"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine"
Subscribe To Weekly Newsletter!

ALIEN VS PREDATOR
by Peter Sobczynski

August13, 2004

1/2 (out of 4 stars)

FILM CREDITS: Written and directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. Starring Sanaa Lathan, Raoul Bova, Lance Henriksen and Ewen Bremner. PG-13

Ever since an in-joke reference in "Predator 2", followed by a best-selling comic book and video game, fanboys all over the world have been eagerly anticipating a film that would feature two hugely popular movie monsters-the Alien and the Predator-whomping the crap out of each other in the monster mash to end all monster mashes. Through nearly fifteen years of rumors and false starts, I am sure that those fans have played out in their minds how they envisioned such a film but I suspect that none of them came up with something as lackluster as "Alien Vs. Predator", a franchise killer of a sequel that is so draggy and lifeless that the biggest single reaction I detected during the fan-heavy midnight screening I attended (since 20th Century Fox lacked the nerve to let critics anywhere near it ahead of time) was the moment when an audience member noisily broke wind. Some might have said he was being gross-I prefer to think he was just being honest.

When a film attempts to combine two separate franchises into one story, it usually means that each series has run out of gas on their own and the hope is that by tossing in a new-but-familiar element, the filmmakers can get a much-needed creative jump-start. Although such films rarely have any artistic merit, they can occasionally be fun if they are made with the right spirit. Last year’s "Freddy vs. Jason", whose success no doubt was the kicker that finally got "AvP" off the ground, was a load but it had a fun, junky spirit-it knew that it was a load and had fun with itself-that was irresistible for horror buffs. That silly spirit is utterly lacking in "AvP"; it is a crappy rip-off that is under the delusions that it is somehow a worthy successor to the "Alien" and "Predator" films.

Set in the present day, the film follows an expedition-including a spunky female guide (Sanaa Lathan), an Italian archaeologist (Raoul Bova), a wacky Brit (Ewen Bremner) and the rich guy funding the project (Lance Henriksen, playing his third and least effective role in an "Alien" film) and a bunch of anonymous dopes whose low billing all but ensures their gory demises-to Antarctica to uncover a pyramid buried hundreds of feet below the ice. Before long, all of them are trapped in the structure and discover that it is really a training ground for future Predators (I assume that if you have read this far, you need no further explanation as to what Aliens and Predators are); inside the structure is an Alien Queen and every 100 years, when her eggs are ready to hatch, the Predators come down and hunt them as an exercise.

The greatest metaphorical movie monsters of their respective time periods (the Alien representing fears of the sexual revolution of the 1970’s and the Predator symbolizing the might-makes-right military mindset of the Reagan era) battling for supremacy sounds, at least on the surface, like a great idea for a movie-one that could inspire grad students and gorehounds in equal measure. Perhaps if they had hired someone as ingenious as those who handled the previous "Alien" films (Ridley Scott, James Cameron, David Fincher and Jean-Pierre Jeunet) or as technically proficient as the "Predator" helmers (John McTiernan and Stephen Hopkins) to direct, it might have had a chance. However, the keys to the picture were inexplicably turned over to Paul W.S. Anderson, the man responsible for such "classics" as "Mortal Kombat", "Event Horizon" and "Soldier". (He did do the trash-classic "Resident Evil", to give him some credit.) Although he professes in the press kit to be an enormous fan of both the "Alien" and "Predator" films, he has such a fumbling touch with the proceedings here that it feels as if he had never actually seen any of them before. Instead of expanding on the ideas that had been laid down in the previous "Alien" films (as the earlier directors did), Anderson simply repeats things that worked before on the assumption that they will work again.

An example. One of the striking things about "Alien" (and "Predator", now that I think about it") was the way that it was slow to reveal itself-the monster didn’t get loose on the ship until the film was nearly halfway finished-only to ramp up the tension immeasurably in the second half. Anderson attempts the same sort of build-up here-it takes nearly 30 minutes for an Alien or a Predator to make a significant appearance and maybe another half-hour to start fighting each other in earnest-but this is the wrong film for that approach.; a film titled "Alien Vs. Predator", you want to see both of them early on, preferably inflicting heavy damage on each other as soon as possible. (Personally, my ideal "AvP" movie would have been designed along the lines of one of those old Disney True-Life nature films that would simply feature the two species hunting each other with nary a human in sight.)

Other times, he is just content to steal things from the previous films either note-for-note (the famously deleted "cocoon" scene from the original is repeated here nearly verbatim) or by adding lame attempts at humor (instead of a cat jumping out at an inopportune time, we get a penguin) or things designed to make it seem "cooler" to the younger kids (such as a face-hugger attack that features moves right out of "The Matrix"). This laziness and disinterest is palpable in every scene of the film-even when the creatures make their first appearances, the human characters (who, of course, have never seen them before) never give even a moment’s hesitation to contemplate the two heretofore unknown alien species duking it out right in front of them.

"Alien Vs. Predator" is a real mess-it never works on its own terms for a second and it is not only unworthy to follow in the footsteps of the "Alien" films (for my money, the greatest of all the sci-fi film franchises-yes, "Alien Resurrection" included) but it even fails to live up to the less-than-great name of the "Predator" films. Utterly bereft of thrills, suspense or even moments of stomach-churning repulsiveness, it plods along for a disjointed 87 minutes until it finally concludes and disgorges its audiences, now unspeakably depressed that their dream film has sunk to the depths of such disappointments as "The Phantom Menace" or the last couple of "Batman" films, out into the street to wonder how it could have gone so wrong. The best thing that can be said about "Alien Vs. Predator" is that it is so instantly forgettable that it will evaporate from memory so quickly that it will seem as if it never existed so that fans can once again dream about their ideal version of the film.

-- PETER SOBCZYNSKI

Copyright © 2004 Peter Sobczynski
All rights reserved.
Used with permission
Peter's Archives

While the views expressed by Peter Sobczynski do not necessarily reflect the views of Criticdoctor.com, the Critic Doctor will occasionally examine Mr. Sobczynski's film reviews to bring forth an honest examination of those views expressed.