Friday, December 10, 2004

Blade: Trinity

Saw this earlier today. Well...most of it. I lost about three minutes due to a call from work (ug).

Overall...its not too bad. I don't mind the reinterpretation of Dracula, since he comes off looking, at least his bite does, like the Reapers from the second movie, who had their blood derived from a fantastically ancient vampire.

Aside from the UV bullets (obvious Underworld ripoff there) and the "UV Arc", I loved the various gadgets.

Now, I'm not too up on the Blade comics, but the Nighstalkers...I seem to remember. In Blade Trinity the team is:
-King, the former vampire-turned-hunter (Hannibal King was apparently an original Nightstalker, according to JasonK)
-Jessica Biel's character who's name I can't remember, sexy (very sexy) archer and martial artist
-the uber-geek tech head who's name I can't remember, who wore the Fantastic Four t-shirt
-the black guy who got no characterization beyond three or four lines
-Summerfield, the blind geneticist who cooked up a new serum for Blade and a wonderful little anti-vampire weapon (...ok, she was hot...I like science chicks...what?)

The main non-Dracula vamp was amusing. To get a good idea of characterization: Take Marla Singer from Fight Club (the movie, not the book). Turn her into a vampire. Make her really rich, and spoiled. That's pretty much the main vampire bitch of the piece.

Dracula (Drake as he was more often referred to in the movie) had a nice suit of armor, though the actor playing him was...barely adequate. Dracula's a complex character who I feel is very seldomly cast correctly, and while the actor (Dominic somethingorother) managed to pull off a great bad-ass attitude, he didn't deliver many of his speeches with the fire that should have gone into them.

There are so many things to talk about in the movie, of course. It did not live up to the first, but sadly there are very few that can bite (pun intended) so deep into the vampire-action genre as the original Blade did. It encapsulated every perfect little thing you hoped for. The movies after that, like Underworld were just ripoffs. Van Helsing came close, with a rather unique interpretation, but got mired in its own cast and mythology. There is only so far you can take the portrayal of the monsters in a movie when one of the main ones serves a totally minor task, and another is a slavering beast. Van Helsing could have been great...but it settled for just barely mediocre (so many possible good scenes if the writers hadn't gone for gags).

The natural evolution of vampire society has been neat to watch over the course of three movies. Going from Deacon Frost and his blood parties to the cool vamp-ninjas in the second, to the huge blood factories in the third. There has also been a progression in the weaponry of the vampire hunters. Blade's gadgets in the first were pretty tame by comparison to the UV bombs of the second and the "UV Arc"/"UV Bullets"/anti-vamp-bio-weapons of the third.

Plus...I found Summerfield by far a cuter science-chick than the hemotologist from the first movie...


Post a Comment

<< Home