Underworld: Evolution (2006) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
379 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Underworld
MR_Heraclius22 February 2020
Good Start up to the new saga of movies. If you are a fan of horror and the underworld series themselves then it's worth a watch, action packed from pretty much start to finish and delivers a good story that moves on for the first lot. Kate is great as always and brings along others to perform a good hour and forty minutes of vampire/werewolf mayhem!
43 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
This movie will satisfy its target audience, guaranteed
drk15020 January 2006
Let's face it. If you're going to see this movie, you probably enjoyed the original and are looking for more. You want high doses of fight scenes, vampire and lycan lore, blood, violence, and Kate Beckinsale wearing leather or less. In short, this movie delivers all of the above in great excess, so if you liked Underworld, you're going to like Underworld: Evolution as much or more.

On the other hand, if you don't like blood, violence, action, mythology, or using a sword in a world full of guns, this movie is not for you, and it's NOT MEANT to be for you, so don't complain about it.

This movie surpasses the original as far as story development. We learn a good bit about each character's past, which helps justify all the extreme violence they engage themselves in. We're also introduced to some new characters and plot lines that add interest and new twists, rather than just rehashing all the familiar faces from Underworld.

This movie fails to get a 10 rating from me for the following reasons:

1) Not quite enough "stuff" to fill the time. Too many shots of Kate Beckinsale "looking intense". The movie could have been 10 minutes shorter if the number of these shots had been reduced from seemingly infinite down to 10 or so. Minor problem.

2) A few glaring continuity errors.

3) Too many flashback/explanation shots from the original Underworld. I suppose this is necessary so as not to alienate viewers who didn't see the original or who forgot it. However, this movie is obviously targeted to people who liked the original and want more, so give us a quick refresher and then hit us with new stuff. No need to keep providing Cliff's notes throughout the movie. Make us think a little!

4) There wasn't a standout power move comparable to the spinning/shooting through the floor in the original Underworld. Let's face it, half the people that went to that movie did so because that shot was in the trailer. This movie had lots of power moves, but none that stood out as the winner.
207 out of 319 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Last Hope Left
claudio_carvalho13 November 2006
Selene (Kate Beckinsale) wishes to expose the truth about the death of Viktor to the first true vampire Marcus (Tony Curran) that is hibernating. However, Marcus has already awakened and wants to release his savage Lycan brother William (Brian Steele), who has been imprisoned for centuries. When Marcus tries to get the medal possessed by Lucian from the hybrid Michael (Scott Speedman), Selene decides to visit Andreas Tanis (Steven Mackintosh), the exiled official historian of the covens, to understand his interest. When Selene and Michael meet Tanis, they disclose the truth about their bloodlines, and later with the support of Alexander Corvinus (Sir Derek Jacobi), Selene faces the powerful and evil Marcus as the last hope left for the mankind.

It is very difficult to see good sequels, but "Underworld – Evolution" gave me the sensation that together with "Underworld", they are one good movie split in two parts. The viewers like me that enjoyed "Underworld" will certainly like this sequel very much. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Anjos da Noite – A Evolução" ("Angels of the Night - The Evolution")

Note; On 28 January 2017, I saw this film again.
45 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Better than the first.
speedracer_haha19 January 2006
Just got back from watching it tonight, let me tell you, the first big surprise was how how many people turned out for it, for a Thursday night the place was packed as if Harry Potter had just come out, it's been a while since my local theatre was like that.

Now to the movie itself. I liked the first one but this one was an improvement. Mostly because of Scott Speedman's character Michael. The last movie only gave us a glimpse into what he has become, and here we get to see him kick butt alongside Selene as what is pretty much an equal. Watching him fight and take-down werewolves was great.

The action scenes were bigger, with great direction and camera-work. the special effects are also great, especially the scene with their winged-nemesis pursuing their truck. Make-up is amazingly well done. It was refreshing to see that the werewolves were still practical make-up creations rather than CG.

There was also the added bonus of sex scenes. one where a guy is having fun with a couple chick vampires, and one between the two leads. we get to see most of Beckinsale's lovely figure (MILF is an understatement) but no direct frontal shots. ladies will enjoy much shirtless Speedman action.

The opening segment makes it worth a look, i definitely recommend it to anyone who liked the first or thought it had promise.
329 out of 520 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Again the eternal fight between vampires and werewolves in this second entry
ma-cortes27 May 2008
This original and gore-soaked vampires film begins in 1202 a.d., eight centuries ago. Unknown to humanity, a blood feud raged between a ruling class of vampires and rebellious legion of werewolves known as Lycans. Legend tells that the war began with two brothers, the immortal sons of Alexander Corvinus(Derek Jacobi). Marcus(Tony Curran) bitten by bat became the blood leader of the vampires. William(Brian Steele) , bitten by wolf became the first and most powerful Lycan. For six centuries Selene(Kate Beckinsale) was a loyal soldier of the vampire clan, but she was betrayed. The war was not as it had seemed. In one night, the lies that had united the kind vampire had been exposed. Kraven, the second-in-command had formed a secret alliance with Lucian, ruler of the werewolf clan to overthrow Viktor(Bill Nighy), vampires leader . But Kraven's lust for power and domination had failed. But Viktor was not the savior they had been led to believe. He has betrayed them all. Soon the hunt would be on for his killer. Selene has but one ally left : Michael(Scott Speedman), the human descendant of Corvinus. Neither vampire nor Lycan, but a hybrid. It's only a matter of time before they're found. Their only hope now is to awaken to Markus , the last remaining Elder and expose the truth, before Kraven tries to murder him while he's still in hibernation. Kraven knows he's match for him awake. Meanwhile, Selene and Michael are going to Tanis's(Steven Mackintosh) fortress for getting information. As the war between vampires and werewolves get more personal and deadly , they decide to launch a full-scale attack on the hideout in order to extinguish the race.

This exciting movie displays unstopped action, thrills ride, spectacular fighting, graphic violence, brief nudism with mild sex scene and is pretty entertaining. Packs large amount of guts and gore , there's a huge body count, this one actually knocks off an immense amount, several vampires and werewolves are staked bloodily in the chest, even more impaled with large claws. There's really savage decapitation, plenty of bodies ripped in scraps and half, including some of the most tears ever, that spill lots of blood and numerous get shot up with bullets. Most of vampires, Lycans and humans victims are relegated to being bitten in the throat and neck. Magnificent special and visual effects as well as excellent make-up department. Bone-chilling and atmospheric musical score by Marco Beltrani and colorful and dark cinematography by Simon Duggan . Spectacular production design by Patrick Tatopoulos. He's author of set design and production design of known blockbusters, such as 10.000 BC, Indepencence day, I robot, Resident evil, Pith black among them. The motion picture is well directed by Len Wiseman, Kate Beckinsale's husband . He's also the screenwriter along with Danny McBride and Kevin Grevioux. All participate in the following, a prequel in pre-production, titled 'Rise of the Lycans' directed by Patrick Tatopoulos and with similar actors. Recommended to those who amuse those kind of vampires-werewolves films or those enjoy in general.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Enjoyable But Not Too Good Overall
Apolcold6 February 2006
To start off, let me say that I'm a very big fan of the original. I think it did everything right; having a nice Gothic overtone, great characters, an original, intriguing and in-depth plot, fun action and an overall script that never once felt dull. Oh, and of course...it had Kate Beckinsale in tight leather, hehehe. Now does this sequel contain all these qualities that made the original so good? Personally, I'd have to say no, I don't think it did. Was the movie necessarily bad? Also no. It was highly entertaining but not that good of a movie overall.

STORYLINE: The story in this film was no where near as good or developed as the original. As it starts off with a war scene in the past, I found myself really enjoying it. We find out a little about the Corvinus family and the origins or Marcus, who was the very first vampire, and his brother, who was the very first Lycan. But after we witness these scenes and learn these few minor plot details, the story development pretty much comes to a dead stop. Honestly, nothing really happens in this movie. It's all just action and really nothing more.

CHARACTERS: The lead characters were good. Selene and Michael didn't exactly have any development but that's okay because they were developed enough in the first film. But what was slightly developed was their romance, which the first film seemed to be lacking. We really got to feel the connection between them and how much they really cared for each other. And it was great to see Michael show off his new hybrid abilities and kick some booty along the way. He was a lot cooler in this film than in the original. The new vampire leader, Marcus, was also pretty damn cool. He had a very sinister appearance, especially with the devil-like wings, and didn't seem to have any sympathy at all as he brutally disposed of anyone who got in his way. In the original, we had Lucian, who was a well developed bad-guy character and I actually found myself caring for him. Marcus, on the other hand, didn't strike a cord with me at all. He looked cool, sure, but besides that, he had absolutely nothing going for him and I really didn't care what happened to him. All the other characters in this film were also very undeveloped as well. We really knew nothing of them and as a result, felt unsure whether we should like them or hate them. So that's a major issue.

ACTION: The action, most the time, was very enjoyable. And I stress MOST of the time, not ALL of the time. There was some really fun action and fight sequences and a nice amount of blood and gore thrown into the mix. So it definitely does manage to entertain the action buffs. But then, at times, the action began to feel annoying as it got extremely repetitive. It was like they just kept replaying the same action scene over and over and just tweaked it a little in order to pass it off as a different scene. This was a problem because the whole movie seemed to base itself on action, rather than story, and the action wasn't even all that good.

ATMOSPHERE: Another good thing about this movie would have to be the scenery. Yeah, I know that's not really important in the movie, but it really did help with the overall experience. There were beautiful mountain landscapes, snowy woods, old style castles in ruins and gorgeous red colored twilight skies. So I think it actually helped a lot in setting the atmosphere and gets points for great eye candy.

OVERALL: The first film was an action-horror movie with a great original storyline. This sequel, on the other hand, felt more like a series of left over action scenes that were taken out of the first film. I think watching the two films back to back will make a great overall experience. But as a stand-alone, it doesn't quite work. It's fun for sure, but that's about it. It's not even remotely close to being as good or better than the original in any way.
125 out of 200 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Very enjoyable and engaging
jbird97920 January 2006
From beginning to end, my eyes didn't stray from the screen. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie in the theater that I was so transfixed by.

A number of great performances from polished actors complimented some truly spectacular action scenes and plot developments and twists.

The title alone says exactly what the film accomplishes, as the story 'evolves' seemingly by the minute, and it never becomes stale or overtly contrived.

I found myself able to predict certain parts of the film, and even still in those instances, the events that unfolded shortly thereafter kept me from feeling disappointed in the very fact that I was almost certain of what was coming.

