Skip to main content

She continues to make us all very proud.

Alien Resurrection
(1997)

(SPOILERS) At least Alien3 has its die-hard defenders, particularly with the advent of The Assembly Cut. Alien Resurrection appears destined to remain the unloved, ugly newborn of the original quartet, a sequel that’s full of ideas (probably more than the rest put together), but fails to deliver them in an entirely satisfying way. It doesn’t even end properly, something that could at least be relied upon previously (with the consequence of “now get-out of that rewriting” for the sequels), making the fact that it was never followed up additionally cruel (Neill Blomkamp even wanted to retcon it and Alien3 out of existence; fortunately, Ridley appears to have nixed his gorilla fingers). On top of which, Joss Whedon has lambasted it; whatever is wrong with Alien Resurrection is not his fault, let that be clear to everyone. But you know what? I kind of like the movie. I don’t think it’s great by any means, but if Alien3 is more tonally of a piece, then Alien Resurrection is just flat-out weirder and more interesting.


I can’t say I was especially impressed with it on first viewing, however. The newborn was a particular sticking point, and still is. And for all the thematic ideas thrown in, there’s a schematic quality to the structure that really Alien Resurrection feel like the first of the series to come in the aftermath of Alien videogames. But I like the picture’s goofy tone, love the visual sensibility Jean-Pierre Jeunet and cinematographer Darius Khondji bring to the table (of the sequels, this wipes the floor with the others in visual lustre), and on a scene-by-scene basis, it offers some of the most engaging moments in the series. It just doesn’t hang together very well, even the extended Special Edition cut (which I prefer, despite the daft CGI bug that kicks it off).


This is not, however, Joss Whedon’s fault. Or so he’d have you believe. I’m a fan of much that Whedon has contributed to TV and movies, but there’s little doubt he’s a bit over-protective of his oeuvre, launching into those he perceives to have messed with his creations (another being the Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie). In the case of Alien Resurrection, his self-righteousness is hardly justified, particularly as many of the picture’s problems revolve around the fingerprints of his particular style of character and dialogue; if anything, we’re lucky to have Jeunet throwing that into relief as much as he can. I can only imagine how generic and knock-off the picture would have ended up if Paul W Anderson, for example (who was approached, and of whose Alien vs. Predator Whedon has suggested he liked), had been employed (in the run-up to its making, I was most intrigued when Danny Boyle was flirting with it, although he and John Hodge ultimately decided they couldn’t thrash out a concept the studio agreed with.)


Maybe that’s its biggest problem. Alien Resurrection can’t escape the feeling of a picture produced by corporate mandate, and whatever the pros and cons of Aliens and Alien3, they bear the intent of makers who had a clear idea of what they wanted to bring to the screen. Jeunet happily admits he tackled the project as a director for hire (“a very long commercial”), so while he layers it in terms of design and tone, he isn’t invested in it conceptually. And Whedon is simply pulling a rabbit out of the hat as justification for Ripley’s return. The plus side is that he manages to run with it, making it coherent thematically while only occasionally resorting to the glib throwaways of his character building; we’re certainly lucky this is set hundreds of years in the future, as it limits his yen for pop culture dialogue, but unfortunately his general manner and cadence are insufficiently curtailed.


It’s notable, and notably odd, that the most oft-quoted Whedon take on Alien Resurrection is that he wrote it as “playful, tongue in cheek” or “camp parody” and the director chose to “play it straight”. You can even find reviews built around this say-so. But such a reading simply doesn’t make any sense, to the extent that I wonder if someone had their wires crossed or was being purposefully misleading. I cannot see how anyone would mistake what Jeunet is doing with Alien Resurrection as playing it straight; virtually his every choice is in the service of exaggeration and an inclination to go OTT, be it in performance, design or editing. Besides which, you have to ask why Whedon, as a disciple of the series, would want to undermine it? Jeunet’s another matter; he can’t resist bringing his Gallic sensibility to bear (there are times this feels more like a kindred spirit to Luc Besson’s The Fifth Element than a part of the Alien universe). As he said, “I can’t avoid humour”.


So, here’s what Joss definitely had to say:

Whedon: Uh...you know, it wasn’t a question of doing everything differently, although they changed the ending, it was mostly a matter of doing everything wrong. They said the lines...mostly...but they said them all wrong. And they cast it wrong. And they designed it wrong. And they scored it wrong. They did everything wrong that they could possibly do. There’s actually a fascinating lesson in filmmaking, because everything that they did reflects back to the script or looks like something from the script, and people assume that, if I hated it, then they’d changed the script...but it wasn’t so much that they’d changed the script; it’s that they just executed it in such a ghastly fashion as to render it almost unwatchable.


