We bought/watched BLADE TRINITY last night. (we own the other 2) By far, this sequel was my least favorite of the series. An obvious introduction to the Night Stalkers group, rather than a Blade movie per se. (Notice it’s not BLADE 3, but ‘trinity’ with hottie Ryan Reynolds and an ass kicking Jennifer Biel equally sharing the starring roles). The second BLADE was the best in terms of plot, character depth, and action sequences, etc, but the first one remains my favourite. Stephen Dorff rawked it out as Frost.
Getting back to one of the reasons I didn’t like BLADE TRINITY. Don’t mess with Dracula people. If you want to write your own vampire origin, do so. More power to ya. But hands off Drac if you don’t understand that some things about his legend/history are sacrosanct. (btw, don’t rename him Drake, as in BLADE TRINITY, as in Lame.)
Dracula is a tragically romantic figure. He renounced God because of his great love for his wife Elizabeth. Yeah, the bloody legend of Vlad the Impaler is mixed in there, but all this crappy Dracula 2000, and even Buffy’s take on Drac? Don’t do it. It’s like making Superman a genetically engineered human, rather than an orphaned alien whose super-powers are derived from our yellow sun. It’s. Not. The. Same. I won’t get into all the other nit picks I had with the movie. ::scowling::
And speaking of sucking, we also rented ANACONDA 2. lol. On the other hand, Suspect Zero looks quite good. We'll probably watch that one tonight, since it has to go back tomorrow. Oh, wait. ::slaps forehead:: BlOCKBUSTER did away with late charges.... heh.
6 comments:
Although all BLADE films have flaws, BLADE is my personal favourite [even though Karen irritates me :D]. BLADE: TRINITY is the weakest, but I dislike B2 most, which kills me because I adore on Perlman and del Toro's works. :P
B3's biggest flaw is their attempt to cram in two major plot lines: "Dracula" and the harvest scheme. By doing that, both are neglected and underused. Don't let me start on Parker Posey.
In fairness, B3 does acknowledge and pay an understated tribute to Bram Stoker's version of vampirism, e.g. immunity to the sun, ability to shape-shift, etc. Not many films do that. Including DRACULA 2000. :D
If you're in mood to try something different, I recommend FRAILTY, SESSION 9, THE DEVIL'S BACKBONE [dir. by del Toro], THE EYE -- hm, shall I shut up? *thinking* Yes. :D
I agree w/Maili....the double plot lines were too much. The biggest hting that bugged me about B3 was the um rather SLOW pacing. And the lack of leather--sue me.
My fucking comment got ate! I agree w/maili on the double plots. I can't remember what else...oh there was no leather and it really took away from Blade's imposing appearance.
But you do have to admit that that vampire pomeranian was pretty damned funny!
ok I suck....my comment didn't show up so I commented again =(
Maili I think you're right. They had too much going on in the movie with those two undeveloped plots. Things started off on the wrong foot for me with the car chase. It just seemed like obvious pandering to audience 'demographic - male 18-21 yrs.'. Yes, there was a nod to the Bram Stoker's version, but barely a nod. A nod hardly worth the head jerk. So his origins are now that he's from Sumerian. And? Yes? How did he become vampire? And why did Dracula (seem to) defer to the other vampires when he was clearly more powerful than them? I've got a million and one nit picks with the movie.
Cece - yeah, the vampire dogs were cute for about 1 sec. :-P Since they didn't really do anyting, what was the point? And Triple H, what was up with the metal fangs? Was that suppposed to make him more scary? I laughed my ass off at that scene where he's running behind the get away car. Now *there* was a freakish sight.
oops, thanks for the movie suggestions, Maili, I'll keep an eye out for them.
Uhm, we'll both leave the subject of Parker Posey's character alone. Deacon Frost/Stephen Dorff she ain't.
Post a Comment