It tried, and that's more than can be said for the next sequel...

Rating: 6/10 (21 December 2004)

The first time I heard of Alien: Resurrection was when a reader of those Hollywood magazines reported reading about a new Alien sequel rumoured to be in the works. According to his statement, Ripley would be "brought back" by cloning. Given that Sigourney Weaver insisted that she be killed off at the end of the previous film, those in the know were skeptical that she would even appear. In spite of all that, they found the right price for her, and the rest is history. Thankfully, she had the good sense to avoid the dreadful Alien VS. Predator project. Apparently, she read that script and said it sounded like a dreadful idea, which makes one wonder why Fox has never examined some of the ideas in such sources as Dark Horse comic books.
Thankfully, Fox learned their lesson from the Alien 3 experience. Instead of rushing an incomplete script into production, they hired a decent writer and gave him time to come up with something watchable. As with Aliens after Alien, the decision was also made to attempt to follow up a slow, languid science-fiction/horror piece with a fast-paced, breathless science-fiction/action piece. The results, while not even remotely able to compete with the best of the series, are such an improvement upon Alien 3 that it makes the elements of Gibson's Alien 3 script that can be seen in Alien: Resurrection a bitchslap to Brandywine Productions.
However, a number of problems keep Alien: Resurrection from really achieving its potential. One of them is the casting. While Brad Dourif can be believed in a film like this in spite of his relatively tiny size, Winona Ryder screams out "miscast" like Roseanne Barr would as the lead in a porn film. Not only is she tiny even in comparison to Dourif, her mannerisms and voice scream a softness that the world of the Alien series will not suffer. That she lives to see the end while more appropriate characters like those portrayed by Michael Wincott or Dominique Pinon bite it about forty minutes after they are introduced indicates that plausibility was a secondary concern to the director.
The design of the Alien-Human hybrid in particular makes one wonder exactly what was going on in the minds of the production team. Apparently, a more crab-like version was originally proposed, but changed in order to make it seem more "plausible". That... thing... is meant to be plausible? I must have been asleep when they redefined that word. The statement that the Alien Queen also now has a Human reproductive system is a bit of a joke, given that it is implied in the same monologue that she reproduces asexually. Then again, given that the prologue expects us to believe they can obtain an Alien by cloning someone who carried one once, I doubt that respect for the audience's sense of the plausible was a big concern.
To the credit of the film, Ron Perlman makes an excellent addition to the canon. Unlike Ryder, one has no trouble believing Perlman could survive well in a universe like this. Weaver has also grown in terms of acting to the point where the role of Ellen Ripley fits her like a glove. She could practically portray this role in her sleep, so there's not much chance of her not giving an awesome performance. With the new direction the character is taken in, she shows that there is nothing she cannot do if given a chance.
In the end, however, the flaws outweigh the strengths. I don't know whether the seven minutes added to the Special Edition for a 2003 release fix this, but I doubt it. As a result, I'd rate Alien: Resurrection a six out of ten. It is far better than its most immediate predecessor, but long-time fans of the series had a right to expect more.