Runaway egos and unnecessary sequels

Rating: 4/10 (23 April 2007)

Back when I was about thirteen, I remember cheering with delight upon hearing that this movie would be made. I was born too late to catch any of the preceding films in the cinema but thanks to play ground gossip and not-entirely-wholesome class mates I'd managed to catch all three on video in those heady few hours between getting home from school and the scramble to hide the boxes when my parents got in from work. Needless to say then, my hormone addled teenage self practically foamed at the mouth at the prospect of more alien carnage, especially when somebody mentioned they were bringing the guns back into the franchise. However, I was of course still too young to see it on the big screen and it wasn't until a plane flight back from Florida a year later that I finally caught Alien: Resurrection in all it's glory. I whooped and hollered with delight and thought it was the most bad ass thing I'd ever seen. However, upon watching it again recently, all it really achieved was reminding me of the old me (which ironically was the young me) and how easily pleased I was. So I guess the whole point of this whimsical and nostalgic tale which has most likely caused the majority of you to skip to the next review down after clicking the "not useful" button is simply this; for gun crazy, early teenagers wanting gore, violence and acid bleeding monsters, this is a an absolute must once you've seen Aliens. For the slightly more seasoned film goer however, the ones who would have chosen The Third Man, The Seventh Seal, Cool Runnings or Citizen Kane on the flight instead, Alien: Resurrection is ultimately unrewarding.
Now, for all the plus points (Ron Pearlman!), the minus points (alien sex???) and the sitting on the fence points (is Distephano awesome or not? I can't tell), the principle reason for dismissing Alien: Resurrection is this: it's completely and utterly unnecessary. The original trilogy as I'm sure you're well aware runs in sequence quite beautifully. It moves from a haunting, slow paced opener, to a fast paced and action packed middle bit before climaxing in a grim, nihilistic opus of despair. Alien: Resurrection doesn't fit the storyline at all, it feels tacked on, the last slow gasp of the horse as it gets beaten to death. And given that two hundred years after Alien 3, scientists are able to clone Ripley and the alien inside her makes the character's noble sacrifice at the close of the third act less heroic and more of a delaying action.
Credit where credit's due though, it does have a very striking visual style. The influence of French director Jean Pierre Jeunet has carried over into the Gilliam-alike cinematography where everything is filmed with muddied, hazy colours and bizarre machinery waits round every corner. The appearance of the scientists in particular is pure nightmare fantasy; all shiny white suits that lead up to heads wearing quirky optic goggles and topped off with slick, greased back hair. The corridors of the ship meanwhile are dimly lit, endless octagonal constructs that fittingly enough, look like the inside of an alien's intestinal tract. Alien: Resurrection may not be the high point of the franchise, but it sure as hell is the weirdest looking one. In fact, the best way to describe the whole thing would be as some kind of dark, science fiction carnival of the grotesque, with the 'grotesque' part ably supplied by a smattering of gore in which the human body is ruined in some incredibly inventive ways (at one point a man quite literally picks apart his own brain).
Unfortunately though, imagery, gore and violence alone do not a good movie make. Unless it's 300. 300 was great. But I digress...
At the forefront of the problem here is this new version of Ripley. I hate to pass judgement on an actress the calibre of Sigourney Weaver but it does seem as though her ego was left to run rampant on the film every step of the way. This carries over into her performance as well, with this version of Ripley remaining nothing more than an aloof, nonchalant presence to such an extent that even the emotional outpouring when she torches a clone lab feels altogether forced and unnatural. The Ripley of the previous movies was an impassioned and determined survivalist, this one is just sterile. This wouldn't be so bad if the rest of the cast could fill in the blanks but sadly, they're the most uninteresting bunch of xenomorph ready meals yet. There's none of the natural charisma or camaraderie of the marines or the inmates and with the exception of Dominique Pinon as an ass kicking, handicapped mechanic and Ron Pearlman as Ron Pearlman, they're very difficult to root for.
By and large then, not a great film. It has its plus points but an uninteresting cast, silly concept and uninspiring heroine bring it down terribly and it's only real worth when compared to the rest of the series is as a catalogue of inventive deaths, best of which is undoubtedly the "chestburster out the torso and through a man's head" bit. It all reaches its zenith of course with the unveiling of the new monster, a human/alien hybrid that resembles a New York sanitation commissioner who just had the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man detonate above his head.
And Winona Ryder was rubbish.