If the standard notion amongst avid movie buffs is that sequels rarely, if ever best their predecessor, 'Underworld: Evolution' defies that notion through and through. Much like 'Terminator 2: Judgement Day' was able to take a solid foundation from its predecessor and take it to a level where it became the standard for sci-fi/action films at the time of its release, U:E should become the blue-print for all werewolf and/or vampire action/dramas to come, or creature-related action/dramas in general, for that matter.

The pacing was very good, the dialogue was at times great, overall very fitting (and never poor), all questions a viewer could have possibly coming into the film are addressed and sufficiently answered, and some of the subtleties of the film, such as the appropriate use of brief flashbacks, kept the film from ever becoming confusing or difficult to follow, which I felt happened on occasion in the first film the first time I saw it.

Kate Beckinsale delivers a performance that shows she is a very versatile actress who just so happens to be strikingly beautiful, and Scott Speedman was more than just a little eye-candy for the ladies, delivering a performance that made me believe he was the perfect Michael Corvin far more than the first film. And the supporting cast around the two main stars were all equally up to the task, with many turning in performances that are likely to be career defining.

Hats off to Len Wiseman for living up to a last name that couldn't be more fitting. He never compromises his vision, and more importantly the story by trying to woo the crowd with over-the-top (Matrix-y) action scenes or gratuitous sexual imagery, as many directors do to try to win over their audiences, and yet the movie has some of the best action scenes the genre has seen in years, and a sexual chemistry between Selene and Michael that is very believable, and yet not over-done. Even in one very intimate scene between them, it is never excessive or tasteless.

I will likely go see this film in theaters again before it is out, and the only film I've ever seen in theaters twice was 'Batman' when I was 10 years old and the second viewing was for a birthday of a friend of mine at the time. I will also certainly be buying the DVD when it is released in an effort to support film-making at its finest. For anyone who liked the first film, you will most likely love this one as I did (do), and for anyone on the fence, you will likely find yourself joining us fans in rejoicing over this highly anticipated sequel. As for doubters of the first film, just give it a chance and you'll likely find that whatever your gripe was with the 'Underworld', 'Underworld: Evolution' does not suffer from the kinds of flaws you may have found the original to have had.

b/c I can only vote using IMDb's scoring system with whole numbers I am giving it a 10, but on a scale of 1 to 10 including halves, with 10 being the best, I give it a 9.5/10, whereas I give the first an 8/10
200 out of 332 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Darned good Sequel
motivolispam22 February 2006
I haven't seen a sequel this good since Terminator 2! They really went back in history to give so much more storyline, or just added to the original story in such a clever way. They also did a great job in out-doing the killings from part1! I was so intrigued by this movie I felt like I got my moneys worth in the first twenty minutes :) . The director did a great job of bringing you into his "underworld". Every part of the story line was pleasantly unexpected. I like that Celine's love for Michael wasn't the only important part of this story anymore. It isn't mostly centered on love like the first one, however it is all there, from love, to the long history, to time jumping.

I wouldn't recommend watching this if you haven't seen part 1! But I would recommend watching the whole series! Very Awesome. Cant wait to see part 3 if they make it.
83 out of 139 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
If you liked the first one, you'll likely enjoy this one too.
Hey_Sweden6 October 2019
Kate Beckinsale and Scott Speedman reprise their roles as leather-clad, ass-kicking vampire warrior Selene and vampire / werewolf hybrid Michael in this decent sequel. The story picks up where the original movie ended; now Selene and Michael are on the lam and determined to obtain exposition regarding the centuries-old war between blood suckers and bloodthirsty canines. Relentlessly pursuing them is thoroughly evil bad guy vampire Marcus (Tony Curran); Selene and Michael attempt to get some help from the legendary Alexander Corvinus (Sir Derek Jacobi), the man who got the ball rolling on this conflict so many years ago.

"Underworld: Evolution" is okay as far as this kind of entertainment goes. It depicts a bleak, stylized environment that refrains from many primary colours, going for the gusto in terms of action and gore, and trying to deliver a poignant moment here and there. The CGI can be ropey at times - as we all come to expect from this sort of thing - but there is fortunately some practical work as well (like Brian Steele in costume as the fearsome werewolf William, who's been imprisoned for centuries).

It really helps to have a largely British cast with such a tale; they lend gravitas where it might not have been delivered otherwise, and the actors all give it their best effort. Curran is a vivid villain, and it's a real treat to have Jacobi in a pivotal role in a modern genre crossover of a movie. Steven Mackintosh is a hoot as a seedy beast who's been the historian for the two clans, but was forced into exile. Some cast members from the original film, like Bill Nighy as Viktor, Shane Brolly as Kraven, and Michael Sheen as Lucian, appear briefly.

Director and co-writer Len Wiseman keeps the story moving forward adequately, spices it up with a bit of sex, and gives us a finale where Selene and Michael are fighting their adversaries side by side.

Not bad overall, but if one is NOT a fan of the first "Underworld", this sequel probably won't get them to change their minds about this series.

Filmed in Vancouver.

