he wants to build the family, there's some new anthropology, to explain why they enjoyed their childhood.

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.

Be nice to know what the point of it all is too, aside from megalomania.

Selene (Kate Beckinsale) wishes to expose the truth about the death of Viktor to the first true vampire Marcus (Tony Curran) that is hibernating. However, Marcus has already awakened and wants to release his savage Lycan brother William (Brian Steele), who has been imprisoned for centuries. When Marcus tries to get the medal possessed by Lucian from the hybrid Michael (Scott Speedman), Selene decides to visit Andreas Tanis (Steven Mackintosh), the exiled official historian of the covens, to understand his interest. When Selene and Michael meet Tanis, they disclose the truth about their bloodlines, and later with the support of Alexander Corvinus (Sir Derek Jacobi), Selene faces the powerful and evil Marcus as the last hope left for the mankind.

It is very difficult to see good sequels, but "Underworld – Evolution" gave me the sensation that together with "Underworld", they are one good movie split in two parts. The viewers like me that enjoyed "Underworld" will certainly like this sequel very much. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Anjos da Noite – A Evolução" ("Angels of the Night - The Evolution")

Note; On 28 January 2017, I saw this film again.

To start off, let me say that I'm a very big fan of the original. I think it did everything right; having a nice Gothic overtone, great characters, an original, intriguing and in-depth plot, fun action and an overall script that never once felt dull. Oh, and of course...it had Kate Beckinsale in tight leather, hehehe. Now does this sequel contain all these qualities that made the original so good? Personally, I'd have to say no, I don't think it did. Was the movie necessarily bad? Also no. It was highly entertaining but not that good of a movie overall.

STORYLINE: The story in this film was no where near as good or developed as the original. As it starts off with a war scene in the past, I found myself really enjoying it. We find out a little about the Corvinus family and the origins or Marcus, who was the very first vampire, and his brother, who was the very first Lycan. But after we witness these scenes and learn these few minor plot details, the story development pretty much comes to a dead stop. Honestly, nothing really happens in this movie. It's all just action and really nothing more.

CHARACTERS: The lead characters were good. Selene and Michael didn't exactly have any development but that's okay because they were developed enough in the first film. But what was slightly developed was their romance, which the first film seemed to be lacking. We really got to feel the connection between them and how much they really cared for each other. And it was great to see Michael show off his new hybrid abilities and kick some booty along the way. He was a lot cooler in this film than in the original. The new vampire leader, Marcus, was also pretty damn cool. He had a very sinister appearance, especially with the devil-like wings, and didn't seem to have any sympathy at all as he brutally disposed of anyone who got in his way. In the original, we had Lucian, who was a well developed bad-guy character and I actually found myself caring for him. Marcus, on the other hand, didn't strike a cord with me at all. He looked cool, sure, but besides that, he had absolutely nothing going for him and I really didn't care what happened to him. All the other characters in this film were also very undeveloped as well. We really knew nothing of them and as a result, felt unsure whether we should like them or hate them. So that's a major issue.

ACTION: The action, most the time, was very enjoyable. And I stress MOST of the time, not ALL of the time. There was some really fun action and fight sequences and a nice amount of blood and gore thrown into the mix. So it definitely does manage to entertain the action buffs. But then, at times, the action began to feel annoying as it got extremely repetitive. It was like they just kept replaying the same action scene over and over and just tweaked it a little in order to pass it off as a different scene. This was a problem because the whole movie seemed to base itself on action, rather than story, and the action wasn't even all that good.

ATMOSPHERE: Another good thing about this movie would have to be the scenery. Yeah, I know that's not really important in the movie, but it really did help with the overall experience. There were beautiful mountain landscapes, snowy woods, old style castles in ruins and gorgeous red colored twilight skies. So I think it actually helped a lot in setting the atmosphere and gets points for great eye candy.

OVERALL: The first film was an action-horror movie with a great original storyline. This sequel, on the other hand, felt more like a series of left over action scenes that were taken out of the first film. I think watching the two films back to back will make a great overall experience. But as a stand-alone, it doesn't quite work. It's fun for sure, but that's about it. It's not even remotely close to being as good or better than the original in any way.

Kate Beckinsale and Scott Speedman reprise their roles as leather-clad, ass-kicking vampire warrior Selene and vampire / werewolf hybrid Michael in this decent sequel. The story picks up where the original movie ended; now Selene and Michael are on the lam and determined to obtain exposition regarding the centuries-old war between blood suckers and bloodthirsty canines. Relentlessly pursuing them is thoroughly evil bad guy vampire Marcus (Tony Curran); Selene and Michael attempt to get some help from the legendary Alexander Corvinus (Sir Derek Jacobi), the man who got the ball rolling on this conflict so many years ago.

"Underworld: Evolution" is okay as far as this kind of entertainment goes. It depicts a bleak, stylized environment that refrains from many primary colours, going for the gusto in terms of action and gore, and trying to deliver a poignant moment here and there. The CGI can be ropey at times - as we all come to expect from this sort of thing - but there is fortunately some practical work as well (like Brian Steele in costume as the fearsome werewolf William, who's been imprisoned for centuries).

It really helps to have a largely British cast with such a tale; they lend gravitas where it might not have been delivered otherwise, and the actors all give it their best effort. Curran is a vivid villain, and it's a real treat to have Jacobi in a pivotal role in a modern genre crossover of a movie. Steven Mackintosh is a hoot as a seedy beast who's been the historian for the two clans, but was forced into exile. Some cast members from the original film, like Bill Nighy as Viktor, Shane Brolly as Kraven, and Michael Sheen as Lucian, appear briefly.

Director and co-writer Len Wiseman keeps the story moving forward adequately, spices it up with a bit of sex, and gives us a finale where Selene and Michael are fighting their adversaries side by side.

Not bad overall, but if one is NOT a fan of the first "Underworld", this sequel probably won't get them to change their minds about this series.

Filmed in Vancouver.

Six out of 10.