So i just re watched Underworld and Underworld Evolution....(SPOILERS)
- Thread starter Gustov
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 20,185
- Location
- Middlesbrough
All 3 are fantastic. Watched them all the other week. #2 is a bit weaker than the other 2 but it's still excellent 
All 3 are fantastic. Watched them all the other week. #2 is a bit weaker than the other 2 but it's still excellent
I thought 2 was even better than the first
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2005
- Posts
- 8,833
- Location
- Leeds
I personally found the 1st to be dire, worst film I've seen in ages, different points of view and all that though
How you can class Underworld as dire is beyond comprehension for me.
I understand it might not fit into your particular genre but seriously, dire? Do you go watch films at the cinema on a regular occurrence as Underworld is miles ahead of most of the trash released.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion, it's just your opinion deludes me and by the looks of things most of the others in this thread.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,084
- Location
- Surrey
Evolution not a good film?
Siiiiiiiiiiiigh
You really need to start respecting other people's opinions
Just looking on Metacritic Underworld 1 has an average review of 42%, Underworld 2 has 36% I enjoyed them but clearly it's a niche following.
Meh, I don't bother with film critic sites. The fact that Drag me to hell got 94% on Rotten Tomatoes only emulated my opinion of 'real' film critics. LOL at that film It was so bad.....
Only one i really take into account is IMDB as it has a lot of members who are regular cinema attendees, not pompus film critics who knock down a film the second CGI, greenscreen or miniatures are used.
For me a film has to have good acting, an innovative plot line, a strong script and most importantly be entertaining. IMO underworld fulfills all four.
It was so bad.....Only one i really take into account is IMDB as it has a lot of members who are regular cinema attendees, not pompus film critics who knock down a film the second CGI, greenscreen or miniatures are used.
For me a film has to have good acting, an innovative plot line, a strong script and most importantly be entertaining. IMO underworld fulfills all four.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,108
Not a huge fan of the original. It seriously lacked substance in the story department, with the whole love affair almost coming completely from left-field and it's supposed to be the plot! Plus Michael Sheen's enormous forehead scares me.
Evolution, however, I thought was miles ahead - they amped it up on almost every level. The threat, the characters' relationships, Selena's determination and the special effects are utterly fantastic. Not to mention gory as hell, so right up my alley.
Evolution, however, I thought was miles ahead - they amped it up on almost every level. The threat, the characters' relationships, Selena's determination and the special effects are utterly fantastic. Not to mention gory as hell, so right up my alley.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
They're entertaining enough films but not very good, the sort of thing that I'd watch to while away a rainy Sunday afternoon rather than engage my brain.
They're entertaining enough films but not very good, the sort of thing that I'd watch to while away a rainy Sunday afternoon rather than engage my brain.
This. Mindless entertainment. No more, no less. Imo of course.