Yeah I know, I haven't seen it...I'm just not crazy about 3-D.Monterey Jack wrote:Dude, you haven't seen Toy Story 3 yet?!AndyDursin wrote: Really looking forward to Friday now...first movie since IRON MAN 2!
PREDATORS - Early Reviews Excellent
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 9742
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
I truthfully am not really into the whole CGI animated genre as far as my own personal viewing interests go. They seem to come out every other month now and they're all in 3-D, and honestly I found the last couple of Pixar movies very overrated. Cute, fun, smart, but also overlong and overpraised. So I am sure TOY STORY 3 is outstanding and all, but it's still another sequel to two movies I liked but I haven't watched again since seeing them theatrically.mkaroly wrote:I haven't seen any of the TOY STORY movies. The only animated films I've seen along those lines are FINDING NEMO and WALL-E. So I'm REALLY behind in those types of movies!
I'll be sure to give it a fair shake on video, I always do, but as a paying movie-goer I'd, yes, rather watch PREDATORS -- if it's any good
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
This review in Time Out (4 stars) seems pretty representative of the reviews I've seen so far.
This is the sequel that John McTiernan and Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 1987 original deserved, as director Nimrod Antal delivers enough hard core sci-fi, explosive action and monster mayhem to justify its belated arrival. Forget the official sequel and the lame ‘Alien vs Predator’ spin-offs, this ‘Predator’ sequel deserves one of its own.
Armed to the teeth but unknown to one another, a multiracial group of military/criminal killers (plus Topher Grace’s anomalous wimpy doctor) find themselves on a Predator hunting planet where they are the game. Faced with an evolved generation of super-Predators, Adrien Brody’s Hemingway-quoting, self-appointed leader (“There is no hunting like the hunting of men . . . “) insists that their survival depends upon pooling their own killer instincts.
http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/886 ... ators.html
This is the sequel that John McTiernan and Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 1987 original deserved, as director Nimrod Antal delivers enough hard core sci-fi, explosive action and monster mayhem to justify its belated arrival. Forget the official sequel and the lame ‘Alien vs Predator’ spin-offs, this ‘Predator’ sequel deserves one of its own.
Armed to the teeth but unknown to one another, a multiracial group of military/criminal killers (plus Topher Grace’s anomalous wimpy doctor) find themselves on a Predator hunting planet where they are the game. Faced with an evolved generation of super-Predators, Adrien Brody’s Hemingway-quoting, self-appointed leader (“There is no hunting like the hunting of men . . . “) insists that their survival depends upon pooling their own killer instincts.
http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/886 ... ators.html
Ok, this has got to be one of the most inanely stupid films that I have ever seen. It's essentially a modern day remake of the original, but without any of it's substance, what so ever. I wish that I could do a point for point comparison of this washout to the original, and why it fails at every level, but I am still too dumbfounded by the whole experience to even want to waste anymore time promoting it, negatively or not. Suffice to say, the films concept of paramilitary abductiees being taken to another planet to be hunted sounds like a plausible idea on paper, but it's execution on film is nothing more than a lazy excuse at film making. And what's up with Adrien Brody? He looks like nothing more than a pumped up version of Paul Rubins (Pee-Wee Herman) running around acting nonsensically. Then there's John Debney's score, which only seems to work when he copies Silverstri's score note for note (I may be wrong here, but it sounded, at times, that they just re-used Silvestri's score from the first film, rather than have Debney write his own music. In the end it sounded like a mash-up of styles that doesn't really work all that well. What a mess!)
Anyways, I haven't seen one bit of footage from any of the AVP films, so I can't compare them to this movie, so maybe this one actually is a good follow up the two previous PREDATOR films. Please, do tell?
Peace,
SH
Anyways, I haven't seen one bit of footage from any of the AVP films, so I can't compare them to this movie, so maybe this one actually is a good follow up the two previous PREDATOR films. Please, do tell?
