UPDATE: Just as this was to ready to post, news has flitered through from Bloody Disgusting that Neil Marshall (The Descent, Dog Soldiers, Doomsday) is in talks to direct Rodriguez's script for Predators at 20th Century Fox. The movie is on the fast track looking for a July 2010 release.
If you hang around nerd circles these days, you might have heard rumors that a remake or sequel to
Predator is in the works, and that a prequel to
Alien is also in development. If you hang around nerd circles, youve probably also already encountered some debate between those who want to
hang the money-hungry producers for trying to financially and artistically rape the two franchises and those who just cant help but be curious about either of the two projects in the off chance that a deft hand at directing causes them to be watchable. But do any of these projects have any chance at existing, firstly, and then secondly, surviving?
Lets just go over what we are dealing with here. The
Alien project, though first rumored to be a remake, is apparently now a prequel film about the origins of the creature. The
Predator project was first rumored to be a remake of the original as well, but has now been clarified as being based off a treatment
Robert Rodriguez wrote 15 years ago called
Predators, which is actually a sequel to the original film that takes place on the creatures home planet. In either case, there are problems, but also potential. Yet, in the end one ultimately has to ask the same question: whats the point? But let me first make a few constructive comments here. To start, both concepts offer very intriguing possibilities.
Sir. Ridley Scott, who began the franchise with his masterpiece
Alien, was, as little as six or seven years ago, considering an
Alien prequel which would examine the origins of the creature, just as is currently proposedin fact, the current project probably traces its lineage to his initial development. This was not due to artistic bankruptcy, trying to milk a successful franchise for a quick buck, as some have accused the more recent developmentsScott is already one of the most prolific, successful and critically-praised directors in the worldbut out of a genuine conviction that there is an interesting subject to explore. In early 2002, Scott stated,
Im seriously mulling it over. I think it would be a lot of fun, but the most important thing is to get the story right. We should go back to where the alien creatures were first found and explain how they were created. No one has ever explained why. I always figured a battleship carrying bio-mechanical organisms that could be weapons was sent into space with some space jockey who didnt last.
This would certainly be an interesting direction to take things, and, for instance, with Scott directing or at least producing, we can be sure that the tale would be told with some measure of sophistication and intelligence. It would probably be the ideal scenario for a fifth
Alien film, though unfortunately Scott is not concretely linked to the current project. However, either way, this loses sight of one of the main issues to be had with such a film: the element of mystery. The creature in
Alien was terrifying precisely because it was unknown, and equally fascinating were the deliberately mysterious incidents surrounding its discovery, where a bunch of space truckers encounter an eerie, derelict spacecraft. The designs by uber-weirdo
H.R. Giger were so evocative that the result was a sort of indescribable horror that seemed as though it was channeled directly from the unconsciousness. The films allure and effectiveness was entirely predicated on withholding information and involving the audience by giving them just a few scraps in order to fire their imagination and paint in a personal creation. Explaining the creature and its origins, no matter how good it is done, ultimately undoes the central mechanism of the original films success, and the success of the following films as well. On the other hand,
Predators has an equally-interesting and perhaps even more ambitious premise. The plot apparently revolves around Schwarzeneggers character being transported to outer space and put in
an alien menagerie on the creatures home world. The film goes one step further than just developing the
Predator creatures; this is a world of galactic interactions, with different aliens and civilizations and far-fetched characters, which sounds more in the vein of
Star Trek, or perhaps
Planet of the Apes, in some sense; based on the admittedly vague descriptions of it, it brings to mind the bustling worlds of the old space opera pulp novels. Rodriguez says:
What Id like to do with it is expand on ideas I dreamt up back in the original treatment, that had really expanded on the universe both the Predators and other species live in. Wed create new otherworldly characters while not taking away from the draw our main Predator has.