Six out of 10.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A Nutshell Review: Underworld: Evolution
DICK STEEL4 March 2006
After Kate Beckinsale's Seline character got around kicking massive rear in slinky black Lycra, we had Charlize Theron doing the same in Aeon Flux, and coming soon, Milla Jovovich in Ultraviolet. Sexy costumes, menacing weapons and killer moves seem to be the order of the day. It's no doubt that Underworld would have a sequel, since it was obviously hinted at after the end credits of the original, though it would be three years before it materialized.

And Kate Beckinsale still looked as hot as the pasty-white faced, black and blue eyed vampire known as a Death Dealer. Actually, that's one of the extremely few good things about this movie. We get to see her more, see her in action more (*ahem* love scene some more to keep the fan boys happy) with her twin rapid firing handguns, and flitting around action sequences without tearing her outfit.

The other good thing about this movie, is if you're a fan of blood and gore, you'll be kept happy with the many decapitations in various creative ways, piercings, shootings (at point blank), and endless gunfire.

Unfortunately, these good points were thin after a while, and seriously, you'll be clock watching for it to end. The movie starts off by going back to the early beginnings of the feud and tries to explain blood ties and brotherly love, in the times when the Death Dealers were wearing hand-me-down armor from the elves in Lord of the Rings. For those who are unfamiliar with the first movie, fret not, this movie does spend some time to try and explain the convoluted plot to you in a series of quick flashbacks. Sometimes so much that I think the entire first movie had been told here in fast forward.

And what a convoluted plot it is! Somehow you know that our heroes can't die - one's a superhuman hybrid never seen before, while the other is Seline the invincible who defied all odds to survive past the first film. But invulnerability makes a character weak, as it takes away the fun. Injuries heal in record time (ok, so they're vampires who recuperate in the darkness), and you'll really wonder if the Highlander way is the only way for a character to perish. The central plot about brotherhood, and the quest to unleash the very first Lycan was pretty boring stuff.

Somehow the production seemed a little lazy too. In the first movie, we had sets which are more in tuned to the present world, with the city and all. But this movie seemed to like darkness and worn out locations, and even the finale set looked suspiciously similar to the original's. And I learnt too that vampires can transfer abilities and skills by letting another suck its blood, much like Chinese Martial Arts films where the kungfu master imparts his skills to his disciples using internal strength - you'll become stronger overnight.

I had great hopes that the sequel would present itself as superior to the original, especially if it could develop a strong back story. However I was proved wrong, and this sequel, like many others, pale when compared to the original. I don't think there'll be another sequel given the characters becoming who they are at the end (almost a copy of X-Men 2's camera moving across a body of water shot with voice over), but then again, you'll never know.
45 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Underworld Evolution reviewed
movieshopstuttga6 February 2006
What can someone write about a movie that has been so well discussed already during the past weeks?! Everything has been said in reviews and fan forums about the plot with Romeo & Juliet resemblances framed by the secret war between vampires and werewolves, about the cast and characters, about the movie's style & atmosphere, action, make-up and CGI effects, camera shots, violence, love scenes & nudity. Underworld Evolution's predecessor was above all underestimated in terms of what potential it had to build up a solid fan base in a genre that throughout movie history like no other has not only drawn people into the theatres but also to conventions, fan clubs, signings and other events. If we go back in time movies which threw together famous film monsters like in "House of Frankenstein", "Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man", later in "Frankenstein's Bloody Terror" or in our days "Freddie Vs. Jason", "Van Helsing" and "Aliens Vs Predator" were most likely designed to squeeze the purse of the audience (which in most cases without no doubt they successfully did) but never have withstood the moviegoer's expectations for a long time. "Underworld" (2003) on the other hand, a sleeper during it's theatrical release as treated with neglect promotion wise in many countries has to be admitted that it rightfully gained it's respect through mouth-to-mouth propaganda resulting in DVD sales which soon exceeded the box-office results. The movie built up a very solid fan base, people that keep talking about it even after three years – creating an under-world (sorry for the pun, I just could not resist) like Star Trek, Star Wars and some other Sci-Fi movies and shows have done before. So it is very possible that for the first time in the horror genre "Underworld" and "Underworld Evolution" really work as 'monster mash' movies.

With only some video clips on his reference list it is obvious that "Underworld" was a child of heart of writer / director Len Wiseman (together with writers Danny McBride and Kevin Grevioux). Only someone very dedicated and so confident can get such a project of the ground without having directed a single feature length movie before - get it produced, assemble a professional cast. And it paid out - with an estimated budget of 22 mill. it achieved an accumulated worldwide gross of more than 90 mill. US dollars. Plus, it activated a great number of fans which were dying to see more. Because of these fans there is a sequel – they made it possible by buying the DVDs, watching Underworld in the cinema and kept talking about it, discussing it from the beginning to the end, throwing up questions, inspiring new story lines, etc. When seeing "Underworld Evolution" I believe that Len Wiseman and Danny McBride accurately meet the expectations of their fans in a very respective way. They stand true to the original in style and action and by not getting too pathetic love story wise. The storyline is not dumb and does not just follow the vampires vs. werewolves plot which it could have done. Of course it has some flaws, but nothing which can be not excused. As there is no perfect crime there is also no perfect plot. All stories have flaws – even the real ones. And if we look behind the almost endless tour-de-action: there is the beautiful Kate Beckinsale who was the lead action heroine in the first movie and now, without loosing any of her screen presence, she leaves enough space for Scott Speedman who now plays a much stronger and more self-confident Michael Corvin. Bill Nighy is always an extreme pleasure to watch and it is amazing how versatile this man is. And of course there is the great Sir Derek Jacobi playing his part so wonderfully understated, yet so present, that it will be a hard task not to bring his character back in a future entry. Conclusion: If you have seen the first "Underworld" movie and liked it, and if you are allowed to "pervasive strong violence and gore, some sexuality/nudity and language" you won't be disappointed. If you don't like horror movies at all – this one is not likely to change your opinion. When you consider this and buy a ticket you will get an action packed horror movie which can be watched for more than one time for several reasons. But see for yourself
75 out of 126 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
OK sequel
xredgarnetx19 June 2006
OK sequel to UNDERWORLD will appeal to its core audience and few others. Too many flashbacks to the first movie do little to explain what is going on in the sequel -- that is, to the uninitiated and people like myself who hasn't seen the original in awhile. The plot is thin, although the action is fast and furious as vampire/warrior Kate Beckinsale is again on the track of those who threaten to destroy the world. Good-looking nonactor Scott Speedman is back as her love interest, himself a combination of vampire and werewolf who is virtually indestructible. And knowing this takes away some of the fun toward the end when the big fight is on and the chips are really down. But enough said about that. Beckinsale looks great in skin-tight black leather, and has a quasi-nude love scene with Speedman. The gore quotient is fully realized, thankfully. The monsters are great-looking, and the atmospheric photography and sets are first rate. Nevertheless, recommended only for fans of the first.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Better then the first
spacemonkey_fg13 February 2006
Title: Underworld: Evolution (2006)

Director: Len Wiseman

Cast: Kate Beckingsale, Scott Speedman, Michael Sheen, Shane Brolly, Bill Nighy, Derek Jakobi

Review:

The first Underworld was alright, not great...just alright. But after a while it sort of grew on me. The first time I saw it I thought...man this really isn't what it could have been. And it wasn't. It was missing more action, vampires and fights between the bloodsuckers and the werewolves. Did the sequel succeed in giving us what was missing in the original? The story this time around is about the first original vampire and the first original werewolf. In this movie the first vampire was called Marcus and his brother William was the first werewolf. They are at war because William the leader of the werewolf pack is a vicious mofo killing and destroying villages left and right. Viktor the leader of the vamps wants William locked up for all eternity, Marcus; Williams vampire brother is against it...but goes with it for the sake of being at peace with Viktor. Fastforward a few thousand years...and now Marcus wants to set his brother free in order to create a new race of half vampires half werewolves.

Len Wiseman gives this sequel the same polished squeaky clean look that the first movie had. In terms of look and feel this film is very much like the original film. Everything seems to be filtered through a blue/metallic light. The film looks slick. The only thing that really changes is that the first film took place in more of an urban setting...here we go into the sticks. Lots of mountains, caves and abandoned buildings in the middle of nowhere.

This film improved on a lot of things that the first film was missing. First of all, the vampires on this movie are more vicious which was something that I hated from the first movie. On the first movie the vampires where portrayed as these bunch of pansies hanging out in mansions drinking blood in wine glasses and gossiping about each other. On this one, those gossipy vampires are gone replaced by a vicious and bloodthirsty Marcus, who is resurrected from his long slumber.

The coolest part about this movie for me was the vampire Marcus, the make up effects work on this character was fantastic. His gigantic bat like wings which turn out to be quite deadly are awesome! This character is really evil, violent and lets his vampire nature run loose. Basically he wont have problems sucking the life out of anyone who stands in his way.

And speaking of special make up effects, kudos to Wiseman for choosing to use actors in wolf suits instead of overusing the computer effects. I loved how the werewolves looked more realistic in this sense. Of course there is CGI involved in certain sequences but it is kept in check and not overused. The transformation sequences are great as well.

There were a few things that didn't make some sense to me though. Like for example: why was Marcus the only vampire to have wings? OK he was the first vampire ever...but wouldn't his offspring have wings also? No explanation is given about this during the movie. Also, if Marcus and William were the first vampires and werewolf ever...how did they become what they became? They're origins are not explored but simply taken for granted. I didn't get that either. And how can William be locked up inside of a sarcophagus for thousands of years, the just pop out and walk around as it he had only been locked up for one day or two? He had not fed, werewolves as far as I know don't live forever and his hair isn't the least bit longer...what? Maybe I missed something amidst all the vampire lore and flashbacks. And there are a lot of those. I'm guessing a lot of these questions will be answered on a future sequel, so lets hold out for it, I'm sure it will happen.

The movie does kind of have certain sequences in which they simply talk waaay to much. These vampires love to just chat chat chat in the most dramatic way about things. In that way this film is very similar to the first one.

On the bonus side, we do get to see part of Kate Beckinsales nude body, but only partially. She never really goes all the way. It must have been hard for Wiseman to see his wife making out with Speedman. By the way, ladies, Speedman shows his bum. So enjoy it! So, in conclusion, this film has taken all of the things that didn't work on the first one and fixed em. There's more blood, more action, better effects, the werewolves seem more realistic and the evil vampire leader is one vicious mother. Good sequel, dare I say it certainly is better then the original.

