Screen Gems | Release Date: September 19, 2003
8.8
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 532 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
461
Mixed:
46
Negative:
25
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
9
kingshahidOct 2, 2011
Not my kind of vampire movie. Especially the fact that they've given them guns. Its not the worst though. It has the action packed thrill to it though.
6 of 6 users found this helpful60
All this user's reviews
9
R0YDec 13, 2011
1st of the Underworld' trilogy.
Not excellent but close to be one of the best Vampires/Lycans movie ever. A pitty that sometime it decline and can look like a B-movie.
6 of 6 users found this helpful60
All this user's reviews
8
TheChaser1985Jun 8, 2012
I LOVE Kate Beckinsale. She is amazing and the guy who plays Michael was a pretty good choice. As a matter of fact, it seems that all the actors played their characters well. The back story is pretty good and I love the way they filmed it,I LOVE Kate Beckinsale. She is amazing and the guy who plays Michael was a pretty good choice. As a matter of fact, it seems that all the actors played their characters well. The back story is pretty good and I love the way they filmed it, but I just wish there would have been better choreography and a better final battle. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
9
AbriannaM.Oct 14, 2006
This was a Spectacular movie I liked the action packed scenes and the forever rising climax. I also liked the special effects.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
10
johnf.Dec 12, 2005
Excellent movie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
8
survivorfan989Feb 25, 2013
This is a good start to what ended up being a great series! The third fourth stand-out more than the first two, but here's where it all began. Kate Beckinsale leads the way as Selene, a vampire trying to protect a human being hunted byThis is a good start to what ended up being a great series! The third fourth stand-out more than the first two, but here's where it all began. Kate Beckinsale leads the way as Selene, a vampire trying to protect a human being hunted by werewolves. There is plenty of Action going on and while it gets a little dull in the slower parts it picks up towards the end. As mentioned, its not the best in the series but a good place to start as all four films are great! Overall well worth a look Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
7
LordOFlibertYFeb 19, 2012
Yea I know this review is a lil' late but I got to tell you, I'd rather watch this film ten times in one ago without breaks then sit through 1 film of the terribly Twilight Saga series. PROS: Kate in cat suit, Good acting, cool characterYea I know this review is a lil' late but I got to tell you, I'd rather watch this film ten times in one ago without breaks then sit through 1 film of the terribly Twilight Saga series. PROS: Kate in cat suit, Good acting, cool character design, an interesting intake in the Vampire vs Werewolf phenomenon and did I mention Kate in cat suit?
CONS: Forgettable side characters, occasional effy writing especially in filler scenes, anti-climactic looking Hybrid. Seriously I expected something really awesome and cool but no its just a muscular guy with black skin and eyes, pretty simple and lame
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
7
TokyochuchuJul 24, 2012
Underworld is an excellent horror / monster movie mash-up that makes great use of it's backstory and lore. The devil is in the details and the Underworld series spins a unique web of bloodlines, ancient traditions and old world betrayals.Underworld is an excellent horror / monster movie mash-up that makes great use of it's backstory and lore. The devil is in the details and the Underworld series spins a unique web of bloodlines, ancient traditions and old world betrayals. There's a lot in this franchise to sink your teeth into, if you so wish. This first Underworld effort is probably outdone by it's excellent sequel, if only by slim margin. Nether-the-less, the acting is great, the art design and effects are spot on and the action scenes are impressive. The movie has a great balance. Basically speaking, Underworld is the perfect start for a much underrated franchise. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
6
cabritaSep 29, 2012
For me I found the film somewhat dull however it delivered great visuals and the odd scene that captured my attention. Also very good voice over narration from the protagonist. It must be set clear that this is not the type of film thatFor me I found the film somewhat dull however it delivered great visuals and the odd scene that captured my attention. Also very good voice over narration from the protagonist. It must be set clear that this is not the type of film that really appeals to me. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
5
grandpajoe6191Oct 1, 2011
"Underworld" decently presents the raging battle between the monstrous Lycans and blood-craving vampires. It's not scary thanks to its war-focusing plot, but at least the film's decently entertaining.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
1
EricM.Sep 17, 2003
Weak, stone-serious, childish, derivative, contrived, thieving, unoriginal, uncreative, dull, laughable, dumb, immature, lame. Atrociously acted. A stunning defeat for both style and substance. Decidedly not cool. Only a hair better than "Glitter."
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
NamelessoneSep 20, 2003
Yawn. the dialogue was horrid. the first hour and a half was filler. the acting was non-existent. the fight scenes were tired. need i say more?
