Rating: 
Summary: Pretty movie...but that's all there is
Review: Underworld is a movie about an invisible world within our very midst. A shadowy world of vampires and werewolves, fighting a blood feud that goes back several centuries. The main storyline is about Selene, a vampire warrior or death dealer, aligned with a coven of vampires that has become drunk with their arrogance and decadence.Despite the fact that the vampires have nearly wiped out the werewolves, or lycans, Selene is convinced that they are behind a
plot that will ultimately lead to a new war that will threaten their existence. Of course, no one believes Selene. In an attempt to save her kind, Selene sets out on a course that leads to the truth on how the war started, betrayal, death, and the ultimate test of her allegiance. Underworld is a visual journey, short on action, shallow in its character development, but otherwise beautiful to look at. But herein lies its downfall. For visual effects will only hold your attention for so long until you start wondering why the heck you wasted your money on this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: cliche-flavored eye candy
Review: it's moments of lucidity can get pretty good, but this movie suffers from trying to weave too complex a plot. In addition, it frequently makes no sense and frequently looks like a game being played in "god" mode as characters never run of ammo, go to bullet-time, and actually use the drawn-out villain explanations to, ohmygosh, well, I geuss I won't spoil it for you. Suffice to say, none of these villains could take out Captain Obvious. No one acts like this unless they are reading a script. No one. Maybe pro wrestlers. . . . Nothing in this struck me as new or fresh, just rehashed death scenes and ridiculously present mood music. Goth to be goth, for nothing else. Is it just me, or does it look like they ran out of money for the final fight scene? Check out Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere (book beats film) for a much deeper story, characters, and your own choice of mood music.
Rating:
Summary: Underworld Great! Not!
Review: I went to see Underworld with the greatest excitement in the world. Although I was forewarned a bit when I read the novelization of the book that it might not be that great. I hoped it would translate better on screen. It did not. It sucked! No pun intended... The writing was weak, the dialouge so chessy that in some parts was laughable. The acting was medicore, especially in the part of the vampire Kraven (Shane Brolly). I guess like anyone can be a singer nowadays, anyone can also be an actor. The cinemetography was below par. There were times when I didn't know what I was seeing. Underworld's aim as an action/romance movie didn't hit on target. The movie dragged on too much in my opinion that I was wondering when it will be over. I enjoyed the character of Selene and Kate Beckinsale's performance. My favorite character was Lucian, which frankly was the best thing out of the whole movie. I loved Michael Sheen's performance. It's a shame that the character was axed off. Just because you doing an action movie doesn't mean it doesn't have to be good. If your going to do it, do it right. Underworld did Not do it right. I give it a C+
Rating:
Summary: Under(whelming)world
Review: I was extremely disappointed in the quality of the dialogue, some of the special effects, the story, and the plot or lack thereof. I had seen the trailer in a theater and thought it looked like it would be great movie, a war between mythological immortals made sense to me (vampires versus werewolves (Lycans)). Heck it has Kate Beckinsale as the moody queen of the Vampire deathdealers! Unfortunately it was not even one of her better performances due primarily to the lack of a coherent story and poor character development. It was comfusing at times and all of the stunts were Matrix and Blade redos that just weren't as well pulled off IMHO. The greatest disappointment was that the premise of the story was a great idea but it just wasn't done in a way that made sense. Mediocre dialog between Selene and Victor (Lord of the Vampires) and Craven (his wannabe successor). My biggest question was what did all the Vampires who hung around the "Vampire Mansion" do besides lay around??
Buy Blade or even Blade II just don't waste your money on this flop like I did!
Rating:
Summary: Uninspired
Review: Underworld had potential, and perhaps that's why I'm disappointed. Vampire vs. Werewolf; its actually quite simple and they screwed it up. The writers apparently thought that Werewolves needed a nerdy name, Lycans and Vampires needed redeemable qualities; they don't eat humans. The point of all this resides in one bad vampire king. I think it would have been much more interesting if neither the Vampires or Werewolfs would have had redeemable qualities. Making monsters act human for the sake drudging along an unoriginal love story with no payoff is just stupid. The only reason I gave it Two Stars is the background scenery, costuming, and some of the special effects.
Rating: 
Summary: Underwhelming
Review: Underworld, has vampires and werewolves in the modern world, fighting each other with guns and special ammo. The only good thing I could say about Underworld is that the special effects were good and the action scenes were well done. Now for the bad parts; the story was boring and confusing, the characters were uninteresting because they had weak dialog. I didn't like any of the characters and couldn't care less who lived or died. Kate Beckinsale's performance was very sterile. The whole movie takes place in nighttime and is terribly dark. All the scenes are so dark, even the action sequences were almost ruined by the darkness. They also kept showing very annoying flashbacks (that made no sense at all). Underworld also has a bad ending! I suggest you see "Blade" instead of this one.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Movie
Review: I thought I would not like it, but in fact I loved it. I was very amazed and await a sequel.
Rating:
Summary: Pleasantly Surprised! A slick, excellent film!
Review: I avoided this movie when it came out in the theater, dismissing it as "yet another Vampire/Werewolf rehash"; a presumptuous sentiment I now regret, having recently watched it for the first time on DVD. My opinion of it now? Quite the opposite... I *love* this movie. "Hooked" is another good word to describe my reaction to it. The creators of this film have done a wonderful job of taking the conventional Vampire/Werewolf mythos and twisting it around, taking a fresh new approach. No mysticism, crucifixes or wooden stakes here... There are sunlight and silver bullets... though Len Wiseman and co. have given the theme a scientific twist that is convincing and consistent. Many may dislike this new direction, but to me, it's a breath of fresh air. To his credit, director and co-writer Len Wiseman made the decision to go with less CG for the creature and special effects, opting for the tried and true method of using prosthetics, make-up, cables and animatronics. The results are, for one example, werewolves that have a more tactile and real look to them, where computer-generated effects all-too-often are never quite convincing enough. There are a few CG moments scattered throughout the film, but they're fleeting, used to good effect and do not detract from the movie at all. It's a lower-budget film with very high production values. The sets are great and the whole movie really maintains the dark and gritty feel that its title evokes. How about the story?
I won't go into the premise of the film. Many others here have already done a fine enough job in their reviews. I will say the story is another aspect of this film that, for me, elevates it far above being "just another supernatural slasher/horror flick". The story starts off seemingly simple... Vampires and Lycans (werewolves) have been at war for centuries and a specific group of Vampires, called Death Dealers, are charged with bringing about the Lycans' extinction. The movie starts out explaining this on-going battle through the narration of the films main protagonist, Selene who is, herself, a Death Dealer. However, as the story develops, you find that there is much more going on than originally revealed and, by the end of the movie, there are enough twists and turns to satisfy even the most jaded viewer. It's intelligent and is conveyed via well written and delivered dialog. I cannot think of one line in this movie that seemed cheesy or made me cringe. One scene in which Viktor, one of the Vampire elders, slays a Lycan was taken a *wee* bit farther than necessary, I think. But that's hardly a complaint... just a minor personal quip. The casting and acting in Underworld also receives high marks. For one, Kate Beckinsale (Selene) delivers an absolutely stunning and intoxicating performance. She's perfect in this role and, by the way, looks incredible. For their part, the rest of the cast deliver a solid performance as well. There are no cardboard-cutouts in this movie. Every actor commands their role skillfully and adequately and I found myself caring about what happens to each one. I could go on much longer about this movie, and there would be nothing but positive.. but I think I've made my point :-). If you want to see a slick, stylish and all around well-done movie, you'd do well to see Underworld.
Rating:
Summary: Underdone
Review: UNDERWORLD is the kind of film that studios -- during the late 70s and 80s -- considered 'throwaways': horror films given a certain degree of mythology meant to attract little more than the teen audience willing to spend a few bucks for a few scares. The influence of STAR WARS, George Lucas, and Steven Spielberg on the film industry, however, largely has caused the industry to reinvent the horror (monster, not slasher) film as "an event film": cast some modest to big name actors, throw in heavier doses of backstory and mythology, and viola! You've got art! Of course, vampires are enjoying a reasonable rebirth as of late. INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE had the critics up in arms, while BLADE (I & II) really catored more to the 18-45 demographic in terms of violence, music, and action. Even television got into the act with KINDRED: THE EMBRACED, BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER, ANGEL, and the stellar BBC mini ULTRAVIOLET. As with the vast vampire subculture, there's plenty of blood here for good stories. In that estimation, UNDERWORLD feels underdone. It's full of big ideas -- a centuries old unknown war between Vampires and Werewolves for dominance, Vampire covens ruled by reawakened members of the undead, DNA sequencing to try and create a hybrid between the two species, a Romeo & Juliet spinoff love story -- that needed to be cooked a while longer in order to determine which ingredients would produce the best dish -- including Kate Beckingsale whose behind looks absolutely spectacular in leather. Despite the studio's rush to greenlight a sequel, UNDERWORLD played to solid (not great) box office receipts, and this viewer only hopes that the creative folk will peel back some layers of the mythology they've created in order to deliver a product that feels less 'rushed' and far more 'important.'
Rating:
Summary: Stylish, but underproductive action film
Review: "Underworld" was a very interesting film to watch. Part horror/action film, this film manages to have a interesting and original storyline, fine cinematography and a good performance by Kate Beckinsale. Despite its strengths, it sometimes lacks "bite". In a film inspired by THE MATRIX and THE CROW, this movie easily seperates itself from because it's about vampires and werewolves. The storyline has the two battling an ancient war for over a 1000 years. Vampire hunteress Selene(Beckinsale) rescues a ill-fated human named Michael(Scott Speedman) from Lycans, a.k.a werewolves. She then stumbles upon a conspiracy by the Lycans, who have turned Michael into one of them, in order to exterminate the vampires. Selene struggles to keep Michael from becoming a Lycan, but gets help from an ancient vampire, Victor, who isn't all he seems. Then of course there's a battle between the two races. I liked the story, but this film just plays by the numbers. This film has a dark and gloomy atmosphere, which I like, yet the film fails to be more gritty. Horror fans will be dissapointed with the lack of blood this film offers, but many may be glad with just the story, which has surprising twists and turns. The special effects aren't all that special, since there's nothing groundbreaking about it. The action wasn't really productive either, just grade B stuff. I felt sometimes this really was a low budget actioner, but it's still stylish now and then. "Underworld" was a film basically filled with a bunch of familar ideas which rewrites what we think of vampires and werewolves. But I just didn't get what this film said to me, because I just wasn't all that excited what it had to offer. Despite some strengths, "Underworld" was a very mixed movie to watch.
| 
