Alien Vs Predator

projectmayhem

it's gotten mixed reviews, which usually indicates the movie is either a sub-standard popcorn flick or is really good and no one "got" it.

when do we get to see it anyway?

Creature

pebble wrote:

I didn't see an 18's cert on Indiana Jones and the Raiders fo the Lost Ark, and that is a classic.

Thats because Raiders of The Lost Ark is aimed toward the family/kids market. The Alien and Predator films certainly are not. AvP is based on two higly successful and extremely violent film franchises. The over the top violence and gore isn't just a gimmick like in many films instead it really helps portray the true savagery of each species.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, any film featuring the Alien or Predator just wont work properly without the violence.

Of course I'll just have to wait till i see it for myself. I never fully judge a film until that happens.

allyourbase

How many people here have actually seen it? I thought it was great, and it had plenty of violence for me. maybe I am old fashioned. The ending leaves pelnty of room for some great sequels too! can someone quantify what they really expect, then after seeing it define why they were disappointed instead of just conjecture? I don't want to give away anything, but there really are some great scenes, and I'd like to know what was so bad about it. I plan to go see it again.

I am really looking forward to Resident Evil 2 as well...

allyourbase

projectmayhem wrote:

it's gotten mixed reviews, which usually indicates the movie is either a sub-standard popcorn flick or is really good and no one "got" it.

when do we get to see it anyway?

I think the reviewers (ebert and roper specifically) pick stuff apart too much. I usually love movies they hate. for some reason I never saw any reviews of it before I went to see it. I wish I had never gone to see alien resurection though, It was like that 2nd Highlander movie, I just wanted it to go away!

ykt0di9url7bc3

Venom wrote:

The PG 13 cert has no effect on this movie. More gore would would not have made AvP any better a film. If your a fan of the original Alien and Preditor movies or the comics you will enjoy AvP. While its not the best in the Alien and Preditor movies its much better than Alien 4

a cert doesnt make a film, I dont see much difference between the violence of the first Alien film and AvP...so whats the big deal on everybody coming down on that...are we hoping for some tits or interbreeding... or should we be waiting for people with entrails in their own hands (if you think its so cool watch a few Zombie B-movies and you'll see it adds little to a film if all you remember is some dude getting ripped slowly apart)

I have to say that I really enjoyed the film, the special effects weren't all cgi which made for some amazing sequences (proper modeling and old skool sfx done really well)...okay so there was no real new effects used and the plot/script wasnt ground breaking but what can do we expect from an established genre without diluting the whole expierence...

The Alien versus Predator film gives exactly what means... 2 species kicking the **** out of each other while us human folk get caught along for the ride...like the other films, its a simple story that anyone can follow and has plenty of action...


Hopefully the series can expand and we may see grow to the likes of Alien 3

Agreed. How anyone could possibly claim Resurrection is superior to Alien3 without either 1) be lying or 2) being insane is beyond me. Alien 3 - particularly the special edition form - is a vastly superior to Alien: Resurrection. Alien 3 had all the pathos and bleak outlook that was always constant in the alien universe. Ripley's character was, much like the prisoners, condemned already and her ultimate sacrifice made sense. There are some gorgeous shots, with great use of Fincher's trademark ability with lighting. It might be a bit slow for those viewers with the attention span of a gnat, but there's some real beauty in here admidst its negatives.

Bingo...*
What i especially like about Alien 3 was how it fit so well into the series

Alien 1 - One ship meets one alien...Our hero marginally wins
Alien 2 - Our hero and Marines go after the Planet of Aliens...the hero kicks arse
Alien 3 - Our hero + some convicts with no weapons meets one Alien...

Throw in some good subplots with the company and Alien 3 really crowns it all

Alien 4 was a cash in action film that tried hard to add some plot dimension which back fired... I dont consider Alien 4 to be associated with the series at all...

*ioxy karma++

John

I think of Alien Ressurection as a What If? scenario (like the What If? Marvel Comics), not as a part of the story.

Has anyone else hear heard rumours of a fifth Alien film? I heard a few months ago that if AvP was a success that there'd be a fifth Alien movie. Sounds bad except that apparently Ridley Scott was interested in directing.

BlitzKrieg

rumour was (before avp went into production) that ridley scott would direct and james cameron would write the script. But Cameron said he wouldnt do it if they made avp. they made avp so nobody knows whats happening now...

Venom

BlitzKrieg wrote:

rumour was (before avp went into production) that ridley scott would direct and james cameron would write the script. But Cameron said he wouldnt do it if they made avp. they made avp so nobody knows whats happening now...

That was just one variation of the alien 5 movie rumour tho. I remember reading somewhere that he didnt give a monkies about AvP but point blank refused to have anything to do with Alien 5 is Ripley was in it as he hates what Weaver has done with the franchise.

Creature

I don't want an over the top B-movie zombie film style gore fest. I just don't want the camera to turn and show something else when an alien plants its second mouth into someone head or when a predator blasts someone's chest apart with an energy cannon....

If this film can deliver that to me then I'll be happy. However somehow I doubt it will given its rating.

Feel free to correct me though...

allyourbase

One of the things that makes it interesting is that in the timelien the AVP would almost certainly have to have occured before the first Alien movie and could have occured before or after Predator 1 and 2. With the ending of AVP, there are several possible sequels imaginiable. Alien 1,2 and 3 and Ressurection occured in sequence, as did predator 1 and 2, but this film has elements that predate both and could lead to the logical reason for the first Alien movie from the standpoint of evidence that lead "the company" (not Umbrella Inc.) to cause the Nostromo to land on the first alien planet.

Rew

allyourbase wrote:

One of the things that makes it interesting is that in the timelien the AVP would almost certainly have to have occured before the first Alien movie and could have occured before or after Predator 1 and 2. With the ending of AVP, there are several possible sequels imaginiable. Alien 1,2 and 3 and Ressurection occured in sequence, as did predator 1 and 2, but this film has elements that predate both and could lead to the logical reason for the first Alien movie from the standpoint of evidence that lead "the company" (not Umbrella Inc.) to cause the Nostromo to land on the first alien planet.

Its set in the very near future (I think after Pred 1 and 2). There is very little advanced technology.

The stary of the moviie is very similar to the start of Jurasic Park for some reason!!

What years were Pred 1 and 2 set?

BlitzKrieg

pred 1 was vietnam wasnt it? or at least columbia?

predator 2 was 1997.

ixoy

Rew wrote:

What years were Pred 1 and 2 set?

They were contemporary for their time right? So 1987 and 1990. The previous Predator movies had the predators coming to earth to hunt, so earth never influenced their policy in any sense.
The obivous mythos here is the inclusion of Charles Bishop Weyland, who is - presumably - one founder of Weyland-Yutani a.k.a. The Company from the Alien movies. I haven't seen AvsP but the actions here could dictate company policy. However, I doubt this movie can actual have given them a headsup on the beacon the Nostromo locks onto in Alien. That's not known. All it could do is given them some forewarning, although the dialog in the Alien movies suggest they know nothing really about the alien spieces. Basically, I don't expect AvsP to tie-in really well with the established mythology which, given the ever-shifting aspect of the alien in the original Alien trilogy (there are only 3), isn't too much of a problem.

BlitzKrieg

predator 2 was set in la in 1997 (the near future when the film went out) and the city was suppose to have collapsed into a gang war and the police were given the rights to use extreme force.


the only link i could see the whole alien mythos and avp hooking up would be with ash in alien 1 when he explians his orders to ripley there is a sort of hint the company knew the general makeup of alien biology and behaviour...but was very limited.

the film i know has a thing like ending and has a similar plot development to the end of the original avp comic

Zoton

If AvP is set a few years into the future and Charles Bishop Weland is alive, how could he still be alive to show up at the end of alien 3, many years ahead?

Kalikat

AvP has kinda established its own canon by intimating that the Weyland at the end of Alien 3 was actually another android. I think Lance Henrikson states that it *is* the real Weyland on the A3 commentary, but it's not inconcievable, really - the company could have been trying to use a familiar friendly face to coax Ripley at the end of A3...

Rew

Zoton wrote:

If AvP is set a few years into the future and Charles Bishop Weland is alive, how could he still be alive to show up at the end of alien 3, many years ahead?

Its actually set in the begining of October 2004. The movie generally takes alot of liberties with establised facts. They change the gestation of a chest buster to minutes instead of hours which is a bit silly. They pull away jsut as the chest busters come out as well (I assume to get the PG13 cert). Fight sceans between the Aliens and the Preds are ok but nothing particularly special (plenty of acid blood and glowing green blood). Ill have to think about it a bit more before I make any major judgements.

dubhthach

basquille wrote:

I quite liked Alien 3! It could have been better if David Fincher had more of a say in where the film was going.

Alien 4 (Resurrection) was truly awful though!

The special edition version of Alien3 is awhole better film, i bought the alien quadriolgy dvd set. Alien3 has over half an hour of cut footage put back into it. Makes for awhole better film, still david fincher didn't do the new edit but he gave his blessing, he's obviously still seriously pissed by Fox stepping in and taking over the editing process (he left because of it)

Rew

Iv made my mind up, the movie is ****, thats about all you can say about it. They rip opff elements from the other Alien movies as well down to the strong female lead kickin Alien ass. It could have been so much better. The end is TERRIBLE! I was sitting there waiting for it to get good and then its over...

Cabaal

Just saw AVP tonight for those that don't know its set in 2004
Wasn't a bad film some nice action sequences I have to say and it really shows how smart the Aliens are.
All in all not to bad, though I would have moved some bits here and there
Over all it could have been much much worse

Rew

Cabaal wrote:

Just saw AVP tonight for those that don't know its set in 2004
Wasn't a bad film some nice action sequences I have to say and it really shows how smart the Aliens are.
All in all not to bad, though I would have moved some bits here and there
Over all it could have been much much worse

Its like watching all the other movies edited together... nothing new at all.

allyourbase

Zoton wrote:

If AvP is set a few years into the future and Charles Bishop Weland is alive, how could he still be alive to show up at the end of alien 3, many years ahead?

I think this is a great question (only because I know the answer to it). Weland is alive in AVP (obviously) and is killed by an angry predator. In Aliens 2, he appears but he is a robot (like ash was in the first alien movie). Technically he is still alive in alien 3 in the beginning when the ship has trouble and crashes on the prison planet. So he appears in the future as a robot, probably created in the likeness of the founder of the company so many years ago who died on the antarctic alien island.

allyourbase

OK, I have been thinking about this ( Alien Resurrection )movie more and more and I didn't like it and actually found it disgusting, which is no usual for me as I am not really squeamish. I needed to hash out what I liked and didn't like....

What I liked was the 3 aliens in the chamber that finally took that scientist guy who kept torturing them... they seemed to have a discussion over which one of them was going to be killed to spill enough acid blood to escape thier chamber. Also, I liked the line Winona Ryder used when she found out where the lead bad guy was and she said on the intercom "all aliens please proceed to deck three" to presumably intercept him. I also liked the idea they used to kell that bastard child alien thing by having it's guts sucked out as the ship entered the earths atmosphere.

What I hated was the CGI alien effect that was so fake that it blew me away, the Winona Ryder character that seemed completely out of place, the wacky freaky half human half alien creature (what was the whole point of that anyway? god it was gross and pointless and took the alien story as a whole nowhere!!) The whole idea of a cloned riply with many other botched clones of her in storage or test tubes -- sick!!! it really took away from the alien story as a whole, and I have no idea who could have let this idea get to production.

Other thoughts I can;t understand why they couldnt have worked this angle and had a super alien for the war department that was really mean instead of a sicko pasty skinned freak alien (what was he supposed to be? an abassador between our two species so we could have peace?? gak!!!)

I was sickened by this film (the only thing worse I have seen is event horizon, which was horribly horribly awful). What makes it worse is there are a few moments that I liked it that gave me a glimmer of hope when I first saw it, but that hope was stolen from me!

allyourbase

I think AVP had enough of what I expected to make it a good movie, after all of the horrid disappointments I have seen, I just wanted something that was halfway decent and didn't have crazy nonsense in it, and AVP fit the bill, the said they were going to have aliens and preadators fighting and by god, that's what they had. Pickings have been so bleak, I have a hard time finding fault with anything in AVP since so many other movies were awful the past several years (ok, I am not into romances or comedies, so my choices are a little limited).

