There were no Human trophies in Prey

[CANNON]

We don't see what he does with Taabe or the Bear and the leader of the fur hunters was still a worthy trophy considering he led the entire group of people Feral had the most fun and sport in hunting. Point is, Feral did try to make a human trophy this movie contrary to what everyone in the first page of this thread tried saying.

The skull of both should have been at his belt like the snake and wolf. The fact that he just stopped at those two is completely out of character.

I agree with you - it would have been nice to see more of an emphasis placed on the trophy. A scene where feral is coveting or admiring his collection would have went a long way in reinforcing the nature of Predator in prey.

Also more of an emphasis on flayed bodies from tree tops, that was an important one.

[PAS]

I like how the goalpost has moved back to once again being "I wish Feral acted just like Jungle Hunter"

[Coolertonic7]

I like how the goalpost has moved back to once again being "I wish Feral acted just like Jungle Hunter"

It's kind of funny how on the alien side of the franchise you get people who don't want things to be just like the originals, but on the predator side you get people who only want things to be like in the original.

[CANNON]

I like how the goalpost has moved back to once again being "I wish Feral acted just like Jungle Hunter"

While I respect your viewpoint and I can't speak for all fans but I personally don't think it's about "acting just like jungle hunter" per se.
Without delving to deep into examples I'll just say I feel the logic is and I'm sure you could agree, at it's simplest form the original two films established and introduced audiences to predator in film and in doing so defined their specific nature and habits.

Now both city hunter and jungle hunter were very different predators with very different styles and approaches but their formula and predator-esqe habits were the same. Mctiernan established that nature im speaking of while Stephen Hopkins understood it and to his credit emphasized that on screen in p2 further establishing the set formula.

The point is as fun as prey is and as close as it does come, for some fans myself included feral felt less than and different from that established Predator nature which I've described. I think Dan could have emphasized that nature a bit more with feral but that's my opinion.

Truth is - no one has got Predator right since those original films so at this point what difference does it really make. Fact of the matter is, those original films are so old now and coupled with the failures that came after them that I think the old timer Predator fans myself included aren't heard anymore, dismissed for the new marketable versions for a new generational audience.

[PAS]

Yes, Feral is different, he is a different individual from a different culture from a different part of the planet, that's one of his main characteristics.

[CANNON]

Yes, Feral is different, he is a different individual from a different culture from a different part of the planet, that's one of his main characteristics.

Understood and I suppose if that's all you've concluded from what I wrote then my last paragraph is truly and conclusively where we are and where there is a cross between fans.

[PAS]

The rest of your paragraph really just sounds like nostalgia. Prey got the Predator right and at it gets quite tiring to see y'all come up with reasons to nitpick it at every turn, the original Predator hardly holds up by today's standards and by itself has some inconsistencies that can't be just excused as age.

[SiL]

You talk about goalpost shifting then switched to talking about effects halfway through ...

[CANNON]

The rest of your paragraph really just sounds like nostalgia. Prey got the Predator right and at it gets quite tiring to see y'all come up with reasons to nitpick it at every turn, the original Predator hardly holds up by today's standards and by itself has some inconsistencies that can't be just excused as age.

You and I are clearly on two different sides here with two totally different perspectives on Predator. Your opinionated comments regarding the original films standards of the day and "inconsistencies" validate my thought and further prove my point from my previous post.

Whether you agree or not, those original films which you have attempted to date are the establishing foundations of Predator.

[PAS]

You talk about goalpost shifting then switched to talking about effects halfway through ...

Not just the effects, hence the "inconsistencies that can't be just excused as age."
The goalpost has moved to being "Prey is not like the original movie.", so I'm gonna talk about how the original movie isn't the holy grail. The original goalpost has already been completely disproven earlier too because Feral did infact try to take a human trophy in the movie.

[SiL]

You talk about goalpost shifting then switched to talking about effects halfway through ...

Not just the effects, hence the "inconsistencies that can't be just excused as age."

Such as?

[CANNON]

@PAS I think you are missing the point entirely. To fans, it's about how the original films established what makes up a Predator, defining his nature and habits.

Whether the movie has inconsistencies to you isn't really the point. Point is, the original films introduced us to Predator for the first time giving us an understanding and after all these years connecting us to the integral intricacies and characteristics that make up a Predator.

[solace97]

I have my gripes with PREY, but I will say the main thing that gets me with Feral is the design. I just can't stand the face on that thing.

But as far as how Feral acts, I actually didn't mind. He displayed curiosity, had a very cool development going from hunting animals to hunting humans. I thought with the design aside he was one of the better Predators we've had in a while.

I didn't really like how Feral was discovering humans for the first time, since I believe predators have been hunting humans for a long time. But this could always be fan cannoned to feral being a different species of predator from a different planet, etc, etc.

With that being said one of the other things that didn't really make sense to me was how primitive ferals equipment felt. Not necessarily the weaponry but just the design. I get what they were going for, but it felt like his design was matching the time period too closely.

Personal preference, but I like the consistency between the Predators in the first few films. Probably helped that Stan Winston was still working on it.

If I really had to nitpick Feral and the interactions with the humans, maybe a little more stalking. But even then it's hard to say because this was Ferals first time encountering humans so it seemed like Feral was just letting it rip and winging it at points. Using more of a beat down approach versus stalking

[Sabres21768]

We don't see what he does with Taabe or the Bear and the leader of the fur hunters was still a worthy trophy considering he led the entire group of people Feral had the most fun and sport in hunting. Point is, Feral did try to make a human trophy this movie contrary to what everyone in the first page of this thread tried saying.

The skull of both should have been at his belt like the snake and wolf. The fact that he just stopped at those two is completely out of character.

Incorrect. Almost all Predators have been shown to wear smaller trophies on their bodies.
So, this Pred not wearing skulls of larger creatures doesn't mean he didn't take other skulls.
He had a cave that he was hunting out of, so any larger skulls could have been kept there.

[Highland]

I have my gripes with PREY, but I will say the main thing that gets me with Feral is the design. I just can't stand the face on that thing.

But as far as how Feral acts, I actually didn't mind. He displayed curiosity, had a very cool development going from hunting animals to hunting humans. I thought with the design aside he was one of the better Predators we've had in a while.

I didn't really like how Feral was discovering humans for the first time, since I believe predators have been hunting humans for a long time. But this could always be fan cannoned to feral being a different species of predator from a different planet, etc, etc.

With that being said one of the other things that didn't really make sense to me was how primitive ferals equipment felt. Not necessarily the weaponry but just the design. I get what they were going for, but it felt like his design was matching the time period too closely.

Personal preference, but I like the consistency between the Predators in the first few films. Probably helped that Stan Winston was still working on it.

If I really had to nitpick Feral and the interactions with the humans, maybe a little more stalking. But even then it's hard to say because this was Ferals first time encountering humans so it seemed like Feral was just letting it rip and winging it at points. Using more of a beat down approach versus stalking

I think (for me) it speaks volumes about how well the movie is shot/paced, that I can still think it's a very very good film despite that (I agree) horrible face.

As for the trophy's thing....meh, doesn't really bother me. It almost just starts to encroach into " oh here's the trophy scene" which is the mistake Romulus fell into.

We don't need the same reinforcement of the same acts to keep happening to somehow qualify how the creatures act. Show us something we never saw ( like a Predator vs a bear)