The continuing story of Selene (Beckinsale), the werewolf-fighting vampire, and Michael (Speedman), the vampire-werewolf hybrid, is presented in the second installment of the Underworld franchise. Because I loved the original, I eagerly awaited this sequel for months before its release in January of 2006. What I got was a very different approach from the director than what I got with the first of this series. While the first was almost devoid of gore and sex scenes, due to Wiseman's wish to not give in to the stereotypical werewolf vs. vampire movie, Evolution starts off with a graphic massacre, is filled in with a graphic (and weirdly filmed) sex scene, and ends with more graphic death scenes.
Despite this, Kate Beckinsale still pulled off an amazing performance of the conflicted vampire heroine, and Scott Speedman kept in character acting mainly as a sidekick, with the exception of the ending. Tony Curran made the film, however, as the ultra-villain, Marcus. With wicked-looking prosthetics and makeup, he made the villains in the first Underworld chapter pale in comparison. Sadly, Marcus disappointed me slightly with his one-track mind, which did not seem to fit with the history of the character and those of the other two vampire Elders. Sir Derek Jacobi as the immortal Alexander Corvinus was a very good casting choice, but again, his single-mindedness and explanations for previous actions did not make much sense in the grand scheme of the story.
My main complaints for this film were the excessive amounts of blood and gore, and the oddly placed sex scene between the main characters. It seemed to just be put in the film to attract more viewers than the previous movie did. However, even though I believe this film to be slightly worse than the first Underworld, the directing style remains an effective way to make the saga of Selene and Michael all the more otherworldly and eerie by desaturating the picture (a process which drains the image of most color) in order to make the blues, grays, blacks, and whites stand out much more. This, I found, was a better choice than overloading the screen with bright, flamboyant colors. There were also various plot holes that I feel could have been explained or fixed, but the filmmakers did not give clarification on these in either Underworld or Evolution.
All in all, I could have done with a little less blood and a little more meat to the plot, but it was still a very enjoyable film and a nice addition to the Underworld legend. As a side note, with as many times as I have been asked this question, I feel that I must mention that I do not recommend anyone under the age of 16 to watch this movie. It's rated R for a reason.
Despite this, Kate Beckinsale still pulled off an amazing performance of the conflicted vampire heroine, and Scott Speedman kept in character acting mainly as a sidekick, with the exception of the ending. Tony Curran made the film, however, as the ultra-villain, Marcus. With wicked-looking prosthetics and makeup, he made the villains in the first Underworld chapter pale in comparison. Sadly, Marcus disappointed me slightly with his one-track mind, which did not seem to fit with the history of the character and those of the other two vampire Elders. Sir Derek Jacobi as the immortal Alexander Corvinus was a very good casting choice, but again, his single-mindedness and explanations for previous actions did not make much sense in the grand scheme of the story.
My main complaints for this film were the excessive amounts of blood and gore, and the oddly placed sex scene between the main characters. It seemed to just be put in the film to attract more viewers than the previous movie did. However, even though I believe this film to be slightly worse than the first Underworld, the directing style remains an effective way to make the saga of Selene and Michael all the more otherworldly and eerie by desaturating the picture (a process which drains the image of most color) in order to make the blues, grays, blacks, and whites stand out much more. This, I found, was a better choice than overloading the screen with bright, flamboyant colors. There were also various plot holes that I feel could have been explained or fixed, but the filmmakers did not give clarification on these in either Underworld or Evolution.
All in all, I could have done with a little less blood and a little more meat to the plot, but it was still a very enjoyable film and a nice addition to the Underworld legend. As a side note, with as many times as I have been asked this question, I feel that I must mention that I do not recommend anyone under the age of 16 to watch this movie. It's rated R for a reason.