This evening I called my dad; we spoke a few days ago, when I returned from New York. He and Judy went out to St. Chapelle today for wine and a concert. Evidently the weather was cooler than normal there, in the low 70s, and even chilly in the shade. I wish for that here (~90, humid enough inside, and the gnats/midges are back … ICK)
After my “Sunday Brunch Writing” with Richard, Gabe, and Helen (Amy was working) I decided to watch a couple of the movies I rented from 4-Star yesterday. Last night I re-watched “Underworld,” the dreary but endearing (endrearing?) vampire movie from a couple years back, a movie that owed far too much in looks and style to “The Matrix.” tI feels like a ripoff. Even now.
This afternoon I watched “Underworld: Evolution,” the sequel, which is a much worse movie in most regards. It lacks a reason for being and is centered around the two survivors — Seline and Michael — from the last, but they’re so thoroughly without personality that it’s hard to center a movie around them. Derek Jacobi gets a cameo as the “First Immoral,” the father of the first vampire and the first werewolf, but he’s clearly slumming it. And his two sons? The vampire spends most of the movie looking like a human-bat hybrid in a rubber costume. The werewolf is locked away until the end; perhaps there’s a human actor inside. No personality, though. The problem — well, one of many — with this movie is that it’s all top-down. It has a “concept” and everything else exists for the sake of that concept. Thus there is no real story. No real plot, just that Markus, the first vampire, has gotten loose, is mad, and wants to free his brother. And since Seline knows — but doesn’t know she knows — where the first werewolf is imprisoned, that’s how she gets drawn into it. See, it’s hard to call it a movie about her or Michael when their presence is mere plot necessity.
In the evening I rewatched “Night Watch,” the first of supposedly three movies based on Russian novels. The sequel is “Day Watch.” I rented it from 4-Star a few months back but didn’t have time to watch it. It aged well enough — “Night Watch” — but it has some low-production-value flaws. Still, it’s entertaining and high-concept. It wants to be more than it can be, that is: it’s clearly trying. And it’s still bottom-up in a sense, even though the “concept” is a good-vs-evil battle of cosmic proportions. But see, it’s bottom-up because it begins with characters and their stories. Sure, we’re partially in the realm of formula and cliche, but as long as you don’t think too hard, it seems fresh (and flesh).
And so I’m looking forward to “Day Watch.” The sequel is now in theaters; it made it to DVD earlier, probably just as an import. The reviews have been mixed. But in any case it’s got to be better than the “Underworld” flicks.
