Well, that wasn’t offensively bad. Just lacking any kind of internal logic. And a sense of direction. And some idea of what the hell is going on with Marcus, and what Selene is “becoming”, and, oh, sod it. It’s a bit crap. It takes ages to warm up (although I suspect it would work better if viewed immediately after Underworld), the action sequences lack a sense of danger, and the whole thing is really dark. (I know it all takes place at night and in gloomy locations, but surely they could have added a bit of sparkle.)
Still, Kate Beckinsale looks nice, so the time wasn’t entirely wasted.
There are constants in life, the anchors on which we can rely when all is crazy.
One of those is the leading lady comment in a sunpig review 🙂
Hey, this is a film series whose very *existence* is predicated upon Ms Beckinsale’s bottom, and how good it looks in black PVC. There’s no way it would have got green-lighted had the male movie-going audience not already proved (with the original _Underworld_) its willingness to shell out good money to spend a couple of hours ogling her taut buttocks.
(And having said that, the rather fit Mr Speedman spends a significant part of the film with his shirt off, so there’s something there for the ladies, too.)
I feel it’s therefore entirely appropriate to compliment the film–and bump up an otherwise one-star rating to a generous two out of five–on such excellent use of its prime ass(et).
The problems with Kate are:
a) She was better in shooting fish (a hugely underrated flick) and she wasn’t in brassed off, despite what people think;
b) Her dad was in porridge;
c) She was Flora Poste! The most practical character ever in the one of the best books ever! And not annoying! What went so horribly wrong?