Predators 2

[spider-neil]

With all the Predator graphic novels out there, you'd think someone would have based a movie on at least one of them.

My favourite was Batman v Predator. Sounds like a joke but it was awesome.

 

[Nathan]

I hope I'll see the day when everything gets adapted, no matter how silly. I don't care if I'm 60 or 70 at that point. I want to see a Batman vs Predator Movie happening.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Batman vs Tarzan was a silly concept but I'd love to see a movie.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Oh snap!

I just thought about them doing Tarzan vs Predator.

Not a graphic novel but still.

 

[Ant-manic]

Rambo vs Predator

 

[Teelie]

That's actually not far off from the origin of Predator where it started off as a joke that the only opponent for Rocky was an alien from another planet. Of course it got many revisions to the point that it became entirely different and Stallone didn't get involved but Arnold instead.

 

[Thundarr]

Maybe, like us, they realized that nothing they have done managed to better or on-par with the first Predator. So they are simply not bothering anymore and just try to milk the first one.

Or maybe they just wanna see Jesse Ventura's chest explode in 3D? C'mon! You gotta admit that scene would look totally f**k'n awesome in 3D!

 

[Thundarr]

He shouldn't come back unless it's a cameo. There comes a point where you just have to say no more, the actor just is too old.

Maybe not a cameo, but most certainly a smaller role. Like maybe he's the commanding officer of a team of commandos specially trained to hunt down and capture/kill a Predator should one return to Earth for another hunt. He'll send his men out on their mission, perhaps arrive in the choppah when they go to retrieve his men, but he won't be their field commander anymore. He'll be like the colonal in the first two Rambo movies. That'll be a good fit for him.

 

[Thundarr]

3D is slowly on its way out (especially with the 3D TVs not selling) so I'm not expecting it to be in the theaters. I am kind of surprised it is being released in 3D at all though.

I don't know about that. I went to see the WWE Money In The Bank PPV last Sunday. With the exception of the PPV and Grown Ups 2, every movie in the 10 cinema multiplex was in 3D.

And with the relatively low number of people owning 3D televisions, it might make more financial sense to rerelease Predator in 3D in the theatres, like they did with The Franchise Menace and more recently Jurassic Park. Some of those scenes will look awesome in 3D (as I mentioned earlier, Jesse Ventura's chest exploding). I don't know if there are any deleted scenes that could/should be edited back into the film, but this could also be a great opportunity to release a Director's Cut.

 

[Thundarr]

With all the Predator graphic novels out there, you'd think someone would have based a movie on at least one of them.

Someone has. It was the first Alien vs Predator movie. Unfortunately the studio couldn't resist butting in where they didn't belong and we ended up with the giant turd that AVP turned into.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

i still don't understand just how anyone can screw up Alien vs Predator

 

[Ant-manic]

Expendables 4: Predators

 

[Thundarr]

i still don't understand just how anyone can screw up Alien vs Predator

I think it's in the studio executives job discription that they absolutely must take everything that's very simple and complicate it. And whenever possible, no matter how good a writer's script is, or how exciting the director's vision, they absolutely, positively, must muck it up somehow. If you don't agree to those terms during the interview you don't get the job.

 

[Brian Braddock]

That's actually not far off from the origin of Predator where it started off as a joke that the only opponent for Rocky was an alien from another planet. Of course it got many revisions to the point that it became entirely different and Stallone didn't get involved but Arnold instead.

Reminds me of Beverley Hill Cop. That too was written for Stallone but, as we all know, it became Murphys film and was revised to the point that it was unrecognisable.

 

[Teelie]

I don't know about that. I went to see the WWE Money In The Bank PPV last Sunday. With the exception of the PPV and Grown Ups 2, every movie in the 10 cinema multiplex was in 3D.

And with the relatively low number of people owning 3D televisions, it might make more financial sense to rerelease Predator in 3D in the theatres, like they did with The Franchise Menace and more recently Jurassic Park. Some of those scenes will look awesome in 3D (as I mentioned earlier, Jesse Ventura's chest exploding). I don't know if there are any deleted scenes that could/should be edited back into the film, but this could also be a great opportunity to release a Director's Cut.

This is came from the people who produce this stuff are saying. Less than 5% of people who own a 3D television actually use the 3D aspect. The BBC is no longer going to be airing it after their Doctor Who 50th anniversary special, ESPN is discontinuing it's 3D channel at the end of the year and the number of people going to doctors for eye problems (eye strain, headaches, physically ill etc) has gone up since the use of 3D glasses.

And on top of that the glasses cost as much as $50 a pair so if you want more than two people to watch a 3D show, you have to shell out another $50 each. Plus the demand just isn't there and the glasses themselves are discomforting.

Spike on 3D TV's death.
Forbes on 3D TV's death and the push for 4k TV instead.
Reuters on Disney (who owns ESPN) killing off the 3D network.
Huffington Post on the eye problems from 3D. 25% of viewers experience trouble with 3D. That being on top of those who don't "see" with the 3D glasses themselves.
Optometrists on the 3D causing issues for their patients.

 

[Dugath]

This is came from the people who produce this stuff are saying. Less than 5% of people who own a 3D television actually use the 3D aspect. The BBC is no longer going to be airing it after their Doctor Who 50th anniversary special, ESPN is discontinuing it's 3D channel at the end of the year and the number of people going to doctors for eye problems (eye strain, headaches, physically ill etc) has gone up since the use of 3D glasses.

And on top of that the glasses cost as much as $50 a pair so if you want more than two people to watch a 3D show, you have to shell out another $50 each. Plus the demand just isn't there and the glasses themselves are discomforting.

Guess you are leaving out the part about active or passive.
Yes Active 3d glasses can be pricy, but who cares, buy it and then you have it for long term enjoyment.

Passive glasses, you can get packs of them for hardly anything.

As for people having Eye issues because of 3D (which I can neither confirm or deny).. but if true, then it is because of user fault mostly. People need to learn about moderation. Also there is even a warning on Active 3D as it might cause side affects with some people.

Lots of people do no research when buying a 3D tv and which (passive/Active) would be better for them. When/if they have issues there is no one to blame but themselves.

As for going to 3D movies.. (which I love).. If watching those are causing people issues, they probably should not go I suppose

 

[Thundarr]

This is came from the people who produce this stuff are saying. Less than 5% of people who own a 3D television actually use the 3D aspect. The BBC is no longer going to be airing it after their Doctor Who 50th anniversary special, ESPN is discontinuing it's 3D channel at the end of the year and the number of people going to doctors for eye problems (eye strain, headaches, physically ill etc) has gone up since the use of 3D glasses.

And on top of that the glasses cost as much as $50 a pair so if you want more than two people to watch a 3D show, you have to shell out another $50 each. Plus the demand just isn't there and the glasses themselves are discomforting.

Spike on 3D TV's death.
Forbes on 3D TV's death and the push for 4k TV instead.
Reuters on Disney (who owns ESPN) killing off the 3D network.
Huffington Post on the eye problems from 3D. 25% of viewers experience trouble with 3D. That being on top of those who don't "see" with the 3D glasses themselves.
Optometrists on the 3D causing issues for their patients.

I wasn't arguing against your claim that 3D TVs weren't selling as well as their production companies thought/hoped. But your claim that 3D movies being released in theatres seems inaccurate. As I said before, 8 out of the 10 cinemas in the theatre I went to last Sunday was showing 3D movies. If it weren't for the WWE PPV, it might have been 9 out of 10. 3D might be a fad that will fizzle out eventually, but I don't see that happening any time in the immediate future.

 

[MadVillainy]

Just rewatched Predators. Really was hoping they'd announce a new film

 

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah, I liked Predators overall. I think it could have been better, but there was plenty to build on there and they could make a great sequel.

Oh, well.

 

[Nathan]

I just hope the next time it won't be such a deja-vu fest. They copied just way too much from the first Movie.

 

[kane9321]

Bumped 'cause I just watched the movie again.

I still say a prequel set some time in Earth's history would be the best way to go.

Predators vs Spartans

Predators vs Apache Indians

Predators vs Vikings

Predators vs Samurai/Ninja

Predators vs Knights


The list of possibilities goes on and on.

See this is what I'm saying...show the preds in a differrent time period

win win

 

[Thundarr]

See this is what I'm saying...show the preds in a differrent time period

win win

I've been saying that since Predator 2!

 

[Teelie]

Guess you are leaving out the part about active or passive.
Yes Active 3d glasses can be pricy, but who cares, buy it and then you have it for long term enjoyment.

Passive glasses, you can get packs of them for hardly anything.

As for people having Eye issues because of 3D (which I can neither confirm or deny).. but if true, then it is because of user fault mostly. People need to learn about moderation. Also there is even a warning on Active 3D as it might cause side affects with some people.

Lots of people do no research when buying a 3D tv and which (passive/Active) would be better for them. When/if they have issues there is no one to blame but themselves.

As for going to 3D movies.. (which I love).. If watching those are causing people issues, they probably should not go I suppose

The average person watches television 5 hours a day. Whether you use the glasses or not, it messes with your brain's ability to interpet what the eyes are seeing. This is easily confirmed by looking at virtually any study on the effects of the effect. You pointed out yourself they warn you. But the glasses are only one factor in it. It's the 3D itself which is a problem. The constant going from 3D viewing to reality is hard to adjust to and what causes people to avoid it.

That's all beside the point, the point was that the technology itself just isn't there for the mainstream audience yet (if ever). So blaming the mainstream audience, the people who will be targeted at and vital to its success, needs to be able to use it without all kinds of special provisions and limitations and that's the speed bump to the continuance of current 3D tech. Winking and shrugging it off won't make the mainstream audience accept it.

So while you might be able to sit and watch 3D effects for five hours and not suffer but the majority of people will and that will keep this from succeeding.

3D in theaters is a little different. First, it's in a totally dark room with no other lights or visual distractions (except for the jackasses with the phones they keep playing with). Watching on average 1.5-2 hours and not enough time to affect most people.

Add to this that the theaters paid a lot of money for these machines they were promised would bring in huge audiences (and in some cases coerced into buying), they are naturally promoting them hard to recoup their losses so you'll see a lot of screenings in 3D. How many of them are filled on an average showing compared to a showing on normal film? After the first weekend I imagine 3D showings plummet in comparison to those who watch it traditionally.

That it is not the success it was predicted to be means it will go away but it is not going to as quickly as past 3D attempts did either.

It will be a different case altogether when we get "true" 3D in the form of holographic film but that isn't in the immediate future. That will not require the eyes to refocus and adjust quite so much but it isn't a well enough tested technology to say it will be easy on the brain adjusting.

If you like 3D, that's great. Watch all you like but don't be surprised to find out if this is later called the last major year of 3D (2013D) where 3D is widely seen and that it dwindles in 2014.

That's long enough.

Though I would have loved to see any of the Predator movies in 3D.

 

[Thundarr]

The average person watches television 5 hours a day. Whether you use the glasses or not, it messes with your brain's ability to interpet what the eyes are seeing. This is easily confirmed by looking at virtually any study on the effects of the effect. You pointed out yourself they warn you. But the glasses are only one factor in it. It's the 3D itself which is a problem. The constant going from 3D viewing to reality is hard to adjust to and what causes people to avoid it.

That's all beside the point, the point was that the technology itself just isn't there for the mainstream audience yet (if ever). So blaming the mainstream audience, the people who will be targeted at and vital to its success, needs to be able to use it without all kinds of special provisions and limitations and that's the speed bump to the continuance of current 3D tech. Winking and shrugging it off won't make the mainstream audience accept it.

So while you might be able to sit and watch 3D effects for five hours and not suffer but the majority of people will and that will keep this from succeeding.

3D in theaters is a little different. First, it's in a totally dark room with no other lights or visual distractions (except for the jackasses with the phones they keep playing with). Watching on average 1.5-2 hours and not enough time to affect most people.

Add to this that the theaters paid a lot of money for these machines they were promised would bring in huge audiences (and in some cases coerced into buying), they are naturally promoting them hard to recoup their losses so you'll see a lot of screenings in 3D. How many of them are filled on an average showing compared to a showing on normal film? After the first weekend I imagine 3D showings plummet in comparison to those who watch it traditionally.

That it is not the success it was predicted to be means it will go away but it is not going to as quickly as past 3D attempts did either.

It will be a different case altogether when we get "true" 3D in the form of holographic film but that isn't in the immediate future. That will not require the eyes to refocus and adjust quite so much but it isn't a well enough tested technology to say it will be easy on the brain adjusting.

If you like 3D, that's great. Watch all you like but don't be surprised to find out if this is later called the last major year of 3D (2013D) where 3D is widely seen and that it dwindles in 2014.

That's long enough.

Though I would have loved to see any of the Predator movies in 3D.

Again you're arguing about the effects of 3D TVs on your eyes. I don't even own a TV, I have a video projector (IMO much better than a TV). If they're rereleasing Predator in 3D IN THEATRES, then it doesn't really matter. And even if it does get rereleased on BluRay in 3D it doesn't really matter. Because you can choose whether or not you watch it in 3D. If the 3D glasses bug you? THEN WATCH IT IN 2D!

 

[samsnee]

See this is what I'm saying...show the preds in a differrent time period

win win

Eh, that would get old. Every movie has the same formula where the first half is a group of people who have no idea what's hunting them.

I want a Predator movie where we take the hunt to the Predator. No more "What was that?" setup for the plot.