Paul Haine | Tales from the city

Paul Haine | Tales from the city | Film & TV

Aliens Vs. Predator

,

14 years we’ve been waiting for this film. 14 years since Stephen Hopkins thought it’d be a bit of a giggle to include an Alien skull in Predator 2. That one clip spawned comic books, novels, videogames, scripts, rumours — a whole industry dedicated to the idea of the Alien and the Predator facing off and having a bit of a barney. 14 years. And what do we get to show for it, finally, 14 years on? We get a derivative rip-off of The Thing and Jurassic Park. Come in, Paul Anderson, your time is up.

I’ll begin with a quick summary of the plot, which may contain spoilers if you’re particularly dim and can’t see all the events in the film happening from a mile away. A satellite spots a sudden burst of heat out in Antarctica, and so wealthy Charles Weylan collects together a team of witless, charmless nobodies — the best in their fields! — to join him in finding out what’s what. They discover an abandoned 1904 whaling station, beneath which lies an underground pyramid. The orbiting Predators, presumably attracted by the same sudden heat source, helpfully provide a tunnel down into the ruins. Meanwhile, a frozen queen Alien is being woken deep below, and laying eggs. All three parties get stuck inside the pyramid, and then, you know, there are some fights, and then it basically ends.

The film has a hurried beginning, a rush to get to the action. The Alien franchise has presented modern-day MTV film-makers with a bit of a problem in pacing, insofar that there’s a certain gestation period that the Alien requires. In the original Alien, the foetal parasite takes maybe a day or so to grow to chest-bursting size, followed by another few hours to grow to the beautiful and terrifying H.R. Giger creation. In Aliens Vs. Predator (AvP), Paul Anderson trims the entire egg-to-adult process down to about, ooh, 10 minutes, tops. If Ridley Scott’s Alien is poetry, then Paul Anderson’s AvP is a limerick.

There once was a man from Nantucket

So, we tick off the boxes — Alien eggs, check, Face Hugger, check, Chest-Burster, check, come on, come on — and await the point of the film, which is to see a Predator and an Alien have a fight. We ask for so little!

Little is what we get. Anderson chooses to ignore the fine pedigree provided for him by Scott, Cameron, and — yes — Fincher, so the Aliens lack any hint of intelligence, choosing to hunt the Predators by playing “What’s the time, Mr. Wolf?” with them. The Predators are heavily reminiscent of John Travolta in Battlefield Earth, lacking the heavy grace that original Predator Kevin Hall brought to the role, particularly noticeable in the “We’re going to miss the bus!” moment as they realise that the pyramid is about to shut them outside. But, they do fight, which is why we’re here. You may have seen the clip of one of these fights on the interweb — a Predator grabbing an Alien by the tail and swinging it around. If you have, then congratulations! You’ve seen the best bit of the film already, and needn’t bother seeing the rest.

And what of the humans? Well, the aforementioned group of forgettables are dispatched of over the space of about 20 minutes, mostly by walking straight into waiting Aliens — a sort of mobile buffet, if you will — leaving only Alexa Woods, who is neither an Ellen Ripley nor a Dutch Schaeffer — she’s not even a Mike Harrigan. I can see what Anderson was trying to achieve — a cast of relative unknowns, just as in the original Alien, but he forgot that while the original group were unknown, they were still all very good actors. He also has them killed off far too quickly and anonymously, but it would have stretched plausibility to have any of them survive for long; where Scott had deep-space miners, Cameron had a collection of foot soldiers to work with, and Fincher had murderers and rapists, there’s just no muscle in AvP — it’s a team of journalists and archaeologists, so somewhat akin to pitting Tony Robinson against Anne Widdecombe.

The Alien Queen does feature heavily during the climax of the film; suffice to say that it’s a damp squib compared to Cameron’s now-classic face-off between said Queen and Ripley. Anderson chooses, bizarrely, to pay homage to the ‘T-Rex chasing the truck’ scene from Jurassic Park.

