E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Kate Beckinsale sat out the third "Underworld" film, but returned for the fourth.
REVIEW
The fourth entry in this profitable B-movie series helpfully brings its viewers up to speed with a quick recap of the first two movies (conveniently skipping the third, which star Kate Beckinsale sat out). The comely British actress — also currently being seen in theaters as the wife-in-peril in "Contraband" -- has returned to once again don the skintight black latex outfit that is these films’ biggest draw to fanboys. More aggressively violent and thankfully less mythology driven than previous installments, "Underworld Awakening" is strictly for the converted.
PHOTOS: The Evolution of Film Vampires
This film begins with vampiress Selene waking up after being in a cryogenically frozen state for 12 years, a convincing plot element since the 38-year-old actress doesn’t seem to have aged a day. Apparently we humans have gotten hip to the preponderance of Lycans — werewolves, to the uninitiated — and bloodsuckers in their midst, and have made determined efforts to eradicate them.
Busting out of the lab, Selene takes no prisoners. Indeed, the character seems even more ruthlessly violent and murderous than in the previous films, perhaps the result of having been woken up from a nice long nap.
Accompanied by a hunky vampire (Theo James) and a young woman (India Eisley) awakened from a similarly frozen state, Selene finds herself in an endless series of violent battles with both humans and Lycans — who are, in many cases, one and the same. Along the way, a sympathetic cop (Michael Ealy) tries to help out, with unfortunate results.
VIDEO: Kate Beckinsale's 'Underworld: Awakening': 5 New Clips Released
The actress goes through her energetic paces and an awful lot of wire work with the requisite athleticism and steely facial expressions. When she’s not actually fighting, her performance consists of little more than striding purposefully towards or away from the camera: “I’m not good with feelings,” Selene accurately points out.
Swedish directors Mans Marlind and Bjorn Stein — they’re billed by just their last names in the credits, which admittedly looks cooler — keep the pace frenetic enough that the film clocks in at just 89 minutes. This is the first of the series to be done in 3D but -- considering the monochromatic, blue-grey palette, the frenetic editing and the general darkness — it only results in making the proceedings harder to see in an additional dimension.
As is customary for the series, there are veteran British actors on hand to pick up a quick paycheck. Here, replacing such predecessors as Bill Nighy and Derek Jacobi, are Stephen Rea as an evil scientist and Charles Dance as the head of a vampire coven. Both look despondent that they’ll no longer be any "Harry Potter" movies to provide an alternative form of financial security.
Will you see the movie? Tell us on Facebook.
More movie stories:
Leave a Comment:
The 3rd Underworld ("Rise of the Lycans") was the best one. I've seen that movie numerous times and I thought that was Kate Beckinsale playing the part of Sonja. The plot of this 4th movie (a hybrid child that is "the key to winning this war") has already been done (very trite) and well...it didn't work! So, is this one bad since you say it's "sleep-inducing"?!? Your "review" isn't much of a review!!
How can Kate in tight clothes ever be considered "sleep inducing". She is a solid actress and rocking hot.
Because the review is about the quality of the movie, not the hottness of the actors.
I have never seen a movie that a reviewer ever liked, ever since the original Star wars came out. They wouldn't know a good movie if it dropped on them
Typically, the movies that the critics ridicule the most are the ones worth paying money to see.
What SkinnyCracker said.
Going to see this one tomorrow, and looking forward to it!
B-Rated??? Not!! I don't think the reviewer even knows what a b-rated slasher flick is!
The recap at the beginning of Awakening skips the third movie, not because kate wasn't in it but because it took place before the other two movies. Also the movie doesn't begin with Selene waking up, it begins showing humans trying to wipe out the vamps and lycans. I guess knowing what you are talking about isn't a prerequisite for reviewing a film.
I always thought Kate Beckinsale would be great in those kind of movies where the "hot n naughty" chick has to truly "suck". :)
I would watch 89 minutes of that chick just standing still.
jumping jacks
He'd probably pay double to see that!
Two minutes or more of Kate Beckinsale in any 24 hour period precludes "meh."
Although it's a fitting review for a site that says this about the above sentence: "Uh oh! Our Spam Detection Apparatus has indicated that your contribution might be spam. It's probably just a mistake. Identify the characters below and you can be on your way."
The site runners here truly define sub-meh.
When the so called critics say is bad then "I can't wait" to see it. Loved all the Underworld movies.
With the extreme narrowmindeness of this review and the lack of comprehension of the plot, this will be the last time I even look to anything by Frank Schenk for any type of credible review.
Ah, fer Chrissake guy, just appreciate the movie for what it is. We know we're not going to see Grammy-nominated performances in this. We know it's not going to have a soul-wrenching, profound plot with a cathartic climax. We know it's going to be full of cliches and corny one-liners. But you know what? That's what it is, and you should review it as such. Not every movie needs to be "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" or "The Notebook" or "Saving Private Ryan". Sometimes you just want to go turn your brain off for an hour and a half and watch a hot woman in tight leather shoot guns at things.
@Chris-629698 "watch a hot woman...shoot guns at things." - is exactly what happens. Just got back from a packed IMAX 3D showing. Only those unclear on the concept attend expecting anything more than live-action pulp fiction, cheesy one-liners and all. If you were expecting "Coriolanus," dear reviewer, that's YOUR bad...and you certainly shouldn't be reviewing films for a living. Those willing to suspend disbelief and dive in it will have a grand time.
