Very artistic and almost brilliant gore...Far too underrated!

Rating: 9/10 (28 October 2011)

As one reviewer put it: Alien was about suspense, Aliens was an action movie, the third was a tragedy and this final one is gore. But just like Alien 3, for which Sigourney Weaver should have won the Oscar, also this fourth installment is underrated – even by James Cameron, who ranked Alien Vs. Predator as the number three in the franchise. I think the same happened to the Matrix sequels; the second and third were incredible movies with lots of new stuff, but nobody particularly liked them. Why? The Matrix, as Alien, and Aliens were just some of the best movies ever made and probably Aliens is, with The Godfather 2, the only sequel I know that is equally good as the first (or better). The reason that sequels are still made is therefore commercial, not a director's ambition to leave his artistic mark. Still, Aliens, the first sequel in the series became a classic, why? The success of Aliens was due to the fact that James Cameron realized that for now only an action movie would do, making a totally different genre of his sequel. So how about Resurrection? If you ask me, I think this is a good sequel since it flowed naturally from the first three movies: we have the Ripley character and a bunch of people being hunted by the Aliens trying to make their way out into space. That part is familiar (= what we go to see an Alien movie for); the rest is new to make it a movie strong enough to stand on its own (that is why we still go to see a sequel). Resurrection had a comic book style script with humor, and beautiful decadent sets, almost futuristic Art Deco. Ripley herself was the perfect mix: she had something familiar, and lots of new stuff, since she was Ripley and yet, being cloned 200 years later with an Alien inside her, she wasn't Ripley anymore. Ripley being different was probably the thing many fans had problems with, but had she stayed the same helpful brave woman, the same fans would have complained it was all too repetitive. I think the fact she was and wasn't the same helped me to adjust to a new formula, which after three movies was inevitable. I thought this new Ripley and Alien-queen-in-one was a great find (albeit with disgusting consequences, making a smart anti clone statement at the same time); she was almost like a predator herself, with a humoristic and unpredictable tweak, still keeping her strong character alive that made her an extremely credible protagonist in the first three movies. Still, this movie got less than a 7 score. For me this is the paradox of sequels: when we get the new stuff we have not seen before we think the movie deviates too much from the original, and yet, too many familiar things make any sequel too repetitive. But to be fair: I have never seen a more disgusting movie, and I had problems with that. That is the reason I could never give it a 10 like the first two. But visually it was a pleasure to watch, making this director just as much an artist as Cameron or Scott were. Let's just say Alien and Aliens were classics and I am happy we got Alien 3 & 4, since I enjoyed them more than I was disappointed that they were not as good as the first two (impossible anyway). Resurrection had lots of new stuff, beautiful sets, and effects, and the acting acting, especially of Sigourney, was great: definitely 9 out of 10!