“Everyone except the protagonist is expendable.” This criticism, directed at the supporting characters in 《Prey》, is inaccurate when considering Tabe. He is not a character who sacrifices his abilities to make his younger sibling stand out.
The setting is the North American Great Plains in 1719. Naru, a member of the Comanche people, a Native American tribe, wants to become a hunter. While she is skilled in herbalism and healing, the hunting party does not value her knowledge as a hunting skill.
This hunting team notifies applicants of their rejection before reviewing their listed skills. However, the film does not portray everyone who does not recognize Naru as foolish. This is because Tabe, who is already an excellent hunter, is present.
Tave’s skill must be genuine for the barrier that Naru must overcome to be real. The only thing I care about is this: does the film make Naru’s victory believable as a result of learning? I prefer 《Pray》 because, instead of making a weak person suddenly strong, it shows how knowledge that was once disregarded can become a source of power.
The claim that Naru is all that remains in the film misses Taabe
I agree with the criticism that the supporting characters are underdeveloped. However, if Tabe is simply treated as a disposable tool for Naru, it misses the point of how this film demonstrates its strengths.
Taabe is both an opponent that his younger sister must defeat and someone that she must learn from. His confidence is well-founded, as evidenced by the sibling rivalry that arises from their hunting competition. The film does not diminish Tave’s hunting skills; instead, it encourages the audience to support Naru.
I believe this is a good choice. If everyone who ignores Naru is incompetent, then the recognition that Naru receives becomes devalued. It is difficult to prove a hunter’s qualifications by passing an exam judged by incompetent examiners.
It is not to say that Tabe’s judgments are always correct. The ability to hunt well is different from the ability to recognize the potential of others. Even when someone is trying to protect their younger sibling, their judgment may be clouded by a tendency to underestimate that sibling.
These siblings are interesting precisely because of their differences. Tabe is someone who understands risk, while Naru is someone who wants to delve into that risk. It is difficult to dismiss either of them with a single word.
What Naru needs is not the realization that her brother is not as special as she thought. What she needs is proof that she possesses abilities that her brother lacks, and that these abilities are useful in hunting. Therefore, the knowledge of herbs and healing should not simply be a decorative element in the character’s introduction.
As an audience member, I am also curious to see if that knowledge actually proves effective. Simply because others have not recognized it does not grant one the qualification to engage in a dangerous hunt. Support and evaluation of skill are separate matters.
Here, Tabe’s role becomes clear. Even if someone fights as well as Tabe, it is still dangerous. Naru needs weapons other than hunting skills. Naru must overcome that level through other means.
Meanwhile, other warriors and trappers have limited time to exercise their own judgment. While they clearly have roles in stopping or threatening Naru, they cannot develop beyond those roles. This is why their affection for Tabe does not extend to other characters.
Therefore, I only accept half of the criticism that the characters around me are shallow. Taabe does not simply block Naru’s path; he makes us believe in the difficulty of that path. So, how does the film demonstrate that Naru’s knowledge, which was previously disregarded, is the power that will overcome those difficulties?
The film demonstrates power and seeks alternative solutions
The scene with the bear accurately demonstrates the difference in power. This is because the scene makes us physically understand why Naru must find answers through observation and tools.
The bear that had been threatening Naru became prey in front of the alien hunter, the Predator. I was stunned here. The fact that even a beast that was more than Naru could handle was prey to that being was immediately apparent.
There is no need to elaborate on how superior the enemy’s weapons are. After witnessing how it dealt with the bear, one immediately realizes that Naru should not attack in the same way. This is not a gap that can be overcome with mere encouragement.
The advice to solve problems with your fists is best given to a bear.
The important thing is what the movie shows next. Instead of suddenly granting Naru immense power, it gives her time to observe her surroundings and learn how to use tools. The scene showcasing the strength of the antagonist makes the audience anticipate the protagonist’s other abilities.
The mud, the axe, the plants, and the enemy’s aiming devices – these are not isolated elements, but rather interconnected parts of the whole. What is encountered first can later prove useful. Even the failures that Naru experiences contribute to future decisions.
Therefore, there are things to see even when traveling through the forest. It is important to remember where Naru gets stuck and what she is observing. The film does not discard the experiences accumulated at that time just because the fighting has become more urgent.
I especially appreciate the way the game handles herbs and healing knowledge. Abilities that were previously considered irrelevant to hunting become crucial for overcoming challenges. Naru is not the type of person who needs to become someone else to survive.
This difference is not insignificant. When a skill that has not been previously demonstrated suddenly appears in a moment of crisis, the audience is more likely to perceive the intervention of the script than the protagonist’s own ability. In this case, because we have seen similar situations before, we follow Naru’s judgment.
The mere fact that something reappears does not constitute learning. Naru must make different judgments before and after experiencing it. The film does not simply indicate the existence of a tool; it also uses failure as the basis for subsequent choices.
Of course, actually applying what one has learned is a separate challenge. A movie doesn’t claim that anyone can defeat a strong opponent simply by observing. The film narrows down, together with Naru, what one should see and learn from a disadvantageous fight.
What makes people believe in this learning process before dialogue is the actors’ attitude.
Midthunder is strong because it doesn’t pretend to be strong
Amber Midthunder, playing Naru, demonstrates keen observation skills, while Dakota Beavers, as Tave, showcases his hunting prowess. The actors’ performances highlight their individual strengths, which also underscores the reason why Naroo must fight in a different way.
Midthunder’s strength as the actor playing Naru, becomes apparent when observing the opponent and the terrain. Her gaze, which reads unfamiliar signs, demonstrates a focus on discovering information rather than immediately providing answers. Therefore, I found myself following what Naru was seeing, rather than what she was claiming.
He doesn’t put his body on the line as if he were someone who would unconditionally endure any danger. Instead, he first observes his opponent’s movements and the surrounding environment. Thanks to this, Naru’s caution is far more reliable than someone who boasts of being fearless.
This performance does not present Naru as someone who knows the answer from the beginning. It captures the attention of the audience, even those who are watching but do not yet understand everything. Because the audience must also make judgments, the time spent observing is not separate from the action.
Beavers, who plays Taabe, embodies the confidence of a recognized hunter. Even when siblings compete in hunting, he does not merely act as someone who is anxious about being surpassed by his younger sibling. Because he possesses skill, his warnings carry weight.
It is not always the case that the older brother’s protection is welcomed. The older brother embodies both the feelings of wanting to protect his younger sibling and the tendency to override his younger sibling’s judgment. This explains why Naru feels frustrated and why Taabe is worried.
In combat against formidable opponents, his confidence proved to be more than just words. I appreciated that the film did not diminish Taabe’s skills to prove Naru’s abilities while he was fighting. What the younger sibling needs is not her older brother’s failure, but the opportunity to use her own knowledge.
Michelle Thrush, playing the role of Aruka, expresses concern and acknowledges the risks of the challenge, but her options for changing her mind are limited.
Stormy Kipp, who plays the character of Wasape, clearly establishes a dynamic of pushing Naru away, but she has little opportunity to move beyond that attitude.
The performances of the two main actors cannot completely compensate for the limited depth of the surrounding characters. However, the skills recognized between the siblings and the knowledge that has been overlooked are well-matched. In that it does not portray powerful characters as fools, “Prey” properly continues the questions raised by the first “Predator” film.
The change lies not in the hunting rules, but in the starting line
“Prey” does not abandon the survival rules established in the first “Predator” film. Instead of focusing on already strong individuals, it applies those rules to Naru, who is initially perceived as weak.
“Predator” (1987) is a story about strong soldiers encountering an even stronger hunter. The strength that worked among humans is not enough against an alien enemy. To survive, they must first reconsider the kind of fighting they had excelled at.
Naru starts from a position further back. She is not recognized as a hunter even before she faces a strong opponent. From the beginning, proving her skills and surviving are intertwined.
Therefore, both films ask the same question: if you cannot achieve your goals through force, what else must you know? The difference lies in the evaluation given to the person who seeks the answer.
In the first film, the soldiers, despite being portrayed as strong, find that they cannot survive. Naru must prove that being perceived as weak does not fully define her capabilities. I believe this shift in characterization is a welcome change, as it offers more potential for the sequels than simply increasing the scale of the story.
It is difficult to create something new simply by making the enemy larger or the weapons more powerful. “Prey” changes who is at the center of the conflict. This, in turn, causes us to re-evaluate knowledge that was previously not considered important in combat.
The plants used for treatment become important even in combat, and this is precisely where their value lies. What Naru already knows gains new significance in the face of new dangers. This is different from simply providing unfamiliar skills in a time of urgency.
The job posting for the hunting team did not mention any experience in medical treatment, but that experience is proving useful in practical work.
At this point, the distinction that one must abandon treatment to become a hunter is also challenged. Naru does not erase the knowledge she has acquired, nor does she simply follow Tabe’s fighting style. Even while facing the same dangers, she seeks different solutions based on what she possesses.
Therefore, I don’t view plants simply as hidden trump cards. This is evidence that Naru’s previously undervalued experience is actually being used in practical decision-making. The demand for recognition is transformed into actions that demonstrate what I am capable of.
Even without having seen the previous installment, one can easily follow this process. However, when considering the first film, it becomes even clearer that Naru’s transformation does not break the rules of the series. She has taken on the requirement to read her opponent from a different starting point.
However, the principle of applying what one has learned cannot eliminate all the elements of chance in a final battle.
Learning is convincing, but the conditions for success are too rigid
While preparations for the final battle are complete, the necessary conditions are falling into place with unnerving precision. Although the argument that Naru is utilizing what she has learned holds some weight, it does not completely dispel the risk that the plan might go awry.
I will not disclose the specific methods. However, this plan is not simply about knowing the tools; the placement of the tools and the direction in which the enemy is moving must also be right for it to function properly.
I nodded, acknowledging that Naru had devised such a plan. This was because the time spent observing and failing had provided the basis for her judgment. It is not a convenient method of overcoming a crisis by suddenly employing skills that were previously unknown.
However, the ability to conceive of a plan and the ability to make the other party act according to that plan are different. The enemy also has its own judgment, and unexpected developments can occur in a fight. In the end, those variables cooperate with Naru somewhat meekly.
I do not agree with the criticism that there is no foreshadowing. The problem is not the preparation, but the cooperation of the enemy. The preparation is in place. However, the feeling that the “script” is being followed comes first in the process of bringing together the necessary conditions at the necessary moment.
Because of this difference, there is no need to deny Naru’s learning. I believe in what she has discovered, but I hesitated slightly at how neatly everything was resolved in its execution. Even with a well-laid plan, a little more friction was needed.
A similar sense of regret lingers even when depicting a community. While the process of Naru developing her abilities is shown, the process by which those around her accept those abilities is depicted briefly. Demonstrating skill and changing the opinions of others are not always portrayed as happening simultaneously.
Mother Aluka’s worries are based on the realistic possibility of losing her daughter. Therefore, it takes time for her perception of her daughter to change. Other warriors also have limited opportunities to express their true feelings, especially compared to their initial stance of trying to restrain Naru.
In my opinion, this is a choice that focuses on Naru’s experiences for 99 minutes. As a result, while learning and fighting are closely linked, it is difficult to praise the portrayal, which does not fully depict the recognition of the community. I also wanted to see the changes in the surroundings as much as Naru’s abilities.
Even so, these two shortcomings do not outweigh the joy I experienced following Naru. What ultimately determines my final judgment is not the neatly aligned conditions for success, but the process of changing the situation by utilizing knowledge that was previously disregarded.
I trust the Naru who has learned more than the Naru who has become stronger
“Prey” does not suddenly grant power to a weak protagonist. Instead, it demonstrates how knowledge that others may undervalue can be useful in dangerous situations. I was more convinced by the way Naru uses her observations and past failures to inform her subsequent decisions, rather than her desire for recognition.
This film keeps in view to the very end the power disparity confirmed in front of the bear. Because this disparity is not erased, Naroo is forced to seek alternative solutions. The time spent learning about herbs and tools is not waiting for the fight to start; it is already part of the fight itself.
The skill of using observation and learning as a solution to conflict, combined with the performance that utilizes the abilities of both siblings, is the reason for the high score. My rating is 4 out of 5 stars. The final plan is overly precise, and the process by which the people around her begin to see Naru differently is too short.
If you enjoy stories about underdog protagonists who analyze their opponents and use tools to turn the tide in their favor, then these 99 minutes are worthwhile. On the other hand, if you are looking for a story that delves deeply into the lives of the hunting group and the Comanche community, you may find it lacking. The computer-generated animal imagery is disappointing. While it effectively conveys how frightening a bear can be, it often fails to create the feeling that a real bear is standing right in front of you.
When watching it, it is helpful to remember what Naru is examining, where she fails, and what tools she is learning to use. There is no need to try to predict what will be used later. Simply observing how those experiences change their subsequent choices can make the game more enjoyable.
You do not need to be familiar with the previous installments to enjoy this one, and the Comanche dubbed version is also an option. Following this, I recommend “Predator” (1987). It is beneficial to compare how strong soldiers and Naru, who has been disregarded from the start, respond to danger.
What this film changed is the standard for measuring ability, rather than the size of the enemy. I believe in Naru, who ultimately makes use of what others called useless, rather than in a hero who suddenly becomes strong.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Can 《Pray》 be understood without having seen the previous installments?
Even if you haven’t seen the previous installment, you won’t have any trouble following Naru’s observations and her struggle for survival. While the film deals with the past, it’s not a story that requires you to remember previous events to understand it. After watching the film, seeing “Predator” (1987) will make the differences in the protagonists’ starting points even more apparent.
Is “Prey” a true story? Is there a novel it is based on?
This is not a true story or an adaptation of a novel, but a science fiction survival drama that expands the “Predator” universe. It is set in a Comanche community in the North American Great Plains in the year 1719. It is better to approach this as a story about how Naru uses knowledge and tools to overcome adversity, rather than as a historical reenactment.
Is it an action-packed movie, or a coming-of-age story?
This is a film in which Naru’s process of learning leads to solutions for its action sequences. If you want big fights to follow one another without letup from the outset, you’ll have to wait. If you focus on the scenes examining traces, terrain, and tools, that time supports the battles that follow.
What is the most disappointing aspect of “Prey”?
The conditions required for the final plan are too precisely aligned. It is not an unprepared solution, but the execution process is overly smooth. Furthermore, the process by which individuals outside of Naru and Tabe are changing their minds is not sufficiently developed.
What language is best to watch it in, and what should one keep in mind while watching?
In addition to the standard version, a Comanche dub is also available, so it is a good idea to check the audio menu of the service you are using. Regardless of the version, it is recommended to remember the locations where Naru failed and the tools she mastered. It is more enjoyable to follow the moment when learning transforms into judgment, rather than knowing the ending in advance.