In terms of continuity with the parent franchises, this film is set after Predator 2, but before Alien. It is at least aware of its heritage, and is peppered with references; for instance, the character of Charles Weyland is the co-founder of the Weyland-Yutani Corporation — known in the Alien films as ‘The Company’ — and is played by the dependable Lance Henriksen, who also played the android ‘Bishop’ in Aliens and Alien 3. There are too many references to list here, but the IMDB AvP trivia page is worth reading if you’re into this sort of thing. Sadly, all these references achieve is to remind the watcher how weak the film is compared to those that came before.

I don’t know. I just find it incredible that someone can take such a wealth of source material and get it all so wrong — AvP is up there alongside Batman & Robin and almost every episode of Enterprise. We’re so far removed now from Scott and Cameron’s works that, far from rejuvenating the Alien and Predator films, I can see AvP sounding their death knell.

14 Comments so far

  1. lazydave on October 22nd, 2004

    i haven’t seen it yet, and after reading that, don’t know if it really is worth it – it’s always sad when they waste such great potential

  2. paul on October 22nd, 2004

    As a rule of thumb, it’s very rare that I would actually recommend people don’t see a film, even if the film is dreadful. Otherwise, how could we tell people who think the film is good that they’re wrong?

  3. Brett on October 22nd, 2004

    I’m torn on this one. Reviews are bad, trailer loks good, you say it’s bad (and you have quite good taste normally) and another friend said he went with a group of people who all thought it was great. Also other friends seem to really want to see it. I think I’ll wait for the DVD!

  4. paul on October 22nd, 2004

    If there’s one thing that life has taught me, it is that you never, ever, ever trust the trailer.

  5. leon on October 22nd, 2004

    It’s got some kind of a pyramid in it, and that’s always a bad sign.

  6. paul on October 22nd, 2004

    It is a bit of a cop-out for story writers who lack imagination. Why is it always pyramids? What’s wrong with the Nazca Lines, eh?

  7. leon on October 22nd, 2004

    Got to be pyramids, cos of like, y’know, the ancient Egyptians, and stuff. Sometimes Ankgor Wat (or similar) gets a look in too

  8. leon on October 22nd, 2004

    Personally I’m rather disappointed they didn’t include a few Nazis as well

  9. gv on October 22nd, 2004

    Anne Widdecombe was mentioned in the review…

  10. WOODY on January 5th, 2006

    Never before have i read a review that is so completely true! More or less everything written in the above article is accurate. Being a fan of both the francise’s i was also looking forward to seeing this film…which sadly almost made me physically sick. Whilst still not quite understanding how the human Bishop (or Weyland or whatever) can exist in both AvP and Alien 3 (both with red blood, so not android), the whole gestation period for the alien made my blood boil. When will cheap and talentless Directors learn.

  11. Steve Williams on January 8th, 2006

    Sorry, but I totally disagree – Paul WS Anderson is the best new directing talent I’ve seen since Scott/Cameron for the horror/sci-fi genre!

    C’mon, you’re expecting too much. Alien and Aliens are absolute classics, and lets face it – when has a ’3′ or higher movie been able to be original or completely true to all that preceeded it? Or even half decent… Superman III maybe, but I can’t think of another?

    So you’re onto a loser to start with, and given that I think Anderson did a terrific job. It is WAY better than Alien 3 and Resurrection (what the f**k was that at the end, a joke?) and for me at least has awoken interest in the Alien saga again.

  12. paul on January 10th, 2006

    “So you’re onto a loser to start with”

    I’ve always found the ‘we shouldn’t expect any better’ argument to be fairly spurious. If Anderson really is the ‘best new directing talent’ since Scott/Cameron (which he isn’t) then surely he should be able to come up with something as good?

  13. the scary albino on August 5th, 2006

    yeah so the main point was we want to see preds kill we got that. but at the same time the movie has a creation story to go along with it. preds come down to earth to help us in return for a little hunting. they keep coming back every one hundred years. and the moron who wrote this… it says that the heat signal was sent out by the preds in the movie. i thought it was great. i also think your a prick and have no taste. you probably thing that the new star wars are better then the old ones. i order you to stop writing reviews from this day folward

  14. paul on August 5th, 2006

    Why does everybody keep making Star Wars referencesall of a sudden around here? Have I really not made my feelings on that issue clear enough? Perhaps from this day ‘folward’ I’ll need to be more specific.

Tags: