Alien, la résurrection

Alien Resurrection is the most radical departure in the series that has now spanned centuries in its own universe and nearly twenty years of our own earth time. Gone is the meticulously constructed suspense of Ridley Scott's 1979 original. Gone is the heart-stopping pulse of uncannily staged action from James Cameron's 1986 sequel. Gone is the Ripley who cried and fought and bled and sacrificed her own life to save the world from the horror she very nearly unleashed in David Fincher's atmospheric and underrated Alien 3. Instead, we get the all-new Ripley: cynical, sardonic, and ready with a wisecrack or a fist for anyone who crosses her path. Director Jeunet unfortunately seems to bask in self-parody, and this is where the film goes wrong. He serves up plenty of nasty evisceration and gruesome chest-bursting, but by now we have seen so much of the creatures that they are no longer terrifying. Still, I have a lasting affection and fascination with this series -- and Jeunet Alien is better than no Alien.

I actually read the novel before I had ever seen the feature, and I really enjoyed it. As I remembered being on holidays with my family soon after it just opened at cinemas and grabbing a copy to fill in the time. The aspect I liked about it was that the fact you could read that of the thoughts of the aliens. Sure it wouldn't work on film (well it might --- however it would feel quite odd to tell the truth), but it was an interesting touch in the book. I seen it a couple times now and it remains just as adrenaline pumped and enjoyably over-the-top entertainment.

Anyhow French director Jean-Pierre Jeunet and writer Josh Whedon (best known for penning "Buffy: The Vampire Slayer" TV series and than later on the TV show and movie "Firefly") would definitely change the tone of the franchise with this well-budgeted sequel "Alien Resurrection" as its broodingly surreal visual edge and venomous tongue-in-cheek approach were the signature styles of its creators. Was it better for it… well, yes and no. While for me it doesn't come close to the first two films, I believe it to be an improvement over David Fincher's "Alien 3". Which I don't believe to be as bad as many make it out to be, but still a disappointing experience (although the producer's cut fixes up some problems evident in the theatrical release).

Whedon's story is a perfect blend of sci-fi/ horror / action that starts off with an interesting vision, before transcending into the same old formula. Nonetheless director Jeunet's clinical, but streamlined handling constructs some twisted images (like that of the newborn alien) and exciting passages outside the graphic jolts, liked the sequences staged underwater and involving some ladder climbing. The atmosphere is dark and shadowy with vast, open long wide photography and an expansively simmering score.

Special effects remain impressive as ever. Mixing with effective puppet work (how can you forget the second tongue and constant drooling!) and decent CGI work. The competent make-up FX stands up with moments of graphic carnage and new creation or two. The ensemble cast do decent job. Ron Pealman pretty much steals the show and Sigourney Weaver seems to be relishing her return. Winona Ryder is okay. Then there's solid support by Michael Wincott, J.E. Freeman, Dan Hedaya, Gary Dourdan and Brad Dourif.

I am one of those older (mature) reviewers who can claim to have seen this series in real time, in theatres.

First I will share my recollection of what that was like at the time.

Alien 1 was magnificent. If you were to make a list of the greatest films of all time (and all reviewers do this, if only subconsciously) Alien 1 would be make the list. Alien 2 was doubly astonishing because it was almost as good as Alien 1 and, as any film buff knows, the sequel is rarely if ever that good.

Expectations were high going into Alien 3, the prison planet movie, but the entry was disappointing and for the first time fans started to wonder if the franchise was going to self-destruct.

For this reason, Alien 4, Resurrection, was disappointing in every possible way. It was a weak concept, poorly timed and poorly executed. The template for the story was more "haunted house" than sci-fi. Not only was the story flawed but at the end of the day it ran out of steam after the first 30 minutes and became tedious for the audience, a sin no film should ever commit. All the characters were so unlikable -- including to a large extent Weaver's saucy clone -- that even if the audience WANTED to root for a character, there was no one worthy of the effort.

I got hold of the director's cut and re-reviewed this film because another member posted a review saying this film was unappreciated.

OK, so let's appreciate it for what it is -- a flawed entry that almost destroyed the franchise. The IMDb rating is solid -- in other words, this is really a very weak film.