He also called it “A shitty Alien movie with my name on it” and gripes about Brad Dourif and JE Freeman’s casting as ruining the mystery of their characters. With all those sour grapes – a spoiled vineyard’s worth – on Joss’ part, you’d assume he’d written something dynamite (because, as he admits, they didn’t fundamentally change his script; it’s still there in the final product).


Ripley: I’m finding a lot of things funny lately.

Yet one can hear his glib dialogue tripping off Ripley’s tongue, as if she’s been siphoned from one of his TV show or Marvel (interpretations of) characters, from her commenting on the alien queen (“You mean, my baby?, I’m the monster’s mother”), what she did when she last ran into the aliens (“I died”),  to her death ("I get that a lot" in response to "I thought you were dead"; she's not Snake Plissken, for goodness sake) to the Betty (“This piece of shit is even older than I am”), or just tired lines (“Who do I have to fuck to get off this boat?”; “Was it everything you hoped for?” on climbing out of the floor through the remains of Elgyn) to her unique appeal (“They’re curious. I’m the latest thing”).


Frankly, there’s far too much of the trademark Whedon smirk-talk (“Must be a chick thing”, “Earth, man. What a shithole”; “You’re programmed to be an asshole?”; “Since you were born without balls”; “All Aliens please proceed to level one”; the terrible, throwaway Walmart gag, making the series as disposable as everything else Joss lays his hands on – and as ephemeral as the cut idea the station is growing cannabis to finance its research: really? 200 years from now?) and, in general, the manner in which every character resorts to crudities is reminiscent of the constant cries of “Fuck!” in Alien3. If Jeunet isn’t playing up to Whedon’s predilections, that can only be a good thing. Indeed, the best compliment you can pay Alien Resurrection in that regard is that it doesn’t unspool like it’s a Whedon piece, even if the Betty crew’s similarities to Firefly have been pointed out.


I should stress that I’m not saying cloned Ripley shouldn’t have a sense of humour (handing Cal the alien innards as a souvenir is amusingly twisted), but you reduce her if her strangeness, and the altered state of her rebirth, is continually undercut by Whedon’s brand of one-liners. The humour I like in Alien Resurrection is very much the offbeat attitude Jeunet brings to it, the aspect Whedon has no control over, be it through casting or line delivery or staging. Likewise, the sensual undercurrents here are all Jeunet (Ripley and the newborn, Ripley and Cal, Ripley luxuriating in the alien nest, the glistening, fecund aliens themselves, even Elgyn and Hillard’s relationship), something John Frizzell said he consciously emphasised in his (very good) score.


Jeunet casts the film wholly with an eye to colourful characterisation (the only decision he had no say in, besides Weaver obviously, Noonie, shows in this regard). They give substance to their 2-D roles in a manner that recalls Cameron’s Aliens, but with an added penchant for zesty ham. No one is especially likeable in Alien Resurrection (even Ripley), but they’re all memorable (even Cal). Dan Hedaya plays General Perez as an imbecile so slow off the mark he doesn’t even realise he’s dead until he perplexedly catches sight of his brains in his hand (Hedaya’s hirsuteness, however, is perhaps the most horrifying sight in the movie). 


Fellow Coen Brothers veteran Freeman delivers Dr Wren as odiously as he possibly can, in what devolves into the Burke role (trying to get away and leaving the rest behind). Ron Pearlman, who previously worked with Jeunet on City of the Lost Children, embraces his inner oafish vulgarian, making it all the more surprising he makes it through the carnage intact (his funniest moment might be shooting a spider). Michael Wincott surprises for not being cast as the villain (amoral, certainly), and Jeunet lucky charm Dominique Pinon adds further texture to the ensemble. I’m also always struck by Kim Flowers in this, and left wondering what happened to her career.


And then there’s Leland Orser offering a terrifically dedicated performance as a doomed, alien-infested walking dead, managing to tread the line between terrified and humorous with great skill; of particular note is the scene where the alien appears about to burst forth, before the moment passes and Purvis pushes away the guns aimed at his head. Most gloriously ridiculous is when it actually does burst forth and he attacks Wren, the alien going through him and out of the doctor (incorporating a CGI dive down Purvis’ throat to witness the alien creature stirring – Jeunet loves his slapstick crash-zooms). It’s very patchy, but it’s so wacky it’s hard to resist.


Gediman: She is giving birth for you, Ripley, and now she is perfect.

My absolute favourite performance is Brad Dourif as Gediman, though, furnishing his mad scientist with just enough genuine enquiry to make him not sympathetic, but not reprehensible either. He’s consistent, that’s what’s great about him; even when he’s cocooned, he’s still analysing, marvelling at what is, to any sane person, a horror show (“You are a beautiful butterfly” he informs the newborn). The scene where he is baring his teeth at the alien, misguidedly believing he can find a means to not just understand but control the star beast, is fascinating, the picture finding itself on a genuinely different and distinctive track during these passages (and it’s in this area where Whedon shines, rather than with his quick quips).


Dourif is masterful at playing someone who is fascinated by Ripley (willing to interact and discuss with her, rather than treat her purely as an object), and by the alien – he’s the most interesting character in the movie (and, like Dance in Alien3, you miss him when he disappears and perk up briefly when he returns). The actor doesn’t need to be given funny lines to being amusing; it’s all in his character’s unbridled, ghoulish enthusiasm. Although, there is the scene where the alien hand grabs him from below for yuks stakes. It isn’t quite Dallas in the ducts as far as shock encounters go: closer to Gremlins.


Perez: You brought a terrorist aboard a military vessel.

And then, of course, there’s Noonie. I tend to be a defender of Winona – forever, in fact – but when she’s miscast, she’s as miscast as prime Keanu, not because she appears plankish but because if she’s not (wasn’t) the ingénue, she’s playing something her physicality and manner isn’t up to. So here you get a synthetic that doesn’t make any sense – nervy, terrified, whiny, but who also apparently took on the determination to put an end to Ripley when she accessed the main frame. She’s a hodgepodge of a character, Whedon looking for something to mark out a different artificial person to those we’ve seen previously and only succeeding in making one less singular (all he’s really got is that he’s doing a trademark “strong” female role).


The only aspect of Cal that is artificial is that she doesn’t die when she’s fake-out killed (oh, and she’s plugged into the ship, which is called – way to go, Joss - Father), which seems like a twist reverse-engineered into a character. Mostly, she’s there to respond to the sexual innuendoes of the male members of the crew, or just to other characters generally, with a less than scintillating riposte (“Fuck you!”) or make banal remarks (“Why don’t you just kill yourself?”) Or treat Ripley as a vaguely surrogate mother when she’s got over wanting to kill her. It’s a shame – I remember rooting for Ryder when she was announced, after all, here were two of my favourite genre actresses sharing the screen, and she evidently loves the series and overcame challenges to make it (her fear of water after a childhood drowning incident) – but Cal is undoubtedly the weakest link in the characters, as is Ryder in the cast.


Ripley: No matter how bad the dreams get, when I wake up, it’s always worse.

Despite his feeding Weaver some lousy lines, Whedon does succeed in taking cloned Ripley to interesting places. He commented that the alienness of the character grew in consultation with the star, and while I don’t think Alien Resurrection succeeds in defining her clone (that was for the aborted Alien 5, presumably) it creates a fertile ground for material. Ripley’s central to some of the best scenes in the movie, from the grandstanding basketball court encounter, establishing her new fearless, barbell-resistant persona (and famous for Weaver actually getting a slam dunk) in the face of a gang of hard nuts, to the beautifully grim scene in the cloning room, as the sight of various grotesque stillborns suspended in glass lead to a nearly-not-quite mutation pleading “Kill me”.


The only reservation I have about this is that, given Ripley’s compassion, is she really going to condemn “herself” to a horrible fiery end? Surely blowing her clone’s head off would be much more humane? Perhaps it was in there because you have to have a flame thrower in an Alien movie. There’s even a (intentionally? You never know in this movie) funny moment where Ripley gets a face hugger in the face and reacts to it like Frank Drebin being attacked by a towel in The Naked Gun.


While some of the ideas Whedon comes up with are simply logical for the cynical-corporate environment of the series (the Betty’s cargo being stolen cryo sleepers, taken to a ship outside of regulated space), others are genuinely inspired. I’ve mentioned Dourif’s experiments (“So, you’re a fast learner”), and the scene in which two aliens escape their cell by killing another and exiting through the hole in the floor is a lovely bit of ingenuity that suggests their smarts in a believable way. Less so pressing the red button on Dourif, although that’s at least off-the-wall.


