Talk:Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Alien (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alien, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.AlienWikipedia:WikiProject AlienTemplate:WikiProject AlienAlien articles

Film: Canadian / Comic book / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Comic book films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comics: United States / Films Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Related work groups:
/
	This article is supported by United States comics work group.
	This article is supported by Comic book films work group.

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

20th Century Studios Low‑importance

	20th Century Studios portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 20th Century Studios, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 20th Century Studios and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.20th Century StudiosWikipedia:WikiProject 20th Century StudiosTemplate:WikiProject 20th Century Studios20th Century Studios articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Someone needs to check there math

"Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem was released in North America on December 25, 2007, in 2,563 theatres. The film impressed $9,515,615 on its opening day for an average of $3,707 per theatres, and was number ten at the box office.[11] It impressed $5 million in Australia, $9 million in Japan and the United Kingdom, and $7 million in Russia for an international total of $86,288,761"

If you add that up it doesn't even come close to 86 million —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.41.21 (talk) 00:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"There math?" Someone needs to check their grammar. Similarly, this might surprise you - but internationally there are more countries than Australia, Japan, Russia, and the UK. 71.145.153.72 (talk) 10:27, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, 71.145.153.72, it's a spelling problem, not a grammar one, lol.--66.69.214.69 (talk) 14:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, its a grammar error. He hasn't spelled the word wrong, he's used a correctly spelled word in the wrong context, as in: "I didn't do nothing" versus "I didn't do anything".Icemotoboy (talk) 04:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plot section rewrite

I've been avoiding working on this article until the hype dies down, but today I took a stab at rewriting the plot section. Basically it was too detailed and had a lot of inappropriate terms in it, like the nicknames "Chet" and "Wolf" for the Predalien and the Predator. Though I've come to accept Predalien as an official production name for the creature, since they call it that in the DVD featurettes, the name "Wolf" is not used anywhere in the film, credits, or featurettes. I have no idea where that idea came from so I struck it from the plot summary & cast sections. Even if that was a nickname for him by the production team, it's not appropriate for the plot summary. It's credited as "the Predator", so that's how it should be presented in the plot section. It's perfectly appropriate to mention that "Chet" was the production team's nickname for the Predalien, but this belongs in the Production section and really not anywhere else. I also removed several things that only took place in the unrated DVD version (ie. the Predator mothership/scout ship separation). These should be discussed in a section on the DVD release; the plot summary aims to summarize only the theatrical version. Overall we should aim for simplicity and conciseness in plot sections and overall throughout the article. --IllaZilla (talk) 23:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, someone found a source for the Strauss bros. nicknaming the Predator "Wolf" in reference to the character in Pulp Fiction: [1]. I removed it from the "Plot" section as that's not the place for it. The character is credited in the film as "the Predator", so that's what it should be called in the plot & cast sections. This and the "Chet" nickname could be added into the "Production" section, but I'm not doing this yet as that section doesn't currently discuss the creation of the film's creatures. It's definitely something we can use as that section develops, though. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to know that you're at least sitting on the link. You don't look like a bad guy after all.Dibol (talk) 06:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It's just that these nicknames were being used willy-nilly all over the article until recently, and this is the first time anyone's provided a reference for the "Wolf" one. Basically using the nicknames all throughout the article made it look very fannish and unprofessional/unencyclopedic in my opinion. My feeling is that nicknames taht the filmmakers used for the creatures are worth mentioning, but it should be restricted to the production section since that's all they are: production nicknames. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong, the rewrite of the Plot section is great. The only problem is that some of the paragraphs run on so long as to be difficult to follow. A paragraph should cover a single topic or thought; my interest is in making the text more readable and I will continue to edit to that effect. IllaZilla, you did a really great job of writing the plot synopsis but rapid or frequent changes in the locale or participants being described merit paragraph breaks. Perhaps we can agree on a middle ground that has neither too many nor too few paragraph breaks? Uncle Bubba (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: The Plot section of the excellent Alien_vs._Predator_(film) article has an easy-to-read structure that is quite similar to what I was attempting to accomplish here. I'd love to hear your thoughts... Uncle Bubba (talk) 22:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like the way it looks now, I just thought the previous revisions created too many mini-paragraphs of only 2 or 3 sentences that didn't need to be separated out, as they were part of the same events of the paragraphs they were split from. For example, the part about Ricky and Jesse at the pool ties in with the Predator-at-the-power-plant scene, as the pool scene involves the blackout caused by the Predator. And the helicopter crash is directly tied in to the nuclear strike; it's part of the same scene and it's all part of the climax/ending. I've made a few minor wording changes and restored the serial commas. (P.S. For what it's worth, I wrote the plot section in Alien vs. Predator (film) and helped get it to FA, so I understand what you're saying about its structure). --IllaZilla (talk) 00:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know you wrote it; that's why I cited it. I agree the article looks pretty darned good right now; the serial commas issue is not really a big deal, just habit. (I was taught most of my writing by a retired newspaper editor—the AP Style Manual was next to the Bible on his bookshelf...)

