How is Predators (2010) any better than The Predator (2018)?

[Huggs]

Predators is a predator movie, set in a predator environment.

The Predator is a dark comedy with long stretches of doing nothing and pointless dialogue at hotels, houses and farms.

Can I quote you on this? That was awesome. 

Feel free. It's the damn truth.

[AhabPredator]

Predators is a predator movie, set in a predator environment.

The Predator is a dark comedy with long stretches of doing nothing and pointless dialogue at hotels, houses and farms.

Can I quote you on this? That was awesome. 

Feel free. It's the damn truth.

Oh, I agree. I just found it amusing. It felt like a Mauler video quote.

[LastSurvivor92]

Fair points as well. But that movie didn't leave me wanting to walk out because of how bad it was. The Predator did. Pure cringe in some parts. At least Predators got the formula and tone correct.

Honestly, I thought I was going to see nothing but 'cringe' in The Predator but actually got the complete opposite after I viewed it. I liked the characters, the set up and objectively I thought the giant Predator was pretty cool. Predators got the tone right and it was more realistic in some of it's approaches to the story and lore of Predator but it still fell short with quite a few critics. I found The Predator to be just as entertaining and if not more fun than Predators. I don't think Predators is bad and I actually like it, it's just I don't see in retrospect how It comes out being on top of anything in comparison to this newest Predator film.

[AhabPredator]

Fair points as well. But that movie didn't leave me wanting to walk out because of how bad it was. The Predator did. Pure cringe in some parts. At least Predators got the formula and tone correct.

Honestly, I thought I was going to see nothing but 'cringe' in The Predator but actually got the complete opposite after I viewed it. I liked the characters, the set up and objectively I thought the giant Predator was pretty cool. Predators got the tone right and it was more realistic in some of it's approaches to the story and lore of Predator but it still fell short with quite a few critics. I found The Predator to be just as entertaining and if not more fun than Predators. I don't think Predators is bad and I actually like it, it's just I don't see in retrospect how It comes out being on top of anything in comparison to this newest Predator film.

Everyone will have their likes and dislikes and both points have merit, but ultimately the new one was not successful or well received.

[Deadmeat]

Predators understood what it wanted to do. It knew what kind of movie it wanted to be. Whether it actually lived up to its own expectations or not, well... we can all agree it fell short. But ultimately it never had an identity crisis.

The Predator was confused about its goal since day 1. Rewrites, reshoots, recasts... A movie can benefit from changing itself halfway into production, there more than a few examples to prove that. But even those cases are exceptions to the rule. Relying on that chance is a mistake no seasoned director should done.

Both movies fell on their noses, but for different reasons.

[Gilfryd]

Yeah both are pretty lousy to me, with eerily similar concepts and ideas (big Predator vs normal Predator, Predator dogs).

Sorta like AVP and Prometheus (ancient aliens, star maps, temples).

[CelticP]

The easiest answer is that Predators doesn't butcher the lore, The Predator does.

Nah, this isn't it. The Predator is lousy for a lot of reasons. Mostly halfway through the editing starts to get real sloppy, and story elements from the reshoots start to slam into each other creating a incoherent mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be, and that's kind of the problem.

The lore doesn't matter because someone else will come along and do their own thing, which will add or remove elements of it.


Predators rules because it actually makes a pretty fun Predator story with a lower budget, and a pretty stacked cast of character actors. I mean holy hell is it great. It also doesn't try as hard to please the fans outside of some lame call backs. For the most part it does it's own thing, and adds enough new elements that it felt (and feels) fresh.

[PsyKore]

Predators is more competently put together but it feels like diet coke. Just missing something to really make it substantial. By no means bad though. This film actually grew on me more over time.

The Predator I feel is way more entertaining but it's choppy, not grounded, messes with established lore, rewrites how their tech works. The kid and the autism angle is ridiculous. The whole film is frustrating. Plus, that godawful ending...

[El Pistolero]

The interesting thing about predators is, that this movie brings kind of racism to the predator culture while different humans from all over the world have to work together to defeat them.

The thing is, we saw bad bloods already in the comic books. It was refreshing to see that in a predator movie. And I dont think that the super preds are just genetically modified, they are just the Vikings under the predators. And I want to see more different kind of predators. Maybe they live on more than one planet, maybe thak makes them different from each other.
And that movie gives a sweet tribute to the first one, we all love.

The Predator is something different. This movie comes with new rule they dont work out with me and most of the fans and the narrative is also very bad. I dont hate it, but it killed the universe for a while. I think we will get another one, but not in the next years

[AhabPredator]

The easiest answer is that Predators doesn't butcher the lore, The Predator does.

Nah, this isn't it. The Predator is lousy for a lot of reasons. Mostly halfway through the editing starts to get real sloppy, and story elements from the reshoots start to slam into each other creating a incoherent mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be, and that's kind of the problem.

The lore doesn't matter because someone else will come along and do their own thing, which will add or remove elements of it.


Predators rules because it actually makes a pretty fun Predator story with a lower budget, and a pretty stacked cast of character actors. I mean holy hell is it great. It also doesn't try as hard to please the fans outside of some lame call backs. For the most part it does it's own thing, and adds enough new elements that it felt (and feels) fresh.

Lore absolutely matters. They are established rules of the universe provided by the prior movies. Without them, there is no suspension of disbelief. Without that, we can't invest in the ideas, characters, and story being pushed forward. They would be a farse.

It becomes a mindless action flick. And that is not what made Predator 1987 legendary.

[Russ]

Lore absolutely matters.

It does - look at TLJ... one example (of many) is that they completely subvert Star Wars lore with the hyperspace trick - thus rendering both Death Star battles pointless (they could have just launched 100 R2 piloted x-wings at them at light speed and have done with it).

Predators felt like a Predator movie that was set in the Predator universe. The Predator felt like... well, I don't know what it felt like. I'll have to watch it again, but I remember really thinking it was pants when I saw it the first time.

The super-preds in "Predators" felt... natural. The UberPred in The Predator felt like "we need something bigger and badder than the usual Predator"... it felt forced to me in a way that Predators never did.

Royce was a decent character played by a more-than-decent actor... the realisation that he was using the rest of the team for bait... stuff like that ... it was just really well done. The fact that the Yakuza bloke was able to fight the predator was thrilling... it really was (to me anyway)... the JCVD predator design... all that stuff. I just really liked it.

I just thought the team in The Predator were stupid and annoying - and this was a team that had Thomas Jane and Boyd Holbrook.... the banter felt false in a way that 87's didn't... I dunno...

I had really high hopes - I mean ... bringing Shane Black... the portents were good... and really... it was all a bit shit.

[CelticP]

The easiest answer is that Predators doesn't butcher the lore, The Predator does.

Nah, this isn't it. The Predator is lousy for a lot of reasons. Mostly halfway through the editing starts to get real sloppy, and story elements from the reshoots start to slam into each other creating a incoherent mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be, and that's kind of the problem.

The lore doesn't matter because someone else will come along and do their own thing, which will add or remove elements of it.


Predators rules because it actually makes a pretty fun Predator story with a lower budget, and a pretty stacked cast of character actors. I mean holy hell is it great. It also doesn't try as hard to please the fans outside of some lame call backs. For the most part it does it's own thing, and adds enough new elements that it felt (and feels) fresh.

Lore absolutely matters. They are established rules of the universe provided by the prior movies. Without them, there is no suspension of disbelief. Without that, we can't invest in the ideas, characters, and story being pushed forward. They would be a farse.

It becomes a mindless action flick. And that is not what made Predator 1987 legendary.

All this stuff can easily be done without lore though. Suspension of disbelief (which I feel like you can do with any film ever made. It's totally up to the viewer) doesn't hinge on if the Predator kills unarmed people or juices itself with dna.

A good story is a good story. If it's good enough and changes everything, no one really minds. Every Predator film and Alien film keeps adding things that weren't there, and often ignores aspects of the films that came before it. But because (for the most part) they're good enough, people don't mind.

I just don't find canon or lore interesting these days and wish someone would just go for broke and get weird with these concepts. The franchises are so old at this point and for most people they're getting stale.

And the TLJ hyperspace complaint is the one of the worst in my opinion. It was cool. It looked cool. If this is your hang up in a franchise where it established and took away the idea the force Is little microbes then I dunno. Sounds like a stressful way to watch movies.

[AhabPredator]

The easiest answer is that Predators doesn't butcher the lore, The Predator does.

Nah, this isn't it. The Predator is lousy for a lot of reasons. Mostly halfway through the editing starts to get real sloppy, and story elements from the reshoots start to slam into each other creating a incoherent mess. It doesn't know what it wants to be, and that's kind of the problem.

The lore doesn't matter because someone else will come along and do their own thing, which will add or remove elements of it.


Predators rules because it actually makes a pretty fun Predator story with a lower budget, and a pretty stacked cast of character actors. I mean holy hell is it great. It also doesn't try as hard to please the fans outside of some lame call backs. For the most part it does it's own thing, and adds enough new elements that it felt (and feels) fresh.

Lore absolutely matters. They are established rules of the universe provided by the prior movies. Without them, there is no suspension of disbelief. Without that, we can't invest in the ideas, characters, and story being pushed forward. They would be a farse.

It becomes a mindless action flick. And that is not what made Predator 1987 legendary.

All this stuff can easily be done without lore though. Suspension of disbelief (which I feel like you can do with any film ever made. It's totally up to the viewer) doesn't hinge on if the Predator kills unarmed people or juices itself with dna.

A good story is a good story. If it's good enough and changes everything, no one really minds. Every Predator film and Alien film keeps adding things that weren't there, and often ignores aspects of the films that came before it. But because (for the most part) they're good enough, people don't mind.

I just don't find canon or lore interesting these days and wish someone would just go for broke and get weird with these concepts. The franchises are so old at this point and for most people they're getting stale.

And the TLJ hyperspace complaint is the one of the worst in my opinion. It was cool. It looked cool. If this is your hang up in a franchise where it established and took away the idea the force Is little microbes then I dunno. Sounds like a stressful way to watch movies.

Turn brain off, look at pretty colors. 

The fan feedback of both franchises tells me what I need to know on that one lol.

[CelticP]

Story, character, and themes aren't lore. They're just things that existed before that people want to keep going for continuity. It really doesn't affect the overall narrative unless you're a fan.

[Wysps]

Story, character, and themes aren't lore. They're just things that existed before that people want to keep going for continuity. It really doesn't affect the overall narrative unless you're a fan.

What would you define lore as being, if not stories, characters, and themes that are continuous throughout the media?