THE MORE I THINK ABOUT IT, THE WORSE THIS FILM GETS!!!

Rating: Null/10 (16 August 2004)

While I did experience a few fun moments while watching this film, I must say that - overall - this film was poorly made if for no other reason than because elements of the story seemed to disregard basic elements of the first two Alien films (1979 and 1986)(we'll pretend Alien III and IV just don't exist).
First, why did the Aliens not take as long to gestate in their human hosts in this film as they did in the prior Alien films? Second, are we really supposed to believe that the Queen Alien (or anything for that matter) could have been kept "on ice" for such a long time and did not suffer any ill effects (e.g., atrophied muscles)?
Third, why did the Predators even go back to Earth? According to the story told by Sebastian (Raoul Bova), the three Predators nuked everything when they were overtaken by the horde of Aliens. If everything was nuked, how did the pyramid survive? How did the Queen Alien survive? HOW DID ANYTHING SURVIVE? There would have been nothing for the Predators to go back and fight. Or did the three defeated Predators have a special bomb that only annihilated everything above ground?
FOURTH - and this little development was just asinine - how was an Alien implanted in the final Predator? Anyone who paid attention to ANY of the films knows the birth of an Alien is a three-step process - Facehugger lays an egg in the host, the egg gestates for a time, the Alien erupts from the host's chest cavity. No Facehugger attacked the final Predator to lay an egg inside him. And anyone who tries to argue that the Queen Alien infected the final Predator during their final battle is just deluding him/herself. Why the filmmakers skipped such a key factor in the creation of the Predator/Alien hybrid is beyond me. Yes, it's obvious they set the stage for a sequel, but COME ON! They could have put a bit more thought into it, don't you think?
Then there's the timeline regarding Bishop's existence. Was his death in this film explained in any way that would help us believe that a android made in his image would exist 175 years later (the time frame for "ALIENS")?

When flaws like those listed above become apparent and it seems the filmmakers (writer[s], director[s], continuity staff, etc.) disregarded the fundamentals of good storytelling, it's hard for someone to keep his/her belief in abeyance and just "enjoy the film". Movie-going is becoming too expensive for the audience to tolerate such shoddy filmmaking.

Someone needs to take Paul W. S. Anderson aside and tell him that special effects don't make the film. A bad film is a bad film and special effects just distract the audience for a time; they don't cover up such obvious flaws very well. On the other hand, in a well-made film, special effects are just icing on the cake. Unfortunately, no matter how many bad films Anderson makes, as long as they make money for the studios, they'll let him make as many bad films as he wants. WHAT A SHAME!!!