0
As a general rule I'm not interested in prequels. They usually take place because the filmmakers/producers don't know where to take the story, or it simply isn't worth going any further. In the case of Underworld 3, I was especially unenthused about the prospects of a prequel because the last two films dive so haphazardly into flashbacks that we already know this tale. So...based on that...I looked to this film for what it can offer in and of itself.
The cast is top notch. The shakespearean plot is familiar and easy to follow. (As opposed to its convoluted predecessors.) The visual effects are top notch (for the most part). There is plenty of blood and carnage for the fanbase.
If there is a major criticism with this film I would say it's the edit. The drama and dialogue scenes are put together with competence, but a couple of the action sequences are cut so tightly that they are virtually incomprehensible. It's another classic case of producers with short attention spans being afraid to let an action sequence breath. Often times it happens for a reason. For example, an actor lacks the physicality to perform onscreen in a fight, a lack of coverage, a small budget, etc. Other times it happens because studio execs don't understand action, and as a result, the audience is assaulted with quick cuts and an overblown sound mix instead of a visually compelling emotional progression through a high stakes sequence. In the case of 'Lycans' it's the latter.
Overall though, it's a good little night at the movies. Nothing that will stick with you a year from now (though not many films do that anymore), but a fun B-movie souped up to look like an "A" that delivers what it promises.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by koolmike
