ROTTEN TOMATOES: Underworld Prequel to Trace Rise of the Lycans

Underworld Prequel to Trace Rise of the Lycans

Critics sharpen teeth, claws.

by Jeff Giles | October 26, 2007

Last year's Underworld: Evolution was given an old-fashioned reaming by critics when it reached theaters -- but between box office and rental receipts, it's grossed over $100 million, so it comes as no surprise that we'll soon be treated to Underworld 3: Rise of the Lycans.

As Variety reports, Underworld 3 will be helmed by well-known monster creator and first-time director Patrick Tatopoulos, "who developed the creatures for the first two films in the franchise," and will be produced by series creator Len Wiseman. Michael Sheen, Bill Nighy, and Rhona Mitra are attached to star, and the screenplay -- written by Danny McBride -- will take viewers back in time:

Prequel story traces the origins of the centuries-old blood feud between the aristocratic vampires known as Death Dealers and their onetime slaves, the Lycans. In the Dark Ages, a young Lycan named Lucian (Sheen) emerges as a powerful leader who rallies the werewolves to rise up against Viktor (Nighy), the cruel vampire king who has enslaved them. Lucian is joined by his secret lover, Sonja (Mitra), in his battle against the Death Dealer army and his struggle for Lycan freedom.

Wiseman's enthusiasm for the Underworld franchise remains undimmed by the critical brickbats. Variety quotes him as saying:

"For the first time we will experience the 'Underworld' universe through the eyes of the Lycans...Patrick has always played such an essential part in helping to create 'Underworld' from the start...So I feel it is both exciting and fitting that (he) now takes the helm."

Source: Variety

Related Items

Movie:	Underworld
Celeb:	Bill Nighy
	Patrick Tatopoulos
	Rhona Mitra
	Danny McBride
	Michael Sheen
	Len Wiseman

(1-18 of 18 posts) | Reply

tawo writes:
on Oct 26 2007 07:08 AM

Thats w'sup!!!

(Reply to this)

bat-fink writes:
on Oct 26 2007 07:40 AM

I actually quite liked the prequel setting in evolution, maybe this could be ok. I found 1 & 2 very average though. A few good touches i guess. Beckinsale is hot.

(Reply to this)

xenogears writes:
on Oct 26 2007 07:46 AM

Should be some cool sword fights (as they didn't have guns when this started, not counting crappy muskets). Hope there is an all out, full scale war with vamps against wolfs.

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on Oct 26 2007 08:22 AM

I remain mystified that this series is still alive. I was profoundly underwhelmed by the first one and couldn't *quite* get up the interest to see the second one, even on DVD. Kudos, I guess, to those who can. I hope this is all you ever wanted.

Having said all that, I'd probably be willing to spend at least five dollars to watch Kate Beckinsale do her taxes as long as she wears those pants. And that's not a perverted metaphor-- she could actually be doing her taxes.

(Reply to this)

Matanuki writes:
on Oct 26 2007 08:33 AM

Here's my problem with Underworld: the vampires are too weak. They should be a much more formidable adversary for the "Lycans". Instead, they seem more like vulnerable gun-toting humans with an ax to grind. That's all fine and good, mind you. After all, I am a big Batman fan... But if we're talking vampires vs. werewolves, then that's what I want to see. It's cool that the vamps use guns and wear their black leather, but they shouldn't need guns or black leather to be cool and, furthermore, to survive. Cutting out their time honored strengths this way is far too gimmicky for my taste, especially for a franchise.

(Reply to this)

maharblliw writes:
on Oct 26 2007 09:51 AM

F this franchise. They should have made this like Vampire The Masquerade bloodlines. Remember the werewolf scene at the sky park where a giant *** werewolf tries to kill you at a space observatory? Now that was intense and bad-***.

(Reply to this)

quietus28 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:18 PM

The Underworld series has an interesting concept, but as mentioned by other users, the execution is pretty underwhelming. Too bad, too, because it has a lot of potential.

(Reply to this)

Prosper761 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:27 PM

The first Underworld movie was ugly, stupid, poorly acted, directed by a blind man and edited with a meat cleaver. Who on Earth would pay money to see a sequel to that mess?

(Reply to this)

GravitaZ writes:
on Oct 26 2007 12:44 PM

I liked them both, this site has some vendetta against horror franchises that I can't quite figure out.

(Reply to this)

SpikesInMySkull writes:
on Oct 26 2007 01:11 PM

Yeah, they where both pretty awful... the biggest problem with the first one was that for a movie about werewolves and vampires it was awfully full of people looking pretty while shooting at each other.

The second movie was a lot more face chomping, which was an improvement, but the plotline was completely inchoherant.

Also, these movies both have fairly strong casts with the blinding expception of the two pretty leads, who are both completely terrible. Agin, please spare me the hot chick arguement, as I've always said, for every hot chick in every movie, there is a hotter chick out there that could have done a better job acting, so the "hot chick" arguement makes everyone who uses it a complete moron.

What sucks is I'm a big fan of werewolves, and I'm completely convinced that hollywood has a conspiracry where they intentionally release crap like this... and Cursed... and Skinwalkers... and S2DVD soft-core porn/Howling sequals... JUST to keep the Werewolf genre a joke, so nothing good get's made, or when it does (Ginger Snaps, Dog Soilders) it get's under-distributed and over-looked.

Hell they did this with fantasy for years until Lord of The Rings/Harry Potter came out.

maharblliw was on to something with the mention of Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines. Definatelly one of the better "Hidden World of Vampires and Werewolves" multi-media presetations out there. Truely and interactive movie, in the very best sence of the word. And the werewolf encounter is sufficiently awesome.

(Reply to this)

pinkincide writes:
on Oct 26 2007 01:13 PM

We've reached the point where vampires can be killed with a flashlight if you put the right bulb in. Pretty soon we'll be killing them with garlic farts.

I demand bulb-proof vampires.

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Oct 26 2007 04:30 PM

Oooooh, an Underworld prequel, I think I first heard about this in Who Gives a Flying **** magazine.

(Reply to this)

travis_blum writes:
on Oct 26 2007 05:23 PM

HELL YA!! LUCIAN IS THE ****!!!

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Oct 26 2007 06:16 PM

whatever

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Oct 26 2007 06:17 PM

bad thang about it this is the only vampire movie my wife will watch

(Reply to this)

Elixor writes:
on Oct 26 2007 08:15 PM

I agree that these movies thrive on potential and underwhelm the viewers. I've still got enough hope that they can maybe make one good movie out of this franchise. The others are mediocre at best.

(Reply to this)

TheAnswerMVP2001 writes:
on Oct 26 2007 09:42 PM

So we lose Kate and get Rhona... I don't like that deal.

(Reply to this)

kissman24 writes:
on Oct 27 2007 07:13 PM

I really like this series a lot, but this is a big mistake. "Underworld" needs Kate Beckensale in order to be any good. I can't get excited for this.

(Reply to this)

RottenTomatoes.com