Subscribers Only Content Area

Home

New Movies

All Movies

New Videos

All Videos

DVD

Search

(About Our Ads) "ALIEN VS. PREDATOR" (2004) (Sanaa Lathan, Raoul Bova) (PG-13) If you've come from our parental review of this film and wish to return to it, simply click on your browser's BACK button. Otherwise, use the following link to read our complete Parental Review of this film. QUICK TAKE: Horror/Sci-Fi: An archaeological expedition in Antarctica leads to the discovery of extraterrestrial beings that wish to kill each other and the humans. PLOT: It's the fall of 2004 and satellites owned by Charles Bishop Weyland (LANCE HENRIKSEN) have not only detected a heat source deep in Antarctica, but also a massive pyramid buried 2,000 feet below an old whaling station that was mysteriously abandoned one-hundred years earlier. Showing signs of various ancient cultural influences, the site would obviously be quite the archaeological find. Accordingly, Weyland has sent his right-hand man, Maxwell Stafford (COLIN SALMON), to assemble a team of experts to help him claim it before anyone else does. Among those added to the team is Alexa Woods (SANAA LATHAN) who's initially reluctant to be the leader; chemical engineer Graeme Miller (EWEN BREMNER); archaeologists Sebastian De Rosa (RAOUL BOVA) and Thomas Parks (SAM TROUGHTON); and Rusten Quinn (CARSTEN NORGAARD) who's prepared to use his crew to drill down to the pyramid. When they arrive at the isolated location, however, they find that a thirty-degree tunnel has suddenly and mysteriously been created from the surface down to the pyramid. After the crew gets to the bottom, they not only find the buried structure, but also that an ancient ritual is going to be reenacted where extraterrestrial predators plan on hunting a more primitive but equally deadly alien species. With the queen thawed out and producing eggs, the humans soon learn that they're going to be the hosts for the aliens that will then hatch from their bodies. From that point on, and as the pyramid repeatedly reconfigures itself every ten minutes, the humans do what they can to avoid being killed by the predators and/or aliens. OUR TAKE: 3.5 out of 10 All drama stems from conflict. While that can originate from any number of societal, interpersonal or even individual or imagined sources, there are a lot of viewers who enjoy the physical variety and watching the hero dispatch the antagonist(s). Considering that some of the bad guys are non-human and that there are those who actually enjoy rooting for the villains, it isn't surprising that films such as "Alien vs. Predator" (or "AVP" as it's being touted in cool "shorthand") exist. Following the likes of "Jason vs. Freddy," "King Kong vs. Godzilla," and all of those Universal monster battle flicks from more than half a century ago, we now have 20th Century Fox entering the fray with two of its more popular monster characters. Like all of those other offerings, this one obviously seems just like another way of milking the last possible box office (and later video rentals and sales) out of franchises that have long since run their course. After all, "Alien" debuted way back in 1979 and spawned three sequels - one good, one okay and the last also feeling like nothing more than a ploy to do more of that milking. "Predator" - possibly the only alien hunter from outer space flick to feature two future governors - was a blast of testosterone-based conflict (epitomized by the past leader of Minnesota stating that he didn't have time to bleed) released in 1987. It then generated a decidedly less than spectacular sequel and then pretty much seemed done or at least tapped out, just like the "Alien" franchise. In Hollywood, however, nothing is dead until it no longer possesses the ability to make money. And since the key figures in the two franchises have segued to success in comic books and video games, it isn't that surprising that there's now a movie about the same. The question that remains - notwithstanding any financial gains - is whether it was a good idea. The answer, probably to no one's surprise, is a definite no, although the film isn't as bad as you might think and does have some fun, turn off the brain, escapist moments. Even so, the effects a little chintzier and various aspects and details from the film (especially the "Alien" ones) have been changed for the filmmakers' convenience. Then there's the fact that the titular match-up just isn't anything special or memorable. Following a very long and labored introduction, the heavyweights finally get to battle and there's plenty of blood, green goo and acid to go around (apparently as long as it's alien and not human-based that earns a PG-13 rating). Yet, since there are no personalities at play (at least "Freddy vs. Jason" had the former character's sarcasm with which to work), it's nothing more than an emotionally flat, intergalactic cockfight. Diehard fans of the aliens or predators might enjoy the violent encounters and deaths by various means, but they'll mean next to nothing to everyone else. There are a group of humans caught in the crossfire, but the likes of Sanaa Lathan ("Out of Time," "Brown Sugar"), Raoul Bova ("Under the Tuscan Sun," "Avenging Angelo") and Lance Henriksen ("Hard Target," "Aliens") - along with the weak script by Ronal Shusett ("Total Recall," "Freejack") - don't do anything to make us care or worry about them. And perhaps due to a smaller than needed budget (resulting in some of those cheap effects), director Paul W.S. Anderson (who made the creepy "Event Horizon," but also the less than stellar "Soldier" and "Resident Evil") is unable to get the film's momentum rolling as fast and as hard as a picture like this deserves. Throw in a ridiculous and ill-conceived, late in the game development (that continues the trend of rewriting both film series' sets of ground rules) and you have a decidedly less than stellar and obviously unneeded tie-together sequel. "Alien vs. Predator" rates as a 3.5 out of 10. Reviewed August 13, 2004 / Posted August 13, 2004