| Reviewer Roundup |
| 1. |
 | Dustin Putman |
| review follows |
|  |
| 2. |
| Steve Rhodes |
| read the review |
|  |
|
Review by Dustin Putman
2 stars out of 4
Following in the footsteps of 2003's successful collaboration, "Freddy
Vs. Jason," "Alien Vs. Predator" comes off as a less inspired, less
original knockoff. It is also so watered-down in the horror and gore
department that not once does it induce a single shiver or feeling
of nervousness in the viewer. This may not be the motion picture writer-director
Paul W.S. Anderson (2002's "Resident Evil") initially planned to make,
but the finished product is clearly what studio 20th Century Fox asked
for—a family-friendly, PG-13 rehash of the unanimously R-rated "Alien"
and "Predator" series', built out of pure greed and a reckless disregard
for what the fans see these kinds of movies for in the first place.
Intended as a loose sequel to the 1980s-set "Predator" films and an
even looser prequel to the future-set "Alien" quadrilogy, the present-set
"Alien Vs. Predator" wastes no time in setting up its premise. When
a sudden rise in heat emanates from below Antarctica's surface, ultra-wealthy
industrialist Charles Bishop Weyland (Lance Henriksen) enlists a team
of specialized scientists and adventurers, including environmentalist
and expert climber Alexa Woods (Sanaa Lathan), to travel down to the
controlled area for exploration purposes. What the team discovers
is an ancient pyramid, one whose frequently moving chambers make it
impossible to stick together. Even worse, they come to find themselves
in the middle of a war between two species from space—Predators, who
once ruled the Antarctic land, and Aliens, who have been used as reproducing
pawns to help train the younger Predators.
Pity poor Paul W.S. Anderson, who can never seem to make the film
he sets out to. 1997's "Event Horizon," a sort of "The Shining"-in-space
flick, had its tense moments, but was burdened by reported studio-enforced
cuts. 2002's "Resident Evil" was also severely chopped up, this time
thanks to the inconsistent, pompous MPAA board. Now here comes "Alien
Vs. Predator," which takes the general path of both series', but has
been rendered impotent by the insane demands of a studio obsessed
with the PG-13 rating. It is difficult to say whether the film would
have been worthwhile even with the stomach-churning, blood-curdling
material intact, but having it could have only helped. Audiences going
to see "Alien Vs. Predator" want—no, expect—to be treated to violent,
graphic death scenes and gore galore. What they will receive is an
attractive but empty horror-lite version, suitable for pre-teens,
that cuts away from the violence every time it is about to take place.
The film offers no valid payoffs; it is akin to dedicating fifteen
weeks to a reality series or ongoing television drama and then forgetting
to watch the finale episode. Now imagine such a quandary occurring
over and over again, and that is what the experience of watch "Alien
Vs. Predator" is like.
The plot of "Alien Vs. Predator" is preposterous and its characters
stock figures from the official handbook of one-dimensional cliches,
but in an icky sci-fi thriller such problems can be easily overlooked
if said film is genuinely effective from a visceral standpoint. PG-13
horror can achieve spine-tingling chills—look no further than 1999's
"The Sixth Sense," 2001's "The Others," 2002's "Signs," and 2002's
"The Ring." What is offensive about this same rating being given to
"Alien Vs. Predator" is that director Anderson has been forced to
compromise not only his vision, but squander the talents of his technical
crew. The editing by Alexander Berner (2002's "Resident Evil") is
a hack job, with so much footage cut out of the action sequences that
they become murky and nearly incomprehensible. The scares are non-existent,
their attempts more of the "false-jump" variety (none of which work)
than from a building of tension. The deaths, as mentioned, are plentiful
but mostly off-camera, making the picture a slasher film without the
slashing. The movie is also a horror film without a true sense of requisite uneasiness.
Sanaa Lathan (2003's "Out of Time") makes for a sturdy, memorable
successor to female heroine Ripley, played in all four "Alien" pictures
by Sigourney Weaver, as the similar Alexa Woods. Lathan has little
to work with, but she ably brings vulnerability, strength, and reality
to her every scene. That is more than can be said for the rest of
the terrible cast, particularly French male lead Raoul Bova (2003's
"Under the Tuscan Sun"), who doesn't seem to understand what he is
saying in English. The rest of the crew members are strictly of the
chopping-block persuasion. Finally, sole "Alien" returnee Lance Henriksen
(2000's "Scream 3") plays the original Bishop, whose descendants in
the earlier entries were robotic replicas, but is underused.
"Alien Vs. Predator" isn't about acting, or screenwriting, or heartfelt
drama. It is about the chase, and the horror of the situations, and
the slimy creep factor of the alien species, but it fumbles the outcome.
The film is blessed with some accomplished cinematography by David
Johnson (2002's "Resident Evil"), a hybrid of moody gothic architecture
and atmospheric Egyptian inspiration, and the particulars of the climax
boast stylish showmanship while being appreciably unpredictable. Furthermore,
Paul W.S. Anderson shows efficiency in his filmmaking style, as he
has in the past; perhaps one day he will be able to make the movie
he wants to without any interference from outside sources. As a genre
pic, however, "Alien Vs. Predator" simply doesn't make the cut. After
all, why watch an undercooked, virtually bloodless remake of all the
other "Alien" and "Predator" flicks when they were done better and
treated the ir audience with more respect? There is no reason to.
Copyright © 2004 Dustin Putman
|
out of 4
