Alien - Ranked

For the fifteen of you who regularly visit this site, you know the drill: I can’t just watch one entry in a franchise anymore without watching everything, and if I’m going to devote that much time to a series, then I’m going to rank it in an attempt to get tens of clicks. 

I love the Alien franchise, even if I am a little late to the game. Growing up, I don’t think I watched any of them. In fact, when Alien vs. Predator came out, I think it may have technically been only the second Alien movie I had ever seen. Thankfully, I was able to remove my head from my ass and embrace the series. There’s only one movie on this list that I actually dislike, and I still own that one, too, so I enjoyed revisiting all of these. I even watched both the theatrical and unrated/director’s/Special Edition/Assembly Cut versions of all of these this time around, so, where applicable, I’ll also mention which version I prefer. (And if you don’t own the quadrilogy and physical releases of the AVP movies, just keep an eye out for when the series is on Max, which has the alternate cuts under the Extras tab.)

1. Alien

The eternal sci-fi dork question: “Which do you like more, Alien or Aliens?” For me, it’s always been Alien. The mood and tension created by Scott in that film is masterful. I could watch hours of tracking shots through the Nostromo. Add to that the grimy future in which a bunch of space truckers have to fight an alien, and you have one of my favorite films of all time. 

Theatrical or “Director’s Cut”: Ridley Scott introduces the director’s cut by basically saying it’s not a director’s cut, and that the studio just wanted him to make a new cut so they could call it that. He considers the theatrical cut the best version, and so do I. I do like the extended argument about Ripley not opening the airlock, and seeing Dallas and Brett cocooned is cool (though it doesn’t make much sense as there’s no way for them to be impregnated, maybe the xenomorph was saving them on the off chance it found some eggs). But the director’s cut shortens those tracking shots I love, so from here on out, I’m sticking with theatrical.

2. Aliens

Truly one of the best sequels of all time largely because it has no interest in recreating the original. Cameron wanted to make an action movie instead of a horror movie to awesome effect. Assembling a great group of characters and even better actors made the seemingly impossible possible: Cameron made a fun Alien movie.

Theatrical or Special Edition: I’ve seen people shit on the Special Edition for the early scene at the settlement, claiming it ruins the suspense when the Marines show up later. Maybe that’s true the first time you watch this, but come on, who seriously watches this and thinks that everything at the settlement is probably going great? Aside from that, the most important addition was Ripley’s daughter, who lived an entire life and died while Ripley was in cryosleep. Maybe this makes her surrogate motherhood of Newt too obvious, but it works better on me (maybe I’m just a dumbass, though), so I’m a Special Edition guy. And of course Cameron is too; dude never made a movie he didn’t think needed thirty more minutes.

3. Prometheus

And now I’ve lost some of you. I don’t care. I love this movie. At this point in the series, they had milked the Ripley character and the xenomorphs all that they possibly could. So instead of returning to that well, Scott instead decided to connect the series to the origin of humanity. I can see why people found it unnecessary or silly or stupid, but I was on board from the very beginning with this one. And Michael Fassbender as David is the perfect element that puts this above everything but the first two films for me. 

Shockingly, there’s no other cut of this one.

4. Alien³

And I’ve lost the rest of you. Sure, the behind the scenes drama is arguably more interesting than the movie itself, but I’ve always dug Fincher’s vision. To go from the guns blazing adrenaline shot of Aliens to this dour, gun-less nihilistic take is a bold choice, and I’m all for it. 

Theatrical or Assembly Cut: There are those that find the theatrical cut unwatchable and claim the Assembly Cut saves the film. I certainly prefer the Assembly Cut, but I don’t hate the theatrical cut like many do. I find it a little confusing at times, but the overall mood and aesthetic of the film is intact. But yeah, the Assembly Cut is far and away the better version.

5. Alien: Covenant

I’m still disappointed that this is only half a sequel to Prometheus, and the most interesting parts happened between movies or in a brief flashback. But overall, this is a good combination of what the series was and what Scott turned it into. And Fassbender in a dual role is simply a delight. 

There is only the theatrical cut of this film.

6. Alien: Romulus

I wrote more in depth about the film here. But basically, a couple fan service moments really took me out of it, but the overall look of the movie and the simple focus on survival made it enjoyable for me, though nothing special.

There is only the theatrical cut of this one, for now.