And, as set pieces go, the underwater sequence is a bravura piece of staging and execution. One might argue it is let down slightly by the CGI aliens used in some of the shots, but I’d argue they work reasonably well in this environment; it’s in corridors or up ladders that they’re rendered in a particularly unflattering light (having them spit CGI acid is an odd decision also). Where they’re traditional guys in suits, however, the creatures are their most effective since the original; the black, glistening look of the creatures in Dourif’s cells are arresting in a manner the xenomorph hasn’t been since it was scaring the bejesus out of Jonesy that first time. The alien queen also looks better than in Aliens, although I’ve never been overly keen on the design; each new maker wants to lay their stamp on Giger’s original, and each variation achieves diminishing returns. Until, eventually, you get a Predalien, God help us.


Which brings us to… the newborn. I mean, it sort of works. Sort of, in that Jeunet was aiming at something unsettling and freakish, with an emotionally fragile, infant component, and all of that comes across. The real eyes achieve the intended effect, even if the snuffle snout is a step too far. The problem is that, while the design is works that sense, it’s still a terrible design; from The Making of the Alien Anthology documentary, it was clear that the crew weren’t coming up with what the director wanted, but the design that eventually inspired Jeunet was still way better (because it was alien) than what we have. Weird and grotesque simply isn’t enough; it should be uncanny if you want to continue the original’s impact. What we get is a killer mutant baby that is odd and ugly but also feels derivative; it killing its mother (rather than grandma) is perhaps the highpoint, the low being sucked out of an airlock through its bottom. To the extent that its presence works, it’s mostly down to Weaver selling the emotional content of those scenes.


Alien Resurrection has much I enjoy in it, but it ultimately feels to me that Whedon never nailed the screenplay, much as he’s wont to blame the execution. He has a series of strong vignettes, but they’re hung on a linear narrative that feels like a greatest hits package, that might have come out of the Alien Trilogy computer game and characters and motifs in the previous instalments. Running around corridors as per Aliens, trying to reach the ship in time, up against aliens and turncoats and androids, showing the cocooned character that always ended up getting cut before (Dallas, Burke), even returning to Earth (always mooted). It’s Alien fan fiction.


The strongest element is the one forced on Whedon by the return of Weaver (he originally had Newt coming back), and he makes the most hay with that limitation, but even there there’s a sense that the picture fails to meet its ambitions. At least in the Special Edition Ripley makes it back to Earth, making it preferable for that alone; it would be a shame, whatever Ridley Scott’s personal views on this entry, to forget about it now it seems he’s in sole charge of where the franchise goes with umpteen potential sequels he may or may not helm before he hits 100. There may be a feeling, though, that with two successive imperfect pictures, they don’t want to return to Ripley well. When Scott talks about another trilogy, I presume he means post- this quartet, since forever living behind them would be a cop out (something Star Trek has been doing for 15 years now). The challenge would be to move forward and make Alien Resurrection meaningful to the series, even given that it looks destined to remain its greatest tonal anomaly.



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You kind of look like a slutty Ebola virus.

Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
(SPOILERS) The phenomenal success of Crazy Rich Asians – in the US at any rate, thus far – might lead one to think it's some kind of startling original, but the truth is, whatever its core demographic appeal, this adaptation of Kevin Kwan's novel taps into universally accepted romantic comedy DNA and readily recognisable tropes of family and class, regardless of cultural background. It emerges a smoothly professional product, ticking the expected boxes in those areas – the heroine's highs, lows, rejections, proposals, accompanied by whacky scene-stealing best friend – even if the writing is sometimes a little on the clunky side.

They make themselves now.

Screamers (1995)
(SPOILERS) Adapting Philip K Dick isn’t as easy as it may seem, but that doesn't stop eager screenwriters from attempting to hit that elusive jackpot. The recent Electric Dreams managed to exorcise most of the existential gymnastics and doubts that shine through in the best versions of his work, leaving material that felt sadly facile. Dan O'Bannon had adapted Second Variety more than a decade before it appeared as Screamers, a period during which he and Ronald Shusett also turned We Can Remember It For You Wholesale into Total Recall. So the problem with Screamers isn't really the (rewritten) screenplay, which is more faithful than most to its source material (setting aside). The problem with Screamers is largely that it's cheap as chips.

