Bad, But Could Be Worse

Rating: 4/10 (3 December 2005)

Director Paul W. Anderson (the brains behind the awful Resident Evil films) tries his hand at a franchise woven into science fiction/horror history by such legendary directors as Cameron and Scott and the result is predictably bad.
The plot involves a team of archaeologists facing off with the terrifying creatures from the Alien and Predator films.
A major problem of the film is that it simply isn't scary enough. In fact, compared to the MA ratings of previous films in the franchise, this one barely warrants the M. It feels like a kid's movie. The creatures, while superbly computer generated, just don't feel gritty enough to produce the claustrophobic and arachnophobic intensities of the previous films. To put it simply, it isn't scary enough to be classed as a horror but falls way short of being an interesting sci fi. It also plays very superficially. The film lacks any real symbolism or depth.
The film is set in the present day as opposed to the distant future of the Alien films, which may lead hardcore fans of the Alien films to take offence to Anderson's 'tampering' with the timeline, introducing new facts and theories into the fray. Some fans might have preferred no plot at all, I suspect, instead opting for an hour-and-a-half battle between the two creatures.
Claims that it is the 'worst movie of all time' are great exaggerations, although any hardcore fan of the Alien/Predator films might come away feeling cheated. Far from being a masterpiece, but there are definitely worse ways to spend 100 minutes.