7. Alien: Resurrection

I hated this the first time I saw it, but I come around on it a bit more each time I watch it. I appreciate the hardcore sci-fi turn they took setting it two hundred years farther into the future. It’s a bit goofier and nastier than all the other movies, but you can’t claim it didn’t go for something new. But it’s low on my list because it’ll always be the movie in which Ripley fucking dunked a basketball.

Theatrical or Special Edition: Much like with the first film, Jeunet says the theatrical is his preferred cut and this was just made for the Quadrilogy release. The main differences I clocked were a silly CG bug opening, a couple references to Newt, and an extended ending showing a destroyed Paris. None of it added much for me. I’m okay with watching the theatrical cut if that’s all that’s available to me, but I guess if the Special Edition is an option, I’ll take it.

8. Alien vs. Predator 

Don’t be fooled by this low ranking; I actually like this stupid shit. It helps that I don’t take it seriously, and I don’t consider it to be truly part of the franchise. It definitely takes itself a little too seriously and takes too long setting up characters we all know are destined to be chestbursted or…um…Predatorized, but there’s still fun to be had with this one, even if it is more of a Predator than an Alien movie. 

Theatrical or Unrated: This one caught some extra shit for being PG-13 when the two series it was mashing up were exclusively R, and I agree with the criticism. They attempted to mend this with an unrated DVD that includes a promise of “more violence” on the back. The unrated cut fixes this a little bit with some CG blood and few slightly more gruesome elements, but this is still far too tame for this showdown. But yeah, if I’m watching this, I’m going unrated every time.

9. Alien vs. Predator: Requiem

The only movie on this list I don’t like and don’t want to ever see again. I like the premise of the fight taking place in a small town, and there’s plenty of gruesome shit in this, but it’s all so dark it might as well be PG-13-level violence. Also, this should be more fun, but it’s just a slog, and when I can’t even tell what’s going on in the slog, then it’s something I’d rather not watch again.

Theatrical or Unrated: I really don’t care. The back of this DVD promised “more gore,” but the only thing that would have interested me was “more light.” The unrated cut does show a young boy die from a chestburster if that’s something you want to see.

Alien: Romulus - This One's for the Holmies

SPOILERS THROUGHOUT

Alien: Romulus is meant to be a return to form for the franchise after Ridley Scott’s more ambitious prequel films about the origin of humanity and an android’s obsession with creating life failed to resonate (though I was a big fan of both). Instead of following David on his next misadventure, Romulus is a safe play, directly following the original film and drawing inspiration from all of them. In other words, it was meant to appeal to fans. In that regard, it’s a bit of a mixed bag. 

At first, I was in love with this movie. The dreary dystopian mine planet and all the recreated technology from the original film completely hooked me. Because of that, I’ll gladly revisit this film for years to come. It’s not trying to expound on any big ideas; it’s just a solid survival movie that looks great…until the ghost of Ian Holm showed up.

The de-aging stuff that Hollywood (but especially Disney) insists on forcing on us doesn’t bother me as much as it seems to bother others. Don’t get me wrong, I think most of it looks strange, and it almost always takes me out of the movie; but it doesn’t ruin it for me. Holm in this one almost did, though. 

It’s not the quality of the de-aging, even though it’s not great as Holm’s eyes look odd and his mouth somehow looks 2D while the rest of his face is 3D. It’s how unnecessary it is that gets to me. He’s not playing Ash, so it didn’t have to be Holm. And in the original film, everyone was shocked that Ash was a robot, but if his likeness was a standard model, wouldn’t at least one person be aware of it? Ignoring that possible plot hole, who was this for? Is there anyone in the audience thinking, “Fuck yeah, they brought Holm back from the dead!”? 

Sure, there’s a precedent for androids looking identical with David and Walter in Covenant, but that was done for dramatic effect (whether that was effective or not is beside the point). And it wasn’t like they digitally recreated Fassbender for it. 

I’ve read articles about how Holm’s family gave it the okay, and it was meant as a tribute from the filmmakers, but it was simply a distraction for me, which is why the bulk of this article is about the use of Holm instead of the aesthetics or action or new creatures. Once I accept it, though, it’s easy to enjoy the rest of the film.

While others have bemoaned the fact that Romulus doesn’t attempt to take the franchise in a bold new direction as Aliens (turning to action), Alien³ (turning to nihilism), Alien: Resurrection (turning French?), AVP and AVP: Requiem (turning it all into a joke) and Prometheus and Covenant had before it, I didn’t mind. Not every movie needs to take a big swing if it can deliver a solid bunt that advances a runner. And Romulus is a serviceable bunt. I know that makes it sound like it sucks shit, but I truly mean it as a compliment. 

Romulus is a fun enough ride to make me forget the lesser elements like Holm and the sometimes incomprehensible accents from some of the actors (apparently on loan from the Red Riding trilogy). All of the space stuff looks great, the acting is fine, with David Jonsson the standout as android Andy, and there’s plenty of facehugger and alien nastiness to keep things moving. And that Engineer-looking monstrosity at the end was truly disturbing. 

It certainly felt like none of Romulus matters much to the franchise as whole, and that’s fine with me. If the studio isn’t going to let Ridley Scott make more Fassbender-as-Old-Testament-android-God-creating-new-life movies, then I’ll take one of these from Fede Alvarez (or whomever) every few years.

Random Thought

I don’t have a lot of randomness to comment on, not until I watch it again at least, but I did want to write a bit about the “Get away from her, you bitch” line. Initially, I fucking hated the inclusion of the line. It made no sense for a character to quote another character from a movie that hasn’t happened yet in the timeline. But then I read a defense of the line that points out one of the Red Riding dickheads calls Andy a bitch earlier in the movie, so that’s why he said it. Fine, I guess that works as an explanation. But come on, it was just there in the hopes that dildos like me would say, “Ha ha, just like in Aliens!” So even with the explanation, I still fucking hate it.

The Mixed Bag of Sci-Fi Nostalgia: Star Wars, Alien, and Blade Runner

(NewsRadio was originally going to be my next post, but I decided to postpone that and write something a bit more relevant since Blade Runner 2049 is coming out this week. NewsRadio is written and will be posted in a week or so.)

Nostalgia seems to be fueling the biggest movies and TV shows recently, and that is not going to change anytime soon thanks to the popularity of Star Wars returning to the original trilogy characters. Star Wars didn't start this trend or anything, but the massive success likely led to the greenlighting of new entries in other older properties. I can't help but think that Alien: Covenant was able to be made because of a promise to be more like the original Alien than the recent, divisive Prometheus. And based on the previews of Blade Runner 2049, it looks like the studio provided a huge budget; it's not a stretch to assume this is because of the Star Wars effect. While I love the resurgence of all these films I loved growing up, the nostalgia factor makes it a mixed bag (though I'm crazy optimistic for Blade Runner 2049). So is nostalgia helping or hurting the integrity of these franchises? Let's start with Star Wars.

The Force Awakens, many claim, gave the fans what they wanted whereas the prequels gave them what they didn't want. Not to get into a prequel vs. original trilogy debate, but one thing that can be said for the prequels is that they are different. For a lot of fans, that means they're terrible (I happen to hold them in the same regard as the original trilogy, but that's not the point). So when The Force Awakens came out, there was this collective sigh of relief: Star Wars was truly back. 

I enjoyed The Force Awakens, but the more I watched it, the more the nostalgia wore off. I still like it, but I also realize that it is an unapologetic rehash of A New Hope. People have pointed this out, but it seems like most give the film a pass. "Yeah, it's basically a remake, but, man, it really felt like Star Wars!" In other words, "Yeah, I've seen this movie before, but, man, it's a really good movie!" 

This is where I disagree with fans of The Force Awakens. Nostalgia is all about feeling, but I didn't think The Force Awakens felt like a Star Wars movie. It had all the right parts and whatnot, but it felt different. Not bad, just different. It's to the point now that I don't even consider that film's success the product of nostalgia; it was successful simply because of recognition. 

This is where the Alien and Blade Runner franchises come into play. Obviously nostalgia and recognition are part of the appeal (hell, Harrison Ford returns in Blade Runner, just like he did in Star Wars [PS - it's my theory that Ford is going through his most iconic characters and killing them off one by one; Deckard is probably going to die in the new Blade Runner, and he could also kill off Indiana Jones in the announced fifth film]), but one major difference with these two properties is that the original director, Ridley Scott, is heavily involved. Meanwhile, George Lucas, to the delight of most fans, has almost nothing to do with the new films. 

Scott's involvement is so important because he's not a fan. Everyone working on the new Star Wars films are fans, so, in essence, all the new stuff is fan fiction. Fan fiction can be good, but it will always feel a step removed. Just like Lucas was willing to do something vastly different (even if a lot of fans hated it), Scott can do whatever he wants with Alien and Blade Runner.

This has happened a bit already. The Alien prequel Prometheus, while certified fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, received a lot of negative blowback online. The film, in my opinion, has been nitpicked excessively possibly because it didn't deliver enough answers and/or the same experience of the first Alien film. The issue here is that Scott didn't set out to do either. Prometheus is not technically an Alien film as Scott has been following a multi-film plan to lead up to the original Alien. That's why there isn't a proper xenomorph in the film, and it's also why there are plenty of unanswered questions.

The more recent Alien: Covenant is different. It's as if Scott listened to the upset fans of Prometheus and tried to do two separate things: continue his multi-film plan and give the audience something very similar to the original Alien. I think the film accomplishes that, but that makes it the lesser of the two new films. I enjoyed the xenomorph sequence at the end of Covenant, but I was much more interested in the continued story from Prometheus. Pleasing fans is important, but when you give into them, it's like giving into a child who wants candy for dinner. Sure, the child will be full, but it's empty nourishment. Here's hoping that the next Alien film leans more towards Prometheus than Covenant. (To be clear, though, I really liked both movies.)

One thing that is undeniable about the Alien prequels is that Scott is still able to create the Alien atmosphere. Rewatching Alien recently, I realized that the atmosphere is why I love that first film more than Aliens. It's slow and brooding and effective. It also took what the original Star Wars presented (a futuristic sci-fi that looks lived rather than shiny and new) and perfected it. I recall Alien being described as truckers in space, and that's exactly what it is. This is best exemplified by the great Yaphet Kotto and Harry Dean Stanton (R.I.P.). How often in a film set on a spaceship do you have characters arguing about wages? All of these elements add up to a nearly perfect film. A film that could not be replicated today because of pacing alone. Look at Covenant; they essentially remade Alien in the last twenty minutes. Audiences don't have time for slow burn tension these days.

Perhaps Blade Runner 2049 will prove me wrong, though. With a running time nearing three hours and a director (Denis Villeneuve) who specializes in mood, this could be the film that gets it right. Blade Runner 2049 could placate fans and retain the atmospheric feeling of the original. 

Blade Runner 2049 may have found the perfect formula for nostalgic filmmaking. Rather than shutting out the original director, allow him to be involved in the process (as Scott is on 2049 as a producer) without giving him total control. Star Wars could benefit from George Lucas's input, as blasphemous as that might seem to certain fans. Don't let him go full prequel with it, but let him in on the process. The guy who started it all just might have a few ideas for where the story can go.

Back to Blade Runner, what made me fall in love with this film over the years was the mood and atmosphere. Judging it on face value, it's a boring film. (SPOILERS throughout the rest of this paragraph.) Deckard is very low energy and is no match against a replicant in a fight, and he only survives at the end because Batty lets him. It's not meant to be much of an action film, though. It's an atmospheric consideration of what life is, especially in a technologically advanced world. It's slow and beautiful. I don't rewatch it at least once a year for the badass action sequences; I watch it because I want to revisit the world of the film.

Of course, simply wanting to revisit the world of a film is what led to some of the problems with nostalgic filmmaking in the first place. I guess the best way to describe it is that The Force Awakens felt like I was looking at a picture of the Star Wars universe, and I hope that Blade Runner 2049 feels more like a return to the world. 

Based on early reviews for 2049, it appears that they got it right with this one. I hope so. Because nostalgia will continue to drive the content of Hollywood as long as it's profitable. Nostalgia doesn't have to be a bad thing. When done right, filmmakers might be able to recreate the magic of the past. I'll find out this weekend when I watch Blade Runner 2049.

"The Martian": The Anti-"Alien"

The Martian

Director Ridley Scott’s recent return to sci-fi, Prometheus, was not very well-received (though I really enjoyed it) partially because it did not live up to the expectations created from Scott’s early sci-fi classic, Alien. Scott returns to science fiction again with The Martian, a film that could be called the anti-Alien.

Comparing The Martian to Alien simply because they are both sci-fi films directed by Scott is not fair. But the opening credits and score invite the comparison. The film begins with ominous music very similar to Alien as the title appears and then fades away one piece of a letter at a time, which is the reverse of the title reveal of Alien. That subtle nod lets the viewer know this is not going to be like Alien.

The difference is important to note because Scott’s filmography is filled with dark, ultra-serious movies. It would be easy for Scott to take the novel The Martian is based on, which is actually quite light-hearted despite the serious situation, and turn it into a much darker film. The intro makes it clear that Scott is venturing into new, nearly opposite territory, meaning The Martian is going to be fun, which is not a word typically associated with Ridley Scott.

The Martian has a setup that should be devoid of fun, however. Astronaut Mark Watney (Matt Damon) is presumed dead while his team aborts a Mars mission to return to Earth. It turns out he is still alive and must figure out how to survive on an inhospitable planet, alone, for four years. That alone sounds more like a depressing survival story than a fun movie, but add to it the logical higher-ups at NASA constantly discussing how impossible it will be for him to survive, and it sounds downright miserable. This is why tone is so important in writing and filmmaking. The source material (written by Andy Weir) deserves the most credit, as it is filled with sarcastic humor. Screenwriter Drew Goddard retained that comedy, and Ridley Scott finalized it with a bit of help from a great cast, many of whom are known for comedy. So instead of a depressing slog of a movie, we get a fast-paced space movie in which a funny astronaut solves every problem thrown his way.

The casting of Mark Watney is critical, and Matt Damon is the perfect choice. Watney needs to be someone you want to see saved, and Damon is very likable (despite his recent brushes with controversy in interviews and on Project Greenlight). He is also capable of carrying a film by himself for long stretches of time. Part of this is thanks to the fact that Watney is constantly talking to the NASA cameras tracking everything, which allows Watney’s portions of the film to be more dialogue-heavy than you would think. The other part of that is Damon’s abilities as an actor. This performance might get dismissed later in the year since the film is light-hearted at times, but he is truly impressive with seemingly no effort. But when you consider that he has make you laugh, cry, and care about him in general, all while talking to himself and reacting to typed messages, it becomes much clearer how great a performance this is. The rest of the cast is great and impressive, but this is definitely Matt Damon’s movie.

Performance and tone aside, any film that takes place on Mars needs to look great to work. This is where Ridley Scott truly shines. Say what you will about his less popular films, but Scott’s movies always look amazing. The sets look so intricate and realistic it’s easy to buy into this near-future of manned Mars missions. And Mars, created with a combination of a practical location (the Wadi Rum in Jordan) and CG, looks beautiful.

All of these elements combine to make The Martian the most exhilarating movie about space exploration in years. In fact, it almost felt like a promotional movie to get people interested in manned Mars missions (and with NASA’s obvious cooperation, I think it’s safe to say they see it that way too). But that doesn’t take away from the film at all. It’s refreshing to see a movie set in a world where space exploration is done for exploration’s sake rather than as a quest to save the world or escape a dead world or (insert depressing plotline here).

This is not to say The Martian is just some fun, empty, forgetful experience. Ridley Scott cannot make a film without plenty of thematic elements. The most dominant theme concerns how important a single human life is. The movie spells it out in no uncertain terms that every life is worth saving, and saving one person on a distant planet can unite everyone on this planet. Is this true? No. Of course not. If this were to happen in the real world, there would be an entire subsection of the population that would doubt that there was actually a mission sent to Mars at all. But The Martian is not the real world, which is why it’s a great, fun film. Alien is still the better film, but it’s hard to compete with the feeling you will have after watching The Martian.

The Martian receives a:

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

Hats off to Matt Damon and Jessica Chastain not being too afraid of doing similar projects to accept this role. Chastain's role isn't all that similar to Interstellar, but Damon's is. In fact, Interstellar works as an alternate ending. A kind of "This is what could have happened" warning.  

I loved that they kept the Elrond joke, especially since Sean Bean (Boromir) was in the scene. Speaking of Sean Bean, good for him for not dying in this one.

I'm getting pretty sick of seeing China pandered to in movies, but at least in this one, it was part of the book, and it makes much more sense as they do have a space program. In other movies (like Transformers: Revenge of the Returned Fallen or Whatever) the characters almost randomly end up in China. And the China stuff paid off in this film as we see a Chinese astronaut on the next Ares mission during the credits sequence.

Didn't see this one in 3D, but I can imagine some of it might have looked great. Visually speaking, it was plenty impressive in 2D. 

