Do people only want to see movies that repeat what the first two predators did?

[BigDaddyJohn]

Predator 2 did portray the predator very well (except maybe for the subway scene, a bit jason-esque), the way he hunts, uses his weapons and taunts his main prey, all this was cool.

[SiL]

Predator 2 probably outright qualifies as a slasher (and hey, the director did a Freddy film just before).

Seen in that light its $58m box office takings are actually really impressive, as slasher films typically did about $15-$20m (Freddy movies were on the higher end around $25-$35m). Unfortunately it did not cost the same as those films cost, and so bombed spectacularly.

[Local Trouble]

Speaking of OWLF, I always wondered why Adam Baldwin never came back for one of the sequels.  There were plenty of opportunities to use his character.

I thought I heard they were trying to bring him back for AvPR?

Sounds like he dodged a bullet.

[DARIAS93]

So recently, I've seen people on this forum saying that they didn't like that Prey wasn't like the first two movies.

But, considering how a lot of people on this forum reacted to Alien: Romulus, do people really want to see the first two movies over and over again.

Because, in my opinion if every movie in this franchise were copies of the first two, I would probably lose interest in this franchise.

Also, if every predator acts like jungle hunter, then what's the point of having different individuals. I'm sorry, but you are a basically treating him like Jason Voorhees, while every other predators are rejected like Roy Burns.

I don't really care if the new Predator movies stick to the original formula or not—as long as the story is strong and the characters are worth caring about. The franchise has room to explore different tones and styles, but without solid writing and emotional investment, even the best action or effects fall flat. What matters most is creating tension and stakes through characters that feel real, not just bodies for the Predator to pick off. That's why I consider Prey as one of the best in the franchise.

Predator 2 probably outright qualifies as a slasher (and hey, the director did a Freddy film just before).

Seen in that light its $58m box office takings are actually really impressive, as slasher films typically did about $15-$20m (Freddy movies were on the higher end around $25-$35m). Unfortunately it did not cost the same as those films cost, and so bombed spectacularly.

I agree—Predator 2 definitely fits within the slasher genre, and that's a big part of why it doesn't resonate with me as strongly as it does with some fans. The film essentially swaps out a masked, knife-wielding killer for an alien with advanced tech, but the structure remains the same: a mysterious, nearly unstoppable force methodically stalks and kills its victims, most of whom are given minimal development and exist largely as fodder for the body count.

While I respect the film's ambition, especially in terms of expanding the Predator's lore and shifting the setting from the jungle to a gritty, urban environment, the character work just isn't there. Most of the supporting cast feel like archetypes rather than real people—flat and one-dimensional, lacking the nuance or emotional grounding that would make their deaths impactful or their roles memorable. Harrigan stands out somewhat, if only because he has a clear arc and Danny Glover brings a certain weary intensity to the role, but even he feels more like a stock action hero than a fully fleshed-out protagonist.

Ultimately, the film's focus on spectacle and kill sequences over character depth makes it more akin to a traditional slasher than a layered sci-fi thriller. And while that works for some viewers, it leaves me feeling detached from the experience.

But hey-at least it's better than The Predator.

[BigDaddyJohn]

The best death in the franchise.

[Coolertonic7]

It must be an art to kill of characters so suddenly and out of nowhere, that it can't even be considered shock value!

[Cougerboy]

I believe that the first two Predator movies should be seen as the rule, or standard that's been set... However, I really don't want something that's a literal repeat of the first two movies but at the same time, something that just doesn't deviate too far or even betray what the first two Predator movies established.

A rule/standard or something that constrain the creative process for those in charge of the sequels? Its a fine line, one that is easy to get wrong. Variation on a theme is all nice and well, but just how much variation can the basic formula take? Some here suggest the variation on the basic theme is endless. I...tend to be a bit more skeptical of that.

Obviously yes, a predator movie should involve a hunt in some form. With a hunter and a (group) of prey, usually humans, but can be something else. But beyond that, I think there is more room to experiment on things than what some suggest here.