khaktus

I appreciated the reflection of the contemporary politics (expansive totalitarian nations, hybrid war, admired but empathy-less tech gurus, the whimsical public opinions shaped by the (a)social media, even the philosophical conflict of legality and good cause) but also the occasional darker tones, meta humor, sarcastic winks. If they were not too obvious and rare ...

Unfortunately all of it was presented in a very cheap readable 1:1 rendering, for the very under-educated spectator, caricatures (that no one in 1960s would dare) and cliches piling up.

There is also this notorious "feature" well known and annoying even the average critics: The cringeworthy monologues that interrupt the natural flow of events, characters verbally describing what they do, are about to do, or think... it got so bad, that the whole movie is mostly composed of this sort of verbal fill in. It's not fun even if it was parodied ... here it seems like taken seriously even.

The movie is a sample and example of the worst of the contemporary comic-based cinema, that has replaced the good old classic sci-fi: A colorful, blinking, exploding, glittery porridge of cgi vfx, the pointless boring fights video-game style, action for the sake of action. The stuff that was supposed to spice up the movies has now replaced any decent storytelling. Not to forget the self-serving megalomania, the unbearable pathos in declamations. And who cares if the new Superman is on the liberal/democratic side of the things, when the story climaxes in the most old-school straight couple romance on display, so-1950s that it is almost insulting in its unapologetic straight-in-you-face presentation?

Quality wise, story-telling-wise, what-we-dare-to-talk-about wise this is like going a century of human and cinematic development backwards. A product made for consumption by masses of not-so-bright Gen Z teenagers. Maybe they will benefit from the conservative content packed in a progressive wrapper (or the other way around?) and reconsider their influencer-driven and algorithm-managed thinking patterns. But all and all it literally felt like a textbook lecture for the kindergarten.

How many times can you try to kill off the franchise with miserable sequels, prequels and now in-quels? Well, this is a perfect organism, a survivor!

I admit I am a huge fan of Aliens and Alien (in this order) and the franchise itself - even with so many attempts to destroy it, as Ripley (and her subsequent generic stand-ins) tried to destroy the Xenormorph. I get quite perplexed by some (paid?) reviews saying "fans will love it". Who? Fans of what? There's no cost in such statements, just the sheer calculation: it might convince a few more people to come to see it and pay for the ticket. Money are never refunded after the movie screening, right? The only aim is to make yet another gullible spectator eat the bite and pay.

Here's the recipe: One cup of jump scares. ("Because we are making a horror movie, like the pros, yeah!") Half cup of forgettable teenage cannon fodder (Who else goes to the cinema? For what else than the generic genre audiovisual products?).

Quarter cup of romance. (Seriously, this, in an Alien movie?).

Five gallons of "exploding, gore, tentacles, slime, smoke". (Like in any new Marvel/DC clone) Far too many pinches of "homage" winks.

Since long time Hollywood feels like not making real movies anymore - just the generic products prepared by the oversized marketing departments, to pay off reliably. Munch the pop-corn, turn off the brain, get entertained by blinked CGI. No creative ideas, no original story, no characters (daresay their development!), no empathy, no meaning or message, no memorable soundtrack easily associated with that one movie (just the background noise for the scenes, in the most cliche sense: "the action" "the suspense" "the magnificence").

This is indeed a teenage horror movie in space. Since they do not know any other way to keep 'em thrilled, they have to repeat one jump scare after another. "Because that is fun." Boo! - haha!, repeat, boo! - haha!, repeat. Same dumb joke over and over again. Next popcorn. Next popcorn. Next popcorn. As if this - more of the same old trick - was the point of a horror or any other type of movie. While some might point out that this element was also present in the Alien(s) classics - yeah, it was present there, but not the point of it all. The suspense of unknown and unseen, the slow revelation of the various aspect of a totally alien life-form, the imperfect characters brought into impossible situations, the desperation, the fake victories, the unfathomable greed and malice.