I too just got back from a packed IMAX 3D showing and was THRILLED with this latest installment! If you are already an Underworld fan (vs. bitter reviewer) this movie is EXACTLY what we've all been waiting for! Personally I think the plot, acting, use of 3D, and CGI are all stellar. The transformation effects are better than before and enough plot twists and surprises thrown in to keep it interesting. Indeed humans discovering the existence of both Lycan and Vampire then attempting to purge both are a logical progression in the story line. Kate is obviously the sex appeal draw but there's much more to this movie than just her. I can hardly wait for the next one hoping to see Michael, Selene, and Eve unite the covens to combat these new 'silver-proof' Lycans!
I'm sorry, but I can't take seriously a review that starts off by calling Underworld a "B movie" series. This reviewer obviously has no idea what he's talking about. Just because it doesn't have billions of little girls screaming over it (like another vampire series) that doesn't mean it's a B movie. Every one of them did well at the box office. And the comment about Selene looking as if she hasn't aged just confirms that this reviewer knows nothing about the series. She's an immortal vampire. Of course she hasn't aged. In the first two movies we learn that she's already hundreds of years old, and looks like she's 30. So, why the heck would you expect her to look any older after only 12 years?
Oh, the 'industry' has always referred to anything that is not a 'deeply significant (read 'politocally correct') social drama' as a B Movie. I rarely have any interest in an A Movie ... I would rather read the book, and I do read many. I watch movies because they are visually interesting and fun. Star Wars was a B Movie ... by definition (all Science Fiction and Horror/Monster movies will always be regarded as B films, regardless of budget). Fortunately, there are millions of us who go to the movies to have fun and see smeothing we cannot see in our more mundane 'real world', and we rarely pay much attention to any 'serious' movie critic (though we do often read them, anyway). For some of us, this is what movies are all about. Others choose differently ... and this, as they say, is what makes the world go around! :c)
Oddly enough, when I watch a movie, I do it for entertainment. :) While I don't mind movies that make you think, I hate the ones that you have to watch several times just to get the basic plotline figured out.
BTW, I actually own the books of that 'other' vampire series, but none of the movies. While the story is pretty good the movies haven't impressed me. I do, however, have two or three of the underworld dvd's at home.
Boys to men will see the movie mostly to see Kate again in that tight, black wet suit.
"More aggressively violent and thankfully less mythology driven than previous installments." So you want the movie to be a dumb shoot-em-up, but then you pan it for being a dumb shoot-em up...
Just left a packed theater. I enjoyed the story line, as it follows a progressive plot. The action never stops ! I was on the edge of my seat the entire time. My wife doesn't usually like movies with a lot of fight scenes etc. But she really, truly enjoyed this movie and raved about it, the entire 30 minute ride home from the theater.
If you like action and a sensible story line...go see this movie.
I have never taken this guys reviews to heart. He has always rated good movies in a bad way.
Most of these "critics" are talentless and incapable of creating anything worthwhile. It's an action/ horror movie and meant to entertain. My wife and I saw it and had fun... end of story. Kate B. is not expecting a Grammy and neither are any of the other actors.
Note to Critic: Lighten up and have some fun you pretentious tool. Nobody cares about your irrelevant opinion.
I like the Underworld series too. I am hoping you meant Oscar and not Grammy. Grammies are for singers . . .
Incredible amount of horny guys that need to get a life on here. HaHaHaHa.
Frank should probably find a different career as this is probably the most misguided and incorrect film review i have seen. Clearly your taste in movies does not represent the general public or the intended audience of this movie genre. The Underworld series has been extremely successful and continues to do so for previous versions o the movie in other outlets such as online streaming and DVD sales. I believe a film critics job should be measured by their reviews compared to the resulting box office sales of the criticized movie. Then we'll see how many keep a job long term.
I agree with previous posters here. I have yet to see this movie, but I plan to do so. I really enjoy the Underworld series. Film reviewers all seem to suffer from the same problem. They watch hundreds of movies each year and it makes their tastes completely distorted and out of touch with people living in the real world wanting to see a movie that is simply exciting and fun. Not every movie has to be Citizen Kane and make some profound statement. That said, I would like to add a gentle comment here regarding those posters above who have said that Kate Beckensale is not going to win a "Grammy". Unless Selene sings in this film, it would be more correct to say she isn't going to win any Oscars or Golden Globes. Those are acting awards, while the Grammy is a music award. Of course, if she does sing in this movie, I apologize. :-)
I did not go for a Shakespeare play, a Bergman film, or the like... I went for 90 minutes of loud, over the top action with an actress that I like to see in just about anything she does. This series is like the Resident Evil to me. Critics blast them, but I will continue to see them as long as they are made.
I'm not a big fan of the series, but I really enjoyed the first one. That got pretty bad reviews too. (31% positive on Rotten Tomatoes) When a film is being bombasted like this one, it's probably better to pay more attention to the positive reviews and consider if what the critic enjoyed about it is something you might also enjoy. Poor reviews have a definite "piling-on" feel to them and sometimes just read too similarly. And by my last estimate there have been over one thousand movies with the title "worst movie ever." You'd figure there would just be one of those.
What in the Article justifies the Headline "Sleep Inducing". If you can't write a headline, don't !!!