Peace,
SH
If this is anything to go by I think you might get physically ill and even get violent if you see the AVP films.scorehead wrote:Ok, this has got to be one of the most inanely stupid films that I have ever seen. It's essentially a modern day remake of the original, but without any of it's substance, what so ever. I wish that I could do a point for point comparison of this washout to the original, and why it fails at every level, but I am still too dumbfounded by the whole experience to even want to waste anymore time promoting it, negatively or not. Suffice to say, the films concept of paramilitary abductiees being taken to another planet to be hunted sounds like a plausible idea on paper, but it's execution on film is nothing more than a lazy excuse at film making. And what's up with Adrien Brody? He looks like nothing more than a pumped up version of Paul Rubins (Pee-Wee Herman) running around acting nonsensically. Then there's John Debney's score, which only seems to work when he copies Silverstri's score note for note (I may be wrong here, but it sounded, at times, that they just re-used Silvestri's score from the first film, rather than have Debney write his own music. In the end it sounded like a mash-up of styles that doesn't really work all that well. What a mess!)
Anyways, I haven't seen one bit of footage from any of the AVP films, so I can't compare them to this movie, so maybe this one actually is a good follow up the two previous PREDATOR films. Please, do tell?
Peace,
SH
Far and away you're the harshest critic I've run across when it comes to this film.
Andy went to see it today so it'll be interesting to see what he thinks later on.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Hey guys, I just got back.
In short -- I liked it, with some reservations. Sadly I think this summer has been so horrible that some of the reviews are tending to overrate it, when it does have its share of problems. To sum it up:
The Good:
-It's actually a SEQUEL, not a reboot
-Debney's score is indeed written in the exact same style as Silvestri's -- for me this was not a bad thing. I would've sworn that Silvestri had scored the movie had I not known.
-Fishburne is outrageously good in basically a cameo role (would have been more fun if it wasn't given away in the ads)
-Liked the cinematography
-Didn't have jerky-herky handheld camerawork; the film felt like the original
-Liked Brody more than I thought I would
The Not So Good:
-Characters not very interesting; supporting roles bland
-Pacing issues; film "stops and starts"
-Could have used more creature action (what was up with the "predator dogs"? were they cut? they were hardly in it!)
-The "Predator Helmets" were kind of silly -- then again, the Predator itself is pretty silly, so take that for what it is
Overall, I'd give it a 2.5 stars out of 4 ordinarily -- but this summer I have to bump it up to a 3 because everything has been so lame.
It's not in a class with the original PREDATOR, but it's probably better than PREDATOR 2, and it's certainly better than AVP-REQUIEM. It's also moderately more satisfying than the first AVP, though truth be told, I thought some of the creature stuff in the climax of the first AVP was actually kind of fun. I felt the end of this movie could've used just a bit more juice.
Not great -- I wouldn't go if you didn't like the first film -- but I still was entertained by it. I think fans overall will enjoy it.
I also don't know if it's a good sign or not, but there was a pretty solid crowd on hand for the local 1:50 show...I think audiences are starved for something like this, and thankfully it delivers enough to satisfy (though it's not as great as some of the hugely overpraised reviews would lead you to believe).
In short -- I liked it, with some reservations. Sadly I think this summer has been so horrible that some of the reviews are tending to overrate it, when it does have its share of problems. To sum it up:
The Good:
-It's actually a SEQUEL, not a reboot
-Debney's score is indeed written in the exact same style as Silvestri's -- for me this was not a bad thing. I would've sworn that Silvestri had scored the movie had I not known.
-Fishburne is outrageously good in basically a cameo role (would have been more fun if it wasn't given away in the ads)
-Liked the cinematography
-Didn't have jerky-herky handheld camerawork; the film felt like the original
-Liked Brody more than I thought I would
The Not So Good:
-Characters not very interesting; supporting roles bland
-Pacing issues; film "stops and starts"
-Could have used more creature action (what was up with the "predator dogs"? were they cut? they were hardly in it!)
