“Underworld: Rise of the Lycans” is coming to theaters on Jan. 23, and given how strongly I dislike the previous installments, I can say with complete sincerity that I have absolutely no desire to see it.
The 2006 film “Underworld: Evolution” is without a doubt one of the very worst movies I have ever seen, a rarity of a dud that had me longing for the theater exit after having sat through only 30 minutes.
While the original “Underworld” is certainly miles better than its sequel, it, too, was absolutely insufferable to watch, thanks to its hackneyed and convoluted plot, horrible performances and a particularly ugly visual look.
“Underworld” is one of the rare awful movies that announces its badness from scene one.
After Kate Beckinsale provides us with a stilted voice-over reading, the movie catapults into a bloody, needlessly protracted, bystander-endangering subway shootout between characters we haven’t been introduced to yet, before anyone speaks a line of dialogue.
The plot, as convoluted as it is, involves a 1,000-year-old war between the upper-class vampires and the scruffy, lower-class lycans (aka werewolves), who human beings seem to be unaware of despite the fact that these monsters are constantly having gun/monster battles in public subways and apartment complexes.
The main character is the leather-clad, trigger-happy vampiress Selene (a bland Kate Beckinsale), who, after the subway shoot-out, stumbles upon a conspiracy involving a human doctor named Michael Corvin (the underused Scott Speedman), who holds the key for the Lycans’ victory.
For reasons that aren’t very clear, Selene falls head over heels in love with the ruggedly handsome young doctor, and against the wishes of the temporary vampire leader Kraven (a hilariously bad Shane Brolly), she risks her life and betrays her people to protect Michael from both sides.
Little does Selene know that the thought-to-be-dead Lycan leader Lucian (Michael Sheen) has already bitten Michael, and with the full moon only a few days away, Michael (because of his DNA) will transform into a new sort of werewolf who is twice as powerful as the regular Lycan.
The plot is nonsensical and seems to exist for no other reason than to showcase a bunch of comic-book-inspired visuals. Generally, I don’t mind movies like this; I gave a mild pass to last year’s “Max Payne” because of its style and Mark Wahlberg’s solid lead performance. Yet, the problem with “Underworld” is that it’s not particularly impressive on a visual level. In fact, it’s downright ugly to look at.
Featuring many sets stolen from far superior works like “The Crow,” “Dark City” and the Tim Burton’s “Batman” movies, the entire film is bathed in dark and murky blues and greens, giving the movie a particularly nasty visual polish that becomes absolutely unbearable after a while.
Even worse than the visual approach is the fact that the movie just isn’t scary at all. I know it’s supposed to be an action movie and all, but is one creepy shot too much to ask? With a movie featuring vampires and werewolves, it seems almost criminal for a movie like this to be utterly devoid of scares.
This wouldn’t be too much of a problem if the action scenes were up to snuff, but even they’re depressingly dull and formulaic, relying on “Matrix”-inspired visual gimmicks that do nothing but remind you of just how much better the “Matrix” movies are.
With little to almost nothing to recommend about it, the one thing you can say in “Underworld’s” defense is that it’s miles better than recent action bombs like “Rambo” and “Wanted.” That might not be saying much, but it’s better than not saying anything nice at all.