The Alien characters were middle-aged blue-collar workers f..d by the corporation, though mentally slightly unstable, a toxic cocktail even without the Xenomorph (who serves more as a trigger for their deficiencies to play out). The Aliens had the bad-ass soldiers (iconic ones, copied ever since) versus civilians tension. Experienced/inexperienced, macchiavelists/dummies, tough/sensitive, bold/cautious, weary/vital dynamics resplendent - even for a sci-fi action movie. What does Romulus "sacrifice" at the altar of horrors - some unconvincing, dumb, tasteless teenagers?

I do wonder what new thing have I seen in this "new installment in the franchise" (saying this with reluctance). Nothing. Except the "new monster" that looks like from a completely different movie. Even Scott's Prometheus and Covenant have brought in some creatures that feel alien to the original Giger's Alien design, or its further free adaptation in Aliens. A frenzy of grey slimy worms and tentacles, that are more disgusting than scary or otherworldly. Not to mention Scott's need to explain certain aspects of Xenomorph cosmology/biology in a way that no one asked him to, that few fans liked really, that denies the aesthetics of the original Aliens, that denies all the years of fan fictions, flattens all those free running fantasies into contemporary hype "genetic engineering, AI". And he surely loves those - as he proved even in late Raised by Wolves. An so under his production, yet another ugly (and not in a good way) creature needs to see the perpetual darkness of the space. A one-thousand-th copy of some annoyingly familiar grey-tentacled-toothed-slimy-monster from any generic comic/sci-fi/horror movie after year 2000. As if the perverse but stylish imagination died out in Hollywood after H. R. Giger?

I can't even figure out what was the business with the constant homage. One of the strongest (but often overlooked) features of the first two Alien(s) movies was what I call "the immersive experience". You go on a mission with a crew, you walk with them step by step, from the tension in the first encounter of the group-to-form, through the first-hand taste of the shaky descend to the surface, and then walking the haunted castle that feels eerily familiar though spookily damaged - and that contrast throws you off balance. But throughout the experience you feel like one member of the group, living the horrorful adventure with them. That particular screenwriting skill seems vanished. Why do I need to be constantly winked at in Romulus, with those "homage" inserts, and thus taken out of the possible immersive experience? One or two such winks might be pardonable, but when you build the whole movie of the lines and scenes of some other movies - it stops being an "homage" and it becomes a plagiate. So unashamed that it leaves you speechless, in cringe - that someone actually dared to do this, and seriously.

As many have pointed out, this movie has become a 1:1 warning signal (that some misunderstood as SOS) to the corporate greed, that eventually destroys anything good. Rendering the new Alien installment as a predictable teenage horror movie hybridized with any-contemporary-blockbuster product, is quite an insult to the franchise. One possible aspect of this are the generic positive reviews, that seem most probably paid for (this is the ear of copywriters and even text generated by AI), or perhaps written by folks who missed the whole "bold innovative cinema" eras that ended silently after 2000s and were breast-fed only on the generic corporate products and think that this is the masterly art. I am particularly amused by the fake reviews that look like cowing to the fans' dislike of the bad sequels and bad prequels in the Alien franchise, bowing to the seemingly unsurpassable first iconic movies, but all in a well calculated intention - to make you feel "on the same wavelength", to get you curious - and ultimately pay. That is your only purpose. If Weyland-Yutani did a marketing campaign for a new Alien movie, it would look something like this. Alas, it has become a well established practice.

I liked the initial world-building attempt, even if the "corporate tyranny" is sketched in a tasteless caricature that could be anything - Andor or 1984 - especially that old corpulent lady in the booth, so cliche, almost a cheep "kids playing at ..." parody. Like the rest of the movie. I liked the initial slower pace - I don't need my movies to be packed with senseless action from the start till the end. One of the mature feats of the first Alien(s) movies )and many sci-fi classics) is that they are quite slow, they take their time to immerse you in the story, the dynamics between characters, the claustrophobic limits of the space and time they draw. I liked the human-android theme that they tried to play out, but remained at the doorstep, most of the time. I am not sure if I liked the 1970s technology - yet another futile homage to the first movies, barely switching any of the right bodily buttons.

