Review: Underworld (the film)

4:52pm, 12th October 2003

(Wrote this weeks ago. Don’t know why I didn’t post it. The film was probably so bad it wasn’t even worth writing a bad review of.)

Underworld is 100% shite. It wasn’t even bad enough to be entertainingly shoddy; it was just boring. All the bad bits of the Matrices, but aimed at goths, and crapper. About 20 people walked out.

It’s not bad like an MST3K’d film is bad. It’s bad like a one legged chair is bad; it’s pointless and useless, no matter how nicely it’s carved. The photography was OK, the sets were well built, etc., but there was just a screaming hollow emptiness where things like characters, acting, and dialogue should’ve been

It’s films like this that make me think obnoxious literature snobs are right: when you haven’t read/watched/listened to much, anything seems good. When you’ve read around a bit, you start to notice the truly original works which reveal supposedly new ideas for the cheap derivatives they really are.

If you like vampires and werewolves, play nethack instead.


Comments

  1. dave said at 4:24pm on the 12th of October, 2003:

    “If you like vampires and werewolves, play nethack instead.” <– hahahaha. I just saw Kill Bill yesterday with lsd in leicster square, and its it entirely style without substance. This is a good thing. Unlike this film, which I would have probably walked away from being so bored, if I hadnt downloaded it, h0h0.


  2. James said at 3:14am on the 13th of October, 2003:

    You minor warez baron!

    BTW, are you putting the article URL in as your URL, or is this some horrible bug I didn’t anticipate?


  3. James said at 3:18am on the 13th of October, 2003:

    Oh, I see now. Curses. Fixing.


  4. James said at 3:21pm on the 13th of October, 2003:

    Fixed.


  5. dave said at 7:14pm on the 19th of October, 2003:

    What, no way for me to see all the comments, and have a cookie based ‘highlight the ones i havent seen before’ page? :) *whip crack*


  6. James said at 3:58am on the 20th of October, 2003:

    Er, time lol.


  7. James said at 5:11am on the 20th of October, 2003:

    I find cookies displeasing. However! It’s a legitimate feature request. Easy, but time consuming. /2003/recent/ should point to the last ~20 comments.


  8. dave said at 12:04pm on the 21st of October, 2003:

    that’ll do, forget the cookies. Although it doesnt work! :( http://james.lab6.com/2003/recent/ gives your amusing 404 page, but the 28th feb link it broken, pointing to /2003/03/31 and saying 404!


  9. James said at 4:16am on the 22nd of October, 2003:

    /2003/recent/ *should* point to the last 20 comments, but doesn’t, because I haven’t done it yet :)

    Feb/march was when I started working on the blog scripts, but I never actually got anything done until July when the holidays had started. 404 page amended.


  10. i like vampire movies said at 3:42pm on the 15th of December, 2003:

    Well i thougth it was a brill film to go and see because like me i like vampires and werewolves so if you did not like it why did you go an see it…


  11. James said at 6:32am on the 16th of December, 2003:

    > if you did not like it why did you go an see it

    On the one hand, how can you know whether you’ll like anything unless you try it? On the other hand, the adverts and previews looked bad, so I should’ve known better. I just went with a load of people who wanted to see *something*.



Leave a comment

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Please enter the following words to prove your humanity: