A good movie. I haven't seen the first two, so I can't say how it compares to them, but it was good.

Violent, fairly gory (too much for my taste, in fact), some tense moments and some tasty action scenes. Wesley Snipes was Wesley Snipes. Jessica Biel was a decent actor and very much above average in the movie-babe department. Ryan Reynolds was excellent in the role of wisecracking sidekick and bad-guy punching bag. I've heard that quite a few of his lines were improv.

I was a little disappointed in the villain, though. He started out scary and became progressively less so.

The first one's worth watching too. 2nd one is skip-able in my opinion, but I can't really remember why. That itself says something doesn't it? hehe

Blade had some of that Matrix-esque neo-goth superman style, but I think it predates that movie by a little.

Blade was '98, Matrix was '99.

I was a fan of the first, but didn't really like either the second or this new one. Too tired right now to list specific reasons behind those feelings, if there are any, but there you have it.

I saw it on Thursday, I'll throw in my two cents.

It was a good movie, but there are a lot of pitfalls in it.

The cast, it was a motley crew, you gotta admit. People from 7th Heaven, the King of Queens and American Pie I thought was funny. They did a fairly good job getting into those roles, but what I didn't care for was the amount of cursing it had in it, probably made up about 40% of the dialogue [img]tongue.gif[/img]

What I really got a kick out of though was when Triple H was fighting at the end of it. They made a good move with him though, they didn't put a lot of hype around him like they did the Rock when he stared in Mummy II, and his acting wasn't that bad. The fight scene though, he needed to work on the punches but I busted out laughing when he did an Oklahoma Slam :D

You guys are funny. I actually think the 2nd one is the best of the three. Oh well, no accounting for taste :D

Gangrell - the amount of cursing? I didn't think there was that much actually, maybe my ears are desensitised to that due to the rap I've been listening to for 10 years?

I did think this film was quite entertaining, slightly fewer surprises than I had hoped for though. They've left it open for a 4th I think, but I don't know what else they can do with the story.

Without having seen the third I do agree that the 2nd is the best (so maybe all I'm saying is that I didn't like the first one...).

Anyway, I liked it for a number of reasons. The bad guy was better than the first - who'd have thought Luke Goss could be menacing. And the ending was just a good, no nonsense, fight. In an age when action films are constantly trying to top each other for inventive spectacle its nice to see a film where the good guy and the bad guy just knock chunks out of each other until one of them dies. Plus it had Ron Perlman and The Cat in it. Oh yes.

<font color = lightgreen>The unknown is always scarier. Knowledge leads to understanding and thence to acceptance. However, there were too many characters in this movie to fully develop the villain, as compared to the first two.
Still, overall I give a [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] as a decent use of the money invested in the tickets and concessions. </font>

Got a question about the 1st & 3rd movies:
Spoiler warning...
10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

may have to highlight to read it...
<font color=black>
If Whistler died in the 1st, how is he back for the 3rd?
</font>

SPOILER...AGAIN:
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
HIGHLIGHT:
<font color="#463300">Whistler is "revived" in the second film. He was never "dead" but kept in a constant state of vampirism locked in a big vat.</font>

Maybe, I just thought it was a bit excessive, tends to ruin a movie usually.