Cheesier than Swiss with more holes to boot. (Alien vs Predator (DVD))

Member Name: The Duke

Product:	Alien vs Predator (DVD)
Date:	24/01/05 (77 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Excellent special effects

Disadvantages: Inconsistencies with other franchise elements, Terrible acting, Not enough Alien or Predator

If there was ever a film which was going to have to please a wide number and variety of fans, it was Alien vs. Predator. The Alien film franchise is over twenty years old, the Predator franchise is over fifteen years old and since then there have been many books, comics and video games based on these iconic film monsters. Whoever made the decision to make a film with the Alien and Predator was going to have to get it right or face the wrath of twenty years worth of film, game and comics fans.

Step forward Paul W. S. Anderson, the man behind such cinematic erm... treats such as Mortal Kombat, Event Horizon and Resident Evil. Maybe that's harsh because I quite enjoyed Resident Evil and even Soldier, in a weird kind of way. I still wasn't holding out much hope for this franchise crossover though, despite (or because of) being a huge fan of both.

A satellite belonging to the Weyland Corporation has identified a mysterious heat signature in Antarctica. Convinced that there is something of tremendous value at this location, the company's owner/founder, Charles Bishop Weyland (Lance Henriksen) puts together a team of various experts (survival, archaeologist, engineer etc.) to travel to the wasteland to investigate the heat source. At the same time, a ship of Predators arrives at Earth and they are also drawn to this site in Antarctica. It appears that the site in question is some sort of ancient temple, but how ancient is it, what's the source of this heat and what exactly is there about it that's attracting the Predators?

It's hard to know where to start with AvP. The plot is something that's going to figure heavily in my analysis, so it's best to start there. The plot, overall, is not bad. There are some immediate elements that don't just sit right with me. The fact that the film takes place on Earth is something that I'd always queried. This is something I think is carried over from the Alien franchise where the main driving force of the characters in ALL Alien movies is to stop the Alien species from getting to Earth, so to set this film on Earth during the present day is at odds with everything which has gone before.

Of course, the idea of 20th Century Fox's two main sci-fi franchises going head-to-head has been around since an Alien head was glimpsed in one of the final scenes of Predator 2 in 1990. There are any number of possible combinations of story that could have resulted in an AvP movie; Alien movies are set in the future, Predators movies in the present day. Alien movies are set in outer space/other planets, Predator movies are set on Earth. In setting the story on Earth, I feel a fundamental mistake was made.

There is also a problem with the 'facehugger' creatures too. In the previous Alien films, the facehugger cycle took many hours, if not days, but in AvP this seems to have been reduced to a matter of minutes without any explanation.

From the Predator point of view, the fact that the story takes place in a cold environment when it is strongly hinted at in both previous Predator movies that those creatures prefer hot and humid environments is also unexplained.

These are only two, of many franchise related plot holes that you'll encounter in AvP. If you have little or no interest in either of these, then it's entirely possible that they won't spoil the film for you but, as a fan, I thought there were too many to ignore. (As an aside: there are rumours that many scenes were left out of the cinematic release which do address the many plot holes and it is assumed that a Director's Cut would probably help matters a lot.)

There are some non-franchise related plot holes and logical errors too, but every film contains plot holes, so let's not dwell on these relatively unimportant aspects, despite the fact there are a few too many for my liking. My last criticism of the plot would be the amount of direct Alien vs. Predator action. In a film entitled Alien vs. Predator, there simply wasn't enough direct confrontation of these two species for my liking and the story focused too much on the human element. This was exacerbated by the brief glimpses of Alien vs. Predator combat that we do see and you then realise what might have been.

On the other hand, I thought the special effects were fantastic and that, for the first time, the Aliens could be properly realised. All the usual Predator effects are present and correct and done in a similar style to the first two films but with a bit more spit and polish this time around. The Alien effects are reflected more in the range of movement that they have – far more than in any other film so far. No longer is it obvious that they're men in suits or puppets. The sets in which the action takes place are also very good and the temple itself was very impressive.

Characterisation was extremely poor, though. All the characters had no depth to them, and I really struggled to empathise with them as they became aware of what was happening around them. In all the previous movies of both franchises, there was always an element of bonding with the characters (even those as badly acted as the first Predator film), but in AvP only Ewan Bremner's character of Graeme Miller evoked any sort of reaction from me.

Audio wise, I have to admit that I'm struggling to remember any of it. Whether you're interested in sound effects or music, I can't say that any of it was exceedingly poor or outstanding in quality.

Visually, I had no real problems with the movie apart from one or two scenes which were too dark and shaky to be able to see exactly what was going on. Apart from that, the rest of the movie was fine.

A lot of people heavily criticised Anderson for his direction of the movie, but I really didn't see that much wrong with it. If any criticism is to be leveled towards him, it would be for the script because of the inconsistencies and lack of character depth mentioned above rather than his treatment of the script.

The film reminded me of Terminator 3 in a way. As a standalone film, it's actually not bad at all, but when referencing the other media in the franchises, large plot holes and inconsistencies make themselves really apparent. Lastly, the film was released in America with a PG-13 certificate. That's not to say that there's no gore in it – there are shots in AvP which are similar to shots in Resident Evil (which was given an R in America/15 UK), the only different being that in AvP the violence/gore is non-human. Still, with the PG-13 rating, I can't help but feel that the film has been aimed at younger viewers in terms of plot complexity. This is a very strange decision given that the Predator and Alien franchises thus far have been adult orientated and perhaps hints at 20th Century Fox being more concerned with using the franchises for money making than entertaining (an accusation that's been leveled at them since the production of Alien 3 which was such a shambles). Sine the film's release, there have been rumours (as mentioned above) of a Director's Cut, especially in light of Anderson's comments that the film was shot for an 18 certificate and the cinema edit manages to lower this to a 15.

It's the plot holes and inconsistencies that really do damage to the film, though. The film runs in at around 100 minutes, which makes it a good 20 minutes shorter than an average Alien movie. An extra twenty minutes of character development and actual AvP action could really have improved this film immensely, even with the glaring inconsistencies from the other franchise entries.

Is it a terribly bad movie? Probably not and while it's certainly not an Alien or Aliens or even a Predator, it's arguably as good as Alien 3, Alien Resurrection or Predator 2. It doesn't bear up to too much repeated viewing, however.

Summary: