Some thoughts on the Alien trilogy
If you were to make a list of, say, the ten most influential science fiction films and then another of the ten most influential horror films, there would be a very strong case for Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) to be included on both. Not only an instant classic, the film also launched one of the most important and enduring multimedia franchises we
( Read more... )
Nice review/retrospective/analysis/whatever. I agree that the realism of the characters in Alien is part of what makes the film as good as it is. I also feel that Veronica Cartwright's performance contributes to the tension in the latter portion; being a hysterical and gibbering wreck is kind of a thankless role, but that is exactly how a lot of people would behave in such a situation. Also, Giger's design for the xenomorph was one of those things that's so significant that it can only be done once -- like, after that, a lot of people seemed befuddled as to how to come up with a really interesting alien design that wasn't a rip-off of or homage to it. Finally, while Ridley Scott has, IMO, largely settled cozily into being a Reliable Hollywood Director and no longer demonstrates the sheer genius he once did (though he's still better than a lot of people), he deserves credit for creating a REALLY unsettling atmosphere and keeping the pacing slow (which contributes to the dreamlike quality) until near the end.
Insofar as my [nuclear] family was functional enough to have such things (occasionally), Aliens, the second film, was one of our "canonical" favorite movies and it's still sort of bathed in a light of specialness in my memory. (Btw, Vasquez is played by Jenette Goldstein; looks like you made a typo there. And lol @ the Michelle Rodriguez thing.) Between this and the first two Terminator films I feel that Cameron has a gift for making stuff that ticks the boxes of Big Entertaining Action Blockbusters while keeping the human element real, well-done, and compelling. And as an action film it's almost unequaled. I have trouble thinking of much in cinema that approaches the second half in terms of sheer intensity (James Horner's score helps). Also an interesting example of a very definite Final Boss Fight even when video games were still in their toddlerhood.
I did see Alien 3 at least two or three times when I was younger, so I remember if fairly well, but it has been awhile and I'm sure it bears revisiting. It seems like a specifically "adult" film in a way distinct from the first two, which, gore notwithstanding, can be pretty easily comprehended by kids. Since both of its predecessors were, IMO, near-perfect examples of films in which the creators knew exactly what they were trying to achieve, and did it, I share your curiosity as to how 3 would have turned out had Fincher been able to just do his own thing. Then again, since, like you said, he seemed mostly interested in the human element, there is also the possibility that he was simply never the right man for this particular job -- his subsequent movies were good, but noticeably removed from the kind of near-mystical viewpoint which seems to underlie 1 and 2. Still, I'm curious to watch this Assembly Edit version, and I do think that killing Ripley off actually makes sense, since like you said, she keeps losing things and people throughout the saga, and is further displaced in time with each film.
Reply
As an aside, I'd also like to add that I thought Alien Resurrection was entertaining enough, but it was essentially camp and an obvious case of the series entering what TvTropes calls a "Franchise Zombie" state.
Prometheus had a lot going for it, but I agree that the absence of Ripley hurt it, and it seemed like it was trying to do 27 different things and ended up just sort of giving up on half of them. Someone else pointed out that the revelation that Old Man Weyland is Charlize Therons's character's father, which is made to seem all dramatic, has no real bearing on the film or anything to do with anything; furthermore I felt that it pushed the series into the dreaded "fan-canon" state at which point all that was delightfully mysterious in the early days is now part of a pedantically-documented "mythology" (see also: the post-Lovecraft Lovecraft "mythos", which was originally just a loose collection of stuff he pulled out of his ass as a sort of metaphor for weird shit in the universe that is beyond human comprehension) where everything has an EXPLANATION. I liked it better when the creepy-as-fuck alien planet the crew visits in the first film is just floating in a void of context.
But yes, these films have been very influential, to a degree that transcends their roots in mere "genre" entertainment, and I enjoyed reading this. (Not sure how I feel about Blomkamp directing a new one since he seems to be a one-trick pony and his spastic style of action, action, action and black-and-white oversimplification of everything is vastly at odds with the first film and even the second. It worked in District 9 due to the general weirdness of that film and its satirical tone, but I'm not sure how well it will translate into a film series as unapologetically BROODING as Alien.)
Reply
Just to clarify, I think the crew in Alien do a fine job, and one of the strengths of there being just 7 of them is that you don't have any Ensign Redshirts like you do in the second and third films. Veronica Cartwright played her role well, and I'm sure you know that story that during the chestburster sequence while the actors were aware of what was going to happen (it was in the script after all) they didn't know how gory it would be and she got several litres of blood squirted in her face and actually fell over which was kept in the final film. You're right about the pacing and building of tension, Alien is a masterpiece of it, I was listening to a podcast on the film and one of the hosts pointed out that it's a 2 hour movie, yet the chestburster, which is really the start of the action, comes at pretty much exactly the one hour mark. If I had more time I would have also mentioned Ian Holm as Ash (another interesting fact is the alphabet of androids, you have Ash in Alien, Bishop in Aliens, Call in Alien Resurrection and David in Prometheus).
Just on the notion of video game final bosses, that same podcast wondered if Hudon's iconic line, "Game over, man, game over" was one of the first references to video game lingo in a major Hollywood film. I've not watched Alien Resurrection in years, probably should give it another go to see if it's as bad as everyone says.
