Predator: Series Retrospective

Last year, I did a retrospective on the classic sci-fi horror franchise, Alien, in time for the release of its latest installment, Alien: Covenant. In that post, I noted that I wasn’t going to be covering the franchise’s two crossover films that it was a part of because I’d have to cover the other franchise that was involved in them, and I was planning on saving that for the release of that franchise’s latest installment. Well, as you might have guessed, the time has finally come for that new installment, so today we’re covering another classic sci-fi horror franchise, Predator. Beginning with the 1987 classic of the same name starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, this series introduced audiences to a ferocious alien creature who hunted other species for sport. The original went on to spawn a sequel in 1990, which notably featured an Alien Easter egg. This, of course, then paved the way for a big crossover franchise between the two classic sci-fi antagonists that was headlined by two feature films in the early 2000’s. The Predator series then saw a return to the big screen in 2010 with the franchise’s first solo installment in two decades. And now the series is back again this year with a new film, simply titled The Predator. The film is the latest outing from director Shane Black, which is a notably fitting choice as Black had played a supporting role in the original film, which happened to come out the same year as the film that launched his career as a writer, Lethal Weapon. Thus, without further ado, it’s time to ‘GET TO THE CHOPPA!’ as we look at the three films in the Predator franchise and the two crossover films that it appeared in alongside the Xenomorphs from Alien.

(Disclaimer: For today’s retrospective, I’ll be going over these five films in the order of their release instead of just focusing on the solo films first and then the Alien vs Predator films)

PREDATOR (1987)

It all begins, of course, with the original Predator, which served as the first studio project for director John McTiernan, who would later go on to direct a few other classic action films like Die Hard and The Hunt for Red October. And while critics weren’t initially big on the film when it first came out, it has since been regarded as one of the greatest action films of all-time, which is easy to see why when watching it. Predator boasts a lot of great build-up when it comes to introducing its title character. For starters, the film doesn’t even start out as a science-fiction film, instead opting for a more straight-forward action film complete with one of the most adrenaline-pumping shootouts to ever come out of the 80’s. But after that, the film then effectively transitions into sci-fi horror and does a great job of establishing the imposing threat that is the titular Predator, which ended up undergoing a major cosmetic change during production. Originally, the creature had a more lobster-like design with movements provided by none other than Jean-Claude Van Damme. However, when it became apparent that this design was far from being a legitimate threat to a bunch of characters who were played by bodybuilders like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura, the creature got a redesign from legendary effects artist Stan Winston. Winston even got a little help from frequent collaborator James Cameron, who suggested mandibles on the creature. What comes out of it is one of the most iconic alien creatures of all-time who helps to make this film a highly compelling ‘cat and mouse’ story. Thus, with great action sequences and a solid ensemble cast headlined by Schwarzenegger and Carl Weathers, Predator managed to overcome all its various production issues (e.g. having to change the title character’s design halfway through, filming in intense heat in the jungles of Mexico, etc.) to become a bona fide classic when it comes to 80’s action films.

Rating: 4.5/5

PREDATOR 2 (1990)

The Predator returned just three years later in 1990 under the direction of Stephen Hopkins, who was fresh off directing the fifth installment of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, The Dream Child. This time, the focus shifted from the jungles of Central America to the streets of Los Angeles, as a group of police officers investigate a string of killings that have been going on that have been tied to the local gangs. What follows is a decent albeit rather forgettable sci-fi action flick. Sure, the concept of having the title character wreak havoc in a major metropolitan city isn’t a bad idea (remember how one teaser trailer for Alien 3 implied that it would be set on Earth before that idea was scrapped? This is basically that idea, just with Predators instead of Xenomorphs), but in execution, the story is quite generic as are most of the characters. The main protagonist, Lt. Mike Harrigan (Danny Glover, in a role that’s honestly not that far off from old Murtagh), is generally solid, though, partially because he gets one of the only major bits of character development in the film when his best friend ends up being one of the Predator’s victims. And because this is a Predator sequel, the film doesn’t skimp on the Predator action, as the title creature gets into the action right away. This does pave the way for some solid action sequences… save for a rather ill-conceived action sequence in a subway car that ends up being nothing more than an endless array of flashing strobe lights. In short, while I don’t ‘dislike’ Predator 2, it’s still a major step down compared to the first film. I do understand, though, why this film has gotten a fan following despite the middling reception that it got from critics, and if anything, I wouldn’t say that it’s as bad as its 28% rating on Rotten Tomatoes suggests. Still, that’s not really saying much considering the legendary film that came before it.

