Example?
They would need to be prepping for a cinema release long in advance. They assumed this would be of equal/lesser quality to the previous few
There is no reason in physics why such a weapon wouldn't. Similar weapons were in use elsewhere in the world at the same time.
They know beforehand how good a film is and also do test screenings before release to see how it is being received.
I think Disney know exactly what they are doing.
I didn't enjoy it too much. I thought the acting was not that great
I don't think that they had that level of faith at all, until reviews started coming in
I wouldn't agree that Disney had no faith. I'd say it was a strategic decision to improve the content of Disney+ and attract subscribers as they are heavily invested in the service and believe in its future.
Netflix and Prime do the same and people don't find it unusual or controversial.
Honestly I think that's a very valid point. In retrospect, this would have been a great cinema release, but I say that after seeing the movie.
I, like so many other people, have a deep love for the Predator franchise, despite the majority of the films being pretty damn bad and I was very skeptical of this movie when it was announced. I probably wouldn't have paid to buy tickets to this movie because I had such low expectations of this film and I would have waited for it's streaming release.
Just watched it, very enjoyable. Not surprised by the Mary Sue crew, it's in line with their usual misogynism. At least they're consistent.
I enjoyed to watch it on the TV
Not sure it would have made a good cinema screen event.
But I still enjoyed it
Any film can ask that, every release is a risk, but plenty of small films do gangbusters on good will and word of mouth: the Jumanji reboot made 300 million off its 50 million budget IIRC on good word of mouth; Everything Everywhere All at Once has done just shy of 100 million - which is insane for what the film is and was made for buttons. Good word of mouth can do a lot of grunt work social media campaigns can't.
We can't know for sure but were the film not so happily cinematic I wouldn't have cared so much it didn't get a wide release. But as I've said before medium sized blockbusters don't get a fair shake anymore.
And how many that watched it here would actually go to the cinema to watch it? Would those who say it would've been better on the big screen have thought that before watching it?
its cheap when you dont have to market it, this one was a 90m one right? dont they say double it for marketing so now you are up to 150ish . the last Predator movie took in 160m in the cinema , so this film would need to take in north of 300m to breakeven. it just looks like the sums dont add up.
I should add that obviously Disney had no faith, given the last attempt only 4 years prior was a total disaster top to bottom. It's not without some justification the Mouse House might have been slow to shove this into cinemas.
The movie has reviewed well and has enjoyed excellent word of mouth; there's no good reason it couldn't have been a modest success as a midtier release. Disney obviously had no faith in the franchise and perhaps, are too obsessed with mega hits.
This film could have easily made its (presumably) low budget back, with the rest being gravy.
I would have much preferred to see it on the big screen. Would not have taken much at all for that to do quite well in the cinema. what's in at the moment worth seeing?
It's the first home film, in a long time, that I did not look at my phone once.
its not a slam dunk, its one thing paying a few bucks to seeing it online versus shelling out 50 or 60 to go see it in the cinema. Its clearly not summer blockbuster material ,
Saw some of The Predator last night, had forgotten how unbelievably bad it was.
Yeah, someone needs to be fired. It's a definite cinema release. Far far worse gets cinema releases and do well
In terms of the series stacking it sits with Predator 2, below the original.
I always feel that P2 gets unfairly maligned. If it was the original film it would be viewed as a very good 80/90s action/sci-fi. But it didn't have Arnie so gets lamblasted. It really gives claustrophobic feel to LA during a hot and horribly humid summer
So I just watched it. It's not perfect but it's not terribly bad either.
Such a pity it was not released in the cinemas. I would have went to see it 3 times at least but sure I will just watch it for free instead on my phone.
I thought it was very dark and hard to see in parts and some of the scenes were hard to make out what was going on too. Like the last fight with Naru and the predator I have watched it twice already and still could not makeout how she cut off the Predators arm or how the laser pointer reflected like it did.
I would give it 7 out of 10.
It might have gotten 9 or 10 out of 10 had it been in the cinema and a little more light and care gone into the film.
Yeah , the physics of such a weapon seem suspect. Its like a fantasy type weapon wielded by the likes of Thor and Kratos.
According to lore Predators return to claim the dead and collect their tech so it doesn't fall into enemy hands. Slaying the tribe goes against their code of honour.
yup, so my thinking is some more preds wiped out the tribe
I haven't checked but was the pistol that featured in Prey the same one that was seen in the Predator ship from Predator 2?
Ah yes, looking back that makes complete sense now, as I always thought they just appeared there but they were there all the time and witnessed the killing and were impressed, hence the reward of the pistol.
Only took me 32 years to work that out.😀
Interesting timeline of the Predator movies from AV Club
Includes the plot of Prey.
those other predators were on the ship in L.A overseeing the hunt , that's what the common explanation is/was apparently!
Also, how come at the end of Predator 2, when the Predator was killed that a bunch of his buddies turned up immediately to retrieve his body but in this film she could claim his head as a trophy an nobody turned up (apart from 3 incoming ships in the animated credits, must be for Prey 2).
I just watched it for what it is – switch off you brain action film that essentially has the same type story as the other predator films, but at the same time is a very well made movie. I didn’t at any time think to myself that the action parts were ridiculous. I was just entertained by the film.
The only part that got me puzzled was I did ponder on how she got the predator to shoot itself. She had obviously set the helmet thing in a particular position to aim at the predator when he stood what had to be a specific position. And was counting on the fact that predator would shoot when he is in that specific position.
Anyway, that’s the only thing that got me thinking anything negative. Maybe I am wrong in that analysis. I haven’t watched it back. As was repeated here, and as I suggested myself, it’s a sc-fi movie. We know that going into it. If the writer/director/producer wants to bring anything into the film, in my opinion, they have license to.
I think I saw Predator 2 some time in the 90s but don't remember it at all (beyond a bit where the predator wouldn't attack someone because they were pregnant and the baby was unarmed?) and obviously I've seen the original a few times as it's shown on telly so frequently, pretty sure I haven't seen any of the others. I think Prey compares well to the original and thought the decision to set it in the past was a good one. The Mary Sue comments don't really hold up for me, the lead was clearly shown to be already training herself as a hunter and had numerous montages depicting her continuing to train, develop her skills, endure her failures and earn her wins. The scene where she dispatches a bunch of trappers was way OTT but in a series kicked off by a classic Schwarzenegger performance, a bit of OTT violence is to be expected imo. It's not like Star Wars where an untrained girl suddenly surpasses all other practitioners of the form of "magic" she possesses the ability to use because she's so special...
Got to see this last night after watching Predator 1 & 2 first as refreshers as I hadn't seen them in years.
Glad I did as I enjoyed them as I did Prey.
Predator is what it is, an alien that enjoys hunting and each movie is a separate adventure for them.
No lore, no backstory, no romances, family issues or sub-plots. Just action and violence.
I thought this one was done very well, was a visual treat (some shots were definitely for the cinema) and was thoroughly enjoyable 100 minutes that I will have forgotten about in a few weeks.
This thread is laughable with complaints of Mary Sue, White knights and even about the Comanche language not being used pitting people off.
Did people complain about everybody speaking English in Schindler's List or even Star Wars? Ridiculous complaint.
Some movies are to be enjoyed for what they are, an entertaining action flick and should not be over-analysed.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5dc0c82bb5d5c9e7a358d7971a18240f.svg)
