Comments on: Beckinsale in Underworld Rise of the Lycans

By: Rodney

Rodney — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:28:45 +0000

Its not an issue of “even if her character wasn’t around yet”

Her character wasn’t BORN yet at the time this movie takes place.

How can you hope that they would do more with Beckinsale. The previews you saw had Rhona in them. She is dressed very similar to how Beckinsale dresses in the previous films. The only footage of Kate in this movie was stock footage from the other movies which were not in the trailers.

By: Dest28

Dest28 — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:01:05 +0000

I know my question sounds stupid, but even if her character wasn’t around yet, seems like they’d try to fit her in a little more than what she was. I guess they did what they could. I did think Rhona was hot though, she did a good job… they needed someone to be the “eye candy” for the movie & she did it very well! I was as disappointed as everyone when I found out she wasn’t going to be in the movie. They tricked me though, the previews I saw had Kate in them… :(

By: Dest28

Dest28 — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 07:53:45 +0000

So does anyone know why Kate Beckinsale didn’t do the movie? Just was wondering why she didn’t take part more in this movie? Was it the director’s choice, was there not enough money for her, not enough for her character to do in the movie or something?? I really am curious if anyone knows? Thanks so much!

By: Rodney

Rodney — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 02:52:38 +0000

Well considering this storyline takes place before Selene was around, it would make sense that Beckinsale wouldn’t be in it.

I think as much as I would like to see her kickass in that outfit again, her storyline ran its course.

By: Taylor

Taylor — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 02:36:34 +0000

I really hate the idea of removing Kate Beckinsale as the main character. She was the main reason i watched these movies and many of my friends agree 100%. She was excellent at her part as well. I will still watch this movie but i doubt i will like it anywhere close as the last two.

By: Dave Lister

Dave Lister — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:21:56 +0000

Yea Kate!
I really wanted to hate these movies, I avoided them in the theater.. they looked really bad to me. Anyway very surprised at how much I really liked both of the movies, but, I remember reading not too long ago that Evolution didn’t make enough to warrant another sequel. Guess that wasn’t true, I’m glad to see this happening. Looks like it’s all about Bill Nighy and as much as I love him as an actor, I’m pretty sure he won’t look as good in vinal.

By: Paul Kelly aka "Tripp Van Easille"

Paul Kelly aka "Tripp Van Easille" — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:30:54 +0000

Any Kate is good Kate! Glad to hear the inclusion. Now if only, “Nothing but the Truth” gets a wider distribution…..

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:04:45 +0000

Likely, she was already paid to film that part, and that makes it their property to do with as they please.

She probably gets nothing out of the appearance since she was already paid for it under a different contract (for the previous movies)

But it is possible that if her contract included it she might get a royalty much like when the movie is replayed on TV etc.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:50:13 +0000

I know nothing about how the movie industry works, so forgive me if this is an ignorant question.

What does this move mean in terms of any compensation due to Beckinsale? Is she owed anything for using her likeness? What about her contract for the 2003 movie? Does that contract extend to usage of scenes from that movie in other movies? I know I have heard of some sort of “point” system in actor contracts – would that apply somehow? I am just curious how this would work. Any ideas?

By: Rodney

Rodney — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:36:46 +0000

Leave it to the girl to introduce logic to shatter your geek fantasies!