Director's Cut Review...

Rating: 10/10 (31 October 2003)

Minor Spoilers
I attended a screening of "Alien: The Director's Cut" not four hours ago, and not four hours ago I was thrilled. I knew that I was going to get a chance to witness one of the most atmospheric and thrilling films of all time--with added footage. Fans who picked up the DVD (now out of print to make way for the new "Alien Quadrilogy") may have already seen a few of the deleted segments, while other fans who didn't, and are waiting on the promised quadrilogy to be released next year, will be enthralled. This film doesn't feature a wealth of new footage such as "Apocalypse Now Redux," scenes that could damage its flow, but instead gives us scenes that click together a bit more. One of these is when Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) finds Dallas (Tom Skerritt) attached to the wall with alien mucus seen later in "Aliens." It doesn't make sense to feature it in the original cut, and director Ridley Scott was smart for deleting it when the film hit theaters back in 1979. It doesn't really make much sense, and stops the gripping flow of the ending when Ripley is racing to get to the escape shuttle. It causes people to think, What? and then they start letting their minds wander. But now that we have seen "Aliens," and understand the significance of the mucus (sounds funny, huh?), it makes complete sense. This is the fan's version.
Plus, it's fun to get to see the movie on the big screen for those who didn't twenty-four years ago.
The plot (as if you didn't know it by now): A mining ship in the future named the Nostromo, carrying seven passengers back to earth, stops in its course to locate an SOS beacon on a distant planet, which may, or may not, actually be a warning signal as opposed to a distress beacon--too late to find out, since they land on the planet and one of the investigating crew members, Kane (John Hurt), gets attacked by a strange alien creature that attaches itself to his face and doesn't let go.
The ship's captain, Dallas, hauls him into the ship's lab, where he is looked over by the ship's scientist, Ash (Ian Holm), who takes an odd affection to the creature that bothers Ripley, the second in command. The technician, Parker (Yaphet Kotto), doesn't like any of this either, and their suspicions reach a maximum when Kane wakes up from his sleep, the alien unattached from his face, and proceeds to eat irregularly. Later that night, back in their course to earth, a small alien bursts from Kane's stomach at dinner. The alien escapes into the depths of the ship. Search parties commence but the alien starts to grow more fierce and terrifying as the film treads on--soon it's a man-eating set of teeth bent on killing the lot of them.
Atmosphere is part of what makes "Alien" the terrifying nail-biter it is. This isn't a routine horror flick that jumps through all the hoops--it's original to a certain degree. Its inspiration comes from earlier films but it improves upon them all for the most part. From its opening shots to its final, it is eerie, moody, and scary. To show millions of aliens abounding from hidden crevices would be typical--the fear of "Alien" lies in the anticipation of the jump, or the startle. We wait, and wait, and suddenly something leaps at the screen. It's not the alien. The alien is in front of the thing that jumped. Our heart stops and then jolts again. Forget pumping volts of electricity through dead people--place them in front of this and their hearts will pound once again.
James Cameron's sequel "Aliens" (1986) is often considered the better of the series, in terms of excitement and aliens themselves. But "Alien," like the movie "Signs" (2002), isn't really about aliens. The film "Aliens" is terrific--but so is "Alien," as its central idea is too unnerve the audience through bumps and jolts. Not through blood and guts. Depends on what your personal preferences are--startles or explosions? I appreciate and enjoy both.
Ridley Scott knows how to evoke wonder and magnificence from his shots. The opening sequence that shows the exterior of the Nostromo and then dissolves to the interior, crawling along the shafts as we wait for something scary to happen and then forget as we are wowed by the movement and visuals, is a fine example of the art of filmmaking and not the filmmaking itself. Cameron is one of my favorite directors. Scott, when given the right material, can turn out wonders. "Alien" is his crowning achievement alongside the dark 1982 classic "Bladerunner," another sci-fi feast for the eyes and mind. I wasn't a fan of "Gladiator," but let's not bring that up, shall we?
"Alien" may seem tame by today's standards. But this isn't a film that wants to be another mindless blood and guts extravaganza. This is a smart horror film, one that is as involving as it visually magnificent, one that is as amazing as it is terrifying. This is horror at its finest. And if you didn't get to see it on the big screen last time around, now is your chance to get a glance at what you've been missing all these years.
Notes: The new "Alien: Director's Cut" version features over three minutes of never-before-seen sequences, as well as restored prints and a newly remixed surround-sound track. Attached to the director's release of the film is also the first teaser trailer for next year's "Alien vs. Predator."
5/5 stars for the 1979 original and 2003 Director's Cut.

John Ulmer