Underworld

[animeghost]

who here has seen both of the under world movies

[rainbowphoenix]

i saw the second movie, underworld revolution, and my opinion was that it, s-u-c-k-e-d, i mean seriosly that movie was so corny, the only good thing about the movie as that there was a lot of blood, the corny part was that when the girl gets her *** kicked, there is no blood or dirt in her face she looks perfectly clean, and another part was when the girl had the machine gun and kept shooting at the werewolf like a million times and he still did't die, that movie was really stupid, my parents also though the movie sucked. No offence if you liked the movie

[Jakehammaren]

I loved BOTH Underworld movies! Say they're corny, say they sucked (which they probably did), but Underworld is my all-time favorite movie, and the sequel did not disappoint. I love 'em. I have no good reason. I just do.

[Rhym]

[FONT=Times New Roman][COLOR=DarkSlateGray]Man, the Underworld series! I love bad movies! There is no better entertainment on a Friday night!

I've seen both, but number 2 is fresher in my mind, so I'll focus on that one.

Sure, the plot was terrible. But come on! Those were some great effects! There was a dude with an axe in the 13th century part! And her [i]eyes![/i] That was a hella cool effect!

Plus, that was the funniest sex scene I've ever seen in a movie. It was so corny! It was like:

"HAY I SAVE YOU FROM BURNING IN SUN HERE IS A WAREHOUSE"
"YES"
"LOL I SHOW YOU MY INTERIOR DECORATING SKILLZ, FOR I AM SEXY"
"YES"
"I PUT YOU IN BOX, AND NOW FOR THE MAKING OF THE SEX, YES?"
"YES"

The funny thing is, Kate Beckinsale's husband is the DIRECTOR of Underworld 2. But which is funnier, that fact, or her quote about that scene? Essentially, she said that Scott Speedman, the actor that plays Michael, is "like the family dog, you just don't care."

Now, you may think me wrong in this thought, but I'm pretty sure [i]I[/i] would care if my hypothetical wife was having an intimate physical relationship with the hypothetical family dog.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[WW2]

I only saw the first film..and I think thats enough. Sure it had some flashy gun play and decent special effects, but the story and performances weren't very good.
Werewolves shooting Vampires with UV bullets?....riiiight.
Also I didn't like how everything in the movie was all black and blue....it bothered me just as most everything in the Matrix had a green tint.

[Ai.sAkUrA.chan]

Aaaahh!! How can someone not love Underworld?!
I've seen both, and i can honestly say they were one of my favorite movies!!
I mean, there's blood (hell yea), action, vampires, werewolves, creepy hybrids,.betrayal(!!!)...it's just there!!!
I guess that's just my type of movie...i mean we all have different tastes and all.

[Guest shredderkid25]

i must say that both movies are terrible

[Guest sexyfairy_34]

i thought that both Underworld movies were good.. but the second one was better then the first.. with the blood and more scecnes of death

[Guest Vash T Stampede]

Ya the second underworld movie was better than the first one.

[arjem27]

[quote name='Vash T Stampede']Ya the second underworld movie was better than the first one.[/quote]
[COLOR=DarkSlateGray]
[FONT=Arial][SIZE=1]=o I've only seen the 1st one. I thought it was ok. Every one was gorgeous. The whole vampires w/ machine guns thing kinda threw me off. & the Lycanthropes thing was so fake but I guess thats what makes it so funny. :animeblus [/SIZE] [/FONT] [/COLOR]

[animeghost]

how can you say they are bad i mean michael literaly rips williams head off and sleane shoves marcus in to helecopter blades tearing him to shreads how often do you get to see that in movies

[Gavin]

[SIZE=1]Interesting, most interesting.

Personally I preferred the original over Evolution, as it not only had a tighter and more convincing storyline but also actually kept you interested in the movie itself.[spoiler] In Evolution you knew from the moment you learned William had been locked away that he was going to be freed eventually, that was simply a given,[/spoiler] so you might as well have fell asleep for half and hour and not missed anything important.

I did enjoy the brief showing of events [spoiler]back in the thirteen century, it gave an idea of exactly how the Vampires acted back then although it did raise the question as to exactly how Markus knew his turning Viktor would not simply result in his death. After all Selene said in the original that most people bitten by an immortal died within hours, of course given Markus is the pregenitor of the Vampire race it does make sense his bite would be less fatal. It also makes you wonder how exactly the "sons of Corvinus" went from being the children of a Hungarian warlord to Markus being a servant of Viktor.[/spoiler]

The movie also raised the question of [spoiler]how exactly Lycans went from being mindless destructive like William to retaining their sanity and being able to focus their anger like Lucian. It may even be possible to assume that Lucian could be the progeniter of the current breed of Lycan. Of course that's simply speculation but it does seem the most logical line of thought. As well as this you're left asking exactly what changes have been made to Selene after recieving some of Alexander's blood.[/spoiler] Still I suppose all shall be revealed in Underworld 3.

Overall I must admit I thought a great deal less of the sequel, it just seemed to stray very far from the original roots of Underworld, taking a more fantasy route when the original had tried to introduce a sense of reality to the proceedings. Most of the acting was sub-par with the exception Steven Mackintosh as Andreas Tanis whom I thought played his role rather spendidly.[/SIZE]

[Guest sesshisgrl01]

i saw the first one and i loved it. i sooooooooooo cnat wait to see the second :catgirl: