ROTTEN TOMATOES: Anderson and Jovovich Sign On for "Resident Evil 3"

Anderson and Jovovich Sign On for "Resident Evil 3"

by Scott Weinberg | November 08, 2005

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

The Hollywood Reporter tells us that filmmaker Paul W.S. Anderson and actress/model Milla Jovovich will be returning to the undead well once more with "Resident Evil: Afterlife," which is the third feature film to be spawned from the well-regarded video game series.

""Afterlife" continues Alice's battle with the diabolical Umbrella Corp. as she races to expose a virus that is threatening mankind with extinction before a new race of clones called the Undead finishes the job.

The film will play in the Nevada desert with the Aussie outback standing in for the American wasteland. The third film will likely to set up the fourth installment, in which the action shifts to Japan.

Paul W.S. Anderson is writing the screenplay and Milla Jovovich is expected to return as Alice."

Related Items

Movie:	Resident Evil
Celeb:	Milla Jovovich
	Paul Anderson

(1-18 of 18 posts) | Reply

Jaws2004 writes:
on Nov 08 2005 04:34 AM

Prediction: It will suck!

(Reply to this)

Spike1967 writes:
on Nov 08 2005 07:22 AM

probably will. I was disappointed by part 2.

(Reply to this)

lavatory love machine writes:
on Nov 08 2005 08:19 AM

if they would just stick to the game's storyline it would be so much better, residentevil is gothic horror, not half-ass tecno action

(Reply to this)

sweet100 writes:
on Nov 08 2005 08:38 AM

In reply to this comment (#827525)
and lots of people will think it's great.

(Reply to this)

Callpacas writes:
on Nov 08 2005 11:08 AM

i've played the games ( except for Resident Evil 4, which cannot be taken into account anyways) and i love the direction they had taken with the franchise. The campiness, and a more enjoybale storyline in the mix. You gonna admit that the 1st game got some attention cause its different..at least for the modern, revitalised console market---remember Alone in the Dark anyone ? The essence of the RE series was all action-horror and how would this translate into an movie form? Could you think of any other way translating a machinegun trotting, flamethrower weilding and---my favourite weapon the bazooka-- blasting vixen taking on zombies, mutated crows and zombie dogs??? and of course Nemesis? to the big screen? No. If you wanted 28 days, the its not Resident Evil. If you want dawn of the dead, its not resident evil. If you want a movie about a few people trapped in a mansion filled with monsters, just think how fun would it be to watch them trot around finding some stupid key to open some stupid door. And eating herbs planted around the place and picking up ammo strewn all around the place.

All and all, the film actually makes more sense than the game. This is a great and fun way to present the franchise, just as silly and campy as the game is. BTW, RE2 movie gave us a look at a very posible form of government, existing as a corporate investment with constant tracking of our very single mov, and also questioning the value of life. Such a great disguised way of bringing this into the attention of the oublic.

(Reply to this)

Lavon writes:
on Nov 08 2005 11:58 AM

I was embarrassed while watching Resident Evil 2. Embarrassed for the reputations of both the excellent franchise and the enjoyable Milla Jovovich. Man was that a bad film. The scene in which she flies through the window on a motorcycle which somehow drives up the wall is just plain awful.

(Reply to this)

lovelykeira writes:
on Nov 08 2005 01:35 PM

I liked the first one but the 2nd one was pretty gay, so hopefully they don't bring back the hack who directed it. And I'm sure Anderson will just be writing this becouse of his being busy with Castlevania, so who will be directing this installment?

(Reply to this)

SuperScarface writes:
on Nov 08 2005 01:48 PM

[b]NO![/b]
Paul W.S. Anderson is a joke... and if you like ANY of his movies, I suggest getting help.. because they are definetly not well acted, nor have a good story to back the acting up...

I don't mind Milla in it... but PLEASE! GET A DIFFERENT DIRECTOR!

(Reply to this)

SuperScarface writes:
on Nov 08 2005 01:49 PM

[b]to LovelyKeira..[/b]
I bet you Paul W.S. Anderson will direct.. and make it in about an hour.. and he's making Castlevania??? God, why does he have ot ruin every videogame?

(Reply to this)

inspector thong writes:
on Nov 08 2005 02:28 PM

In reply to this comment (#827530)
[b]Tragedy[/b]
I could not have said it better myself. Even though the first movie did not represent the coolness that was the game (creepy mansion, heart-wrenching story that was Lisa the freak, giant snake, etc.), it still succeeded at being a delightfully campy and entertaining show. I loved it, and I was anticipating the sequel so so much... then it trampled all over my hopefull little heart. It was so disappointing... so much potential wasted... And here we are with a third installment. In the desert. RE has never and never will take place in a desert! This is blasphemy! And a clone race? I weep. I weep for unreached potential, I weep for Milla, and I weep for the soul of P.W.Anderson.