What was bugging me was the appearance of "Something big happened. Meanwhile, something escaped. Meanwhile, something blew up. Meanwhile, everyone died." in a single paragraph. I'm exaggerating but it did look a bit breathless at first read.

All in all, this is good. Maybe now we can figure out why folks keep trying to change the Budget and Gross numbers so they no longer match the cited refs.

Uncle Bubba (talk) 00:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why the heck people keep doing that either. I mean, it's right there in the cited source... Where are they pulling these magic new numbers from? --IllaZilla (talk) 01:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

This was not a critically well received film - 15% at RT means that it pretty much received five negative reviews to every positive one. If the lead was going to be "balanced" then that's the ratio we should use. On that basis, the 2-1 ratio of negative to positive reviews is more than fair. Black Kite 01:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMO the lead paragraph should stick to a general summation ie. "the film was poorly received by critics and grossed $____". The actual quotes & review scores should be saved for the "Reception" section. The lead paragraphs are supposed to be an introduction; the details should be in the other body sections. --IllaZilla (talk) 02:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least we got 3rd party commercials into the article

"Colin estimates Hydraulx produced 460 of the 500 visual effects shots including the nuclear explosion which was created using Maya fluids and BA Volume Shader. "

Is there any way we could get the brand of memory or monitors they used?

I'm pretty sure the directors themselves wrote this article 2601:18D:87E:10E0:8936:2D1D:2129:3D68 (talk) 03:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dark

Can anyone see this film? I can't believe there is nothing in the article about the lighting in this movie. 79.66.8.137 (talk) 12:21, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you dared to write a comment like "most of the film has a poor lighting" or "some critics have pointed out that the film is too dark", then in no time some nitwit would come along and tag your edit as being unsourced, or requiring a citation, or worse, delete it. This Encyclopedia doesn't trust its own editors, only trusts any soul that has managed to put such comments into a printed publication, or into a website regarded as a 'reliable source'. That steel-armored policy just might be necessary, but I'm sick of it. --AVM (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

plot

The lead-in paragraph needs a section which summarises the plot in a single paragraph. The 'plot' section is too long to act as a synopsis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.49.45 (talk) 08:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The lead could probably contain a couple of sentences acting as a synopsis. I've seen this in a number of other film articles. --IllaZilla (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trophy Room

Just noticed that in the trophy room in the opening sequence, there is not only a Space Jockey's skull on the wall, but also that of a Triceratops, indicating that the Predators have been around for at least 65 million years... -- Imladros (talk) 06:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is mentioned in the articles Space Jockey (Alien) and Predator (alien)#Culture and history. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Predator not a He but a She?

Not sure the comic stance on Female Predators (or if they are both male/female), but the concern of the one Predator over the other when it reached earth seemed more of that of a parent, almost like a mother. Seems since they haven't been identified male or female, perhaps it should be referred to as it until clarified. 96.31.181.147 (talk) 05:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The writers & production staff refer to it as "he" throughout all of the interviews & special features. AFAIK no female Predators have ever been shown in the films. --IllaZilla (talk) 10:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A 'he' you say? Links? Werebereus (talk) 03:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, "throughout all of the interviews and special features". Buy the film on DVD or Blu-ray and watch the special features for yourself. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

named AVP2 REQUIEM?

at least i have a movie on blu ray whose title is listed as that. perhaps it should be added to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, the title is Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (abbreviated AVP:R). There is no "2" anywhere in either variation of the title. You can see this quite clearly on the film poster and in it's opening sequence, if you watch it, or in the credit/copyright listings on the back of the DVD/Blu-ray. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC

in norway it is called AVP2:requiem please dont moderate me again because i am telling the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.86.142 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice. The title of the film is still Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. English titles are often altered in translation into other languages, just as foreign-language titles are often altered when they are translated to English (ie. Annie Hall became Urban Neurotic in Germany, Nixon became The Big Liar in China, and Bad Santa became Santa Is a Pervert in the Czech Republic). The film being slightly mistitled in some other country doesn't change the actual title of the film. It probably still says Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem on the film's title card and credit/copyright listings. You would also need to cite a reliable source to back up your assertion. --IllaZilla (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hybrid

Ok. A facehugger jumps Human and the resulting Creature is a Warrior. Not a Hybrid. A facehugger jumps on a Dog and the resulting creature is a Runner. Not a Hybrid. But when a Facehugger jumps on a Predator it's a Predalien and for some reason, just because it's a Predator, the resulting creature is now a Crossbreed... What? --Werebereus (talk) 04:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Warrior" and "Runner" are behind-the-scenes, fan-type terms. None of these terms are used in any of the films. "Hybrid" distinguishes the Predalien (another behind-the-scenes term)—which is a fusion of the two titular characters (Alien and Predator) and the only one of its type in any of the 9 films of the combined franchises—from the standard Alien "warriors" that we see see in all of the Alien and AVP films. Note that we refer to all of these others simply as "Aliens" in the various plot summaries, as for the purpose of the franchise they are essentially the default form, but in the context of this film it is important to acknowledge that the "Predalien" is unique from the numerous other Aliens in the film (there is no need to distinguish the "runner" Alien from any other Aliens in the context of describing the plot of Alien 3, as it is the only Alien in the film). --IllaZilla (talk) 04:27, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't fan type if the Merchanidise and games use them all as well. And that has nothing to do with anything. We call the Runner "Dog-Alien" and Chet "Pred-Alien" but not the Warriors "Human-Alien". Its NOT a hybrid, no matter what anyone says. It's an alien, it just has a different host, big deal. Werebereus (talk) 03:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The creators of the film treat it as something unique from the run-of-the-mill Aliens that we've seen before. I have never seen "merchanidise" or games that say "warrior", "runner", etc. ^{[citation needed]} on that, please. It is, in fact, a hybrid, though if you want to be a fanboy about it then all Aliens are hybrids in some way. But certainly this one is intended to be distinct from the others and a blatant combination of Alien and Predator characteristics (just look at the thing). In fact I bought an action figure of it at Comic-Con a couple weeks ago and on the back of the box it has pictures of all 3 figures in the AVP:"R series and it labels them "Alien", "Predator", and "Hybrid". So there's your merchandise for you. --IllaZilla (talk) 06:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly haven't played many games then. The newest and oldests game distinguish between many types of aliens. There's no such things as a "run of the mill" type. And look here:

http://easternsoil.com/ccc/popup_image.php?pID=64&osCsid=0b83bcab27f027343cdcf24739d9d906 http://www.popcultcha.com.au/alien-predator-requiem-predalien-scale-bust-p-5988.htmlSee where it says Predalien and NOT Hybrid? You probably got that crappy, lesser quality Neca figure. Thers merch for YOU ZillaWerebereus (talk) 22:04, 14 August 2011 (UTC)Werebereus[reply]

Prometheus comes out soon. Until it is "proven" otherwise, the ALIEN/ XENOMORPH is in (movie) fact HUMAN. The "Engineers" aka Space Jockeys morph HUMANS into ALIENS. (Who better to kill us than us?) Therefore the Human/Alien hybrids are in (movie) fact NOT Hybrids at all. (This is just as lame as humans being cylons in the remade BSG, and Ridley's new idea of Deckard (Mark II) is a Replicant with the memories of a human Deckard Mark I, but thankfully Harrison Ford refused to make the Blade Runner Prequel) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.88.168.34 (talk) 12:55, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Were any dogs or cats harmed in this movie?

I was wondering: were there any dogs or cats that were harmed in this movie? AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs. Yutani?

Doesn't it seem confusing that the character of Mrs. Yutani isn't mentioned till the very end of the plot description—and then, not identified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyFielding (talk • contribs) 05:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AHA!!! Confusing? Perhaps!!! Your comment is an excellent and accurate observation. The whole movie is one confusing, badly written mess. Maybe somebody can find some published source that discusses the disjointed, confusing plot elements of this movie? Marc S. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 12:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:52, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080209005946/http://au.rottentomatoes.com/m/avp2/news/1700043/ to http://au.rottentomatoes.com/m/avp2/news/1700043/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060805234036/http://www.cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=51868 to http://cinescape.com/0/editorial.asp?aff_id=0&this_cat=Movies&action=page&type_id=&cat_id=270338&obj_id=51868

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]