-The "Predator Helmets" were kind of silly -- then again, the Predator itself is pretty silly, so take that for what it is
Overall, I'd give it a 2.5 stars out of 4 ordinarily -- but this summer I have to bump it up to a 3 because everything has been so lame.
It's not in a class with the original PREDATOR, but it's probably better than PREDATOR 2, and it's certainly better than AVP-REQUIEM. It's also moderately more satisfying than the first AVP, though truth be told, I thought some of the creature stuff in the climax of the first AVP was actually kind of fun. I felt the end of this movie could've used just a bit more juice.
Not great -- I wouldn't go if you didn't like the first film -- but I still was entertained by it. I think fans overall will enjoy it.
I also don't know if it's a good sign or not, but there was a pretty solid crowd on hand for the local 1:50 show...I think audiences are starved for something like this, and thankfully it delivers enough to satisfy (though it's not as great as some of the hugely overpraised reviews would lead you to believe).
((((WARNING:SPOILERS))))
You are far kinder and forgiving than I've been, Andy. For certain, there were some pluses to be had, such as the panoramic cinematography, but I found much of the film such a thinly paled copy of the original that I have a hard time giving it any real original creative merit. Most of the films character's look and feel so close to those of the original film that I felt that they weren't just archetypes of the genre, but nothing more than unoriginal carbon copies, right down to a Blain type character with the big tree trimming minigun and Billy character who's a Yakuza gang member who also gets a shirtless standoff with a knife (in this case, it was a sword.) Popular lines like Arnold's trademark "What the hell are you" is replaced by Brody's character uttering "What the **** are you." More over, too much off the film was just regurgitated scenes from the Schwarzenegger outing, such as the traps laid out in the jungle, only to be followed by the tumble down the hill and spilling over into a lake that's filled by a waterfall. One could also argue, in a way, that the "predator dogs" represented the original film's scene of the wild pig. By the end of the film it was pretty much inevitable that the filmmakers were going to show us someone covered in mud... duh, and there it was. Also of note, I went to a midnight screening that was sold out (a good sign that this franchise has a pretty solid following). It was a pretty raucous group that was very vocal. Not a bad thing, as I think the film watching experience can sometimes be enhanced by passionate fans. One thing that I overheard, from the group of young guys seated behind me, was that they noted that the music was exactly the same from the first film. As soon as the music was audible, one said "Holy ****! That's the same exact music from the first film, right down the echoing drums." I'm sure that he was right. It was too close at times and I'm wondering if they didn't just license the score from the first film and just placed it in spots.
Okay… I'll make no apologies, this film just seems to miss the mark for me.
Best,
SH
You are far kinder and forgiving than I've been, Andy. For certain, there were some pluses to be had, such as the panoramic cinematography, but I found much of the film such a thinly paled copy of the original that I have a hard time giving it any real original creative merit. Most of the films character's look and feel so close to those of the original film that I felt that they weren't just archetypes of the genre, but nothing more than unoriginal carbon copies, right down to a Blain type character with the big tree trimming minigun and Billy character who's a Yakuza gang member who also gets a shirtless standoff with a knife (in this case, it was a sword.) Popular lines like Arnold's trademark "What the hell are you" is replaced by Brody's character uttering "What the **** are you." More over, too much off the film was just regurgitated scenes from the Schwarzenegger outing, such as the traps laid out in the jungle, only to be followed by the tumble down the hill and spilling over into a lake that's filled by a waterfall. One could also argue, in a way, that the "predator dogs" represented the original film's scene of the wild pig. By the end of the film it was pretty much inevitable that the filmmakers were going to show us someone covered in mud... duh, and there it was. Also of note, I went to a midnight screening that was sold out (a good sign that this franchise has a pretty solid following). It was a pretty raucous group that was very vocal. Not a bad thing, as I think the film watching experience can sometimes be enhanced by passionate fans. One thing that I overheard, from the group of young guys seated behind me, was that they noted that the music was exactly the same from the first film. As soon as the music was audible, one said "Holy ****! That's the same exact music from the first film, right down the echoing drums." I'm sure that he was right. It was too close at times and I'm wondering if they didn't just license the score from the first film and just placed it in spots.