Rating: 4 out of 5
56 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A proper sequel, Selene 🙌🏽
Calicodreamin3 May 2020
Underworld evolution picks up right after the first movie and keeps the ball rolling. The storyline is well developed and the action is kept up throughout the movie. A successful sequel in that the action is suitable amped up from the first and the characters are further developed. Selene is a badass, and while Michael is a bit of a hapless dope it doesn't matter, Selene is the queen and always will be.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
A superior sequel
phanthinga26 September 2018
Underworld may set up a new tale of Vampire vs Werewolf in the modern world and introduce the beautiful Kate Beckinsale as Selene but the problem that I had with it is people talk too much and the runtime is a bit too long then 3 year after that the sequel Evolution came out more action focus than the first while still give us some fun character backstory and it totally awesome.The story definitely take off faster when Selene kill Viktor so now we got to see the new adventure of Selene and Michael the hyper Lycan when they both bonding and fighting while discover a new secret of these immortal creatures.It's quite strange when the first vampire "Marcus" and the first werewolf "William"go down that easy but in the end justice always win no matter how twisted it is
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good, but not as good as it should have been
sarastro715 February 2006
I am quite a fan of the first movie, and I liked the sequel too. It was a direct continuation of the first, with several new layers added. The whole thing was one long moody and bloody action movie, nearly perfectly recapturing the mood from the first movie. The acting itself was a bit more intense in the first movie, I thought, while the sequel was perhaps slightly too fast-paced to give the characters much room.

The one thing where I felt the sequel fell short of my expectations was a part of the central plot. Underworld: Evolution was exciting and engaging, with much more and much deeper story than in the average action movie, but one of the key points did not satisfy. They spend almost the whole second half of the movie trying to locate the sarcophagus of the first werewolf. This is exciting, because you expect that something wild and interesting will happen when they find it. But... they find it, release the guy, fight him for a couple of minutes and kill him. That's it. Except for the fight, he doesn't have any real role to play in the story. That was a let-down. And a serious one.

But other than that I was quite satisfied. It was cool to see all that British talent, lending a touch of real class to the project!

My rating: 7 out of 10.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
The Name's Selene...
richardchatten13 October 2019
There's been a lot of tiresome talk in recent years about the desirability of making James Bond a woman and calling it "reinvention". But instead of trashing yet another long-established classic franchise, why not simply create a new one?

We've already had a truly badass female action heroine for over fifteen years in the supple form of Selene: an English rose in shiny black PVC capable of driving a truck with one hand while blowing away winged bad guys with an Uzi in the other; a sort of death-dealing Emma Peel who arrives by helicopter to kick ass (but why did she have to be the only woman aboard?).

It's probably just commercial timidity - and laziness - that has so far rendered it beyond the wit of today's filmmakers of creating a non-vampiric Selene and - Bingo! - you've got your female James Bond! (Maybe they could simply put Aeon Flux in a wetsuit and give her a half-decent film this time...?)
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Surpasses the first film, and as good as a sequel to 'Underworld' could be!
The_Void20 January 2006
The original Underworld was not as good as it clearly thought it was, but it's an entertaining flick - and in my view at least, good enough for a sequel. Subtitled 'Evolution', (having numbers after the title for a sequel is now out of fashion), this second instalment builds on the original film; while still finding the time for enough action to please it's target audience. Surprisingly for a boisterous action-horror flick, Len Wiseman's second film is more restrained than you would think. Although there are plenty of action sequences, the focus is put more firmly on the plot; and this ensures that the film isn't merely a dull collection of stunts. The film starts off with a great sequence, which goes back to the beginning of the war between the Lycans and the Vampires. We then follow Selene (Beckinsale) and Michael (Speedman), both now on the run after dispatching vampire elder Viktor (Nighy). We follow the pair as they trace their origins and try to ensure that the first ever vampire, Marcus, isn't able to free his brother William; the first of the werewolves.

One of the major reasons I enjoyed the first film was due to its leather-clad female lead. The sexy Kate Beckinsale reprises her role under the direction of her husband, and is every bit the sassy heroine that a film like this needs. Underworld: Evolution, like the original film, makes best use of this asset! The acting here is a more than a little bit corny overall; but Beckinsale and the rest of the cast do their jobs well enough to ensure that the film doesn't completely fall down on the acting side. The special effects are good, with the werewolves being particularly of note for being impressive. Werewolves don't often translate to the screen well; but they look just fine in this film! The visuals are dark and Gothic, and look absolutely stunning. As with the first film, the glossy style bodes well with the action scenes and ensures that the film is pleasing to the eye. The best thing about the film for me, however, was the mythology surrounding the war between werewolves and vampires. It's portrayed well, and Wiseman leaves enough gaps to keep the interest, while ensuring that the plot builds to a complete whole by the time the credits role.