Predators too seeks to do away with the mystery of the monster by explaining its origins, yet this feels more permissible
Alien had a creature from the unconsciousness, something hidden in shadows, and one whose premise revolved around the sense of the unknown. With
Predator, we have a different story. Lets not kid ourselves here
Predator is a terrific action movie, but it has none of the artistic sophistication of
Alien, except in its deft mechanics as a piece of first-rate action-entertainment. It too revolved around mystery, yet by the pictures end, when the creature is revealed and fights a bare-chested
Arnold Schwarzenegger mano-e-mano, that mystery is revealed as a gimmicky suspense device and not an integral element to the films subconscious underpinnings. The reveal of the
Predator monster at the films conclusion
is one of the most ridiculous, cheesy, and exciting, moments in B-movie history. Yet,
Predator is still just a B-movie, with more biceps, guns, sweaty men, explosions and one-liners than most successful 80s action films, and 80s action films had a lot of those things. So, in many ways,
Predators stands a bigger chance of not, ahem, alienating the original films essence and its fans, for the precise reason that they should not be held upon a pedestal in the first place. The concept, in my opinion, is also quite interestingbut it has almost nothing to do with the original film. Yes, the original film has a creature in it that presumably must have some sort of originbut one can say the same about any creature-feature. Attaching such a story to
Predator seems as arbitrary as attaching it to
Mimic or
The Thing. I think making a completely out-there sci-fi action story, the kind that
E.E. Smith and
Leigh Brackett might have been envisioning way back when, is an absolutely cool idea. But why restrain yourself by shackling it to the
Predator franchise, a film that was nothing more than a well-told Arnold Schwarzenegger B-movie cashing in on the success of monster-stalker horror films and guns-and-muscle action films that were popular during the mid and late 1980s? For this reason, it seems contrived, and, I feel, will have its entertainment potential dragged down by its attempt to be faithful to the original
Predator and show some level of consistency with that first film. Hollywood has the potential to let an original concept remain original, if only it showed some risk-taking. Such is the problem in the first place, I suppose. In the end, which one will actually perform better, financially and artistically, is impossible to say, and to make guesses would be exactly that.
Alien has always been more popular, and has always been considered more artistic, but
Predators could easily attract more viewers with its action-oriented base, especially if you get a couple of name actors in there. On the other hand, Ridley Scott directing an intelligent
Alien prequel that gets good reviews and word of mouth, and stars a few bankable actors like, say,
Jude Law and
Russell Crowe, could emerge the superior picture. Its simply too hard to say at this point. I think we all need to stop making judgments and predictions until a bit more is known about either project. Given that its just relatively empty talk at this point, its really nothing to get too up in arms aboutthere have been talks about continuing both franchises for years, and while these latest developments are the most concrete yet, nothing is written in stone. In fact, most of this information is still based on unconfirmed rumors, and there are conflicting stories circulating, so take it all with a grain of salt. Ultimately, however, I have to ask: what is the point in either of these? A fifth
Alien film that contradicts the entire nature of the franchise is not necessary. For that matter, any
Alien sequel is not necessary; the franchise has already been beaten to a pulp. If you want a scary monster-stalking-people film then you have
Alien, and if you want actiony people-fighting-monsters film then you have
Aliens. Each sequel since have really been just variations on each of those two movies, and none of them have been done with half the skill. Theres no reason for moretheres a million other
Alien and
Aliens clones out there, some good, many bad.
Predators has a couple of cool but bizarre ideas, but whats the point in shackling them to that franchise? If Hollywood wants to do an original, action-based space opera story, then do one, dont compromise it by making it into a sequel to the
Rambo-esque
Predator, a film which was engrossingly entertaining but entirely too simplistic to support more than the solitary film. But I have to say one final thing in closing. Probably the biggest criticism one can make at these films is that they are just grabs for money;
Alien V is being revived because Fox wants to make some cash, and
Predators is being revived in the hopes that it can as well. And they will make money if they are released, no matter how bad they are (look at
AVP). Oh, those soulless producers and their endless greed. But do we ever ask ourselves why they make money? People go to these films, and people like these films.
Alien vs. Predator: Requiem, like its predecessor, was a terrible, soulless film operating on auto-pilot; the previous two
Alien films, while artistically superior, still werent exactly living up the first film, and even
Predator, an 80s B-movie, has never had a follow-up as good as the original, which itself was slightly silly. Yet each sequel makes serious money. They make money because we go to see them, and we buy the goddamn DVDs and all the action figures. If Hollywood functions on the free market, we dictate that market by voting with our wallets, and so blame must ultimately be placed on the public for supporting such a tired franchise.
These films are the demons we have collectively manifested.