Pages

Friday, September 6, 2019

The Sequel was Better? Alien vs. Aliens

The Sequel Was Better? is a series of reviews looking at famous movies with sequels that are considered, rightly or wrongly, to be better than the original movies. Typically, sequels are a step down in quality, acting, and/or production value. But not always. See more such reviews here.


Alien is a famous science fiction film that spawned a long series of sequels, prequels, and crossover films. The first two films are generally considered the best of the series. The recent prequels have done well enough at the box office but viewers debate whether they add or subtract from the quality of the Alien universe. The following reviews include spoilers, so be forewarned.

Alien (1979) directed by Ridley Scott

The crew of the freighter ship Nostromo is awakened because the onboard computer received a seemingly undecipherable signal from a nearby planet. They reluctantly go to investigate. They find a derelict ship with a long dead gigantic humanoid pilot. The cave underneath is full of egg-shaped leathery balls. One of the crew examines a ball and the nascent life form inside bursts onto his face. He's brought back to the ship, against the wishes of Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), the ranking officer still on the ship. She's more concerned about quarantine rules than saving her fellow crew member. The science officer (Ian Holm) seems unconcerned about quarantine issues and overrides her decision. The whole problem of what they should do becomes much more urgent when an alien creature shows up and starts killing off the crew one by one.

This film is a fairly stripped down space horror film. The build up from the beginning is slow, establishing a lot of atmosphere and the ways the characters feel about each other. The more visceral horror starts maybe forty-five minutes into the film. Then the shock-gore and jump-scare scenes come at a steady and effective pace. The characters do not have enough resources to deal with the problem and they do the best they can, which quite often isn't good enough. The alien creature is creepy and menacing--it's often kept just out of view, following the "less is more" tactic famously used in Jaws.

The film adds in a jab at big corporations. The science officer turns out to be an android that was programmed to retrieve the alien from the planet and bring it back as a highly-marketable bio-weapon. The corporation sponsoring the Nostromo, Weyland Yutani, programmed the android to eliminate the crew if necessary. How they knew about the alien is not explained, though the science officer gives a creepy speech about how he admires the alien's pure killing ability and lack of moral limitations.

The movie hold up very well forty years later. The effects are mostly practical and still look believable (given the story context) today. The story is fairly simple, more of a setting for the horror. This film is entertaining if you can handle a medium-to-high level of gore.


Aliens (1986) written and directed by James Cameron

Ripley escaped from the Nostromo with a cat in a small life pod. The new film starts with her ship being picked up by scavengers. She's brought to a star base where she finds out its some sixty years later. Her daughter on Earth has lived her life and died two years ago. The Weyland Yutani rep (Paul Reiser) takes care of her though everyone thinks her story of an alien menace is implausible and untrue. In the meantime, the planet with the alien eggs has been colonized by terraformers. After Ripley is fired, the rep comes back to her because they've lost contact with the colony. He wants her to come with a squad of marines to investigate. She is very reluctant but goes along with the offer of a new job and some resolution to her post-traumatic stress disorder.

When the marines, Ripley, and the rep get to the planet, the colony base is abandoned but intact. They land and investigate. The empty halls of the colony show damage that corroborates Ripley's story, which doesn't really make anyone that much happier. They discover a lone survivor, a young girl named Newt (Carrie Henn) who has been hiding all the time. She knows about the monsters but won't say where her parents are. The marines patch into the colony's computer system and look for the locator badges on the colonists. They are all over at the atmosphere plant, grouped on a sub-level. The marines get all their high-tech weapons ready and go to check out the plant. They find a breeding ground for the aliens (the colonists' bodies being used as hosts). The marines also find some warrior aliens who attack them. The battle goes badly. They are barely able to retreat to the main colony where they hunker down and wait for the onslaught. They work desperately for a way to escape back to their orbiting ship.

The movie is, superficially, an action/horror sequel to the original movie. But a lot more is going on. The marines are high-tech warriors who are overwhelmed by the superior numbers of the low-tech aliens. So there's an overtone of America's failure in Vietnam. Ripley has a very mothering relationship with Newt, who can be seen as a substitute for her lost daughter (a character not mentioned at all in the first film). The aliens have an alien queen, who is also a sort of mother, though the worst sort. So there's a strong motherhood theme, something unexpected in an action/horror film. The corporate rep turns on the humans and wants to bring back samples, just like last time. Things don't work out well for him.

Let's look at some points of comparison:
  • SCRIPT--Alien has a lot of atmosphere and hints at what's going on, though hardly any real details about the creature and its origin. Things just happen and viewers have to accept them as part of this new science fiction world being crafted. The sequel has a much more developed behavior patterns for the aliens, though their origin is still left mysterious. The script has a lot more going on for the humans, who are dealing with infighting and with keeping each other safe. The extra thematic elements (Vietnam parallel, motherhood) give the film a lot more depth than the first.
  • ACTING--The first film has some very fine actors (Ian Holm who went on to be Bilbo Baggins in the Lord of the Rings series; Tom Skerritt who had many character roles; John Hurt later in The Elephant Man and Doctor Who) who give good performances. The sequel has fewer famous actors (Bill Paxton and Paul Reiser are the most famous) but makes good use of a cast of mostly unknowns. Holm is a much better surprise villain than Reiser. Sigourney Weaver stands out in both films. She was even nominated for an acting Oscar for Aliens, something unheard of at the time for a science fiction sequel.
  • ADVANCES THE STORY/MYTHOLOGY--Details about the aliens are scant in the first film though the film makers do establish a fairly detailed world. Viewers learn a lot more about the aliens in the sequel, but not enough to take away their scariness and menace. Weaver's character has a lot more depth and background in the sequel. She grows as a person, becoming not just a survivor but a protector.
  • SPECIAL EFFECTS--Both films use a lot of practical effects so they look less dated than more modern films using cutting edge CGI, which rapidly becomes dated-looking CGI as the years progress. Aliens is more ambitious and has a lot more action, requiring more effects. The alien spawning area in the terraforming station is a lot more horrible than the stuff in the first film.
Aliens was a better film than Alien, for sure. Alien is a very good movie and is still entertaining and worth watching even today. But Aliens is better. Someone could even watch Aliens first and not have a problem with lost bits of the story. The sequel is self-contained and does a great job presenting and expanding the world created in the first film.

The further sequels and prequels are not even close to as good as these films. I keep hoping they will come up with better movies set in this world but so far my hope is unfulfilled.

No comments:

Post a Comment