(Reply to this)

245_trioxin writes:
on Nov 08 2005 02:59 PM

[b]one question[/b]
all i want to know is.....WHEN WILL WE FINALLY SEE CHRIS RENFIELD!!?!?!?!!

(Reply to this)

missinginactonboi writes:
on Nov 08 2005 03:16 PM

In reply to this comment (#827535)
[b]another question[/b]
and LEON S. KENNEDY as well as ADA WONG!!!!!!!!???????????!!!!!!!!!

(Reply to this)

renny2077 writes:
on Nov 08 2005 09:14 PM

Well, as far as the story goes in the first two movies - i liked. People taking on a corporation. Never played the games, so I don't know how close the two are related. I expected them to make RE 3, seeing the way how 2 ended. But it seems that zombies are becoming more of a backdrop rather than a focus, which kinda sucks.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing RE 3. I think Paul Anderson is way better than Uwe Boll. I'll atleast give him that.

(Reply to this)

Rock_The_Luau writes:
on Nov 08 2005 11:02 PM

In reply to this comment (#827533)
Hey, the first RE wasn't half bad. Haven't seen the 2nd, though. Plus, Anderson isn't ruining video games. His movies I can tolerate. Uwe Boll, on the other hand, not only makes some of the most horrible movies imagineable, they're based off not that great video games. Seriously, Bloodrayne? Dungeon Seige? POSTAL? AT least Paul Anderson aims high. Boll just goes for the gutter.

(Reply to this)

Darth Clint writes:
on Nov 10 2005 06:26 PM

[b]ALL R WACK[/b]
The first movies did exactly what they should; please the people who just want to see zombies heads being blown to pieces. If you're criticizing this movie, you're just critizing a genre because this was a greta zombie movie. Maybe next time you should see a romance.

(Reply to this)

dylan21484nj writes:
on Nov 10 2005 11:29 PM

In reply to this comment (#827529)
you're taking the gameplay too literally. of course if they had made a movie directly on the games, they would not have had the characters spend most of the film constantly searching for keys or eating herbs. how about developing a story (the characters trying to find a way out of the mansion, discovering the T-Virus, finding ways to kill the zombies, Wesker's betrayal, etc.) instead of putting nameless characters with big guns against zombies you can kill by simply snapping their necks? and where were the head shots? the decapitations? Sin City had more gore than both Resident Evil movies COMBINED.

and you're WRONG when you say that the first few games in the series are action-horror. first of all, ALL ZOMBIE MOVIES HAVE ACTION. does that make all of them action films? hell no. and it wasn't until Code: Veronica that they started using the Matrix-y slow-mo action, when the ol' "slow, shuffling zombies" approach started wearing off. the first three games were HORROR, not action-horror. NOWHERE in the first three games did i see anyone running along walls, shooting slow-motion bullets, and doing wire-fu.

the games aren't silly and campy. did you see Chris Redfield pulling out S.T.A.R.S. credit cards in ANY of the games? did you see any of the characters winking at the camera like it was all some big joke? yeah, the dialogue was bad, but that didn't make the games campfests like "Batman & Robin."and the movies don't make more sense than the games. if anything, the movies were dumber. why would they open The Hive not once, but TWICE when you have a computerized security system designed with the specific purpose to lock the place up when something goes horribly wrong? if the place is locked up, shouldn't they get the hint and KEEP IT LOCKED UP? and why put a giant wall around the city while letting people out after being "scanned" when there's a virus that turns humans into zombies running rampant throughout the city? won't the people who aren't infected and let out of the city go to the media and tell them about zombies and monsters running wild in the city, while Umbrella is trying to keep the zombies and monsters a secret? because of that, the bridge scene made no sense.

damn, am i glad you're not writing the RE games or movies. you have Resident Evil all wrong.

(Reply to this)

ssmithy writes:
on Nov 14 2005 06:14 AM

RE3? No thank you. I think I'l watch 28 Days instead. That movie defintely captures more of the feel of the games than the RE movies ever will.

Hats off to dylan21484nj for comparing the movies to Batman & Robin. My thoughts exactly.

(Reply to this)

scottybarkbark writes:
on Nov 15 2005 06:29 PM

i actually liked the movies ecp. apocalypse, cant wait

(Reply to this)