Finally, the ending is nearly sappy with optimism, but I still liked it. There was a time that maybe the "good" ending would have bothered me, but not anymore. I love darker sci-fi films like Alien, Blade Runner, Interstellar, etc. but sci-fi movies that honestly make me feel good for humanity at the end are so rare that I was okay with it. Plus, I truly wanted Watney to make it, and the tone of the film does not allow for a down ending.

"Prometheus"

Directed by Ridley Scott, written by Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof, starring Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Logan Marshall-Green, Charlize Theron, and Idris Elba - Rated R

"Big things have small beginnings." 

The main discussion concerning Prometheus is whether or not the film is a prequel to Ridley Scott’s classic, Alien.  The cast and crew have been vague about it, at most admitting that there’s some Alien DNA in the film.  I think they’ve been dodging the question not because of spoilers but because of revenue.  If Prometheus had been billed up as a straight up sequel to an old sci-fi film, then interest in it might lessen.  The big question, then, is if Prometheus can be enjoyed by someone who has never seen Alien.  The short answer is yes.  This film does stand on its own.  But only Alien fans can fully enjoy it because no matter what the filmmakers have to say about it, this is a prequel. 

Prometheus is great without any prior knowledge, though, because of the questions asked within the film.  The main question is the age-old question of humanity, “Why are we here?”  That question takes on different variations as the film continues, but it is that initial curiosity that sends the crew of the titular spaceship Prometheus to a planet light years away from Earth to investigate a message left by multiple ancient cultures.  Asking a loaded question like “Why?” can make or break a film because it has to deal with religion and science and how it can co-exist.  Not to go into spoilers, but the film dodges the issue in a satisfying way.  But anytime an issue is dodged there will be complaints.  Could Prometheus take a risk and answer the question in a definitive and dividing way?  Yes, the film could have done that and made a small group of obsessed fans (myself included, most like) extremely happy, but instead the filmmakers left it open.  That not only makes the film more accessible for the population; it also allows the viewers discuss the film.

That is what makes Prometheus truly great.  I am writing this review twelve hours after I watched the film and I am still rolling ideas around.  If all my questions had been answered then I would have very little to write about.  Instead, I am left with so many questions and theories that I can hardly focus on just one.  I find that exhilarating.  I’m usually happy if a film simply makes me feel something.  When a movie makes me think deeply about life: that’s special. 

I realize that I have not given a proper synopsis for this film yet, but I don’t intend to.  Prometheus is science-fiction and it’s about the origin of life.  If that interests you (and it should), then watch it.  If that sounds like a bit too much for you, then skip it.

But Prometheus is still a movie and should be judged as other movies are judged.   First, the visuals.  Sci-fi films are typically the most impressive visual films and this movie does not disappoint.  Director Ridley Scott insisted on using as many natural landscapes and practical sets as possible and the film benefits from it.  The locations are otherworldly and impressive because most of them are real.  The title sequence is so beautiful it seems like Werner Herzog or Terrence Malick took over directorial duties for it.  As for the sets: they were great.  The ship looks polished a bit, but it still fits into the technology of Alien in a very satisfying way. 

Of course, a sci-fi film has to feature some CG effects.  It’s all handled very well, though.  The film is in 3D, as well, and it is better because of it.  Prometheus is a visual spectacle and it should be presented in 3D.  I have decided that all science-fiction films should be in 3D because the vastness of space is best shown in the third dimension.

“Prometheus” also works thanks to the amazing cast.  Noomi Rapace is tasked with the leading role and she does a fine job.  She doesn’t make quite the tough heroine that Sigourney Weaver did in the Alien films, but she certainly holds her own, especially late in the film.  Idris Elba has some interesting scenes as the benevolent captain of the ship, and there are a few questions raised by his actions.  Charlize Theron makes for an effective and emotionless corporate minder.  Sean Harris provides some lively moments as a disgruntled geologist.  And Logan Marshall-Green does fine in a slightly boring role.

It’s Michael Fassbender, though, who steals the show as an android named David.  Who better than Fassbender to play a robot?  Not to mention a robot that watches actors like Peter O’Toole and emulates them.  Fassbender constantly propels the film and every scene he is in is instantly better than those without him. 