Anyway. I think AVP is a great lead in to Alien 1, and they could have at least 1 movie to tie the two together. since in AVP the

queen is sent to the bottom of the ocean, she is presumably not dead, since she was frozen for about a hundred years pior to that when she was awoken at the beginning of AVP, so if she was ever recoverd by Weland industries, she could be the thing that gave the company the clue to alien life and biology, and they could have a great movie of aliens on earth munching on humans

In addition, (and I hope they don;t work this angle) the monster that was strapped in the seat of the ship on the planet in the first alien movie was not an alien, but yet another species that had fallen prey to the aliens. In fact, it kind of looked like a predator (i know that was not the intent, but it kind of did).

By the way: in alien ressurection, it was ironic that in the end the science experiment ship crashed into the earth, causing an explosion that probably would have killed more people than if the aliens got loose on the planet, becuase at least they can be killed with conventional weapons.

Zoton

allyourbase wrote:

I think this is a great question (only because I know the answer to it). Weland is alive in AVP (obviously) and is killed by an angry predator. In Aliens 2, he appears but he is a robot (like ash was in the first alien movie). Technically he is still alive in alien 3 in the beginning when the ship has trouble and crashes on the prison planet. So he appears in the future as a robot, probably created in the likeness of the founder of the company so many years ago who died on the antarctic alien island.

Yeah but he tells Ripley that he's not an android, but the real human basis for the bishop android.

BlitzKrieg

allyourbase wrote:

Anyway. I think AVP is a great lead in to Alien 1, and they could have at least 1 movie to tie the two together. since in AVP the

queen is sent to the bottom of the ocean, she is presumably not dead, since she was frozen for about a hundred years pior to that when she was awoken at the beginning of AVP, so if she was ever recoverd by Weland industries, she could be the thing that gave the company the clue to alien life and biology, and they could have a great movie of aliens on earth munching on humans

In addition, (and I hope they don;t work this angle) the monster that was strapped in the seat of the ship on the planet in the first alien movie was not an alien, but yet another species that had fallen prey to the aliens. In fact, it kind of looked like a predator (i know that was not the intent, but it kind of did).

By the way: in alien ressurection, it was ironic that in the end the science experiment ship crashed into the earth, causing an explosion that probably would have killed more people than if the aliens got loose on the planet, becuase at least they can be killed with conventional weapons.

firstly the whole finding the alien queen on planet earth idea wouldnt really work as a prologue to alien because they state about 10 times in the film that they have NO IDEA! on what makes the alien ticks and they can only make assumptions. Having a Queen is a even bigger no no, because they dont have any idea on the queen until halfway through the second film (see special edition ripley and bishop talking about the alien eggs) Now the closest they have come to tieing the two films together would be explaining why the company is so desperate to bring the alien back alive in alien because they have fragmented info from all the way back to 2004 of a incident involving said creatures causing havoc. Info is very shaky and unsure therefore the android *ash* is sent to study and ensure safety of creature.

On the *pilot* from alien 1 *slaps* its obvious he is a victim to the aliens as the cause of death as said by dallas is "Something exploding from inside him" we learn 30 minutes later what that something is. It aint a predator because firstly he is far too big (this thing is the hieght of at least 3 humans) and his face is designed completely different it had that long elephant like nose. So if any film makers decide to take that angle they will be getting a slap from me.


on alien 4, the script had a bit where ripley asked ryder to ram the ship somewhere unihabited, but was cut from the final piece. So i assume its in the box set or lazy film making.

LegacyUser

Rew wrote:

Its like watching all the other movies edited together... nothing new at all.

well sort off, just finished watchin it myself and its not crap but... lets face it there was only one great film in the franchise and thats aliens, nothins gonna compare no matter how good, game over man, game over ,

alien was ok, as were 3 & resurrection, but there is only one you could honestly sit down and watch twice in a row, or three times and thats aliens, cause its a real kick ass flick !!!

the ending was silly tho, was that supposed to be an alien/predator highbred bustin out, oh we are sooo all dead, animal brutality and killing instinct of alien combined with way out intelligence of predator ?, game over man game over

Furp

Havn't seen the film yet but I just got this bit of info from my weekly www.cinefex.com newletter.