Rating: 3/5

ALIEN VS. PREDATOR (2004)

(Disclaimer: The following review covers the PG-13 rated theatrical cut of Alien vs. Predator. The unrated cut that was released on home video adds in some extra gore effects and additional bits of plot development, which may or may not satisfy those who were disappointed by the fact that the theatrical cut was given an obviously neutered PG-13 rating)

During the finale of Predator 2, Lt. Harrigan ends up on the Predator’s ship, where he comes across the creature’s trophy room full of the skulls of its victims. One of these skulls was from a Xenomorph, the extraterrestrial creatures featured in the Alien series, thus paving the way for one lucrative crossover franchise that had already started the year before. Since then, these two franchises have crossed paths in various forms of media ranging from comics to video games. But for today’s retrospective, we’re looking at the crossover franchise’s two films, starting with 2004’s Alien vs. Predator, directed by Paul W.S. Anderson. While the film was a decent hit at the box office, critical reception was a different story, as it seems like both critics and fans of the two franchises were not happy with how this crossover turned out. Part of the reason why (for fans, at least) was due to the film having a PG-13 rating, meaning that it would be a heavily toned-down affair compared to the R-rated escapades of its two franchises’ previous installments. But for what its worth, when the title characters do get the chance to spar, it is still awesome to watch even with its more audience-friendly rating. In short, Alien vs. Predator is your basic sci-fi horror film with a collection of stock characters for the two title characters to hunt. That said, though, the main protagonist, guide Alexa Woods (Sanaa Lathan), is a solid female lead, and Lance Henriksen also makes a welcome return to the world of Alien as the owner of the series’ Weyland Corporation, Charles Weyland, after previously playing the android Bishop and his creator, Michael Weyland, in Aliens and Alien 3, respectively. With all this in mind, Alien vs. Predator is admittedly a complicated film to recommend. If you’re a hardcore fan of the Alien and Predator franchises, then you’re probably going to hate this film because it can very well be argued that it doesn’t necessarily do a good job of properly respecting either franchise. However, if you’re just looking for a mindless yet entertaining crossover between these two classic franchises, this one might do you just fine.

Rating: 3.5/5

ALIENS VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM (2007)

(Disclaimer: As was the case with its predecessor, this review covers the theatrical cut of AvP: Requiem instead of the unrated cut that was released on home video.)

Despite the mediocre reception that it got, Alien vs. Predator ended up getting a sequel three years later, serving as the directorial debut for visual effects artists Greg and Colin Strause. Ultimately, though, it fared about the same as its predecessor upon its release, as it did fine at the box-office but fared terribly with critics… and this time, the critics were right on this one. Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem is a colossal mess. Sure, it returns to its franchises’ R-rated roots, but that doesn’t really matter in the long run when the action sequences in this film are poorly shot, edited, and in some cases, even lit. In other words, this film somehow feels more like a PG-13 rated Alien vs. Predator film than the actual PG-13 rated AvP film. And just like the first AvP film, the story and characters are incredibly flat. The only difference here, though, is that there aren’t any underrated badass characters like Alexa Woods this time around, meaning that you don’t give a crap about any of the characters in this film, most of whom are either unlikable or incredibly stupid. It also doesn’t help that the film sports a surprisingly mean-spirited tone given some of its kills (e.g. a young kid, multiple pregnant women, etc.) and the fact that it ends with the military just straight-up nuking the town where the film is set. In short, Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem is a disastrous follow-up to what was already a problematic first film. It truly is saying something when the best thing about this film is that it’s mercifully short at just 94 minutes long (that and the Alien/Predator hybrid that it introduces, despite its limited screen-time). And because of this, it’s undeniably the lowest point for both the Alien and Predator franchises, thus taking several years for either franchise to recover due to this film being such a train wreck. Granted, the question of whether the Alien franchise managed to rebound is up for debate given the polarizing reaction to both Prometheus and Alien: Covenant, but at least those films did far better with critics than either of the AvP films combined. As for the Predator series…

Rating: 0.5/5

PREDATORS (2010)

Outside of its crossovers with Alien, the main Predator series laid dormant for two decades until it returned in 2010 with Predators. This installment was developed under the eye of none other than Robert Rodriguez, though directorial duties ultimately went to Nimród Antal, who would later go on to direct the IMAX concert film Metallica: Through the Never. As for Predators, which focuses on a group of mercenaries, soldiers, and murderers who find themselves put on another planet where they’re hunted by the titular alien creatures, it is easily the closest in both plot and execution to the original film. This is most notable through the film’s slow but steady buildup that first introduces the main characters before they’re hunted by the Predators. The only thing holding this film back, though, is that it’s quite uneven in terms of its narrative, never really delving into why these characters were put on the planet in the first place or the conflict that’s established between the planet’s two primary groups of Predators, the traditional Predators as seen in previous films and the larger and more intimidating ‘Super Predators’. Heck, the Predators aren’t even really in this all that much, meaning that the film’s also rather lacking in terms of action sequences. Given this film’s ending, it seems like a lot of these plot points were meant to be explored further in a sequel, and yet, based on Shane Black’s new film, it doesn’t seem likely that the franchise will be returning to this part of the story anytime soon. But for what it’s worth, once the film overcomes its rather slow start, it manages to coax by with some solid action sequences during the climax (e.g. a fight between a Super Predator and Yakuza member Hanzo (Louis Ozawa Changchien)). Plus, this film sports one of the best ensemble casts in the franchise’s history, with strong performances from the likes of Adrien Brody, Alice Braga, Walton Goggins, and a highly memorable cameo from Laurence Fishburne as a deranged soldier who has been on the planet for several years. Ultimately, though, Predators is just as much of a mixed bag as Predator 2 was. It is arguably the best of the Predator sequels up to this point, but it still suffers quite a bit from a lackluster script that doesn’t live up to its fullest potential.  

Rating: 3/5

And that concludes this retrospective on the Predator franchise. Thanks for following along and be sure to sound off in the comments below with your own thoughts on these films. And really, what better way to conclude this post than with the most epic handshake in cinematic history… 

King Kong Retrospective (1933, 1976, and 2005)

In the world of cinema, one ape stands above the rest as one of the most iconic creatures in film history; King Kong. In 1933, filmmakers Merian C. Cooper (who also became known as one of the primary figures in the development of the Cinerama projection technique) and Ernest B. Schoedsack co-directed a monster film about a giant ape who lives on a mysterious island known as ‘Skull Island’. There, he is discovered by a filmmaking crew that journeys there and is subsequently brought to New York, where he rampages around for a bit before climbing the Empire State Building, where he is finally shot down by fighter planes. This beloved tale of ‘beauty killed the beast’, in which the ape also falls in love with a young woman who is ‘sacrificed’ to him, still stands as one of the most famous films of all time. But over the years, the ‘Eighth Wonder of the World’ has gone through numerous onscreen interpretations. The latest of these, Kong: Skull Island, hits theaters this weekend and in anticipation of that, today I’ll be reviewing the King Kong films. Now, to be specific, I’m not covering every single film that is part of the official franchise. I’m only reviewing the 1933 original, the 1976 ‘re-imagining’, and the 2005 remake. Plus, I’ll also be looking at a 1962 crossover between Kong and Godzilla, which is being included solely because the new Kong film is part of the same franchise as the 2014 Godzilla reboot and a new version of this crossover is set to come out in 2020. Thus, I will not be reviewing Son of Kong, the sequel to the 1933 Kong that was released just nine months after the original (in the same year, no less), King Kong Escapes, a Toho-produced film that was, believe it or not, co-produced by Rankin/Bass (yes, THAT Rankin/Bass) as a live-action remake of a TV show they produced titled The King Kong Show, and King Kong Lives, a sequel to the 1976 Kong which, from what I hear… is just godawful.