(To date Alien 1 and 2 remain the best of the series. AVP is a remarkably perky little entry that somehow manages to polarize reviewers who either love it or hate. I have re-watched AVP more than any other entry. It is not elegant but it is very very entertaining.)

It is strange, that movie this bad is so memorable and awesome :D

Every other line of script consists loud shouting with close up so the head takes at least 60% of the screen. It is maybe the reason this movie is a walking meme.

It's a horror movie that has given horror theme and basically there are no surprises. You can surprise somebody from behind only couple of times before it gets old. Sometimes the one walking up front gets it, sometimes the one guardian the rear. And this movie does this kinda well, it plays it for its audience.

I liked it. Even back then, still even now. After seeing Alien 2 as a kid, i had nightmares as it was seriously scary movie. But then the A3 + this cured me forever as it does not take itself that seriously. On one hand it's a shame, but on the other hand it's good to have some different take on the same universe.

Alien:Resurrection divided audiences from the day it got released in theatres. To this day, even many studio execs and producers of the earlier films don't even dare watch this film or even consider it as part of the Alien franchise (so glad the Alien anthology Blu-Ray Boxset includes making-of featurettes for each of the four films - pretty awesome stuff). Among the franchise's fanbase, it's not unanimously appreciated either. I can understand why.

Nonetheless, I still think it deserves to be watched, as despite its weaknesses, Jean-Pierre Jeunet's film offers its share of interesting moments, all wrapped up in a technically-sound package.

Now, for anyone who has seen all four films, it's pretty obvious that each one of them has its own respective flavour, so to speak. Each film comes from a different director (and all four directors are extremely talented guys), and the difference in tone is quite noticeable, as the first film is a true, nightmarish, slow-paced sci-fi horror film ; Aliens is more action-oriented ; Alien 3 is a blend of thriller and horror film. Alien:Resurrection is no rupture to this thread of changing tones, as it has its share of dark humor, it's far more gory and graphic than all the previous installments, and it picks up (only) 200 years after Alien 3, in a spaceship, with our favourite monster-slaying female protagonist, none other than Ellen Ripley. Yes, she died in the third film, but writers have found an unoriginal and somewhat far-fetched way of bringing her back, which surprisingly ends up being perhaps one of the most interesting subplots in the whole movie (and one of the only ones too), as it leads to one pretty haunting scene later at the mid- point of the feature.

The script certainly isn't the film's strongest asset, as it serves no purpose other than getting the spaceship crew to confront the notorious alien creatures through all areas of the spaceship, with plenty of bloody and gooey fun throughout. My synopsis might not do the script justice, as there are a few subplots that I will not spoil, some interesting, some just plain silly. It does borrow elements from the previous films: Ripley develops a relationship with one of the characters that's a bit reminiscent of that she had with Newt in Aliens; there is a lot of action and gun play, just like there was in Aliens; it follows the tradition of featuring a robot character; the crew of the spaceship is composed of a few macho characters that might remind you of those in Alien 3, etc. All these elements are nice inclusions, but have a tribute feel to them more than anything else.

Anyhow, we do get good performances from the likes of Ron Pearlman, Brad Dourif, Wynona Ryder, Dominique Pinon and, of course, Sigourney Weaver.

Directing and cinematography rank among the highlights, along with the tremendous makeup and practical effects. Jean-Pierre Jeunet definitely brings a humorous touch here and there, but it never amounts to any overly distracting silliness. The aesthetics are true to the genre and look better in this film than in any of the previous ones, especially the creatures. They're more fluid in movement, the costumes are very detailed and gorgeously textured, and some of the set-pieces bring the gooey madness to a whole new level. Cinematography has a distinct feel to it, and the work on lighting is somewhat reminiscent of that in La cité des enfants perdus and Delicatessen, two of Jeunet's previous films.

The soundtrack by John Frizzell also works very well, and adds a nightmarishly majestic tone to the film, especially in those moments featuring plenty of organic imagery.

Overall, Alien:Resurrection, despite its fundamental flaw of suffering from a linear and quite predictable script that might borrow too much from the previous outings, is still a welcome (yet maybe unnecessary) addition to the franchise, and a technically competent film which profits greatly from Jean-Pierre Jeunet's approach in visual storytelling. While it is not nearly as good as either one of the first two films, it's still a worthwhile 100 minutes in the Alien universe.