Alien Vs. Predator: On-line horror magazine Bloody-Disgusting.com reports, in an interview here with Alien Vs. Predator director Paul W.S. Anderson, that Twentieth Century Fox enforced a PG-13 certificate on the film three weeks prior to its release. Anderson is quoted, "All of the best scenes were cut," and states that the film was conceived and shot with the intention of an R-rating, hence the abbreviated running time."

So maybe we will get to see a directors cut at some point, I'd also like to say with regards to ratings, that a rating does not just define the amount of gore but if a movie was shot with an R (18) rating in mind and is then editing down to a PG-13 rating I'd say that a lot of stuff has to go.

I can't access the interview myself as I'm in work and that site is blocked but I will be taking a look later on.

bringitdown

I saw it, the premise was good Aliens fighting Predators, a kind of prequel to the Alien movies and sequel to the Predator movies however the following is my opinion:

The human interest in the story was almost pointless, their lines rehashes of elements of Arnie's and Sigourney's in the other films.

The script sucked ass, Weylands fate left huge holes in the preceding Alien films.

Nowhere near enough AVP combat - thats what I wanted to see, Predators fighting Aliens and I got (IMHO) 1.5 'fight/combat' scenes.

As an Alien fan who knows that there can be some intelligence in horror/scifi films (in terms of script, plot, direction etc etc) this is a terrible, terrible, movie. Whether as a stand-alone film and when taken in the context of the preceding films.

As a leave-brain-at-the-door-I-wanna-see-any-movie-fan this is no worse than all the other piddle and crap that Hollywood pisses on us every year and we still lap it up.

Pugsley

bananayoghurt wrote:

the ending was silly tho, was that supposed to be an alien/predator highbred bustin out, oh we are sooo all dead, animal brutality and killing instinct of alien combined with way out intelligence of predator ?, game over man game over

Aye I hope we get to see the Predalien inaction sometime, look at how powerful an alien is compared to its usual perant, a human, it cuts lumps out of them, not look at how many lumps a pred could cut out of a human, add that strength to the alien, and you have one kick a** alien.

As for 'how was weyland in alien3 if they kileld him in AvP', well how could he be in it anyway? the Bishop model was based upon Weyland, Ripley was asleep between 2 and 3 for 50 odd years, how could Weyland not have aged in them 50 years? unless he spent the whole time asleep, which I rather doubt, so he must have been an Android regardless wether or not they killed him in AvP

Furp

From an interview with the director Paul Anderson, discussing being forced to put a PG-13 rating on the film three weeks before release! with cut a lot of scenes short and removed a whole subplot, also that there will be a directors cut DVD.

Interview is here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370263/board/flat/11022775%5B/

Extract:

When Anderson and the effects guys approached the tables, they were smirking with each other. The first subject that came up, no thanks to me, was the length and PG-13 rating.

So here it is, from the horses mouth.

About the studio's cutting of the film, which he had no control over, he said, and I quote, "All of the best scenes were cut." Anderson was obviously very annoyed at the way the film was released. However, this was not purely because of the PG-13 limitation, which incidentally, the studio enforced THREE WEEKS before the release date! It was always going to be R until then. Part of the reason for the cutting was that some of the effects were not ready by the time the release date came around. The effects team had very little time to do anything.

As far as the content that was cut, apparently we see all those who die, die on screen, but he also said that there is a sub-plot that we will have to wait for on DVD. Yes there will be an R-rated Director's cut DVD although they don't know the release date yet.

Without saying anything that could dig his own grave, Anderson tactfully pinned the fault of the poor quality of the film on the studio's cut. We all know that the script and performances was not quite up to par either, but then it was time for me to ask my first question.

Venom

Furp wrote:

From an interview with the director Paul Anderson, discussing being forced to put a PG-13 rating on the film three weeks before release! with cut a lot of scenes short and removed a whole subplot, also that there will be a directors cut DVD.

