Blade was one of those movies we watched as kids and one of the first superhero films we saw. The cool katana - type sword immediately caught our attention and we really liked the action. We've always been into action movies even as wee children, so it's no wonder Blade, too, became part of those movies for us. It's also our second favourite superhero film. However, the same cannot be said about the sequel, though it's director is far more famous. In this post we want to highlight some of the things that the first movie does right as an action flick and why the sequel fails oh so badly at it.
The first thing to take note of in any action movie is editing. The second thing is simple character narratives and story. Editing can often make or break an action sequence and fast cuts or shaky cam are unfortunately too frequently seen as something to create an exciting action scene. Instead, these choices make action out-of-focus, hard to follow and forgettable. Blade commits none of these foibles - it keeps its cuts fairly long and focused during action scenes, so it's easy to follow who is fighting who and what's going on. Nor is there any shaky cam to distract from action choreography, so the moves look pretty cool and camera follows the action. There are no five second cuts and we actually see where the action is going. The simplistic narrative and characters also help the film to go along and get us invested in the characters quite early. There is no complicated plot or story gimmicks, it's just a story with one main character, a villain and few important minor characters. Everybody gets enough focus for their screen time and relationships that build feel believable. However, it never tries to be anything more than it is - a decent action flick. We have seen so many shitty action movies, so trust us when we say that Blade is on the way better side. There are a few examples of the first and second aspects that some films utilise, but because they won't combine the two, the movies feel half-finished. Woman King is an example of the first being a problem and Raid on the second aspect. Woman King has a good story and characters but its editing during fighting sequences leaves a lot to be desired (aaaall the five second cuts you hate) whereas Raid has some of the best action and choreography we've ever seen but it is completely shallow in the story and character department thus making it very hard to care about the cool action on display. Blade combines the two aspects and that creates a solid basis for great action scenes that make you feel something because the movie didn't forget about its story and characters.
 |
| Here you can clearly see Blade grab the sword and kill the two vampires. The editing is fast but focused. |
Blade II is another matter entirely. It sucks. It's awful. The action is a blurry fast-paced CGI mess (not to mention the five second cuts) and all the characters we liked in the first film either aren't there or are really not the same characters anymore. The new characters are utterly forgettable and the plot is basically a rehash of the first one. Guillermo Del Toro is an accomplished director but hoo boy did he miss big time with this one. He clearly is not an action director but rather excels at fantasy/horror. Hence why Blade II felt like it was two different films - a Dracula type European monster film and an American superhero film. Yeah, that disparity did not end well for the finished product. The film never quite knows what it wants to be and that is a big part why the characters feel so flat. It's probably why they felt the need to bring Whistler back, since all the other characters were so one-note. His death in the first movie actually felt meaningful but here he adds absolutely nothing to anyone's character or the story. Also, don't get us started with the so-called "female character" - she is there to die and nothing more. Karen in Blade was the main reason why we rewatch the first movie occasionally - she is awesome, quick-witted and smart even though she has no clue how to fight. She also contributes greatly to the plot. The woman in Blade II is none of those things. She is one the female character archetypes we like to call "strong independent woman" - somebody who the story claims is strong but has to be rescued constantly and ultimately makes no difference in anything. Blade himself is way too subdued compared to the first movie and the cool action that he did in the first movie is nonexistent here and makes him a duller character as well.
 |
| In this scene the stunts work well but the editing is choppy and it's hard to follow the action since the camera jumps from guy to guy way too fast nor does it focus on Blade. |
Finally, the action. We ain't lying when we say Blade II has some of the shoddiest, choppiest and disappointing action there has been in an action movie. We know that the actors have prepared to do these action choreographies but the editing, lighting and cinematography makes all of that preparation useless. The action almost always happens in dark rooms, corners, alleys, caves, etc. You barely see anything and the editing makes it even worse. Every single fight sequence is cut in less than five second shots and since it's also dark it is nigh impossible to get what the hell is happening or who is fighting who. It is honestly frustrating how such cool stunts are wasted with the choppy editing and bad lighting. The god-awful CGI doesn't make it any better - it honestly sometimes looks worse than the primitive CGI in the first movie. All in all, if you are a fan of Guillermo Del Toro, we would advise you to skip this one and focus on his more refined projects. For action fans, just watch the first Blade and leave it at that. None of the sequels are worth your time.