On the whole, Evolution is a better film than the original. It builds on the first film, and delivers enough new elements to make it interesting to anyone who liked the original. This is the sort of film that wont be remembered long after it's over - but it makes for a great time while watching, and comes highly recommend to horror/action fans!
71 out of 141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the few sequels that is better than the original!
jellyneckr20 January 2006
Who would of thought January would be a good month for movies? Two weeks ago saw the release of GRANDMA'S BOY, the funniest comedy to come out in the 2000s yet and this week brings UNDERWORLD: EVOLUTION, a sequel that is *gasp* better than the original. Finding a sequel as good or better than the original is, pardon the old expression, like finding a needle in a haystack. It just doesn't happen very often, which what makes UNDERWORLD: EVOLUTION such a treat. It's bigger and better the original. This is no doubt because the cast members are more suited in their roles than they were before and because with his second feature, Len Wiseman has grown as a director. Also improved are the special effects that appeared somewhat fake in the original film. If 'EVOLUTION' was only about special effects like mostly all action pictures today, it would be no good, but thanks to screenwriter Danny McBride and Wiseman, there is actually a good story behind the mayhem. Were there weak points? Just a couple. The chemistry between Selene and Michael seemed a bit off at times. 9/10
69 out of 137 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
More gore...less creativity than the original
IndecentComplacency7 February 2006
I went into this movie with high hopes, but have to say I was fairly disappointed. The plot was way too straightforward and action was overdone with long drawn out sequences and lots of blood. Any shock value in the fighting was lost early on in the movie. Reminded me more of cop shootemup except with characters dressed up like vampires and werewolves.

The general concept, which made the first movie good, is still there, so I still enjoyed it more than most movies I've seen lately. But it could have definitely been better.

Kate Beckinsale and her smoking hot costume and piercing blue eyes bring the rating up from a 4 to a 6.
41 out of 78 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
So very close...
Crimson_Lucky22 January 2006
This movie had potential. Really- there were werewolves, vampires, guns, secret organizations, and climactic battles. What more could you ask for in an action movie? The big problem that killed the movie was the plot. Not to say that it was necessarily bad, or that it didn't have one, or even that it had too much of one. Though the case for all three of these could be made. It just was somewhere in between. They took what could have been a great overall plot for a thriller, and turned it into a bad action movie plot. They had too much plot-oriented nonsense for it to be pure action, and they had too little plot for the movie to make any sense.

If the movie had been all about the gun-fighting with no real plot, it would have been one thing. If it had been all about the plot, with a little combat action thrown in at key points, it would have been one thing. Instead we are treated to poorly-executed action sequences (I'm looking at you, fight on the boat) and overly-long, pointless, poorly-executed flashbacks. We get it- she was someplace important many years ago. We don't need to see the same fifteen second sequence twelve times. Also, the plot merely added to the confusion created by all the random crap going on. That's not to say there weren't cool action sequences. The truck-fight through the winding mountain road was cool, relatively speaking. And so was the opening prologue about the eleventh century.

Then there were just plain stupid moments. All the gratuitous sex and nudity being top on the list. Followed by the Elves from LoTR's armor being used. I understand that it's cheap and easy to get used armor from big-budget flicks. But could they have at least used something period-specific (actually resembling something that MIGHT have been used in the 1200s) and definitely not so easily recognizable. Finally, at the very end, I was irked by some very basic errors that no good filmmaker would have made. Most clearly in my mind I remember the plank-suspension bridge not falling down when its support ropes were cut. Apparently the people who made the movie don't know how bridges work. Though that last one is just me nit-picking.

If this movie had only gone one or two steps further down its chosen outrageous road, it could have been like "Springtime for Hitler". Instead it is only almost funny-bad, but ended up just making my brain hurt.

P.S. They really did aim for their target audience though: goth males who want to see nudity & pale vampire chicks.
26 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The best Underworld sequel in the franchise better then the original!
ivo-cobra829 October 2015
Underworld: Evolution (2006) is one of the best action/vampire/werewolves sequel to the original blockbuster 2003 'Underworld'. I love the original film, but I just love this one much better! Awesome superb sequel. In my opinion this is better than the first one. The acting and the action were pretty good. Vampires and werewolves and lots of guns! Underworld: Evolution was introducing a war between Vampires and Werewolves, where a Vampire "Death Dealer," Selene (Kate Beckinsale), fights to save a human named Michael (Scott Speedman) from becoming a pawn in a scheme by the Werewolves to create a powerful Vampire-Werewolf hybrid. Underworld Evolution returns the primary characters who survived the first film, continues the story, and provides historical backgrounds on the Vampires, Lycans, and the war that rages between the species, all the while charting new territory and increasing the action violence several times over from that seen in the first film.

As the war between the Death Dealers and the Lycans rages on, Selene (Kate Beckinsale), the vampire warrior, and Michael (Scott Speedman), the werewolf hybrid, once again work together to stop one of the four elders who has also turned into another hybrid, in this sequel to the 2003 blockbuster film, 'Underworld'. I personally love this series because it's a total new twist on how we perceive vampires and werewolves. The story is full of action and adventure with a mystery plot that keeps you curious all the way to the end. I love the original film to death! Evolution is much better it has it all no question about that. but watch the original 1st so you can pick up on where this one picks up from. this is full of action plots!

This movie is a fast improvement over the original film, not only making a shorter version of the film than the original was, cause the original film I realized was 2 Hrs. and 13 mins. long. This movie all together runs 1 Hr. and 46 min. So it is a bout 15 mins, 10.mins cut, which is a good movie. So that's a lot better because Underworld don't need to be 2.hrs that long. To get the plot along and the movie along. Underworld Evolution brings back everything I love about the first movie, the actors. All the actors seemingly returns + all with some new faces, but that's it! The acting is outstanding in the movie! The effects just like the first movie, this movie realized heavily on practical effects, the helicopter that was flying all around during the movie, yea that was venture, kind a remote control type helicopter! I know that because I used watched the special features on my DVD that was before got the Blu-ray. That is the time I watched all my features. Yes I appreciate the models and little sex, that they made for this movie to keep, the budget the cost the movie down. Always, always outstanding when they do that, specially when you don't know it is a model but you van tell at certain point that you know the truth, so well done, well done! Of course the make up always look good for the werewolves and the lycans not the lycans the werewolves that they are lycans and the vampires that they have to fight against each other all that looks good! Very look good! Very well put together!

