Does an adequate job

Rating: 8/10 (1 June 2012)

Definitely lacks the claustrophobia of Alien and the acting and scriptwriting are not as tight. However, it must be remembered that comparing anything to the original Alien is setting a very high bar indeed.
There is a plot, well plots, well probably too many plots and not all are drawn to a satisfactory conclusion. Being charitable there is a narrative arc that could be continued in sequels, or it could just be a bit sloppy in this regard, and fail to manage to quite stand alone. There are a few, 'no sane person in this situation would do that', moments, and a couple of characters who, from early in the film, are clearly only there as gore fodder. There is also a sub textual study of the risks of genetic experimentation, but that part is quite predictable. Oh! And do be sure to check-in at the cinema door, any scientific training or critical faculty you may possess ('t were ever thus!).
The acting is a little patchy: at the good end Fassbender is truly excellent and basically does much of the heavy lifting through the film; Theron is suitably captivating and seriously intimidating; Rapace, to me is a bit weak, I expected a more assertive character that developed as the film progressed, as Weaver did with Ripley in Alien, but those high notes were sadly, slightly missed. Idris Elba does a nice job of playing the capable, if world-weary captain. Guy Pearce has a very small part, and doesn't get chance to build up momentum for his character. Logan Marshall-Greene does an okay job but his similarity to Tom Hardy made me think the latter would have been much better suited to this role. Other performances are passable, though not outstanding. It was good to see Benedict Wong give another good, though sadly small, performance.
The sets and CGI are very good. I saw the 3D version with all of the problems that brings with it (low light levels, and some distraction caused by the 'view-master' effect). I'm intending to get back to see the 2D version soon. The use of 3D was not as gratuitous as it might have been in hands with lesser skill than Sir Ridley's but I think this film will be much better in 2D.
So, does that sound negative? Well possibly BUT, compared with the other Alien sequels and spin-offs, with the possible exception of Alien3, (which I **really** like) this film is much better. The script is much less cheesy that Aliens. The plot(s) are more involving and gore scenes much less gratuitous that Resurrection and as for the AVP sub-franchise, well we don't even need to go there.
So, in summary, it's an above average movie in its own right. It extends an interesting and challenging universe in an engaging, unsettling way; and I feel it did manage, to reboot the franchise. I think if you are an Alien fan, you should see it, if you enjoy suspense / horror / gore / action you'll have an enjoyable 124 minutes and if you like Ridly Scott direction and awesome scenes you will also find things to enjoy. However, as it attempts to complement one of the greatest films ever made, but only manages to stand closely by in the shadow, I am giving it a mildly disappointed 8 out of 10.