Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kalyx triaD
After reading some of the rants on AvP, I must say some of these so-called fans are taking the cut far too seriously. Any cross over automatically has an uphill battle to please two fan groups. Ask any comic book writer and they'll tell you. Hell, I'm a writer and after some drafts of Superman/DBZ, I can tell you you can never please both fans fully. But these 'kids', who most likely have no idea how to pen a script or how many other factors can alter your finished work, are tearing into Mr. Anderson unreasonably. Some elements in his script were hard to swallow, like the human/Predator team; but any true fan of AvP (The tales been told through comics and games for a decade now) knows that it isn't the first time Predators accepted humans in battles.
I mean damn, how many worst movies ever can exist?
|
Considering that there are only two "vs." movies in recent times that I can think of, the Crossover genre of movies is pretty limited right now. THis movie was worse than Freddy vs. Jason, so one could easily accept the lable of "worst movie of it's genre" for AvP.
Also, "Any cross over automatically has an uphill battle to please two fan groups. " I have to disagree, because I never heard a bad review of the storylines for computer game and its sequel. The LEAST the writers could have done was maintained any sort of continuity to the characterizations of the alien and the predator. I haven't seen the movie, but I know enough about it to come to the following conclusions:
1: The movie is set in the present. If that were the case, people haven't SEEN FREAKING ALIENS BEFORE. So why in the hell doesn't the movie turn into a "Contact" ripoff? Because it was written badly.
2: Why is it in antarctica? THe previous two Predator movies made note that the predator felt more comfortable in very hot places. This movie should have at least have been in an environment where the temperature is either hot or at least warm enough that you don't notice the temperature.
Now, I don't want to rip into you too much here, but I'm a writer just like you are. I don't consider crossovers to be entirely inspiring, but I do them every now and then to entertain my friends. But that's just the thing: they're supposed to ENTERTAIN. These "kids" as you refer to them (meaning anyone who didn't like the movie) aren't saying that they're dissatisfied about minor details in the movie. (ok, griping about the PG-13 is a little petty, but I've heard about a lot more bad in the movie than just that.)
Defending this movie because crossover scripts are hard to write just doesn't cut it anymore. Until last summer, it was impossible to write a "good" comic book adaptation, because you can't please everyone. X2 broke that trend. Then until this summer, it was impossible to write a "great" comic book adaptation for the same reasons. Spiderman 2 cured us of that ignorance. My point here is that Anderson's vision of the crossover wasn't even an effort to make a quality movie. It was made to make bucks quantitatively. Furthermore, although I agree that this movie couldn't possibly be the worst movie of all time, chances are that the writing wasn't the producer's top priority. Just making the movie was probably their top priority (because the name AvP itself could sell even if the screenplay was written by the same team as "Anacondas.")