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
JohnC.Sep 22, 2003
Don't get me started. Not an original character in the whole bunch. Plot holes that put Red Zone Cuba to shame, well maybe bot that bad but. I did like the overuse of three colors, white, black, and almost black blue. Very pretty movie Don't get me started. Not an original character in the whole bunch. Plot holes that put Red Zone Cuba to shame, well maybe bot that bad but. I did like the overuse of three colors, white, black, and almost black blue. Very pretty movie which with less of that whole bad plot and horrid dialogue would be bad. With a name like Kraven, i'm a good guy, but urrr, i'm bad. Go see something else, shot, go watch Lifetime instead. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
DanielC.Sep 20, 2003
Underworld, more like under"pants", this film was awful, for an alleged action film this really was pittiful. For a little over two hours i sat watching this film and the only time my addrenaline rushed was when my mate accidently broke Underworld, more like under"pants", this film was awful, for an alleged action film this really was pittiful. For a little over two hours i sat watching this film and the only time my addrenaline rushed was when my mate accidently broke wind. The acting, other than Kate Beckinsale, was appalling, especially head vampire 'Victor'. He was supposed to be a lord of the underworld though... he acted camper than a row of tents. I gave this film 1 because the special effects were good, but if it were for the plot, script, acting or action then this would have recieved nothing, perhaps even a minus if that were possible! oh and as for the comparisons to the matrix, well the only similarities were that they were both shown in a cinema. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
RirenJan 30, 2007
Atrocious, even for a popcorn flick. The action sequences and "plot twists" feel like the fat they cut off the Blade movies. Coincidentally, almost everyone in this world of eternal rainy nighttime dresses like they were expecting a walk-on Atrocious, even for a popcorn flick. The action sequences and "plot twists" feel like the fat they cut off the Blade movies. Coincidentally, almost everyone in this world of eternal rainy nighttime dresses like they were expecting a walk-on on Blade II. You can't expect too much creativity from a movie that basically steals vampires, werewolves and leather - but this is still insultingly bad, especially with its generic soundtrack and poor acting. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
JustinA.Oct 13, 2003
I deeply wanted to like this movie. Werewolves + Vampires + Romeo + Juliet sounded boneheaded enough to be fantastic. Unfortunately, The Matrix was added with disastrous effects. In that it became a very, very bad Matrix, and not a very very I deeply wanted to like this movie. Werewolves + Vampires + Romeo + Juliet sounded boneheaded enough to be fantastic. Unfortunately, The Matrix was added with disastrous effects. In that it became a very, very bad Matrix, and not a very very ridiculous retelling of a Shakespeare play, which would point out how funny anachronistic retellings are. The film forgets, too, that vampires and werewolves are monsters and as such, they should be scary. Vampires are totally powerful, not inept in all areas besides marksmanship. Werewolves are scary, not people we should try better to understand. It is a one step away from being an utter farce. If it took that step, more enjoyment would be had by all. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
ERG1008Aug 23, 2010
Vampires at war with Werewolves, man with rare blood type, in-fighting, Head Vampire gets awoken, general nonsense.
I saw this about four years ago & thought it was ok & the Werewolves were very good. On this re-watch, it's not very good at
Vampires at war with Werewolves, man with rare blood type, in-fighting, Head Vampire gets awoken, general nonsense.
I saw this about four years ago & thought it was ok & the Werewolves were very good. On this re-watch, it's not very good at all. The effects are pretty average, the acting terrible (even with Michael Sheen in it) & Kate Beckinsale spends most of her time pouting, flicking her hair & jumping around in slow motion.
Tries so hard to be cult & cool but falls well short of the mark.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
HalfwelshmanDec 14, 2011
Underworld is a sloppy example of filmmaking. The acting is as wooden as a bed-side table, with a terrible script and ham-fisted direction by Len Wiseman. The effects and fight scenes might have been decent a few years ago, but they simplyUnderworld is a sloppy example of filmmaking. The acting is as wooden as a bed-side table, with a terrible script and ham-fisted direction by Len Wiseman. The effects and fight scenes might have been decent a few years ago, but they simply don't hold up today. What's more, the film is far too long - the story (what little there is) could have been told in half the time. The only saving graces are Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen, who both have an immense amount of fun as the leaders of the vampires and werewolves respectively, but don't get enough screen time to redeem the film. Underworld plays like it's trying to be somewhere between the Matrix and Blade, but in fact it's a poor imitation of both. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
hoops2448Dec 14, 2011
I was wrong. After watching Underworld again, I came to realise that not only is it the worst of the series, it has no redeeming features at all. It's garbage in the purest sense of the word. The acting is wooden with the best performancesI was wrong. After watching Underworld again, I came to realise that not only is it the worst of the series, it has no redeeming features at all. It's garbage in the purest sense of the word. The acting is wooden with the best performances being ones from bit characters like Bill Nighy's Viktor and Michael Sheen's Lucian (probably why Rise of the Lycans is much more enjoyable). Kate Beckinsale lumbers from scene to scene in a sort of daze, spouting words with no semblance of feeling or thought. I can only imagine its because she is having a severe allergic reaction to the amount of leather shes wearing. Scott Speedman is tragically miscast as Michael not because he doesn't fit the character but because he is just a terrible actor. However the acting is just the beginning. Underworld is poorly directed with almost every scene being both poorly shot, framed and edited with them feeling like they are being rammed down your throat instead of neatly wrapped for your enjoyment. The main problem with the direction (by Len Wiseman) is that it is so remarkably unimaginative. It pushes no boundaries and doesn't try which carries over into the editing, sound mixing and everything else related to the film. The man behind the wheel should at least be able to steer. Len Wiseman got into the drivers seat drunk and everyone in the car held on for dear life.