Interview is here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370263/board/flat/11022775%5B/

Extract:

Thats total BS on Andersons part. AvP was known to be a PG rated movie almost from day one. This was one of the main reasions that so many people where saying that AvP would suck. Well that and it having Paul **** Stain Anderson as a director

Rew

Anderson stopped me before I could continue and said due to the "mangling" of the film, there was a lot left out. I asked, "Does that include the acceleration of the alien life cycle or was that just conveniant."

Whoops, I had hit a nerve. He shook his head. "No, no, the machine that the Predators built to house the Queen pumps her full of hormones that accelerate the birth of the creatures. If we'd seen the REAL film, we'd know that."

This makes a bit more sense now...

koneko

Not strictly related to the film, but there's talk of another Alien film. Signourney Weaver hasn't said no, and has expressed interest in "exploring Ripley's dark side":

Hollywood superstar Sigourney Weaver has hinted she may consider starring in another Alien sequel - to explore character Ellen Ripley's dark side. The statuesque actress - who was nominated an Oscar for her performance in first sequel Aliens - wants the franchise to return to its small beginnings by focusing on the psychology of gun-totting Ripley. Sigourney says, "I always said to Tom Rothman, who runs Fox, that I thought it would be interesting to do a small, spooky movie, more like the first one; a psychological thriller that could take Ripley to whatever the next stage may be. Which side would win out, the Jekyll or the Hyde?"
source: IMDB

bus77

koneko wrote:

Not strictly related to the film, but there's talk of another Alien film. Signourney Weaver hasn't said no, and has expressed interest in "exploring Ripley's dark side"

nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!

Venom

koneko wrote:

Not strictly related to the film, but there's talk of another Alien film. Signourney Weaver hasn't said no, and has expressed interest in "exploring Ripley's dark side":

Hollywood superstar Sigourney Weaver has hinted she may consider starring in another Alien sequel - to explore character Ellen Ripley's dark side. The statuesque actress - who was nominated an Oscar for her performance in first sequel Aliens - wants the franchise to return to its small beginnings by focusing on the psychology of gun-totting Ripley. Sigourney says, "I always said to Tom Rothman, who runs Fox, that I thought it would be interesting to do a small, spooky movie, more like the first one; a psychological thriller that could take Ripley to whatever the next stage may be. Which side would win out, the Jekyll or the Hyde?"
source: IMDB

Both Ridley Scott and James Cameron have stated that they will have nothing to do with a new Alien movie if Weaver is involved in it. Scott is particular pissed off with what she has done with the Alien franchise.

ixoy

Venom wrote:

Both Ridley Scott and James Cameron have stated that they will have nothing to do with a new Alien movie if Weaver is involved in it. Scott is particular pissed off with what she has done with the Alien franchise.

Interesting. Did they have something against Alien3 which, thematically, fits in with the series? Or, as I suspect, did they dislike the Installment We Dare Not Speak Of and how it vomited on the franchise? Have they ever stated anything in particular or is this all hearsay?

Slutmonkey57b

Alien 3 & 4 were vanity projects for Weaver. Some moron decided that the reason Aliens was so popular was that Ripley is teh sh!t, when as we all know the reason is that Aliens Vs Marines and cool lines is the reason it ruled. Ripley should have been killed off at the start of Alien 3, not Hicks.

AvP needed to be all-out alien massacre. PG ratings should never have come into it.

OY

All of this talk just proves that hollywood just ruins franchises. When a movie rocks and makes an impact the first thing that happens is the dollar signs flash and before you know it we are looking at Jaws 5 on late night tv.

What has happened to the Alien series is so sad cause it is such a good idea and could have become so much. I remember when i saw the first two i got so excited about the direction the movies were taking. I forsaw when the aliens reached Earth and what was in my head was too amazing a concept to write down.

Same goes for Predator as i personally do not rate P2 as a good movie.

All of this just makes me sad!
And a little angry! :mad:

Boo!

Batbat

ixoy wrote:

Interesting. Did they have something against Alien3 which, thematically, fits in with the series? Or, as I suspect, did they dislike the Installment We Dare Not Speak Of and how it vomited on the franchise? Have they ever stated anything in particular or is this all hearsay?

Alien 3 was pure garbage, 4 was better but had that stupid cute alien in it, well ive seen AvP and I must say i was very supprised, my expectations were very low, and it was quite good, but disjointed, I really got the feeling that it was cut to pieces and badly edited, but not as bad as i had thought, nowhere near as bad as 3

kaimera

ok, I was all set to see AvP friday 13th but Charley hit florida

so I saw it Aug 14th.