KING KONG (1933)

We start things off, of course, with the original classic produced by RKO from 1933. By next year, this film will be 85 years old… and from the perspective of someone who watched it for the first time ever just a few days ago, it still holds up quite well. Sure, there are obviously some parts of the film that are now dated (e.g. some potentially racist stereotypes) but it’s still a highly enjoyable adventure story with a solid lead cast that includes Fay Wray as the charming leading lady Ann Darrow, Bruce Cabot as the rugged first mate Jack Driscoll who later falls in love with her, and Robert Armstrong as the eccentric filmmaker Carl Denham who leads the expedition to Skull Island. But, of course, the main draw of the film is its ground-breaking special effects that still look great today. Seriously, a lot of effort went into developing the visuals for this film. Most of the creatures in the film, especially Kong, were created via stop-motion animation by special effects pioneer Willis O’Brien. But then there were some other interesting things that they did to integrate live-action footage into the scene, like having a full-sized model of Kong’s head whenever he puts someone in his mouth, having the actors perform in front of a rear projection system, and having shots of actors composited in with shots of the stop-motion animation. And, again, as dated as some of these effects may have become, it’s still quite an impressive feat for a film that was made nearly nine decades ago. Obviously, Kong has seen a lot of other interpretations over the years but, no matter what, the original King Kong is still one of the most iconic films of all-time.

Rating: 5/5!

KING KONG VS. GODZILLA (1962)

(Disclaimer: As is common with a lot of the Godzilla films, there were different versions of this film that were made for the regions that it was released in. The following review is for the original 97-minute Japanese version and not the 91-minute version released in the U.S.)

There’s quite a lot of history surrounding this film. Arguably the first of its kind in terms of monster crossover films, King Kong vs. Godzilla was also the first film in which both monsters appeared in color. But early on in its development, it was almost going to be about King Kong going up against an enlarged version of Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, the original idea conceived by Willis O’Brien in 1960. Once the film was picked up by Toho, the studio behind the Godzilla films, it was reworked into a crossover between Kong and Godzilla, the latter of whom made a triumphant return to the big-screen after the climactic ending in 1955’s Godzilla Raids Again in which he’s buried in ice. Likewise, this was Kong’s first feature film since the original King Kong back in 1933. What follows is exactly what you’d expect from a Godzilla film; you’re not really in it for the plot, which sees a pharmaceutical company attempt to orchestrate a publicity stunt involving Kong, which eventually leads into a battle with Godzilla. Instead, it’s all about the fight between these two iconic monsters in the cheesy but entertaining definitive style of the Godzilla films; in other words, having two guys in rubber suits duking it out. Admittedly, though, this final battle is only at the very end of the film. Aside from that, there’s a brief confrontation between the two and there’s also a scene in which Kong fights a giant octopus that attacks the village on the island which he initially resides on. As such, some parts of the film do drag a bit. However, it’s ultimately worth it for the Kong-Godzilla fights. With that in mind, it’s easy to see why this has been one of the most popular films in the Godzilla series and I do look forward to the upcoming ‘remake’ in 2020 which, of course, is the main reason why this film was included in this retrospective.

Rating: 3/5

KING KONG (1976)

The first big ‘remake’ of King Kong came about in 1976, produced for Paramount by legendary producer Dino De Laurentiis and directed by John Guillermin. From what I’ve read, there was a lot of anticipation surrounding the film upon release. However, it only ended up being a commercial success, as it got a mixed to negative response from critics. So, with that in mind, is this take on the Eighth Wonder of the World as bad as some of the critics said it was? Well, not really; in some aspects, it’s even a little underrated. At the very least, the film is well-made on a technical level; cinematography, location/set design, etc. The key selling point of the film, like the original, is its visuals. In this iteration, Kong was portrayed by legendary makeup artist Rick Baker in an ape suit, and while Baker has stated that he wasn’t pleased with the final design, it does look great on-screen. There’s even one scene in which they have a full-scale, 40-foot-tall Kong animatronic, which was designed by special effects artist Carlo Rambaldi, who also worked on films like E.T. and Alien. Sadly, it didn’t end up working right and, thus, was only used for one scene; the scene in which Kong breaks free from his chains in New York. The only visuals that haven’t aged well, though, are the green-screen effects, specifically whenever Kong is holding someone in his hand. I watched this film on VUDU at the highest quality, HDX, and they just didn’t look good. The best way I can describe it is that it’s obvious whenever a green-screen is being used. Thankfully, most of the other visuals in the film are better by comparison, hence why the film ended up winning the Oscar for Best Visual Effects that year.