Summing up, its just rubbish.
Expand
0 of 4 users found this helpful04
All this user's reviews
5
spadenxDec 26, 2011
The acting was pretty terrible (besides Michael Sheen's performance) and the action sequences sucked really hard. I did enjoy the plot though and it did keep me interested in it but it could have been told in a lot shorter time. I feel the 2+The acting was pretty terrible (besides Michael Sheen's performance) and the action sequences sucked really hard. I did enjoy the plot though and it did keep me interested in it but it could have been told in a lot shorter time. I feel the 2+ hours run time pushes it far too much. Still, Underworld simply has something that makes me intersted in it. I was a bit disapointed in this film but I still have hopes for the sequel. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
4
imthenoobNov 9, 2012
It's not that it's a bad movie. There is a ton of potential here for a pretty good series due to the very interesting story. However, the special effects in this film are rather awful, So bad that it's laughable at times. The acting is on theIt's not that it's a bad movie. There is a ton of potential here for a pretty good series due to the very interesting story. However, the special effects in this film are rather awful, So bad that it's laughable at times. The acting is on the weak side as well despite having an experianced cast. Overall, the potential is there but it's still a below average film. Expand
0 of 4 users found this helpful04
All this user's reviews
1
csw12Apr 2, 2012
I watched this movie in a hotel room which I believe made it even worse. The movie has terrible acting and the action is dreadful to say the least. The movie was atrocious.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
cameronmorewoodNov 8, 2012
It tries to be The Matrix with vampires, but fails to have an actual plot or any coherent characters.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
ChadS.Sep 20, 2003
Kraven should be menacing, alas, he is stupid. "Is that Michael?" this Trent Reznor via Christian Bale-wanna-be shouts at Selene, when he sees a very wet man on his video monitor, begging to be let back into the vampire compound. And Selene, Kraven should be menacing, alas, he is stupid. "Is that Michael?" this Trent Reznor via Christian Bale-wanna-be shouts at Selene, when he sees a very wet man on his video monitor, begging to be let back into the vampire compound. And Selene, she's no Mensa candidate herself. She seems genuinely surprised when Erika tells Michael that he has a Lychen bite, even though she was there when her human friend was fending off Lucian. "Underworld", as expected, features a lot of seen-it-before action executed by actors with very serious faces, redeemed somewhat by a story that's more engaging than "The Matrix: Reloaded". Some kudos, however, should be lavished upon the special effects team for the creation of Victor. His awakening reminds us that vampires should be scary and not brandishers of firearms. All those tubes of blood connected to a skinless, but recognizable Bill Nighy is a genuine contribution to vampire iconography. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
DouglasH.Jan 10, 2004
Better than I thought it would be. It deserves a higher score.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
NateKJan 8, 2004
This movie was one of my favorites of the year. I thought the special effects were good, and the story was really good in my opinion. It had a really good twist in it. I think the negative reviews from this movie are from people who like This movie was one of my favorites of the year. I thought the special effects were good, and the story was really good in my opinion. It had a really good twist in it. I think the negative reviews from this movie are from people who like those boring documentries and artsy films. This movie is good if you like action and fantasy. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TerryP.Feb 8, 2004
Fun filled romp...enjoyable...dark with do the right thing attitude...Loved it...
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
lykenOct 10, 2005
Hey this film is good. the script is good and the effects very well done. one of the best vampire/werewolf films i've seen!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RamG.Oct 5, 2003
Very good. Special effects were incredible. Vampires fighting lycans (werewolves), what more can you ask for?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
PrincessT.Oct 7, 2003
I thought the storyline was intriguing...although the character development was thin, overall I was pleasantly surprised by this movie considering its mediocre ratings.
0 of 0 users found this helpful