'Underworld' should remain unevolved

By Amy Staples

The film “Underworld: Evolution” was, sad to say, awful. Really, really, really, really awful. It was so awful, in fact, that immediately following the film I burst into tears.

Not really, but if I hadn’t been so ticked off about losing the last two hours of my life to the endless pit of never again, I just might have cried out of frustration.

As it is, I have dry eyes, the movie still exists, and it is my most fervent wish (not really) that no one ever views this film.

Here’s a hint to all aspiring filmmakers – don’t EVER make a sequel. If you must break this cardinal rule and ruin most fans’ memories of the first film and create its sequel, here’s another hint – don’t EVER flash back to the first film in the sequel. It is completely unnecessary if the film stands on its own, as “Evolution” may have, if director Len Wiseman had given it four good legs instead of three lame legs and a feather for a fourth, and at best, the flashbacks are boring as hell for people who saw the first movie.

The flashbacks to the original “Underworld” are not the worst thing about this movie, sadly. It does wear the scarlet letter of the sequel, after all, so there are buckets more of blood, dozens more decapitations, and sex everywhere you turn. From the creepy vampire in exile Tanis (Steven Mackintosh, “The Jacket”) and his hapless harem of supermodel-thin, scarcely dressed vampiresses to Selene (Kate Beckinsale, “Van Helsing”) and Michael (Scott Speedman, “xXx: State of the Union” ) getting down in a makeshift coffin, Wiseman knows the other rule of sequels: upping the skin shots, not just body count.

Having seen “Underworld,” I was expecting a good helping of action and gore (this is a story of vampires and werewolves, after all) but was hoping for a little more story.
Why do the two species hate each other so passionately? This is answered, sort of, by a flashback to 1202 A.D., before the truth behind the Corvinus brothers (“one bitten by bat and one by wolf”) was a myth, but still left viewers with question marks above their heads. Could a werewolf truly survive 800 years in a prison with no food or water?
What will happen between the vampire Selene and the werewolf/vampire hybrid Michael? Yes, it sounds like a soap opera starring the Manson family, but the original movie was actually good enough to bring fans to ask these questions.

The best thing about this movie, aside from Beckinsale’s reprisal of the role of Selene, a werewolf-slaying, out-for-vengeance vampire, is the great Bill Nighy. He is back in this film – for about five minutes, since he died in the original.

Something nice should be said about the soundtrack: Something nice.

The film is obviously fiction, as vampires and werewolves aren’t common sights on Stark Street, but when a story is so thin viewers catch themselves making comments to other watchers like, “That helicopter would never do that,” the watchers have suspended disbelief and are unable to swallow the tale.

It’s a sad day for movies when a director can’t draw an audience into the story, and that’s exactly the problem with this one. The sequel is begging to be taken seriously, but unfortunately the excessive gore collects snickers from the audience and Beckinsale’s talent is lost in the muck.

Expect yet another sequel, probably titled “Underworld: The Progeny,” and (here’s a spoiler) you can bet the ranch there will be offspring of Selene and Michael, more sex, gore, guns, and expect it to bore you, too.

I’ve seen the future. And it is dull. Dig your eyes our of your skull before you see this one; you’ll enjoy the film more.