Friday, December 10, 2004

Blade: Trinity Review

I kind of have a soft spot for the Blade movies because the first Blade was the first film of the modern Marvel era. It enjoyed enough success to get decent financial backing for X-Men, which opened with $56 million in its first weekend and convinced movie execs everywhere that the public had indeed recovered from the horror of Batman and Robin and was again ready to go see well-made movies based on comic books. The style and action of the first two Blade films makes them extremely watchable, even with their flaws. Blade:Trinity is supposedly the final Blade movie, although there have been rumors that it may spin off a Nightstalker franchise.

If you've seen the first two Blade movies, you'll probably realize after watching this one that it doesn't really measure up. The action isn't as good. The plot (such as it is) isn't as good. The villian isn't as cool. I even think Blade's character loses something from the first two movies. Also, I enjoy hero shots as much as anyone, but B:T goes a little over the top with the heros-prepping-for-battle montage sequences. David Goyer (who wrote all three and directed this one) could have cut out a solid 30 seconds to a minute and still have plenty to go around. Another thing I was confused by was that, over the course of the first two movies, the vampires were set up as an ancient hierarchical society with tradition, legends, and different families: essentially a fully developed separate culture. The first two movies showed pieces that hinted at a larger whole. That element was completely lacking in this movie. Also, when Whistler dies in the first 15 minutes I was reminded by just how much cooler and how much more impact his death scene had in the first movie. Getting shot in the chest by FBI agents just doesn't compare.

The first movie sets up Blade as a loner: it's just him and Whistler against the world. The second movie teamed Blade up with the Bloodpack, a group of vampires who had been training to take him out. This worked because of the tension and dislike built into the relationship between Blade and the Bloodpack (and the kick ass performance of Ron Perlman). There's not that sense of tension when Blade joins the Nightstalkers (which is unavoidable, since they hunt vampires instead of, well, you get the idea). Sure, Blade doesn't like them at first, but that's about as far as it goes.

This brings me, however, to the one redeeming quality of this movie: Ryan Reynolds' performance as Hannibal King. Not only does he have a fantastic name, he steals pretty much every scene he's in. His acerbic wit is hilarious, whether he's cutting into Blade or giving a big "fuck you" to the vampires when he gets captured. He has all the best lines in the movie, including "you made a fucking vampire Pomeranian?!" He's fantastic.

It's not B:T is outright bad. It's just that it's not that good. Reynolds is pretty much the only reason to see the movie outside of being a compulsive Marvel film viewer like me. If you can avoid paying full price, by all means save your money for the better flicks out there.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

While, I very much agree with Mr. Kreuser on all of his stated points, I'd like to say that the Vampire-bad-girl in this movie is a lot of fun to watch. Parkey Posey is the archetypical cardboard cutout bitch. Regrettably, the only backstory we get on her is mixed up with Hannibal King, and Ryan Reynolds gets the better lines in those scenes. However, the fake fangs give Ms. Posey a frown/pissed-off look that is on par with the best looks given by Wesley Snipes and others in this series (although, you probably have to like her look to make that comparison). All-in-all, really the best that can be said is that she is not detrimental to this movie.... but so, so, so hot.

-Java