Alien Resurrection
Rating: 1.5/5
By: Nathaniel Simpson
After the abysmal Alien 3, you would think producers and filmmakers would get the hint that maybe they should allow this franchise to die out for a while, and to try again in another couple decades or so to achieve the same magic Ridley Scott captured in the first film. With the death of Ripley at the end of David Fincher's film, it was the perfect opportunity for them to wait and explore new stories in this franchise years down the road. While this would easily have been the best course of action, they decide to take the route that earns them money quickly and craft Alien: Resurrection, a movie that not only betrays the sacrificial ending of the main hero from the previous film, but is an annoying, over-the-top campy attempt to appeal to a wider audience.
The film opens by letting the viewer know right away that Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) is going to be back, but not the Ripley the fans know and love. No, this is a version of Ripley that has been created in a lab by scientists to serve as a carrier for the Xenomorph embryo 200 years after the events of the previous film. While they keep her for testing and data, a crew of mercenaries consisting of Elgyn (Michael Wincott), Johner (Ron Perlman), Vriess (Dominique Pinon), Hillard (Kim Flowers), and Call (Winona Ryder) arrive on the ship, delivering abducted humans in stasis to serve as embryo carriers as well. When the crew meets Ripley and they find out what the humans will be used for, they decide to try and put a stop to it so the alien life form won't continue on.
While the third film committed an unforgivable sin in terms of killing off the heroes instantly from the previous film, I think this movie takes another wrong turn by bringing back Ripley. The third movie allowed her to sacrifice herself to save the planet of prisoners, and it was an understandable send-off for Weaver. She didn't even want to do this film, but changed her mind after they offered her a boatload of money, according to the actress. So, they now change the significance of the ending of the previous film to bank off the star returning. This is the usual case of some studios caring more about the money going in their pockets, rather than the art they are making on the screen.
The story is not unique or even unpredictable, but it is better than what we had received in the third film. This movie actually contains a comprehensible, thought-out story that has a clear distinction of what the characters are trying to accomplish. While it is cheesy and at times a bit long, it does work for a film in this franchise. It feels like something we had already seen before, but it is still a sort of fun story that the viewer can get behind.
I may be in the minority who didn't like Weaver's performance as Ripley here. I think they totally botch the character and completely mold the character in a way that is not fitting for the hero of this franchise. I get it - it's a clone of this character and not the original hero we know years prior. But, I'd rather they keep the character dead instead of bring this new iteration of Ripley we got here. In terms of the other characters, I think they're fun in certain parts, but nothing special at all. I can't even tell you the names of the characters or what they really did thirty-minutes after the film ended.
The effects are sort of lackluster here, even though they have cool ideas. The main aspect I loved so much about the first two films were the practical effects they used for the aliens and the terror, but for this movie, they start to bring in VFX and cast a lot of light on the aliens chasing the crew. I agree that less is more in the terms of this film series, and this picture blew that completely out of the water. Is it cool? Sure, but it doesn't have the same effect as Ridley Scott's or James Cameron's films.
I also think this movie leans too much into the campy aspect. It follows in the same footsteps as many of the iconic horror franchises, but I just don't think it fits here with these characters and this setting. This is a series that wants to cast a light on the horror of what is unknown out there, and this movie makes it seem more of a fun time than realistic horror that Scott was going for years prior. It's the same way I feel about the effects for this movie - it's a fun and enjoyable watch for some parts, but simply doesn't work for me in this series.
I would say I did enjoy more of what this movie did compared to David Fincher's Alien 3, but I don't think it is better or worse than what Fincher did. This is a very flawed movie, and doesn't work in the series as a whole. They went on to take a major break from this franchise after this film, but I think they would have been better off not bringing the third or fourth installments into the world.
Comments
Post a Comment