I would like to note that just by changing the tribe to the Apache or Crow, you'd solve the majority of these problems. Several clans and tribes among the Apache allowed and in some cases encouraged women to hunt things like small game for example. Hell, there's even a case where a woman among their tribes fucking murking a Comanche chief out of vengeance for killing her husband (via deception and seduction but still), and escaped with her own horse and spurs out of the camp. She later joined her second husband in Geronimo's warband, fighting among them.
And the Crow is one of the tribes that genuinely did have two spirit as a concept to provide roles to those who didn't fit the gender norms. And that'd still fit more for French trappers given they're located among the same reaches you'd see the Metis.
Apache is still a far stretch, but as you said an Apache woman having some level of bushcraft would at least be in the realm of possibility. It would still be absolute blantant gender-politics bullshit but it wouldn't be impossible on the face.
Crow would be more sensible (and their "two spirit" thing was more about 'what the fuck do we do with males who can't pass the rites of manhood? We put too much effort and scarce resources in raising them so we can't just kill or exile them.' but lets not get into that horsehit) from a location perspective but while they weren't a peaceable hippy tribe by any means they lack the "name brand" recognition because they were reasonable and came to agreements early.
(Also you then potentially run in to issues of people looking up the Crow and seeing they went full-throttle support for the Confederacy and now you have people noticing things)
As I've said in other posts: I have no issues with a Predator coming down to hunt Comanche (though why they'd bother hunting anyone who isn't a Gurka I don't know). I only have issues with the fact there is a Comanche woman well trained enough to take them on and strong enough, due to to modern politics. And issues with a commanche being protrayed as "heroic" in general because they were extremely fucked up.
Also mild issues with the way the Voyagers were portrayed becuase they needed white people bad, but the Voyagers would generally go out of their way to ingratiate themselves with local tribes via gifts and trade, and there weren't enough of them until, effectively, post-Louisiana Purchase to cause any noticeable effects.
But then we can't have our environmental messaging.
Because this is a serious film about an extra terrestrial trophy hunter.
Predator 1's first hour doesn't hold up well at all. It also begins by showing the Predator ship land on Earth so that retards in the audience are immediately clued in that this is a film with an alien monster in it. The action sequences are so over the top as are the 'badass' quotes. But this was the style of nearly every action movie. Stuff like Terminator, James Bond, and Die Hard are filled with characters throwing out stuff for the audience to quote that are fourth wall breaking. Predator lets you know pretty quickly it's more of a satirical film when one of the leads is carrying an 85lbs mini-gun through the jungles.
Predator 2 is a joke of a movie like Alien 4 where it's clearly aimed at an immature and unsophisticated audience. But the series has always been campy and ridiculous. Less horror and more comedy. So fans of 80s and 90s actions movie embrace that stuff. The cocaine filled gangsters acting like Scarface fighting with Predators. An old lady just oblivious to a giant space alien destroying her apartment. Cringe lines for 12-year-olds like "pussy mouth". The audience is supposed to be laughing at these films and characters. When El Scorpio inhales a mountain of cocaine into his nose then gets mowed down by a Predator it's not meant to be serious. Too many Alien fans want the Predator franchise to be as serious not realizing it has always leaned into comedy.
Predator 1's first half holds up fine. When you know the "twist" it does slogs a bit. The director was trying to get audiences to think they were watching a normal action movie, then change shit up on them (seriously. Predator's director commentary the guy took a lot of pride in his work for a sci-fi action film) . The alien space ship at the beginning was an inexpensive way to address where the predator came from because audiences were confused about what the Predator was supposed to be, but it was a little too spot-on.
Predator 2 wasn't a joke, but it was intended to take the formula of "Violent Urban Cop" movie and turn it on its head. Basically Dirty Harry meets Scarface, then add the Predator.
(Predators started to do the same thing with a "Battle Royale" movie but gave up its premise way too early, and lacked a bunch of nesscessary elements, like contracting zones, explosive penalties, and scattered weapons. Also the genre wasn't well established or as pervasive so it that part didn't land very well.)
Both films are far from perfect, but they are enjoyable films that entertain without trying to push a message (other than that Yautja are pretty rad)
You sound like the sort of person who thinks the "Street Fight" in Demolition Man is bad because it uses a bunch of action film cliches.
Well lets leave it here. Some people find throwing a machete through someone's chest and pinning them to the wall less suspension-of-disbelief breaking than the chieftan's daughter learning to hunt, and I am the other way around.
One 2-second sequence is the equivalent of an entire movie's premise. Sure Jan.
If this isn't quality cinema then you're a slack-jawed faggot. End of story.
Fix'd