Okay… I'll make no apologies, this film just seems to miss the mark for me.
Best,
SH
Last edited by scorehead on Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:25 pm, edited 5 times in total.
This is interesting - here is a scene from a documentary on the making of PREDATOR that shows the original Predator design. I'm almost sure that one of the alien creatures in the NEW film closely resembles this one.
http://kiwi.kz/watch/f1jfx23p7410
Enjoy,
SH
http://kiwi.kz/watch/f1jfx23p7410
Enjoy,
SH
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 9742
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
7.5/10
I greatly enjoyed the film, a lot more than I was anticipating. Plus, it's refreshing in this day and age to see a sci-fi movie with a minimum of CGI (surprising, with Robert "Greenscreen" Rodriguez producing and supervising the visual effects). I would have liked to have seen certain characters surviving longer, but that's a modest flaw. Even Debney's score is really good, and thankfully audible above all of the sound effects (hey, low-end piano ostinatos!
). Considering the swill we've had to put up with this summer, this is a real (if modest) winner.
I greatly enjoyed the film, a lot more than I was anticipating. Plus, it's refreshing in this day and age to see a sci-fi movie with a minimum of CGI (surprising, with Robert "Greenscreen" Rodriguez producing and supervising the visual effects). I would have liked to have seen certain characters surviving longer, but that's a modest flaw. Even Debney's score is really good, and thankfully audible above all of the sound effects (hey, low-end piano ostinatos!
). Considering the swill we've had to put up with this summer, this is a real (if modest) winner.-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
Yeah MJ I'm pretty much in line with you. The natural cinematography, and the few wide open landscape shots made me actually think about PLANET OF THE APES for a little bit -- there was no reliance on CGI.
My problem in retrospect was the pacing and the supporting characters. Couldn't have cared less about Topher Grace (that subplot had no pay off really; or it did "pay off," but not in a satisfying way) or the other supporting players. They didn't do a very good job there in that regard.
Fishburne on the other hand was just outstanding. If they do another one (and my goodness I'd expect them to with THAT ending), I would hope they'll find another veteran actor to cast who really can sink their teeth into the part the way he did
My problem in retrospect was the pacing and the supporting characters. Couldn't have cared less about Topher Grace (that subplot had no pay off really; or it did "pay off," but not in a satisfying way) or the other supporting players. They didn't do a very good job there in that regard.
Fishburne on the other hand was just outstanding. If they do another one (and my goodness I'd expect them to with THAT ending), I would hope they'll find another veteran actor to cast who really can sink their teeth into the part the way he did
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
BTW Nikki Finke puts PREDATORS' budget at just $38 million.
That is an unbelievable number for this day and age, not even a third or more less than other genre films.
They're looking at a $20+ million opening weekend, and a sure profit. If Rodriguez can pull films in on the cheap (relatively speaking) he's going to have a long run as a producer.
That is an unbelievable number for this day and age, not even a third or more less than other genre films.
They're looking at a $20+ million opening weekend, and a sure profit. If Rodriguez can pull films in on the cheap (relatively speaking) he's going to have a long run as a producer.
-
AndyDursin
- Posts: 34276
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
- Location: RI
-
Monterey Jack
- Posts: 9742
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:14 am
- Location: Walpole, MA
That's what I like about Rodriguez as a director/producer...he can make a genre flick for under $40 million that looks like it cost three times that, and that's admirable as hell in this age of wretched excess (why on earth does a Robin Hood movie have to cost $200 million?!AndyDursin wrote:BTW Nikki Finke puts PREDATORS' budget at just $38 million.
That is an unbelievable number for this day and age, not even a third or more less than other genre films.
).