This is very well put together movie I was actually kind a surprised, that I actually enjoyed this one a lot more! As a true fan of horror, the Underworld series was something I have waited my whole life for, but never thought would be realized in the horror genre. Extremely rare to see such intelligence put into these types of movies!

"All that is certain is that darkness is still ahead."

Kate Beckinsale is back as vampire heroine Selene in the highly anticipated sequel to Underworld. Underworld Evolution continues the saga of war between the aristocratic Death Dealers and the barbaric Lycans (werewolves). The film traces the beginnings of the ancient feud between the two tribes as Selene (Kate Beckinsale), the vampire heroine, and her love Michael (Scott Speedman), the lycan hybrid, try to unlock the secrets of their bloodlines. The tale of action, intrigue and forbidden love takes them into the battle to end all wars as the immortals must finally face their retribution

Underworld: Evolution (2006) is an American action-vampire film directed by Len Wiseman. It is the second (chronologically, the third) installment in the Underworld series, following Underworld (2003). The events of the film begin during the same night of the first film's finale. In the film, Selene and Michael fight to protect the future of the Corvinus bloodline from its hidden past.

I love this film also it has Selene that she never kills a human been, she could have killed those Russian soldiers firing machine guns on her and Michael and she didn't. Kate Beckinsale did a wonderful performance including Tony Curran as Marcus Corvinus he killed Kraven (Shane Brolly) in the opening scene, that was just outstanding! The best one in the series. Selene learns the truth about the slaughter of her family, I love the fact that film tells more the story than the first one did. Len Wiseman did an outstanding direction debut as his second film of the Underworld movie series.

10/10 Score: Bad Ass Seal Of Approval Studio: Screen Gems, Lakeshore Entertainment Starring: Kate Beckinsale, Scott Speedman, Tony Curran, Shane Brolly, Steven Mackintosh, Derek Jacobi, Bill Nighy Director: Len Wiseman Producers: Tom Rosenberg, Gary Lucchesi, Richard Wright, Len Wiseman, Kevin Grevioux, Danny McBride Screenplay: Danny McBride Story: Len Wiseman, Danny McBride Rated: R Running Time: 1 Hr. 46 Mins. Budget: $50.000.000 Box Office: $62,318,875
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
just not that good
mcbullyfrogus24 January 2006
I'm not going to start some big long rant about how I just didn't like the movie. I'll say a few good things: the CG was very good, the opening scene was badass, and the whole feral werewolf thing was pretty cool. However, the storytelling in this film was dismal at best, a goddamn whirlwind. Too much - too fast. A lot of people also say that the movie maintained the feel of the first one, I have to disagree. Boats and lame chase scenes have very little in common with the first flick. This was an expensive film, the first one was not (it was just well done). And I won't "spoil" anything, but for the many of you who have a problem with the ending, I agree... This movie deserves my vote, it just wasn't that good. You have to be crazy to give this movie a 10, not even the first one deserves a 10 and I love that movie. And for all you monkeys who gave this movie higher marks due to Selene's sex scene and the nude vampires: you need to get laid.
14 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
unbelievable CRAP
dirtyharry6720 July 2006
NO SPOILERS. there is nothing to spoil here!

this movie is just unbelievable. unbelievably BAD that is.

uninspired performances throughout. you cannot really blame the actors, except for participating in this garbage. beats me, how the (otherwise rather talented) cast could possibly partake in this. they must have run out of money or something. there is NO other excuse. the story was lame and stupid. there was not ONE likable character in this. the sets were dark, virtually colorless. the special effects! oh man, you gotta see (for your own sake: don't see it!) to believe. cheap and jumpy. the werewolves and other ridiculous creatures mostly moved like in 1930 stop-motion models. i couldn't believe it.

and of course there was an unbelievably uninspired and utterly misplaced love-story woven into it. i mean, hey, you just went through the most intense fight of your life, you are blood spattered and dead and grossly dismembered creatures all around you and of course the first thing that comes to mind is a deep kiss, right??

this movie can only be enjoyed by brainwashed Americans. brainwashed by Hollywood's war machine and the most stupid TV system on this planet to mindlessly eat dark, violent and utterly heartless garbage like this.

if you are not American, don't even consider spending a single cent on this. any somewhat cultured HUMAN being will regret it, believe me.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
OK sequel
vickic53115 February 2006
I went to see this, making sure to watch Underworld the night before to refresh my memory. I must say, I was a good bit disappointed in this one. Kate Beckinsale looked incredible as usual and Scott Speedman definitely had his body in shape. I think Len Wiseman could've done a lot better job with this one.

At the beginning, I was confused with the time frame, I spent most of the first 15 minutes or so trying to figure out if it was a flashback or present time. There were too many plot holes and things that just didn't make sense, even after the movie was over.

It was OK for two hours on a rainy Saturday afternoon but after seeing the first one I must say my expectations were left mostly unfulfilled.

I still haven't figured out if it was left open for the possibility of a third movie. We'll see.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed