Action/Horror/Sci-Fi
2 hours and 17 minutes
Rated: R
Written by: James Cameron
Directed by: James Cameron
Produced by: Gale Anne Hurd
Cast:
Sigourney Weaver
Michael Biehn
Paul Reiser
Lance Henriksen
Bill Paxton
This time it's war.
I want to begin this review with a disclaimer by saying, I get it. Aliens is flashy, it's violent, it's action-packed, it's full of more than capable performers, and its story doesn't ask the audience to pay too close attention to detail. Aliens is just the kind of movie that has earned its praise from audiences who still shell out cash to see whatever summer CGI blockbuster has been released or anything Michael Bay has to offer. That being said, as someone who praises Ridley Scott's Alien as one of the most brilliant motion-pictures ever conceived - Aliens is not a film that has earned my praise - and it probably never will be. So, if you are someone who adores James Cameron's sequel and will only find yourself becoming infuriated that somebody else out there disagrees with you - this review is not for you. If, however, you'd like to hear the flip side of your coin of praise, then by all means, read on.
I've often drawn comparisons to John Boorman's disastrous sequel Exorcist II: The Heretic when discussing Aliens. It may seem shocking, and I will concur that Boorman's film is significantly inferior to Cameron's, but I draw the comparison because both films seem to have a reckless handling of what was established already by their predecessors. Probably - and if we're being honest, this is the most likely explanation - it was because of the filmmakers' egos.
Aliens begins 57 years after the final moments of Scott's film. Our heroine, Ellen Ripley, is rescued and brought to safety by the very "Company" that nearly six decades ago had approved her death order, saying her and her crew were expendable in bringing back the xenomorph life form. Ripley is humiliated and ridiculed by a board of Company members, who do not believe her story and revoke her piloting license because of it. This would work extremely well if Cameron had solidified that this were a coverup by the Company. Instead, he decides to go down the "group amnesia" route. When the Company informs Ripley that her story is impossible because a colony of people lives on the planet where they found the xenomorph, it destroys the idea that this is a cover up. If the Company knew the alien was there, it would have either a) sent an extraction team to recover it after the Nostromo was destroyed, or b) sent the colony to the planet, and then immediately sent them out to the alien spaceship. Instead, the colony lives just as unaware of the aliens on their planet as the Company has now become for two decades. This "group amnesia" plot hole makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and is even more problematic when Company man Burke revives the idea of trying to bring back an alien at the expense of his protectors.
I'll skip over the lack of logic in Ripley's character agreeing to go back, or her being present not far from where the creatures are first encountered (if she were an "adviser" to the mission, couldn't she have just stayed behind on the spaceship - and wouldn't she have opted to do so given the traumatic events of the first film?), and instead jump to where the marines encounter the xenomorphs. Hundreds of xenomorphs should have had no problem tearing through twelve marines, one Company man, a traumatized ex-space trucker, and a little kid, in a matter of minutes. In Alien, just one xenomorph killed an entire crew within hours. It is true that they were unarmed, whereas the marines have weapons. Despite this, hundreds versus twelve to fifteen, and the knowledge of the creature established by the first film, deems it impossible for the lengthy survival. And even if they got lucky in the first encounter by escaping, surely they would be killed by the overwhelming number of creatures in the second. Perhaps Cameron, like the antagonistic Company, had amnesia and forgot the character of Ash's words in the first film. He was asked "How do we kill it?" to which he directly and promptly answered, "You can't." For something that cannot be killed, the marines sure do make it seem easy.
Cameron also disregards the xenomorph design by artist H.R. Giger from the first film. Sure, the basic elements are there - but there are some surprisingly different elements to Cameron's xenomorphs. For starters, the adult creatures lack the big translucent dome upon their heads. Cameron has stated this was removed for practical reasons, and that the performers in the alien suits couldn't move as easily with the domes upon their heads. But it seems to be more of Cameron's ego than a practical issue that caused the change to happen. Bolaji Badejo, who played the xenomorph in the first film, managed to move surprisingly well with the dome upon the head of his costume. If one can recall, he's even squeezed into tight places at times, camouflaged with the mechanics of the ship. His movements seem almost more demanding than the ones of the xenomorph performers in Aliens. So, the change more than likely occurred because Cameron wanted to leave as much of his fingerprints upon this franchise as he could, regardless of whether or not it disregarded anything set in place by Ridley Scott's film or H.R. Giger's designs.
The chest-bursting phase of the creature has also been changed, with the addition of arms. In Scott's film, this stage of the creature had no arms or legs, looking more cobra-like than anything. Since there is no logical reason for the addition of the arms, Cameron, again, more than likely changed Giger's designs so he could lay claim as a creative force behind the creature. If it seems that this is a stretch to say Cameron's ego caused all these changes, I implore you to watch Aliens again. There's even a moment of self-adulation within the film where the android character of Bishop is discussing Cyberdyne Systems in regards to the manufacturing of androids. Cyberdyne Systems is the fictitious company in Cameron's film Terminator also responsible for robot/android creation. Its presence in Aliens is both illogical and unnecessary and serves only the purpose of Cameron shoving his name as an auteur down the throats of the audience so that they'll walk away feeling he is responsible for so much of the creative elements behind this franchise.
Part of the reason why Scott's Alien is so horrifying is because it plays with the idea of man's fear of the unknown. So much is not known about the creature in the first movie. Where did it come from? Is what we see the final stage of its metamorphosis? Why does it kill, is it merely to kill? The creature is hardly ever completely shown, hidden in shadows and by close ups, so that much is left to the imagination of the audience to conjure up. Cameron's film seems to ignore this successful idea of our being afraid of the unknown, and serves up its audience on a silver platter reasonable explanations to what was left to the imagination of the viewers of Scott's film. Which leads me to the queen xenomorph. It makes sense given what we knew in Scott's movie - but it is completely unwanted and undoes that fear of the unknown already established. We didn't know where the eggs came from until Cameron's movie, and once we do our fears are squashed with an "Oh, well that makes sense," moment. The queen xenomorph itself is another example of Cameron's disgustingly large ego and attempt to leave his signature on the design of the creature. Giger, the original xenomorph artist, had absolutely nothing to do with its design. Cameron could have easily consulted Giger to conjure up some sort of queen alien. Instead, he opted to design it himself. Why? Well, I think that's been thoroughly answered.
There is one moment in Cameron's film that manages to earn respect given that it plays with some of the same fears that Scott did in his movie. The scene where Ripley and Newt are locked in a room with two of the face-hugging xenomorphs is utterly terrifying. It may not play with the fear of the unknown - a fear that, at this point in the film, has been thoroughly squashed by Cameron's egotistical additions - but it does certainly play on the fear of animals or insects. Plenty people have a fear of being trapped in a room with a spider - something that the face-hugging xenomorph does rather look like - or animal that would attack them. Cameron, in all fairness, does a good job playing with the audience's fear in this scene. Had he explored this more thoroughly then perhaps Aliens wouldn't be such a travesty. Unfortunately, this moment within the film is brief, and it doesn't do enough to overcome the damage previously mentioned against the first film that Cameron has done.
Aliens is a movie that is flashy, it's action-packed, its story doesn't require too much attention be paid to it, and it is exactly what most audiences look for in a quick thrill of a film. But upon a deeper examination, James Cameron - driven by his disgustingly large ego - rewrites many of the rules and establishing factors already set in place by Ridley Scott, H.R. Giger, and the writers of the first film, Alien. Like most sequels, it is unnecessary. Perhaps, one might say, Aliens isn't meant to be looked at so analytically. It is a film that asks you to just accept what it has to say and go along for the ride. If the first film had been a less superior motion-picture than it is, I could accept that, and maybe wouldn't be as harsh on Cameron's film. But because Alien is, and always will be, one of the most innovative, groundbreaking, brilliant, frightening, and all around perfect motion-pictures of all time, I cannot accept Aliens as being the brilliant sequel everyone claims it to be.
1/10
No comments:
Post a Comment