Mark F
I found it a bit forgettable when it was released, but returning to it years later I quite enjoyed it. I'd forgotten most of the supporting cast so it was interesting to see Walton Goggins and Marshall Ali in early roles having since gone on to establish themselves. The Predator franchise has been mostly a series of dropped balls IMO, between the initial disappointment of Predator 2, to the dumbness of Requiem, and the heinous mess that is The Predator, I'd become quite jaded with it. So watching Predators again it compares quite favourably, not least because it comes across like homage to the original. After the various duds that tried and failed to build on the original, watching Predators in hindsight is like a lesson in "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Hollywood seems in dire need of heeding that lesson in recent years.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
10/08/25
Full Review
Ash P
This and the next movie until we get to Prey are gonna be my first time seeing them because I never got around to checking them out. Apparently, I never knew that either Predators or The Predator existed. Maybe it had to do with marketing or something? Oh, well. Just a heads up, there might be some minor spoilers. With that said, you've been warned. Let's jump into this jungle of a planet where a band of mercenaries, ex-veterans, and convicts were dropped into it to be hunted by not one Predator but three.
The cast consists of an ex-U.S. Special Operations Forces veteran turned mercenary named Royce, played by Adrien Brody. A doctor who is a recluse of the group yet revealed himself to be a psychopathic murderer named Edwin, played by Topher Grace. A sniper from the Israel Defense Forces named Isabelle, played by Alice Braga. A death row inmate from San Quentin State Prison named Stans, played by Walton Goggins. A Russian commando from the Spetsnaz Alpha Group who was fighting in Chechnya named Nikolai, played by Oleg Taktarov. A ruthless enforcer of the feared Los Zetas Mexican drug cartel named 'Cuchillo,' played by Danny Trejo. A Yakuza Inagawa-kai enforcer named Hanzo, played by Louis Ozawa Changchien. And a Revolutionary United Front death squad soldier named Mombasa, played by Mahershala Ali. Yes, this is a huge cast, and it's certainly as much of a mouthful from what I've shared. But that's okay, with a cast this big, it's actually obvious that most of them do get picked off because the premise of the story is them finding a way off of the planet while surviving against the group of Predators who are hunting them.
Granted, we do learn a little bit of who they are, but not every single one of them. Plus, they do learn why they are here after meeting up with a United States Army Air Cavalry soldier who had survived the alien planet for multiple cycles named Noland, played by Laurence Fishburne. Easier said than done, their writing is pretty thin when they are all action with less development and chemistry. But here's the thing, they don't trust one another since arrival even before learning about why they're on the planet until later on, they had to work together to survive. Plus, the movie does have a double meaning, referring to both the extraterrestrial Predators and the group of humans who are pitted against one another. The movie is more of a front row seat to see both sides fighting one another.
What carries the movie are the action and the pacing. Yes, it's not the best writing with the band of misfits while they acted okay. It's just slow, with the first third being an introduction, the second third, and the third act leading to a great conclusion. The pacing does work well because, again, with a big group, you would know that they would be picked off while fighting for their survival against the Predators. It took them a while to trust one another while they had to adapt against them, who were filled with a variety of their own. From a tracker to a falconer to a berserker. Having their own traits and gadgets at hand. The effects used are good. The designs of each of the Predators and the local wildlife are cool for being on an alien planet. They are not over-the-top, but good. The environment is amazing for what it's worth when the budget of the movie is low around the time.
There is also the classic Predator we all know and love, and it plays a role later on, which I won't spoil. Here's an interesting fact. From the words of the Nimrod Antal, along with Robert Rodriguez, (yes, that same Robert Rodriguez since his production company co-produced the movie), they wanted to avoid casting an actor physically similar to Arnold Schwarzenegger, wanting to "go in a very different direction" and reasoning that real-life soldiers are wiry and tough rather than burly. Granted, Adrien Brody himself did work out to put on muscles for the role because he wanted to entertain and be part of the ride. Adrien even admitted that he was blown away by Predator and viewed his role as a challenge, adding complexity to the character that could contrast with Arnold's role. However, Nimrod Antal quoted, "We thought casting a physically 'Schwarzenegger-esque' character would have done the original any disservice and would have done so because they didn't want to try and remake or copy the original film." Even told everyone in the cast list that he could make anybody look tough. Also admitting that he can't teach them how to act. Which makes sense on how the writing is pretty thin when anyone can wield a gun by any means necessary to survive. It's pretty much a double-edged sword when you think about it.
If I were to add on defending his take, here it is. Yes, this movie is similar to how Predator is, except they are not one in the same. With Predator, Dutch and his unit were sent on a jungle island to rescue politicians yet were lied to. With Predators, they're dumped on a jungle planet, fighting for survival against a group of Predators, while Dutch and his unit fought one that was intrigued enough to hunt them. It might sound like an odd take, but as I have re-watched Predator before getting to Predators as I am on the road to Predator: Badlands, I couldn't help but brainstorm on such. Predators have not done any disservice to the original as it's good on its own while having its own set of flaws.
Despite the flaws that I have mentioned, this is a kind of guilty pleasure movie where you'd shut your brain off to enjoy the action between a group of humans and a group of Predators. Or you'd play it in the background for the fun of it and still enjoy what was going on. I admit it is a bit better than what Predator 2 was like, but it's not up there with the original. Hell, I'd go as far and say it's not even up there with Prey or Predator: Killer of Killers. Of course, we haven't tackled The Predator yet, and I've been reading plenty of bad takes on that one. Would I watch this again in the future if I feel like it? Possibly. Take it for what it's worth and see for yourself.
I'm gonna give the Predators versus a group of humans movie six and a half trio of Predators revealing themselves out of ten. 6.5/10. Revealing themselves out of optic camouflage. What do you think I meant when they revealed themselves?
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
10/09/25
Full Review
Vincent W
A bit sloppy here and there, but it’s better than the 2018 one
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
09/21/25
Full Review
Sebastian D
It’s not quite flawless—some plot beats feel derivative of the original, and character backstories could dig deeper. But these are minor gripes against its strengths. The relentless action, brooding atmosphere, and stellar cast make Predators a near-masterpiece. After weaker entries, it recaptures the franchise’s raw power, delivering a bloody, exhilarating hunt that’s a must-see for sci-fi and action fans.
Rated 4.5/5 Stars •
Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars
09/21/25
Full Review
Adam B
While Predators excels in the action and special effects category, it's writing is an utter mess and the dialouge is inhuman. It's attempts to set up subplots goes absolutely nowhere, and the only thing it seems to care about at all is it's straightforward objective for the characters, leaving many devoid of any complex emotional characteristics with and non-existent character arcs. That being said, it's constant action is never boring, and the Yautja are always good fun.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
09/29/25
Full Review
chris m
english first, below spanish:
english:
the best part is the ending.
with a beginning that aims to be unusual and striking, 'predators' ventures into the realm of science fiction and action with the intention of revitalizing a mythical franchise. however, the result falls far short of expectations. despite being released at a time when technical advances already allowed for much stronger visual achievements, the special effects do not reach the level one would expect from a production of its era. in contrast, the cinematography shows flashes of skill and, at times, manages to recreate atmospheres that nostalgically recall the greatness of the original 1987 film.
the script, however, is its greatest weakness: superficial, fragmented, and lacking true dramatic development. the dialogues, far from adding nuance or building tension, fall into repetition and artificiality, as if each line were a faded echo of the previous one. the characters, although explicitly introduced, barely find differentiation among themselves, forming a flat and soulless ensemble. not even an actor of adrien brody’s stature manages to escape the generalized mediocrity of the cast, whose lack of authenticity translates into performances that feel forced and unconvincing.
the sound design and the score represent one of the film’s few tangible virtues: the music succeeds in evoking an atmosphere of psychological terror and mystery that, at times, elevates the tension beyond what the narrative itself achieves. the same cannot be said of the weapon effects, which sound weak and lacking impact, undermining the force of the action sequences.
the settings, evocative and at times powerful, connect with the spirit of the inaugural film, though the whole never comes close to reaching the level of intensity and freshness of that original. despite a beginning that flirts with spectacle, the film becomes entangled in clumsy narrative jumps and predictable decisions, resorting to plot twists so arbitrary that they shatter credibility.
the ending brings a certain degree of surprise and leaves room for ambiguous interpretations, and a few characters manage, at specific moments, to spark some interest. however, the restraint with which the predators’ presence is handled —perhaps in an attempt to make them more impactful— ends up being counterproductive, as their appearances are so controlled that they lose much of their menace.
in sum, 'predators' is a failed attempt to resurrect a legacy, caught between the monumental shadow of its predecessor and the inability to offer a fresh and forceful vision. a work that, despite its isolated efforts, cannot escape mediocrity nor claim a worthy place within the saga.
spanish:
lo mejor es el final.
con un arranque que pretende ser inusual y contundente, 'predators' se adentra en el terreno de la ciencia ficción y la acción con la intención de revitalizar una franquicia mítica. sin embargo, el resultado dista mucho de lo esperado. a pesar de situarse en un contexto donde los avances técnicos ya permitían logros visuales mucho más sólidos, los efectos especiales no alcanzan el nivel que cabría exigirle a una producción de su época. en contraste, el apartado fotográfico muestra destellos de oficio y consigue, en ciertos momentos, recrear atmósferas que remiten con nostalgia a la grandeza del título original de 1987.
el guion, sin embargo, es su mayor debilidad: superficial, fragmentado y sin verdadero desarrollo dramático. los diálogos, lejos de aportar matices o construir tensiones, caen en la repetición y la artificialidad, como si cada línea fuese un eco deslucido de la anterior. los personajes, aunque se presentan de forma explícita, apenas encuentran diferenciación entre sí, conformando un conjunto plano y sin alma. ni siquiera un actor de la talla de adrien brody logra escapar de la mediocridad generalizada del reparto, cuya falta de autenticidad se traduce en actuaciones que resultan forzadas y carentes de credibilidad.
el diseño sonoro y la música representan una de las pocas virtudes palpables del filme: la partitura sabe invocar un clima de misterio y terror psicológico que, por momentos, consigue elevar la tensión más allá de lo que logra la propia narrativa. no ocurre lo mismo con el sonido de las armas, que se percibe pobre y carente de contundencia, restando impacto a las secuencias de acción.
los escenarios, evocadores y en ocasiones poderosos, conectan con el espíritu del film inaugural, aunque el conjunto nunca logra alcanzar ni remotamente el nivel de intensidad y frescura de aquel. a pesar de un inicio que coquetea con la espectacularidad, la película se pierde en saltos narrativos torpes y decisiones previsibles, recurriendo a giros de guion tan arbitrarios que quiebran la verosimilitud.
el desenlace aporta cierto grado de sorpresa y deja espacio a interpretaciones ambiguas, y algunos personajes logran, en instantes puntuales, despertar interés. sin embargo, la contención con la que se maneja la aparición de los depredadores —quizá con la intención de dotarlos de mayor impacto— termina resultando contraproducente, ya que tienden a la contención de la aparición de los depredadores con el fin de hacerlos más misteriosos.
en suma, 'predators' es un intento fallido de resucitar un legado, atrapado entre la sombra monumental de su antecesora y la incapacidad de ofrecer una visión fresca y contundente. una obra que, pese a sus esfuerzos aislados, no logra escapar de la mediocridad ni reclamar un lugar digno dentro de la saga.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
08/19/25
Full Review
Read all reviews
Continue with Google
>
