Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)

When it’s on: Monday, 26 January (11.10 pm)
Channel: Film4
IMDb Link

The Underworld franchise is contained within that strange hinterland of mid-budget film works that nobody especially loves yet make enough money to guarantee sequels, a bit like the Resident Evil flicks that keep appearing, whether you want them to or not. Before buying the boxset holding all four instalments, I had seen each one, always at home, late at night, having had a few and not each time obtaining them by fair means. They’re okay. There’s little pretence that they started as a pet project for action director Len Wiseman to cast his wife, the English actor Kate Beckinsale, as a vampire in skin tight leather outfits, cavorting around the streets and sewers of a modern cityscape in search of werewolves to smite. and you are either on board with that or you aren’t.

The first film held the conceit that the centuries long war between the vampires and werewolves – known as lycans – threw up misguided loyalties. Bill Nighy, the haughty vampire leader, turned out to be a villain, whereas it was Lucian (Michael Sheen) who was actually all right, much to Beckinsale’s chagrin, who had once blindly followed the former only to have her world turned upside down by the film’s close. The second advanced the mythology a little further whilst plunging its bigger budget into snappier special effects and more dazzling action sequences, but for the third instalment, Underworld: Rise of the Lycans, without Wiseman or Beckinsale’s involvement (the latter provides some narration), it was decided that they’d go for an origin story, explaining the background to the conflict. Again, your choice whether to find this sort of thing interesting, or a big waste of everyone’s time.

These films were always decent enough for an undemanding late night watch, but this one turns out to be the best, perhaps because the medieval setting works so well for these characters of mythology. You don’t need to care for the story or the characters to enjoy the eternal tale of maltreated good against unashamed evil, and that’s exactly the tale served up by Underworld: Rise of the Lycans. It tells how Viktor (Nighy) is the leader of a vampire coven in some dusky European locale, and one day in his fight against the savage lycans comes across a human baby that’s been born of a werewolf. Fighting his natural instinct, Viktor takes in the child, names him Lucian and watches him grow into a strong and fierce warrior. Perturbed by the potential threat Lucian poses to his kind, Viktor places him in a yoke that prevents him from transforming into a wolfman, whilst making him assault other humans in order to create a servant class. Only, Lucian dreams of freedom, and freedom with Viktor’s daughter, Sonja (Rhona Mitra), with whom he’s involved in a passionate, illicit love affair. As tensions rise and Lucian develops into a charismatic leader of the lycan underclass, Sonja’s decision to win him his liberty comes with a fateful toll and Viktor’s despotic malevolence has awful repercussions for all concerned.

Bill Nighy has always been able to add value as villains, often heavily made up, baroque baddies, whether Davy Jones in the Pirates of the Caribbean movies or Naberius in the execrable I, Frankenstein. But it’s Michael Sheen who really owns the film. Better known for his talent at mimicking real-life figures like Brian Clough (The Damned United), David Frost (Frost/Nixon), and Tony Blair in various adaptations, he turns in a muscular performance here, adding real dramatic heft to what is essentially a silly story. He’s beaten, scourged, watches Sonja suffer, imprisoned and impaled, and with each blow makes the viewer really feel his pain.

First time director, Patrick Tatopoulus, makes good use of the New Zealand location shooting to create an untainted forest environment from the Middle Ages, often shot at night to bring the bare winter trees to eerie life, casting dark shadows over the landscape. The darkness helps with the special effects, ensuring those poor sods dressed in werewolf outfits never look so much like men in daft costumes as they could. Considering the production cost $35 million, it never looks cheap, the transformation sequences kept to a merciful minimum and relying instead on glares of dark intent between Lucian and his captors.

As this set a millennia ago, the endless machine gun fire of the first two films (which, naturally, had no effect on the undead) is no more, and instead we get swords and arrows, both of which have a devastating impact on their targets. The fact we see vampires and lycan alike dying in droves gives the film a sense of weight that the others lack. Strangely, it’s all the better for the lack of a Beckinsale upon whom to lavish lascivious close-up shots.

Underworld: Rise of the Lycans: ***

4 Replies to “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans (2009)”

  1. This franchise – don’t really like that word – has passed me by although I have been nominally aware of it. From your description here it sounds as though this installment, mainly due to the period setting, might be worth a look at least.

    1. Franchise is an ugly word when it comes to the craft of motion picture entertainment, so business-y, but I guess when it comes to things like this it’s all about the bottom line and that’s why they keep churning them out.

      They don’t have a great deal of worth really, and the first two in particular come across as pop video films of the most obvious kind. But this one has more class, helped along by Michael Sheen and the medieval setting. Worth a glance. Thanks for posting, Colin.

  2. I’ve always had a soft spot for the Underworld films, mainly the first one. They’re all style over substance, and a very post-Matrix style at that, but their urban-Gothic-fantasy-action schtick works for me, in its own way.

    I didn’t so much care for this one, though, but there seems to be something of a consensus that it’s the best. I dismissed it as telling a story we already knew (from the first two films’ flashbacks), and using the backstory’s medieval setting as a way to cash in on the post-Lord of the Rings fantasy glut (is this series ever anything other than stylistically reactionary?) Your review makes me think I should be giving it another go, trying to judge it a little more in isolation.

    1. Thanks for posting Bob. What makes it kind of cool for me is that it sits halfway between the likes of Lord of the Rings and the kind of straight-to-DVD crap that has tempted many an unwitting supermarket shopper before it vanishes forever. I think it does have some substance, unlike the first two, which seemed to be little more than clothes horses for Miss Beckinsale, not that there’s anything wrong with that. Certainly having bought the set and revisited all four in quick succession, it’s this instalment that sticks out, perhaps as you suggest because it’s not going for dark-in-the-city, Matrix style coolness.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s