For some reason it doesn't seem as apealing to me as the first one did. I'll still probably see it, but i hope it doesn't fall short from the first one.


-Doof

A let down from the first one? I mean, the concept was alright, but the final fight scene seemed like they sent all the special effects people home and tried to finish up with amatuers and no budget. I didnt click the link so I can't comment on it, but the idea that the original underworld was anything worthwile shocked me.

That looks sweet, ill def have to catch that when it comes out.

A little botched FX work isn't enough to make me turn on a film. The first Underworld was a a fun movie in general for me, so I look forward to another one. It was far from perfect, but I don't demand perfection from every bit of entertainment put before me.

The first Underworld movie was one of those movies which I had no expectations about it being any good, and was pleasantly surprised when it turned out to be a very good movie.

The problem with that is now the sequel has expectations from fans that the original didn't. I'm not sure whether I'll see it in theaters or not; if it gets decent reviews it might be one of those ones I'll just wait to buy on DVD to add to my copy of the original.

I find if I go to every movie with this mindset I enjoy a heck of a lot more movies!

Looks good btw!

i'll definatly go and see this when it comes out. the first one wasn't fantastic, but i certainly found it an entertaining film. i generally notice that i tend to be a lot less harsh on movies than most people do, however. i'm easily entertained.

I'll go see it just for medieval vampire vs. werewolf action.

I wasn't that impressed with the first one. The vampires do nothing but sit around drinking glasses of fake blood while looking pouty, while the werewolves (whom the movie has somehow confused with a symbiosis between fungus and algae) enjoy nothing more than numerous bouts of homoerotic sewer wrestling.