I don't understand the low rating. I see a review complaining about dialogue... considering the second half of the movie has nearly zero dialogue in it, I wonder if this person actually watched the whole movie, or maybe watched a different movie altogether... HOW MUCH ECCENTRIC AND INTELLECTUAL DIALOGUE SHOULD AN ACTION MOVIE HAVE? Looking back at the classic action movies, AVP is right on par with the dialogue of the others, and actually above average.

Everything about this movie is better than or far above the usual in every manner. The visuals are great, and in fact, being from 2004, the visuals are better than most action movies that have come out in the past decade.

The acting is great, the cast is great, the storyline is fantastic and actually makes sense and has substance to it.

Once the action starts, the rest of the movie is nonstop action and one really cool scene after another. There were actually some moments with the predator acting that were genius and so well done.

Such a good movie. Easily in the top 100 all time action movies.

Alien vs. Predator (2004) is a movie in my DVD collection that I recently watched on Amazon Prime. The storyline follows a research expedition that recently was discovered miles under the ice. The research team doesn't know the pyramid was setup as a hunting playground for Predators to test their hunting skills against the ultimate beings...and we aren't talking about humans.

This movie is directed by Paul W. S. Anderson (Event Horizon) and stars Sanaa Lathan (Love & Basketball),Lance Henriksen (Pumpkinhead),Ewen Bremner (Rundown),Tommy Flanagan (Gladiator),Raoul Bova (Under the Tuscan Sun).

The storyline for this picture was actually okay and was a good setup for this premise. I enjoyed the settings and the cast. I'd never complain about Lathan and Henriksen movies. The special effects were awesome and the kill and action scenes were very good, loved the depiction of both the Aliens and Predators. The alien vs predator fights were excellent, including how the face huggers were mixed in.

Overall is this a perfect movie? No, this premise had no chance of that. Is this worth viewing and entertaining? Absolutely. I'd score this a 6.5-7/10 and strongly recommend seeing this.

Good idea, bad execution. I was looking forward to this cross-genre collaboration ever since I read a few of those alien vs. predator pulp novels about fifteen years ago, which provided high entertainment value all the way through. Sadly, the film is much less enthralling, offering a minimum of actual alien-on-predator action, instead focusing on a large bunch of uninteresting characters (mostly unknown actors) who wander around for about forty-five minutes before things start warming up. Now, the general plot sounds great; I love the way the mythology of Predators visiting ancient civilisations and instructing them to build pyramids ties up with real theories (try reading Chariots of the Gods) and the idea of a vast, ancient walled city beneath Antarctica is straight out of the Lovecraft story, At the Mountains of Madness. Sadly, this elaborate and expensive set-up eventually results in a load of uninteresting characters running around corridors in the dark, getting bumped off one by one.

Sigh. So far, so boring. The worst offender is unknown lead Sanaa Lathan, who goes for the tough heroine approach a la Sigourney Weaver, but she's bland and uninteresting in comparison. Then there's Italian heart-throb Raoul Bava as a charismatic archaeologist, and I did enjoy the twist involving his character towards the end. Heavyweight acting comes from Lance Henriksen, returning to the series after ALIENS and ALIEN 3. This time, though, he isn't the android Bishop, instead the old man who inspired creation of the androids in the future (this film is set in the present day). While it is cool to see Henriksen back in action – and I loved the pen trick, a reference to ALIENS – it's sad to see him as an ill, tired old man, and something of a wasted opportunity – I would loved to have seen him return as Bishop. Still, he has one good scene, involving him using a makeshift flamethrower on a retreating Predator – great spectacle!

Other actors include Snatch's Ewen Bremner, wasted as a kind-of comic relief Scotsman; then we're down to people like Patrick Troughton's grandson and that scarred guy out of GLADIATOR, but the characterisation attempts fall flat. As for the main contenders – the Predator is big, here, I mean real big, in different "cold" armour, but when he gets his helmet off, his make-up is crap and a big step down from that seen in the 1987 PREDATOR. What gives? Kudos, though, to the guys who did the Aliens, which are magnificent creations, looking scarier and more fluid than ever, whether it be chest-bursters, warriors or the Queen; great work all round. It's just a shame that ALL of the scenes involving either alien take place in the dark, so it's really hard to see what's going on.

Great special effects are just about what keeps you watching this movie. Certainly, with the rating cut down to PG-13, there's no gore or violence here like you'd see in the rest of the films from both series. Predictability rules outright, especially in the routine climax, which is only saved by some outrageously convincing CGI/model work, although it is a little reminiscent of JURASSIC PARK. There are only about 4 or 5 actual alien vs. predator fight scenes, and they are wicked; especially the scene where Predator swings the alien around his head before tossing it through the air. Lots of fun is had with the corrosive acid blood of the alien, and the high-tech weaponry of the Predator. Sadly, though, this is a wasted opportunity, best seen as a nostalgia piece that'll have you reaching for the original movies in the series to see how good they were in comparison.