Well, we took a vote. Predator’s cooler, right?

The Predator (2018)
(SPOILERS) Is The Predator everything you’d want from a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator (or Yautja, or Hish-Qu-Ten, apparently)? Emphatically not. We've already had a Shane Black movie featuring a Predator – or the other way around, at least – and that was on another level. The problem – aside from the enforced reshoots, and the not-altogether-there casting, and the possibility that full-on action extravaganzas, while delivered competently, may not be his best foot forward – is that I don't think Black's really a science-fiction guy, game as he clearly was to take on the permanently beleaguered franchise. He makes The Predator very funny, quite goofy, very gory, often entertaining, but ultimately lacking a coherent sense of what it is, something you couldn't say of his three prior directorial efforts.

Right! Let’s restore some bloody logic!

It Couldn't Happen Here (1987)
(SPOILERS) "I think our film is arguably better than Spiceworld" said Neil Tennant of his and Chris Lowe's much-maligned It Couldn't Happen Here, a quasi-musical, quasi-surrealist journey through the English landscape via the Pet shop Boys' "own" history as envisaged by co-writer-director Jack Bond. Of course, Spiceworld could boast the presence of the illustrious Richard E Grant, while It Couldn't Happen Here had to settle for Gareth Hunt. Is its reputation deserved? It's arguably not very successful at being a coherent film (even thematically), but I have to admit that I rather like it, ramshackle and studiously aloof though it is.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …

My pectorals may leave much to be desired, Mrs Peel, but I’m the most powerful man you’ve ever run into.

The Avengers 2.23: The Positive-Negative Man
If there was a lesson to be learned from Season Five, it was not to include "man" in your title, unless it involves his treasure. The See-Through Man may be the season's stinker, but The Positive-Negative Man isn't far behind, a bog-standard "guy with a magical science device uses it to kill" plot. A bit like The Cybernauts, but with Michael Latimer painted green and a conspicuous absence of a cool hat.

The possibilities are gigantic. In a very small way, of course.

The Avengers 5.24: Mission… Highly Improbable
With a title riffing on a then-riding-high US spy show, just as the previous season's The Girl from Auntie riffed on a then-riding-high US spy show, it's to their credit that neither have even the remotest connection to their "inspirations" besides the cheap gags (in this case, the episode was based on a teleplay submitted back in 1964). Mission… Highly Improbable follows in the increasing tradition (certainly with the advent of Season Five and colour) of SF plotlines, but is also, in its particular problem with shrinkage, informed by other recent adventurers into that area.

What a truly revolting sight.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge (aka Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales) (2017)
(SPOILERS) The biggest mistake the Pirates of the Caribbean sequels have made is embracing continuity. It ought to have been just Jack Sparrow with an entirely new cast of characters each time (well, maybe keep Kevin McNally). Even On Stranger Tides had Geoffrey Rush obligatorily returning as Barbossa. Although, that picture’s biggest problem was its director; Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar’s Revenge has a pair of solid helmers in Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, which is a relief at least. But alas, the continuity is back with a vengeance. And then some. Why, there’s even an origin-of-Jack Sparrow vignette, to supply us with prerequisite, unwanted and distracting uncanny valley (or uncanny Johnny) de-aging. The movie as a whole is an agreeable time passer, by no means the dodo its critical keelhauling would suggest, albeit it isn’t even pretending to try hard to come up with …

Bring home the mother lode, Barry.

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

If Panos Cosmatos’ debut had continued with the slow-paced, tripped-out psychedelia of the first hour or so I would probably have been fully on board with it, but the decision to devolve into an ‘80s slasher flick in the final act lost me.

The director is the son of George Pan Cosmatos (he of The Cassandra Crossing and Cobra, and in name alone of Tombstone, apparently) and it appears that his inspiration was what happened to the baby boomers in the ‘80s, his parents’ generation. That element translates effectively, expressed through the extreme of having a science institute engaging in Crowley/Jack Parsons/Leary occult quests for enlightenment in the ‘60s and the survivors having become burnt out refugees or psychotics by the ‘80s. Depending upon your sensibilities, the torturously slow pace and the synth soundtrack are positives, while the cinematography managed to evoke both lurid early ‘80s cinema and ‘60s experimental fare. 

Ultimately the film takes a …