Alright, I now I’m way behind the curve in finally getting to see this movie, but…I’ve got a question about the internal logic of the movie.
paging Inigo Montoya, paging Inigo Montoya
I have liked all of the Blade movies (including this one) but it seems they took one particular thing over the top in this one to the point of threatening the internal logic of the movie. That being humans going hand to hand with vampires…and winning.
Abigail and Hannibal sure did a lot of bare fisticuffs with vampires and came out on top in this film. Admittedly they had some tools for the coup de grace but while they were ‘softening up’ the vampires before killing them…come on. Aren’t the vampires in this story stronger, faster, bad-asser than humans? And even if we allow for weaker than average vampires and stronger than average humans I think they carried it a little too far. Especially when Hannibal and Jarko were slugging it out. You can’t tell me Jarko was supposed to be a wimpy vamp. Yet those two went at it barehanded forever. Why didn’t Jarko just rip Hannibal’s head off?
Looking to how Blade himself fights vampires, he always goes for the quick kill…get some silver in the bloodsucker quick. Hell, vampire cannon fodder gets toasted so quick by Blade you don’t even have time to see their red shirts! And if the daywalker knows to dispatch them quickly, then these humans should by all rights be toast considering how long they jab and parry with their vampire foes.
On a similar point, Blade can sure make quick work of a vampire, but let a bunch of human familiars jump him and it takes him forever to beat the snot out of them.
I really like this series, but that was just sloppy movie making in my opinion. Am I missing some credible explanation having never read the comics?
Nope, what you’re seeing is a not very good writer NOT getting paired up with a pretty good director for once and not getting his plot holes filled in for him.
If you’re not aware, the writer of Blade 1 and 2 got his chance to direct 3, and Trinity is what resulted from it.
A question? I could write five pages of questions I had about the internal logic of the movie.
Why did they need Dracula anyway? Why did Dracula spend 9/10ths of the movie doing nothing? Then only showed up to kinda tease Blade for no good reason? What was he doing just wandering the streets only to kill a couple of goths? (yes I know he was pissed at the stuff in the store but did he just feel like going out for a stroll when he found it or what?) Why did he decide to ‘join’ the gang of vamps when you’d think he’d just take charge of them? Why did he spend so much time talking about honor yet seemed to have no honor at all? (i.e. taking a hostage in his first meeting with Blade running from him then taking a baby of all things hostage) Why did Dracula look like an oblivion knight from Diablo II? (ok maybe that was just me and not an internal logic problem) Why was Dracula’s home identified as Iraq in the opening of the movie and later Syria? The hand to hand thing drove me nuts too. In fact the humans went out of their way to not use their weapons in order to duke it out. Why did the girl use an IPod? Wouldn’t it make more sense to you know HEAR vamps around you in a fight? Why did she not wear more logical clothes to fight vamps? Why did the anti-vamp cells only have one working at a time? If this was a fight for all of humanity you’d think you’d have as many active as can be supported. Who was funding these cells for their super cool toys anyway? Drac was defeated by being shot in the back with an arrow then injected with a virus yet he tells Blade he fought ‘honorably’ seems to me a very dishonorable way to win.
I could go on but sheesh. Oh I guess I should mention I wasn’t a big fan of Blade I and II but I found them tolerable this one had me shaking my head in horror.
I liked the first movie quite a bit (Kris Kristofferson really made it for me: “I catch you fuckers at a bad time?”) Didn’t like the second one so much, although Ron Perlman redeemed it. Didn’t see Trinity. With the second movie, I actually got bored with the hand-to-hand; for one thing, you can tell when it goes to CGI and you’re essentially watching a cartoon.
The point of logic that I just couldn’t get past was this: it’s established in the first two movies that while there are several ways to destroy a vampire, one surefire way is to use artificial light simulating sunlight. Burns 'em right up – even the supervampires that prey on ordinary vampires. Given that . . . why bother with all the hand-to-hand? Or even silver bullets. If I were a vampire hunter in that scenario, the lights would be my weapon of first resort, last resort, and every resort in between. I’d be a walking used-car lot of lights. I’d never have to do any karate bullshit, use Uzi’s loaded with silver bullets, or throw fancy cool flying guillotines, because those two-legged ticks would be crispy critters before they ever reached me.
I don’t expect rigorous logic from movies based on comic books, but this is a little hard to ignore.
I always thought the problem would be more the other way around. Why would werewolves need guns to fight vampires? A werewolf and a vampire go hand to hand. I’m betting on the werewolf, every time.
Are you shittin me? The vampires are the top of the movie moster food chain. The werewolves were the slaves of the vampires for Christ’s sake. No way should a werewolf be able to take down a vampire in hand to hand combat.
[QUOTE=Baldwin]
because those two-legged ticks would be crispy critters before they ever reached me.
[QUOTE]
And if they did get through my UV light curtain, they would have to figure out how to extract me from my body armor which would resemble a man-sized porcupine (silver needles, of course) while being doused in my silver/garlic/holy-water sprinkler / vampire retardant system.
I’m not. They’re basically lucid walking dead guys who sometimes have hypnotic powers. A couple steps up from zombies. There’s nothing about being undead that should make you able to stick to walls and up huge, hulking beasts with your bare hands, or fly(unless as a bat).
How the hell they managed to enslave the werewolves is beyond me, since a transformed werewolf should have easily been able to tear them to sherds. I had the same problem with Van Hesling.
But then again, they were both crappy movies for a number of reasons.
I didn’t think too much about the logic of this film. In fact, I pretty much switched off to any parts that didn’t have Ryan Reynolds ad-libbing his way through them. The boy is much funnier than I remember him from “Two Guys & A Girl”
This was the first thing that occurred to me while watching the very first “Blade,” about four minutes in. If a silver wound means instant death, why not wear a battle suit studded with silver pins? You’d win every fight.
Oh yeah, let me quit bitching for a second and ask another serious question. They went to all this trouble to find Dracula. And we all know helicopters can’t fly at night…whoops, sorry. said I wasn’t going to bitch. But they find him in order to create super vamps.
Well they all seem to know how Blade came to be. Why not round up a bunch of pregnant ladies and try to recreate that happy accident??? Anyone?