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... )
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