I don't feel like reviewing everything, but as this was an apparent hit, it appears often at the top "new anime to watch" lists and has undeservedly high rating here - I feel like I need to rectify the deluded enthusiasm.

Perhaps, for someone it was one of their first Japanese animated movies - that are made for kids as much as grown ups. Well, welcome to the genre, that is a cinematography of its own. Often far ahead of the Hollywood production, that it tends to inspire. It has its masterpieces - from Akira and Metropolis to Only Yesterday and Spirited Away. Anything from the wise grandpas of old Ghibli. You will never want to play Disney's shallow good-vs-evil plots to your kids, after dealing with the complexities of Nausicaa or Princess Mononoke. You will never praise Nolan's Inception once you see its predecessor: Paprika. Etc., etc.

On the positive side - "warm fuzzy feelings" - of the Ghibli-esque 2D animation ... the house in the terraced village, walking through the bridge over the river that constantly reminds the heroine of the childhood trauma, cute slightly vintage local trains, the usual constellations of the local school. All one wants from "classical anime".

But then ... I'd imagine a different anime about running away into the anonymous safety and illusory opportunities of the virtual world. There is so much sci-fi and high-tech anime out there, that I start to miss those tales that actually take one back to reality, back to nature, back to family. Especially if it pretends to be one of those animations that try to educate youngster about something. "About something." About something?

The 3D world looks cheap and ugly in a way. No rules, just random things happening, random characters claiming random roles, doing random feats - no inner consistency of the vision. It feels so generic, as a copy of a copy of a copy of something that we have seen somewhere in the Hollywood feature films. Yes, since its inception anime holds this odd characteristic - of resembling or even imitating well known stories - with a bit of cheapness to it. Imitating superhero poses, generic replicas, over-dramatized emotions - often without understanding the context that they came from. Copying superficial "cool" without the content.

The musical part sounds like "ok, our heroine has to become the greatest start of the 5 billion users of this VR world", so they try to develop "5 pounds of wonder", mechanically, in the workshop. And the songs sound like that - hypnotic pathos, instant wow. Covering it up with tons of glittery particles running around in arranged flocks.

The worst part, as mentioned by the other reviewers, is the emotional dimension of the movie. After dozens of pieces, I am used to certain childishness in the Japanese animation. Cringiness, embarrassing exaggeration, unbearable pathos. I love their emotional minimalism at times, I dislike the prevailing maximalism. The endless blushing because of the tiniest triggers - followed by unmeasured outbursts. Yelling. One would expect that over the years, this will get tamed down progressively. Unfortunately, in Belle it goes over the top and then further more. All the time, everywhere. Belle+Beast initial interactions remind me of seme+uke dynamics in yaoi. Awfully contrived.

Then, the most annoying part - the plot twists - that are so forced and unanchored, that it did hurt watching. The rules of VR. The inexplicable self-serving destructiveness of the Dragon. The self-proclaimed Justice league. The creepy first assisted talk between Ruka and Kamishin at the station is drawn way beyond parody and farce, it's almost idiotic. Then they try to play on serious note - the domestic violence. Well, they have 4-5 women from the choir who know about it and do nothing? The teenager Suzu then goes to Tokyo alone, to fix it herself, in another creepy unrealistic stand off with the boys' father, that beats any even fairy-tale logic?

Compared to Spirited Away, Girl Who Leapt Through Time, From Up On Poppy Hill, Your Name and whatever else... the scenes are so derivative, "let's say something like when you had the usual generic scene in the other movie". Anything that happens in the movie lack some sort of inner logic, justification, gradual uncovering or believable mystery.