Take What It For What You Will

Rating: Null/10 (18 September 2004)

First and foremost, I enjoyed Resident Evil: Apocalypse. In no way did I find it to be a masterpiece of cinema, nor does it leave an everlasting stamp on any of the genres it tries to adhere itself to. However, that being said, the film is what it was intended to be..a sequel on a somewhat grander scale, intended to be nothing more than a popcorn flick, admitted mindless fun. It can be said that this movie, and it's predecessor were made with the sole intent of capitalizing on the huge pool of the fans of the game who would flock to see it on screen and droves, and that is a fairly correct assumption. However, it does not take away from the fact that the film is entertaining nevertheless.
I've read a lot of complaints about this film on the site, and I want to see if I can address some of the main problems, and just give my thoughts, a bit of a counter to the negativity. Possible Spoilers for those who have not yet seen it.
1. There's no character development-I don't think there is really any intended development for much of the characters, outside of Alice, Jill, and perhaps the Nemesis, if you constitute back story as character development. This type of film is meant to throw disposable characters out into the mix, because half of them will be dead before the film reaches the half way point. It would be near impossible and somewhat futile to establish too much character for someone who will be picked off before that character can even become sympathetic to the audience.
2. The zombies seem less 'zombie like' than the original RE- I feel that the zombies, for the most part, appear exactly as they did in the original RE. These are supposed to be the citizens of Racoon City, who have just died, so in all reality, all you are going to get in terms of appearance is some wounds from what killed them, a pale, dead look, and the trademark gray bloodshot contacts. I've also read a lot of people's comments, saying that they seem to appear to move like the zombies in 28 Days Later. I didn't really see that myself, the only time I saw rapid movement was the result of quick cut, rough shot editing. If anything, there was more emphasis on this film to actually shoot them in slow mo, to emphasis there zombie like walk.
3. Nemeis Sucks/No Logic When He is On Screen- I'll agree that Nemesis did not come off as menacingly or as grand as was probably intended, especially near the end of the film, but in his final scenes with Alice, he is portrayed as something of a sympathetic villain, simply a failed or futile experiment. I think that is why in the final portion of the film his makeup and appearance seem less menacing, and evil, as an attempt to make him more human like, and perhaps more tragic. Also, the idea of shooting him in the head may in fact be a mute point, as Nemesis was not a zombie.
4. Where did the Lickers/Graveyard Zombies Come From-Lickers escaped when the hive was opened, and the T-Virus, being portent, was released in a gas form, permeating the soil.
All in All, I'd say take this film for what it is, a disposable, but fun addition to the Resident Evil universe. Don't scrutinize it too much, it wasn't made with an Oscar in mind, so don't think of it as such.