But if you’re asking me about which one i have choose to watch it, it’s underworld, obviously!
I’ve to admit that i’m really a big fan of that series.
———- Post added at 12:17 AM ———- Previous post was at 12:11 AM ———-
oh yeah, and underworld has a darker and solid gothic atmosphere that makes it perfect for a vampire’s movie instead of the twilight saga.
lol, you nailed it. Though i heard from a friend of mine who actually read the Twilight novels that it is good…i managed to see the first film and it’s ok i guess but it’s just something that is not my cup of tea.
———- Post added at 01:13 AM ———- Previous post was at 01:08 AM ———-
though they’ve ruined the original with a poor quality sequels. (the blair witch project) which become a big budget production’s movie.
But it still become profitable with it’s income.
‘Underworld’ is trash and ‘Twilight’ is garbage.
‘Underworld, generally and at its best, never pretends to be more than it is: a good looking heroine shoots and kills her enemies in as entertaining fashions as possible. This isn’t a knock on the films, some actors have tried to do the action hero role and failed. Kate Beckinsdale (Selene) makes you (at least she does for me) believe she can kill ass and not bother with names. She takes matters into her own bloody hands and never waits around for someone to save her. The movies are light entertainment but fun.
Twilight’ likes to pretend there’s more going on then there really is, but its core its two guys fighting over Bella to see who can get her pregnant. That’s it, the rest is all pseudo romantic padding to fill out four books. Bella is waiting for her prince to come and take her away from everything. Really, this is the 21st century, not the 13th. And there’s a subtext to these films I find disturbing: Bella is choosing between necrophilia (Ed is dead, he’s a vampire, a walking corpse) or bestiality (Jacob is a werewolf, the guy has fur and walks on all fours.)
The strange duality is exemplified by a friend who dragged me to see the first film. Afterwards I asked her if she didn’t find it weird that Edward, who is a 100 years old, hangs around teenage girls. In human terms that’s pedophilia (to be accurate its actually ephebophilia: an interest in children between the ages of 15 and 19.) but Twilight fans find the pairing of Edward and Bella romantic. Her response, she didn’t care because Edward, and these are her words "is so hot."
Moral of this story: it doesn’t matter if you are dead, as long as you’re good looking you’ll get the girl.
so underworld wins for having actual vampires.
twilight had… sparkling faggots
so underworld wins for having actual vampires.
twilight had… sparkling faggots
QFT. Can’t agree enough.
so underworld wins for having actual vampires.
twilight had… sparkling faggots
This. Underworld hands down is better in every way. There is no comparison between the 2.
i’ve also seen twilight and it’s first sequel, where they end up in italy meeting michael sheen who’s now a vampire rather then a lycan in the underworld films, and these films were no fun at all. the first one was intriguing for a while, and i do like the rogue vampires who killed for fun, the rasta and the chick and the bloke who kidnaps bella’s mum and bites her before getting iced by edward’s human-abstinent family who come to the rescue; i liked that bit when the wolves chase the red haired chick through the forest after she causes bella’s dad’s mate to have a heart attack in the first sequel, to that thom yorke/radiohead song. but overall these films seem to be self-important, self-indulgent, pretentious and self-obsessive, with unlikeable characters acted in an annoying, wooden fashion, reminiscent of hayden christiansen’s laughable anakin skywalker performances. you see very little that’s actually worth seeing.
also, this ->
VAMPIRES DONT SPARKLE IN DAYLIGHT.
so underworld wins for having actual vampires.
twilight had… sparkling faggots
at first i actually liked the fact that they didn’t burn up in the sunlight; that’s always bothered me, because if vampires are so fucking weak under the sun, why doesn’t the CMB, or the light from all the stars in our galaxy and beyond etc. harm them? or is it simply because it’s our star, it’s just a magical or supernatural weakness to our particular sun? i’m pretty sure dracula isn’t bothered, or at least not hurt, by the sun in the original novel, correct me if i’m wrong? … but then again, twilight’s vampires are indeed basically sparkling faggots. so yeah, fuck all that waffle, twilight’s take on it just fails spectacularly. there’s no explanation or reason for the sparkling, it’s just shit. and it makes less sense that such gifted and powerful beings would stay underground and out of the public consciousness if all the sun made them do was sparkle rather then burn them to a crisp.
i can’t comment on the twilight novels but that in itself also counts in underworld’s favour in my opinion, since it’s actually an original screenplay, as far as i’m aware, rather then yet another fucking adaptation/remake/reboot/sequel etc. sooooo, in conclusion, the underworld films, while being no masterpieces, are nevertheless vastly superior to the twilight films, to my mind.