Monkeys playing chess

Rating: 1/10 (23 January 2005)

It must have been clear when reading the AVP script that there was no character development and virtually no personality present in this film. How do they get financing for projects with such flaws? Give me their names, I have some bridges to sell.
Films like Alien, Aliens, and to a lesser extent, Predator, have full-blown characters that create real human conflict and evolve as the film progresses. It's not rocket science, particularly with the Alien and Predator series as the characters are very well defined in both the books and in prior films. The female lead is a crucial role and you can see that Ridley Scott and Cameron did not cast a girlie-girl with a chip on her shoulder. They cast Sigourney Weaver who did not make girlie faces during every conflict with the aliens. Sanaa Lathan just isn't believable. Everyone is so goody two shoes. Weyland is usually the evil genius in the books but is woefully nice in this role. Where's the conflict. Whether we take the Ripley character or Machiko Naguchi from the books, we do not find well-adjusted complacent personalities. They both have warrior hearts that are out of sync with their lives and occupations. Conflict with the Aliens exorcises the beast that gnaws at them and fulfills a profound need. That's why they are credible when they start to kick alien ass. Is that so complicated?
Even the Predators remain undeveloped despite massive quantities of exposition endless explanations and the occasional moment within the action. But it is a confused mess to all except for the Predator geeks. Predators are like the Roman soldiers in "Gladiator" with a strict code of honor only multiplied many times over. The life of these hyper honorable hunters is what the female lead finds so attractive. She is already one of them before she ever meets them.
I feel that it is not only incompetence but also a fundamental misogyny with many directors that can only pay lip service to a competent and ferocious female role. Ridley Scott does not have problems with strong women or strong men for that matter. When he reads a book or script, he sees the "essence" as Marcus Auralius once said. Paul W.S. Anderson is like a monkey playing chess; he knows how to move the pieces but can't understand what he is doing. With all the producers that support his efforts, there must be a gaggle of monkeys roaming Hollywood. What a waste!