Prey (2022)

[mjvmovieman]

I think the concept of Predators would make for a great mini series, or the idea of the jungle planet could be continued that way.

And yes, Hulu, sorry (not Netflix)

[Captain Flint]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

Is Hulu still a thing?

(I just verified with my wife that we subscribe to Hulu. Wow. I haven't used that service in at least 2 years.)

Damn straight. Even though I get it for free, I love it. Haven't been subbed to Netflix in at least 6 or 7 years. Can't be bothered with that service anymore.

[Steedeel]

Predator 5/5
Predator 2 3/5
Predators 3/5
The Predator 2/5

Don’t count those other fan fiction pieces of crap.

[TheWildWhelk]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Predator 5/5
Predator 2 3/5
Predators 3/5
The Predator 2/5

Don’t count those other fan fiction pieces of crap.

I'd say that Predators is marginally better than Predator 2, haven't seen The Predator based on how bad it's rep was; as for Mr W S Anderson's film (and sequel) he sold his soul when he made it frickin' PG13. That was to bend the knee to Fox when he went seriously over budget. Utter shill!

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

I'd say that Predators is marginally better than Predator 2, haven't seen The Predator based on how bad it's rep was; as for Mr W S Anderson's film (and sequel) he sold his soul when he made it frickin' PG13. That was to bend the knee to Fox when he went seriously over budget. Utter shill!

I don't know. Shane Black's The Predator is not as bad as some make it out to be. I'll say this: It's the weakest out of the four main films, but still better than AVP-R and arguably the first AVP. That's not saying much, but whatever.

[STD]

Originally Posted by Ben_C

There is, in theory, still plenty of potential in the franchise. We could have a Predator film set during the WW2 Pacific War or the Vietnam War, or fighting cowboys in the Wild West, or conquistadors in South America or plenty of other time periods throughout history.

I prefer it be on an alien planet. There are enough earth based movies.

[STD]

Originally Posted by kylor

Add one thing that alters/ruins the meaning of the movie title: kids.

Actually Romance too.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Foxney should just go with the Die Hard route. Find a good script featuring alien life forms and replace that with Predators.

[JayTL]

That's the problem people have with the Alien movies too. For some reason they want Ripley in it in some way or another. Why do people want Arnold/Glover in this?

It'd probably work best as a disconnected movie.

But please just be good.

[CyberpunkCentral]

Originally Posted by JayTL

That's the problem people have with the Alien movies too. For some reason they want Ripley in it in some way or another. Why do people want Arnold/Glover in this?

It'd probably work best as a disconnected movie.

But please just be good.

There is a good story there in bringing back Arnold, though. Dutch defeated a Predator. So other Predators crave what he is actually made of.

[JayTL]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

There is a good story there in bringing back Arnold, though. Dutch defeated a Predator. So other Predators crave what he is actually made of.

After all this time though?

[brooks101189]

I said this before, but I want to see one of these films be The World's Most Dangerous Game but instead of the humans being hunted, it's unarmed Predators who eventually turn the table on the hunters.

[slumcat]

Originally Posted by JayTL

That's the problem people have with the Alien movies too. For some reason they want Ripley in it in some way or another. Why do people want Arnold/Glover in this?

The answer to this question is really sad. Because besides superheroes, modern cinema has absolutely failed to create memorable characters that the audience cares about.

And they perpetuate those failures by trying not to create new ones but again falling back on already created great characters.

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by JayTL

After all this time though?

They haven't developed warp/light speed yet

(Cue someone saying "In the comics...")

[JayTL]

Oh guys, I agree. To be honest, even I'm having a hard time coming up with a story regarding Predators (and Aliens, but that's another thread lol) that's
1. Original
2. Good
3. Able to make money

[Indiana Jonezzz...]

Originally Posted by CyberpunkCentral

I don't know. Shane Black's The Predator is not as bad as some make it out to be. I'll say this: It's the weakest out of the four main films, but still better than AVP-R and arguably the first AVP. That's not saying much, but whatever.

The thing is though, the film doesn’t even make sense, story wise. A Predator comes to Earth with this very advanced suit, being chased by a bad Predator, but good Predator chooses not to wear the advanced suit. Good Predator apparently came to Earth to help humans fight the bad Predators with this advanced suit, but then good Predator goes around slaughtering humans anyway?!

[kylor]

Just give me this in movie form already. Take my money.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by TheWildWhelk

I'd say that Predators is marginally better than Predator 2, haven't seen The Predator based on how bad it's rep was; as for Mr W S Anderson's film (and sequel) he sold his soul when he made it frickin' PG13. That was to bend the knee to Fox when he went seriously over budget. Utter shill!

Predator 2 had slightly more about it for me.

[Zivouhr]

The Predator series relies on the Predator kicking ass most times. Have a movie where he can do that for 70% of the film, and it'll probably be a success in terms of the Predator franchise. Whoever he's hunting better be tough though, or else it won't work well IMO.

Originally Posted by slumcat

The answer to this question is really sad. Because besides superheroes, modern cinema has absolutely failed to create memorable characters that the audience cares about.

And they perpetuate those failures by trying not to create new ones but again falling back on already created great characters.

Good point about studios sticking with box office stars, however old they may be.

While there are some new memorable action heroes in modern films that appear, for franchises like Terminator, Alien, and Predator, they were formed with the original stars and no one in the following films has been able to replace them with the same level of personality and screen presence in the opinions of many. But questionable plots haven't helped either. It's not always easy creating new ideas when there's a template of strict franchise rules to follow for a new script.

I'm sure there are plenty of capable new actors out there who could succeed if they were given a chance, but Hollywood banks their money on trying to recast the old stars most times.

It reminds me of the endless trend of Mark Walhberg (spelling?) films that Hollywood keeps cranking out for many years. Is no other actor qualified to play in those roles, or is Hollywood stuck on the idea that he's a box office draw? He's a good actor and action star, but give someone else a chance already. But that's how cinema movies work most times sadly.

The Rock is also another star that is almost every action related movie these days. I'm sure there are other strongly built actors that can fill that role, but Studios rely on the box office draw the Rock brings, along with his talents on screen.

At the same time, if most fans enjoys the character and personality of that famous action star, they're probably not going to change the formula by casting a new actor.

[slumcat]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

The Predator series relies on the Predator kicking ass most times. Have a movie where he can do that for 70% of the film, and it'll probably be a success in terms of the Predator franchise. Whoever he's hunting better be tough though, or else it won't work well IMO.



Good point about studios sticking with box office stars, however old they may be.

While there are some new memorable action heroes in modern films that appear, for franchises like Terminator, Alien, and Predator, they were formed with the original stars and no one in the following films has been able to replace them with the same level of personality and screen presence in the opinions of many. But questionable plots haven't helped either. It's not always easy creating new ideas when there's a template of strict franchise rules to follow for a new script.

I'm sure there are plenty of capable new actors out there who could succeed if they were given a chance, but Hollywood banks their money on trying to recast the old stars most times.

It reminds me of the endless trend of Mark Walhberg (spelling?) films that Hollywood keeps cranking out for many years. Is no other actor qualified to play in those roles, or is Hollywood stuck on the idea that he's a box office draw? He's a good actor and action star, but give someone else a chance already. But that's how cinema movies work most times sadly.

The Rock is also another star that is almost every action related movie these days. I'm sure there are other strongly built actors that can fill that role, but Studios rely on the box office draw the Rock brings, along with his talents on screen.

At the same time, if most fans enjoys the character and personality of that famous action star, they're probably not going to change the formula by casting a new actor.

I agree. Take the Rock - he plays one character in all of the franchises and films he stars in - Dwayne Johnson.

He isn't even playing a character, he recites most of his line as himself. It is amazing.