Predators

Antal has an incredible sensitivity for getting that eighties feeling right, in the end Brody surprisingly doesn’t seem like Arnie’s androgynous embryo (in the ending sequence his muscle-bound body was particularly impressive... or else CGI technology is much more advanced that I thought) and so only the more expensive half away from the jungle is the only thing that spoils it; not that it’s outright bad, but it lags far behind the first half in terms of quality. In the better half, it’s so good that it is better than the original. (07/09/2010)

After “Arnie’s” first one, this is hands down the best film in the Predator universe, though the original holds that first place mainly for the cult status it has gained over the years. By this I mean that both are basically the same, but whereas Predators is intentionally silly in a cute 1980s way, in Predator  that’s unintentional and therefore better (or worse, depending on how you see it), thanks to is earnestness. Nimrod Antal proves that the fears about his choice as director were unwarranted. I wasn’t expecting any interesting directorial tricks, but Predators is a film where the craftsmanship and the sense for execution and atmosphere are more than enough. I had a little problem with Adrien Brody, who’s maybe a bit too good a character actor for the role. In short, Predators is almost excellent, I got exactly what I wanted. PS: “Die, you space faggot” is almost as great as “You’re one ugly motherfucker”… (07/08/2010)

Predators would like to appear as an enriching tribute to the original, but they turn out to be a weaker and oddly strange remake. Unfortunately, what worked twenty years ago as an uncompromising rampage now occasionally seems amusing and tiresome in a more psychological sense. The disappointment is even greater because the introduction, full of confused tough guys and tension, promised a lot. However, when the script decides to involve the strategic side of things in the finale and clumsily adds complications and twists involving the characters themselves, everything goes downhill. Not even the good acting duo of Brody-Grace can save it. 50% (01/08/2011)

If I wanted to use a strong word, I’d probably use "disappointment" first, but "wasted potential" seems more appropriate with hindsight. Antal is talented, there’s no denying it because for two hours I felt like I was watching unadulterated 1980s carnage. It’s aided by good cinematography, and Debney’s brilliant soundtrack (those native drums just work even twenty-three years later). The present bunch is worse. True, I can't expect psychological miniatures, but... damn, couldn't it have been stretched for a few more minutes so we could learn a little more about them? There are all sorts of excuses for this, such as the fact that action movies were made this way when the first film was made. But what do you do with one random survivor and a nutcase with a scalpel? It’s also hard to love a film where I have to hit my head a lot to shake the memory of any significant action out of it. In that regard, I'll be eagerly awaiting the Director's Cut on DVD. Until then, it gets a hesitant 3 ½ stars. PS: The first half earns five stars. (07/09/2010)

It is very clear that Roberto as a producer really took care (from the cast, to the director, to the soundtrack, etc.). I have to agree that the first half is more mysterious, more suspenseful, and much more atmospheric; the second half lags a bit compared to the first, but still the result is great. Seeing it in the cinema is a must! :))) (07/09/2010)