If you recall the ending to the theatrical cut of Alien 3 then you're in for somewhat of a surprise with the Assembly Edit of the film, it's not that they put stuff back in, several sequences were filmed in different ways at the studio's behest, so it's really a different film. I don't have a problem with more of a focus on the humans than the aliens, so it's hard to say if Fincher was the man for the job. He actually took it because he was a huge fan of the alien series, especially the first one. He compiled a list of his favourite films, and while there's the usual stuff you'd expect an auteur director to have on there - Kubrick, Wells, Hitchcock, Fellini etc, there's also more populist/exploitation films he loves like Mad Max 2, Alien, The Terminator and Jaws: http://nofilmschool.com/2013/08/26-greatest-movies-according-to-director-david-fincher
I agree with you totally about Prometheus, the characters were mostly idiots which is frustrating enough in a teen-victim slasher movie, but these people were supposed to be scientists? The daughter thing was a plot point that was supposed to be profound yet meant nothing, and why have Guy Pierce put on Benjamin Button gear to play an ancient dude, it's not like there's a shortage of old men actors who could have done a more convincing job. I know the modern trend is "universe building" but I too enjoy the mystery of things, it's more fun to debate with your buddies about the space jockey's origins than have it all spelled out and tied together. Guess we'll see what both Scott and Blomkamp do with their duelling films, but after Prometheus and Elysium (never bothered with Chappie) I'm not hugely optimistic.
Reply
Speaking of which, Resurrection is indeed bad, but your inner 15-year-old may enjoy it. Much of the film seems to be devoted to finding new ways to destroy the human head, which is often a worthy cinematic endeavor.
I pretty much agree with what that article says, i.e. that a lot of Fincher's list is obvious but nevertheless solid, and that several films on it bear almost no relation to his own style, but that's okay. Ha, Mad Max 2 / The Road Warrior seems to be one of the few films in history to receive almost universal praise both at the time of its release, and ever since, despite being basically an exploitation flick. (It was another "canonical favorite movie" of my family, actually, and I'd say it's another example of a genre film that perfectly accomplishes what it sets out to do.)
Yes, as with the recent Hobbit films, one gets the sense that with Prometheus, they secretly outsourced the script to Internet fan-forums and decided most of the characterization and plot-points on the basis of an online poll (or something). Kubrick's films were generally DICTATORSHIPS, and this explains a lot of why they tend to be so damn good. (I know some people dislike the slow pace and extreme cerebral detachment of them, but I feel that these factors contribute a lot to the hypnotic atmosphere and archetypal quality that he usually seems to achieve.)
Uhh, anyway, yes, it will be interesting to see dueling movies from the same technical franchise. Sort of like the Battle of Gorgoroth [the band] or something.
Reply
Your family seems to have pretty good taste in films by the way. My definition of what constitutes a B movie/exploitation flick is one that knows what its audience wants and just gives it to them without the bullshit. If it's an action film, non-stop action, if it's horror, tons of gore and jump scares, sexy flick - tons of nudity etc. This is not a criticism, I respect the honesty and desire to please the audience who often times don't care for the backstory and "universe building" and just want to cut to the entertainment. Therefore you could call something like Mad Max Fury Road the world's most expensive B movie and mean that as a compliment.
As for the Hobbit films, I actually think it goes the other way. Fans wanted a straight translation of the books, not more of Peter Jackson's bullshit (a subject we have covered before). For example this: http://kotaku.com/now-theres-a-three-hour-cut-of-the-hobbit-trilogy-1681224543 Likewise, Interestingly, like Kubrick, Fincher also has a reputation for being somewhat of a dictator on set, but that probably explains his films' quality. I just re-watched Seven the other day too and while you can't capture the thrill of seeing it the first time and not knowing what happened, his camerawork, staging and overall direction is peerless.
As for the duelling movies, it could be decent, or it could be like the tag line for Aliens vs Predator from 2004: "Whoever wins, we lose".
Reply
Other than that the music was, for the first time in the franchise, totally forgettable, except for one cue they stole from the first movie. The sets were uniformly dull and uninteresting, and that's quite something when you consider the previous film was all set in a prison and looked stunning. Just shows the difference between a great director and a journeyman. The space shots and model work was inferior to the first film which seems strange considering the advancements in FX. What I will praise is the creature effects which were impressive and genuinely disgusting. The problem with this however is that it only made the crappy CGI look even worse, and this is inexcusable because this was four years after Jurassic Park which still holds up.
A couple of closing thoughts. It's interesting that the first four Alien films were guided by fairly new people who quickly became huge names in the entrainment industry. Ridley Scott only had one art house film to his name but after Alien went on to direct Blade Runner and so many other great and not so great films. The Terminator was a hit in the US but hadn't really made it abroad, yet Aliens made James Cameron's career. David Fincher as we all know recovered from Alien 3 to become a critical darling and even old Joss Whedon went on to make lots of money. On the other side of the equation, Roger Christian who was the art director on Alien went on to direct Battlefield Earth, widely considered one of the worst films ever made, and Pitof, who was the second unit director on Alien Resurrection a few years later gave the world Catwoman, also one of the worst films ever to be shat out.
Reply
Is this the first time you've seen Ron Perlman outside of Hellboy? Fuck, that means you've never seen The Name of the Rose (I think).
I actually forgot that Joss Whedon was involved with the film since he wasn't a household name at the time. And ha, too bad about Christian and Pitof, I guess.
I'm actually going to watch the whole series (including Prometheus) again now, I think...
Reply
Good marathon, but I see you are leaving out the Predator crossovers...
Reply
I haven't seen the AVP movies and probably won't bother, unless someone can make a convincing case for them.
Reply
Fuck AvP, but I assume you've seen Drive?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment