Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

How do?

So here’s an experiment thread, in what might become a semi-regular theme. What I’m aiming to do here is not to try to convince someone a given, largely maligned, movie is actually high art etc. Rather, it’s an attempt to take a step back, and try to cut through some of the hyperbole.

I kinda did the same when discussing the Terminator films. There, rather than try to big myself up by defying expectation, I instead focussed on the parts I did enjoy in each entry. And that’s what I’m aiming for here.

And as you’ve almost certainly gathered from the title, I’m having a crack at Alien Ressurection.

Now, the common perception is quite correct. It’s pretty shonky, and just doesn’t live up to its predecessors. That’s clear when we watch it.

But I feel it does have redeeming features. Not a great many to be sure, but enough to make it at least enjoyable, despite being ultimately disappointing.

First? The cloning of Ripley. That’s a pretty decent way to bring her back. And the reasoning behind it does hold up. It’s also where we first need to take a step back, and see beyond the hyperbole.

See, the whole reason behind Ripley’s cloning was because she ultimately succeeded in wiping out the Xenomorphs, so far anyone was aware. They weren’t trying to clone her, but the Queen she was incubating at the time. So whilst not exactly cast iron, it’s at least a decent crack at a reason.

Second? We finally get to see what The Company (although it’s not them, natch) might’ve hand in mind for the Xenomorph species. So rather than being an out and out retread of what came before, we instead get at least a stab at something new. Yes it didn’t exactly land - but I can still appreciate the effort.

Third? The cast were pretty good overall. Nobody felt like particularly dead weight, and I at least was interested enough to be able to care to note when one of them got bumped off, which is more than I can say for the two prequels, where everyone seems to die from stupididiotitis.

Fourth? Ripley’s sheer swagger. Sigourney Weaver of course owns every scene she’s in. But also manages to portray the fact that Ripley isn’t entirely human, without losing much Ripley. That’s pretty tough to do, to revisit a character but portray them, convincingly, as slightly off.

Fifth? The overall plot is actually kinda fun. Flawed in places (who signed off on the hybrid’s design? And why beige???), but entertaining enough. And as noted above, it was at least a stab at viewing a familiar threat through a new lens.

Sixth? Where Ripley was deliberately a bit off, they stuck with what makes Xenomorphs scary in the first place. No ‘but this time, instead of a face, they’ve got four arses, and...and...and...and they’ve got laser fingers!’ I really do appreciate this.

In terms of the plot, I’d say this veers somewhat more into Zombie territory than classic Alien. Simply the main threat isn’t the beasties themselves (as Aliens showed, one on one their no match for some tactical ranged violence), but the bloody idiots running the show. The whole premise is what happens when morons try to domesticate the most perfect killing machine yet encountered. Of course it all goes horribly, horribly wrong.

For me, most impressively, you could show someone this as their first Alien film and not completely ruin the others. Equally, when viewed in order, this one is absolutely no worse than simply ‘disposable’. It doesn’t really add much to the series, but on balance, it doesn’t really detract from them. No sudden evolution of the Xenomorph. No abilities suddenly introduced with ‘they were always there’ handwavium. The central gribblies are the same central gribblies as the preceding three movies.

In summary? Much like various sequels in that era, it’s main crime (and it is a crime, to be honest) is being a disappointing entry in a much respected series. If we relabelled this as another type of film, I think it’d still found its market. It’s well shot, the plot isn’t completely Swiss cheese, and it’s made with love if not necessarily competence. Whilst far from a classic of its series, let alone its genre, it still rises above Mindless Cash Grab territory, or ‘blatantly only made to retain the rights’.

So that’s my revisit and defence of Alien Resurrection. Being a conversation topic, do feel free to chip in. I’ve tried to skirt away from the obvious ( and justified) criticism for the first post, but you don’t have to. So have at it Dakka. Do you think I’m on to something, or has some tosspot forcibly nailed rose tinted specs onto my bonce? Am I making fair points, or talking utter mince?

Let me know, and let discussion begin!

I thought it was alright. I don't think the hybrid was as bad as everyone made out. It had Ron Perlman in it, who is one cool bastard. And Winona Ryder, who I still fancy.

The concept of the Hybrid is a good one. I just feel the execution was lacking.

I mean, let’s look at it.



I kinda see where they were going with it. But why that colour? Looking at it, it may have been required to make visually distinct on-screen.

But for an attempt to blend human physiology with Xenomorph physiology, it just doesn’t quite cut it for me. Sure, I’m about as artistic as a dead Hedgehog, and couldn’t begin to explain what might’ve looked better.

It just looks too gangly for my eyes. The arms look overextended, which again might be down to the colouration. Whilst understandably it doesn’t look like either ‘parent’ species, it doesn’t look anything like what I’d imagine a hybrid twixt the two would look like.

Though, thought hits me. Is it not the same colour as a chestburster?



Kinda, I guess. Not quite as dark. So ok, maybe I was hasty. It could be argued that it could’ve darkened up had it lived more than a few minutes.

But.....why is it fully grown? Neither humans nor Xenomorphs start out full sized. Perhaps that’s what really irks me.

You know, proposed improvement. Introduce the hybrid earlier on. Let it be small - because a toddler sized Hybrid would’ve been most upsetting. Throughout the film, let it be ambiguous in allegiance. Somewhat able to to direct Xenomorphs, but acts differently around Ripley.

Oh gods I’m wimbrilling already! But yeah. The concept is sound. The execution not so sound.

Aliens don't have a child-phase, they are fully developed as adult survivors right out the egg. However they do go through several metamorphic changes through their lifespan which advances them up a notch each time.

So it makes sense that if the human alien hybrid and development of a womb would result in a huge change to that; advancing to the final stages of development. It might even be that it goes through those earlier phases, but inside the womb itself, with the queen providing it food rather than it having to seek out food. Remember the chest burster basically uses a human (or other living thing) as an incubator.
I agree its white in colour because its new, clearly the youth in it; chances are it might have shed its skin or even metamorphed more than once to gain the true thick armour plating and black/dark brown colours we see on the regular aliens. Interestingly if you look at early props the aliens were more dark browns, whilst in latter films they are dark black - I think because the browns never showed up all that strong in the original films. There were also eye sockets in some of the props under the dome; again something that sort of got lost over the years.


Personally I found the science for cloning flawed and a bit hamfisted in, but its honestly about the only big thing I find glaring in it and I accept it as the excuse to get aliens and Ripley back. Also the whole genetic memory thing going on is also false/flawed, but at the time it was one of the raging hollywood type levels of science so its quite a good fit all told.



I also liked that there were some almost sensual and sexual scenes in the film; especially once Ripley fell through the floor into the strange alien flooring underneath and was then carried by the alien as well as the scenes with her and the human alien hybrid. I felt that they spoke of a strong connection to G.R. Giger's artwork and many of the original themes and ideas behind his alien design.

The upgrade in visuals and effects were also a great welcome treat. Seeing aliens moving in a dynamic fast motion; seeing them swim and such were all great to see with fully realised visuals of the day. It was a turn away from the shadowy hidden alien of the earlier films; but I think it was well done and timed to fit with an audience who had seen that kind of alien before and who basically wanted to see it more so. Plus it fit well with them invading a military vessel as opposed to the previous films where the humans were mostly unarmed or in very small military numbers. When they break out there is a bit of a "OMG its out everyone flee its unstoppable" which is kind of a bit overblown. I'd have welcomed a longer battle for the ship as I felt the military did abandon it very fast without a good fight.

One of my favourite scenes is when the CO rolls a grenade into the escape pod.

I mean, you would, wouldn’t you? It stops a Xenomorph surviving, and spares your soldiers from a horrendous death.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
One of my favourite scenes is when the CO rolls a grenade into the escape pod.

I mean, you would, wouldn’t you? It stops a Xenomorph surviving, and spares your soldiers from a horrendous death.

Yes that's a great scene!

Honestly for me I've always enjoyed the film - its in my "I can see some of the flaws and I still don't freaking care cause the rest and what I do like in it is great".

Plus lets face it it at least fits the original storyline better than the rehashes since then with the prequels.




Still having read the Comics from that era about Alien I'm a touch sad that we never saw them develop it toward the War on Earth storyline. Now that would have been epic! Esp with a Hollywood budget and getting to see Alien infestation takes on other species on the Earth; as well as seeing the Alien species conducting itself on the large scale developing big hives; multiple queens, war patterns and such.

Tend to agree with your high points and overall assessment; I think the biggest issue is the tone. In and of itself it’s fine as an action-adventure, but that’s very jarring compared to the dark, serious tone of the other films. It made me laugh at points, and that’s just not right for an Alien film.

I liked resurrection, especially nu-ripley, and their take on the sythentics was also quite clever,

although the hybrid did spoil things a bit as it just looked shonkey (a bit too much 3rd rate The Thing rip off, not enough Alien)

I'd certainly far rather watch it than 3 which to my mind was a far weaker, less interesting entry in the series

Well, this is going well.

I’m off to find similar low hanging fruit for the next effort!

Perhaps a Star Wars prequel one? Again, not being smug or poncey. Just trying to get past the hyperbole to what’s actually fairly enjoyable within?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well, this is going well.

I’m off to find similar low hanging fruit for the next effort!

Perhaps a Star Wars prequel one? Again, not being smug or poncey. Just trying to get past the hyperbole to what’s actually fairly enjoyable within?

Perhaps something not Star Wars - we've done that one to death (and it normally ends up 10 pages and a lock and stuff).

Go on be bold find something non-mainstream! How about The Black Hole!?

You......you mean people didn’t enjoy that movie?

Hmmmm. Perhaps a ‘straight to video’ entry in the Hellraiser series?

Inferno seems suitable, given my appreciation for it......

Yes. I’ll do that one next. In a week or two. In the meantime, ON WITH THE SHOW!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You......you mean people didn’t enjoy that movie?

Yes apparently some people hated it! I can't fathom why I must have watched the VHS we had of it a hundred times!



anyway er back to Aliens!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

First? The cloning of Ripley. That’s a pretty decent way to bring her back. And the reasoning behind it does hold up. It’s also where we first need to take a step back, and see beyond the hyperbole.

See, the whole reason behind Ripley’s cloning was because she ultimately succeeded in wiping out the Xenomorphs, so far anyone was aware. They weren’t trying to clone her, but the Queen she was incubating at the time. So whilst not exactly cast iron, it’s at least a decent crack at a reason.

"Not exactly cast iron" is an understatement.

It shouldn't have even been difficult.

"Once a Xenomorph implants a host, it shares the host's bloodstream and some of its cells spread throughout the host's body via the bloodstream. We isolated those cells from your bloodstains left on the prison colony to develop a viable queen egg, but all out attempts to implant the egg into other hosts failed. Apparently the egg keys itself genetically to the host upon implantation and cannot be implanted in another host. So we had to go back and clone Ripley to provide a matched host that could carry the queen to term."

If they really needed alien hybrid Ripley, they could have just done that deliberately. Both her and the big hybrid were just two experiments of how much alien DNA to mix in.

 Jadenim wrote:
Tend to agree with your high points and overall assessment; I think the biggest issue is the tone. In and of itself it’s fine as an action-adventure, but that’s very jarring compared to the dark, serious tone of the other films. It made me laugh at points, and that’s just not right for an Alien film.

The issues with tone from what I understand is that the script was a mishmash of about 4-5 rewrites and whole scrpits being mashed together. Now one of the scripts used was written by a relatively unknown writer by the name Joss Wheddon, in an interview I Remember him being asked was any of his script used and him saying something like the smuggler crew were out of his script and bad ass ripley plus the some of the gak jokes. He did say in the context of his script the humour was better placed and a little funnier, he then said at least it was not as bad as x men or toy story.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 John Prins wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

First? The cloning of Ripley. That’s a pretty decent way to bring her back. And the reasoning behind it does hold up. It’s also where we first need to take a step back, and see beyond the hyperbole.

See, the whole reason behind Ripley’s cloning was because she ultimately succeeded in wiping out the Xenomorphs, so far anyone was aware. They weren’t trying to clone her, but the Queen she was incubating at the time. So whilst not exactly cast iron, it’s at least a decent crack at a reason.

"Not exactly cast iron" is an understatement.

It shouldn't have even been difficult.

"Once a Xenomorph implants a host, it shares the host's bloodstream and some of its cells spread throughout the host's body via the bloodstream. We isolated those cells from your bloodstains left on the prison colony to develop a viable queen egg, but all out attempts to implant the egg into other hosts failed. Apparently the egg keys itself genetically to the host upon implantation and cannot be implanted in another host. So we had to go back and clone Ripley to provide a matched host that could carry the queen to term."

If they really needed alien hybrid Ripley, they could have just done that deliberately. Both her and the big hybrid were just two experiments of how much alien DNA to mix in.

What made no sense to me was since it was all about weaponisation of the Aliens rather than trying to control the uncontrollable animals, they have a much better weapon in the hybrid ripley, either clone her repealed star wars style or just figure out from her dna what needs to be added to make a hybrid and do that.

Ripley was also limited by being human. The Aliens are clearly a weapon capable of far faster and cheaper reproduction whilst with Ripley they'd have to keep cloning her each time to get a new one - coupled to the slower growth, the uncertain growth and the need to remove the queen each time. Plus she clearly needs a lot of training to get up to speed.

Aliens are battle ready - all they need is to find a way to control the queen and they've got mature, battle ready warriors in an instant.


That said chances are they did want to weaponize Ripley, the issue likely was they just hadn't got that far yet in the development. Heck they'd hardly started touching the surface for proper training of the Aliens (remember the smugglers are only there for a short while before the first generation aliens are hatched and active

Ripley was a by-product if memory serves?

If not? Guess what’s going up the spout, right about now!

It had some good stuff

Alien-Ripley is solid - some nice moments and works really well
Ms W Ryder is lovely as always
The Aliens are good.

But the final hybrid is poor and the Military are bad as well.

Seen alot worst - I mean its not Last Jedi bad - but what is.

Its a bit like AVP - the graphic novel is just better - so the Aliens graphic novel follow up to the 2nd film is so much better than Aliens 3 and 4.

Alien 3 got messed around by the studio and cinema group. The directors cut makes a lot more sense (though for some annoying reason they cut the dog alien scene - which was dark and brutal - and replaced it with a very tame cow scene) and fills in some gaps.

In general though it was one of those films that I think was just cursed from the onset and that shows in how it got messed up story and plot wise for its original launch.

 Overread wrote:
Ripley was also limited by being human. The Aliens are clearly a weapon capable of far faster and cheaper reproduction whilst with Ripley they'd have to keep cloning her each time to get a new one - coupled to the slower growth, the uncertain growth and the need to remove the queen each time. Plus she clearly needs a lot of training to get up to speed.

Aliens are battle ready - all they need is to find a way to control the queen and they've got mature, battle ready warriors in an instant.


That said chances are they did want to weaponize Ripley, the issue likely was they just hadn't got that far yet in the development. Heck they'd hardly started touching the surface for proper training of the Aliens (remember the smugglers are only there for a short while before the first generation aliens are hatched and active

No, he's right, the Aliens are extremely poor weapons. While they were cunning enough to be good predators and apparently could be barely trained, they died like flies to gunfire in Aliens (2nd movie) and only survived in the 1st and 3rd movie because of a lack of firearms and an advantageous environment for a lurking monster.

In a setting with androids with superhuman reflexes and control, there's little barrier to making killbots that would be far superior and reasonably bulletproof.

I can see studying the biology of the xenomorphs 'for science and profit', but they'd only be good as a terror weapon and killbots would do that just fine as well.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well, this is going well.

I’m off to find similar low hanging fruit for the next effort!

Perhaps a Star Wars prequel one? Again, not being smug or poncey. Just trying to get past the hyperbole to what’s actually fairly enjoyable within?

Cross-pollinating from the other thread, what about John Carter?

I’m not that familiar with it.

I know I’ve seen it, but only the once. Others can feel free to join in the ‘defends’ theme though!

 Jadenim wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well, this is going well.

I’m off to find similar low hanging fruit for the next effort!

Perhaps a Star Wars prequel one? Again, not being smug or poncey. Just trying to get past the hyperbole to what’s actually fairly enjoyable within?

Cross-pollinating from the other thread, what about John Carter?

I liked John Carter - Another example of critics talking BS.

 John Prins wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Ripley was also limited by being human. The Aliens are clearly a weapon capable of far faster and cheaper reproduction whilst with Ripley they'd have to keep cloning her each time to get a new one - coupled to the slower growth, the uncertain growth and the need to remove the queen each time. Plus she clearly needs a lot of training to get up to speed.

Aliens are battle ready - all they need is to find a way to control the queen and they've got mature, battle ready warriors in an instant.


That said chances are they did want to weaponize Ripley, the issue likely was they just hadn't got that far yet in the development. Heck they'd hardly started touching the surface for proper training of the Aliens (remember the smugglers are only there for a short while before the first generation aliens are hatched and active

No, he's right, the Aliens are extremely poor weapons. While they were cunning enough to be good predators and apparently could be barely trained, they died like flies to gunfire in Aliens (2nd movie) and only survived in the 1st and 3rd movie because of a lack of firearms and an advantageous environment for a lurking monster.

In a setting with androids with superhuman reflexes and control, there's little barrier to making killbots that would be far superior and reasonably bulletproof.

I can see studying the biology of the xenomorphs 'for science and profit', but they'd only be good as a terror weapon and killbots would do that just fine as well.

Lets not forget every time we've encountered Aliens they are very young. The first Alien is only hours old, the Aliens 2 they are probably the oldest aliens we encounter in the films, however their first opponents were miners with perhaps only light weapons at best; whilst the military were their first encounter with such a force. Third film its again an age from hours to only a few days; and Alien 4 its the same back a very small age.

Considering most of them had very little time to actually learn its clear that they are capable of very fast learning. With a much more mature and trained hive of them they could be far more effective. For the military I could easily see them training Aliens to the point where they are armed for battle (heck one of the comics features a mechanical alien robot). However there also the fact that the Alien represents a fantastic terror weapon against not just a military but a large population.

Same trouble as a Nuke though - utterly useless if you’re on a mission of conquest.

Seriously, once unleashed, how do you purge the target of the Xenomorphs?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Same trouble as a Nuke though - utterly useless if you’re on a mission of conquest.

Seriously, once unleashed, how do you purge the target of the Xenomorphs?

You're thinking of wild Xenos rather than battle trained/enslaved hives.

In theory though you could use Xenos to purge a location even in their wild state; however, as you say, you then have the problem that you've got to go clean up your superweapon yourself.
However if you've trained those Xenos then you can simply march in and take over and ship your weapon off to a new location. That, I think, was the end result the military were after, not just a bio-weapon for a one time use; but something that could be trained and deployed instead of risking human lives. A species capable of reproducing in the battle environment; capable of adaptation to new situations; and a terror weapon all at once.

Another angle is they might even have been thinking along the lines of the Dominion from Starcraft 1 - a superior military force seeding disruptive colonies/sites with a non-human terror weapon and then coming in to purge that site themselves. The military get lauded as heroes and the Xeno, whilst deadly, isn't up to battling experienced, xeno fighting trained, troops. This could be especially effective if they only seeded with mature adults or eggs free of queen dna so that the hive would lack the ability to increase its numbers beyond a certain point.

Also lets not forget that from what we've seen the Xenos are ideal for space combat as they can operate without space suits and in a very harsh environment of space.


In the end the military had hardly begun with the successful Xenos before they escaped so we never really saw them training anything up beyond Ripley.

 Overread wrote:


Considering most of them had very little time to actually learn its clear that they are capable of very fast learning. With a much more mature and trained hive of them they could be far more effective. For the military I could easily see them training Aliens to the point where they are armed for battle (heck one of the comics features a mechanical alien robot). However there also the fact that the Alien represents a fantastic terror weapon against not just a military but a large population.

They had a ton of instinctual knowledge, but that just gives credence to the idea that they're primarily instinctual. I don't know if that counts as 'fast learning'. I tend to view them more as hive animals, though it's obvious from Aliens (2nd movie) that the queen was beyond pure instinct and had control over the other Xenomorphs. But you can't send a queen on military missions to co-ordinate the others, she'll just form a hive.

Now, it's the nature of fictional militaries to TRY seemingly stupid gak in the name of finding something really spiff, but I can only presume they thought this would be a lot cheaper than developing killer androids or killbots, despite being way less controllable.

They should have leaned harder into the alien-human hybrid angle of mad science to improve humanity.

I've long thought a good way to bring the horror roots back to the series is having some local rebellion win a major victory only to discover a Xenomorph that stalks and kills them once they settle in to whatever area they had reclaimed. The twist being that we learn that they've been effectively weaponized.

Taking that a step further in a sequel, it would be very interesting to see soldiers that have been implanted with chestbursters that are kept suppressed until triggered or Xenomorphs with implants to kill them remotely (ideally explosively in a messy acidic blast).

I think there's lots you can do with the premise. You just have to commit to moving past the "stopping the bad guys from getting what they want" plot of the originals.

Perhaps but don't forget the recently hatched drones were still able to very quickly learn about punishments and also how to operate the controls on the machine. They also clearly communicated a plan to each other within the containment cell.

I agree that queens certainly show a higher level of thinking and a much faster too. Another aspect to consider is that we've only ever, in the films, seen three kinds of alien. Queens, drones and "dog drones". We've never really seen if there are a wider variety of breeds; it might well be that drones appear early on to serve a queen, but that later as a hive expands a queen would need higher thinking drones to control an increasing population away from the hive. So it would stand to reason that a queen with a mature hive might start to change egg production or that the hatched larva stage change form to account for a larger population.

I feel like Alien Resurrection is a really great case study in directing and franchising.

In one film, you can see a lot about how Joss Whedon approaches film making, characters, and storytelling. Honestly, I feel like whether or not you can even tolerate the movie hinges on whether or not you like Joss Whedon's style of film.

For the franchise angle, it just kind of shows how badly a franchise can go when you stray too far from formula. Alien 3 was a bad movie, but you can easily see how it tonally and narratively fits into the Alien franchise. If I were to rename Alien Resurrection to "Bodacious Space Babes vs Monsters," would anyone ever think it was an alien film outside of the visual style of the alien's and Ripley's character? The tone and style of the film is very different, surrendering the gritty monsters in the shadows feel of the first three films for tongue in cheek humor, quirky characters, and action.

I don't think Resurrection is actually all that bad a movie. Pretty generic B grade horror/action really. It just comes out completely out of place in the Alien's franchise and doesn't remotely meet the expectations you go into it with.

 LordofHats wrote:
I feel like Alien Resurrection is a really great case study in directing and franchising.

In one film, you can see a lot about how Joss Whedon approaches film making, characters, and storytelling. Honestly, I feel like whether or not you can even tolerate the movie hinges on whether or not you like Joss Whedon's style of film.

For the franchise angle, it just kind of shows how badly a franchise can go when you stray too far from formula. Alien 3 was a bad movie, but you can easily see how it tonally and narratively fits into the Alien franchise. If I were to rename Alien Resurrection to "Bodacious Space Babes vs Monsters," would anyone ever think it was an alien film outside of the visual style of the alien's and Ripley's character? The tone and style of the film is very different, surrendering the gritty monsters in the shadows feel of the first three films for tongue in cheek humor, quirky characters, and action.

I don't think Resurrection is actually all that bad a movie. Pretty generic B grade horror/action really. It just comes out completely out of place in the Alien's franchise and doesn't remotely meet the expectations you go into it with.

Excellent post