But while most of the film’s visuals are great, resulting in some great monster action sequences, the story isn’t as successful. Now, for the record, I don’t mind the changes that were made to differentiate the film from the original. Instead of the premise being about a film crew that goes to shoot at Skull Island, this film instead focuses on an oil tycoon named Fred Wilson who journeys to the island in search of oil. Once Kong is found, he’s taken back to New York and is used as a marketing gimmick for his company. And instead of climbing the Empire State Building, he climbs the towers of the World Trade Center in yet another equally memorable Kong finale. Again, I’m fine with these changes, but the film has an overall campy tone that I don’t think works very well. The acting’s hit-or-miss, too. Jeff Bridges is fine in the Jack Driscoll role (re-imagined here as Jack Prescott, a paleontologist) and Charles Grodin is enjoyably over-the-top in the role of Fred Wilson. Jessica Lange, on the other hand, is the big weak link of the film as she’s just too ditzy in the role of the Ann Darrow equivalent, Dwan. Thankfully, this didn’t immediately kill her career because, as we all know, she has done better in other projects. So, in conclusion, what do I think about this arguably infamous remake? Well, I don’t hate it, but I don’t necessarily love it either. It is well-made for its time and has some nice creature effects thanks to the legendary duo of Rick Baker and Carlo Rambaldi. Not only that, but the film did leave its mark on pop culture as evident from two former attractions at Universal Studios parks; the iconic King Kong Encounter from Universal Studios Hollywood’s Studio Tour and Kongfrontation at Universal Studios Orlando. Still, it just didn’t have the same awe factor of the original. Thus, as far as Kong remakes go, I prefer the following remake over this one.

Rating: 3/5

KING KONG (2005)

And, finally, we have the latest ‘remake’ of the original film; from 2005, Universal’s King Kong, directed by Peter Jackson in what was his first major project after the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Like the ’76 film, there was a lot of hype surrounding it, but unlike that film, this one fared much better with critics and audiences. Sure enough, it’s an excellent new take on the classic story of ‘Beauty Killed the Beast’. The story is more in line with the original and Jackson’s affection for the 1933 film is apparent throughout (e.g. using classic lines, featuring snippets of the original film’s score, etc.). At the same time, though, he does just enough to make his take on the story his own, like giving Ann Darrow more drive in this version than previous incarnations of the character. By comparison, Fay Wray’s take on the character in the ’33 film, while still undeniably great and iconic, was mostly just a damsel-in-distress that didn’t have much of an emotional connection with Kong. This Ann, on the other hand, stands her own ground against Kong and has a much more personal bond with him up until the very end. On that note, Naomi Watts does a fantastic job in the role of Ann and while Jack Black and Adrien Brody have gotten less positive responses as Carl Denham and Jack Driscoll, respectively (in Brody’s case, for being too bland, and in Black’s case, for being too over-the-top), I thought that they were both fine. The other big star of the cast? Andy Serkis, the king of motion-capture. Via the same process that turned him into Gollum in the Lord of the Rings films, he took on the role of Kong in this film, and the motion-capture effects for Kong are fantastic. Heck, a lot of the film’s effects are excellent. Sure, most of them are primarily CG-based this time around but they do their job in creating the world of Skull Island and the creatures that inhabit it.

There’s only one thing that really holds this film back, and it’s the one thing that everyone has said about the film; it’s too damn long. Clocking in at a staggering 187 minutes (and, for the record, that’s only the Theatrical Cut; the ‘Extended Edition’, released on DVD, buffs up the already hefty runtime by 20 minutes), the film takes its sweet time to tell the story and while I wasn’t necessarily ‘bored’ at any part in the film, at the same time I will admit that sometimes it can be a chore to get through. By comparison, the 1933 film was far better paced at a brisk 100 minutes (or 104 minutes if you add in the overture). Heck, even the 1976 film, which also had a slower pace to it, wasn’t as long; it was just a little over two hours. Simply put, there are quite a few parts in this film that would’ve benefitted greatly from some cuts, especially during the long, long, LONG trip to Skull Island. But, despite the arguably problematic runtime, it’s undeniably clear that Jackson was the best choice to do a new version of King Kong and he succeeds in doing so with this film. Now, I’ll admit that I watched this version first before the original. Like the 2009 Star Trek film, I had purchased it on iTunes and originally watched it on my iPod (and before any of you ask, yes, I managed to get through the whole three-hour film while watching it on an iPod). And while I now regard the original as the best version of the story (because, obviously…), I still have highly positive feelings towards the 2005 film, one of the best remakes of all-time.  

Rating: 4.5/5