I knew it was a pg13 going into it and was sorely disappointed.

but

after watching the movie
[dispite missing the first 10 mins because some black ****ers thought everybody else in the damn cinema would fine them funny and ****. cops threw them out ]

I liked it. I was saying to my g/f they had to bring out a director's ed dvd. I mean it's Aliens & Predator combined and it's a damn pg13 ffs.

not scary, I found the AvP fight scenes very good but needed more, more gore obviously. some good humour I found. [then I tend to laugh at a lot of sick **** ]

disappointed no predalien in this one.

ending caught me off guard given I knew what had happened but there was no sign of anything weird after that.

as for who would win a battle: the alien or the predator?

predator...that queen wasn't going anywhere at the end

worth seeing if you dont exect too much. Dont knock it before you see it tho.
cant wait for the dvd.

chewy

no predalien in avp is that not the point of the film

kaimera

no.
see the film and you'll understand.

mang87

I just saw this film. I have to say, after all the bad reviews and loyal fans ripping the s h out of it, I was expecting it to be completely useless. But I like this film. It wasn't the seething horror story fans/critics/nit-pickers were expecting, it was an actiong pop corn flick, which is exactly what I was looking for, forget this horror nonsense, I want to see aliens and preds beating the crap out of each other. And that they did :cool:

I liked the ending, it leaves room for a sequal:

PRED-ALIEN!! WOOT!! \o/

also, alien 3 was good you hoes :mad:
Ressurection did suck bit time though

CyberGhost

on word: sucked!

hollywood is getting to greedy grabbing people's money PG13? for Aliens and Predators? damn!

such a franchise and such a sucky director!

slow motion scenese sucked!

the movie was like a game, very predictible, and very progressive like

is it me, or there hasn't been a good scifi movie in a loooong time?

projectmayhem

anderson seems to be pulling the "it's their fault" line, effectively saying what fincher would have said if fincher bothered to say anything about alien3. he had spoken quite openly about the coolness of avp months before it's release, so maybe an r-rated directors cut dvd will be good, we'll just have to wait and see.

BlitzKrieg

I finally got to see it...


Just a few things i found funny.

The Predators were pussies and it made me laugh when one alien kicks both their asses. It was *cute* how each predator had their own weapon, One Predator always had the spear and he threw it. Another always used the net. And finally the main one threw those discs everywhere (the original disc looked cooler!)

Every Alien film has its own unique feel. This one is no different sadly its not the sort of feeling you want in the alien film because it was closer to Jurassic Park then to any of the other alien films that annoyed me. One feature they kept from the other alien films (which is very minor but made me happy) is that in each alien film a certain way to attack is always the most prominant. For example in Aliens it was the tail piercing Bishop. In Alien 3 it was the fast claw attacks and grabs. In the original it was the inner mouth attack. Finally in Resurrection it was those traps and spit attacks.

In this one though...The most prominant attack by the aliens in my view seemed to be the b*tch slap by the tail. Every fight the alien B*tch slaps the Predator with its tail and then attacks. Even the Queen does it??? Man that is stupid.


Overall a fan is deeply disapointed. But a general movie goer enjoyed it enough. I'm glad the Queen was a big role in it. Queen is the coolest!

blobert

It's really awful, I wouldn't get too excited about it. Such a shame, but then with these "VS" films you can't expect much. Jason VS. Freddy was never going to win any Oscars was it?

BrookieD

just watching this filem now and i must say it sucks big, the really stupid thing is the camera shakes for every step the Predetor takes, just to push home how big it must be, also the preds have a stupid lion type roar, where did that come from, ????

Crap do not wast your money on this

Batbat

BrookieD wrote:

just watching this filem now and i must say it sucks big, the really stupid thing is the camera shakes for every step the Predetor takes, just to push home how big it must be, also the preds have a stupid lion type roar, where did that come from, ????

Crap do not wast your money on this

its not that bad, its not a classic but not as bad as it could have been, I think people have been building up their expectations too much for this one, considering the director