Critics are generally giving the vampire movie Blade II less biting reviews than they gave the original Blade. But that's not saying a whole lot. Liam Lacey in the Toronto Globe and Mail writes, for example: "Though superior to the original Blade, the superiority is mostly in the myriad ways the 'suck-head' enemies can be blown up, melted and dismembered." Noting that "it's not quite the bloodbath" that the first Blade presented, Lou Lumenick in the New York Post adds that the movie "seems mainly aimed at hard-core comic book and action fans who check their brains at the popcorn stand." Joe Morgenstern in the Wall Street Journal begins his review by calling the film "mass-market junk" and remarking: "You may wonder why I'm giving it space on the front page of this august section." But the film is receiving quite a number of enthusiastic reviews as well. Elvis Mitchell in the New York Times calls the movie "a rocking, dexterous piece of genre-busting." Roger Ebert describes it as "a really rather brilliant vomitorium of viscera." And Stephen Hunter in the Washington Post, while conceding up-front that "there is no possible adult justification for the picture," goes on to say, "It is pure pagan glee, a raptor's flesh fest, a zesty paprika of cannibal stew, stylized toward almost total abstraction, beyond describing, beyond imagining except by its makers. And that is why it's so good."