But the real star of the film is director Ridley Scott.  I am a huge fan of his work, most notably his sci-fi efforts, Alien and Blade Runner.  A lot has been made about Scott’s return to his best genre, so I don’t need to add much to that discussion apart from saying that I am glad Scott is back in sci-fi.  He has always been an ambitious filmmaker and sci-fi is the perfect place for lofty ideas and questions.  Scott has tried to insert themes and ideas about life in general into recent works like Robin Hood and Kingdom of Heaven to mixed results.  The vastness of space is a much better place to present ideas about humanity than historical settings are. 

It was also nice to see Scott return to the Alien universe for both his style and his attempt to shock.  Scott emulates the style of the original film with his long tracking shots throughout the ship.  It’s pretty much mimicking Kubrick, but who better to copy?  Also, Scott doesn’t turn the camera away when things get gory.  Prometheus earns its R-rating (something fans were worried about for a while) by featuring some truly gruesome moments.  Is anything as shocking or iconic as the chest burst scene from the original?  No, but it is definitely some disturbing, cringe-worthy stuff. 

Overall, Prometheus is an incredibly ambitious film made with great style by one of the best working directors out there.  The film doesn’t answer many questions for the viewer and, honestly, a truly great film never tells the audience much.  Prometheus is an excellent film to discuss and think about.  Just check out some message boards and you’ll find multiple complex debates going on about this film.  Even if you hate it, you have to respect that it presents some interesting ideas about humanity, technology, religion, abortion, faith, and…well, life.  It helps that the film is absolutely beautiful and features some great performances.  It’s my favorite film of the year thus far and will certainly be near (or at) the top of my list by year’s end.

Random Thoughts (SPOILERS)

Okay, I have a lot more to write about on this one.  First: all the potential issues this film raises.

I loved that the question changed from the why of our origin into the why of our attempted annihilation.  And I am okay with our why simply being because the Engineers could.  It ties into our issues with technology.  Why do we create a lot of the technology we have?  Because we can and we want to make things better and better.  In the world of the film, it is brought up in a very effective scene between David and Holloway.  It is also extremely interesting when you factor in the timeframe when the Engineers decided to destroy humanity, which is roughly the time when Jesus walked the earth.  Scott has made this reference himself in an interview, going so far as to say that Jesus may have been an Engineer (i.e. alien).  But they strayed from that idea, for better or worse.  (If you want to check the interview, just Google "Ridley Scott moviefone interview.")

Religion is definitely a major factor in the film, though it isn't given the main focus.  It's more about faith and how someone can still believe after being put through trials and the answer given by Shaw is that she simply "chooses" to believe.  Not a groundbreaking answer and really kind of a boring answer, but it doesn't make it any less logical and it is still a statement about belief systems. 

The religion aspect is what I had in mind when I mentioned that Idris Elba's character, Janek, raises questions.  It is almost out of nowhere, but Shaw talks to Janek near the end of the film as he was God.  She asks how he can just sit back and watch horrible things happen without getting involved.  If you think back before that scene, we get to see Janek watching over all of the characters and even though they appear to be in imminent danger, he is very nonchalant and even uncaring a bit.  Kind of sounds like a certain deity who gets prayed to but seems to never intervene, right?  Of course, this changes a bit when Janek decides to care at the end and basically saves humanity.  So God was finally forced at act, basically.  Hey, at least this deus ex machina didn't simply magically show up...

Now, looking into how the technology of this film matches up with Alien.  An issue with a sci-fi prequel is that technology is better today so even though the film takes place before the original, the ship looks much better.  This has been explained in an interview I read a few weeks ago (so I don't remember who said it), but the basic idea is that the Prometheus is filled with scientists, which explains why they would have all the bells and whistles that the Nostromo does not, since that ship was basically an 18-wheeler in space.  Aside from that, the corridors still look similar and the ship does fit in nicely within the franchise.

Lastly, there is the issue of where this film takes place.  At first, I just assumed this took place on the same planet that the first film took place on.  That is not the case.  This is a completely different planet, but it is very similar in that it is also used as a cache for the Engineers' deadly weapons.  Presumably things went bad at all these locations which is why such a similar ship and issue occurred on an entirely different planet.  I know, I know, wouldn't it have been much easier just to make it the same?  Yes, but the story can go in more places if it isn't, so I'm cool with it.  Plus, it still explains the origin of the Space Jockey in an interesting way.  So Prometheus didn't end up being a true prequel, but it's still pretty damn close.