You can only repair things so much

Rating: 7/10 (2 August 2006)

OK, this one does have quite a few questionable plot aspects, but it's still A LOT better than the garbage that Alien 3 was. First of all, cloning Ripley back into the series may come off as real desperate, but what can you do when the damage of Alien 3 is already done? I don't buy the idea that Resurrection stands out negatively as a pointless follow-up to the trilogy. If anything, it actually saves the series from ending in horrible fashion, both considering the plot and production.
Resurrection starts off brilliantly - the cast is great (apart from the misplaced Winona Ryder) and the Aliens look better than they ever did; the 1st Alien was more magic for obvious reasons but there were technical limitations, whereas Cameron's Aliens were lost in the action-packed style of the film. Fincher's Alien was too obvious in its CGI-ness.
However, the whole thing pretty much starts lacking when the action starts. It just doesn't really live up to the initial build-up (which I agree, may not have been that original as such). I will also agree on comments above that Ripley is not the same Ripley that we got to know from the first Alien movies, but again, she was already damaged by Fincher. Also, yes, the villain in this movie is a questionable one, for reasons that the viewer will see as the movie rolls on.
I read some comments about how this one isn't scary enough compared to the other Alien films. This may be true more or less (I really think Cameron kinda started this by putting action before suspense), but on the plus side, Alien is once again a true sci-fi movie, whereas Fincher unfortunately steered it into the direction of horror.