Despite its ups and downs, I’ve always respected the Alien franchise for daring to try something new with every new entry. From Vietnam allegories to reimagining Chariots of the Gods as a Lovecraftian origin story for the Xenomorphs, the series challenges the very concept of genre as it explores what might go wrong when humanity comes into contact with a truly perfect organism.
And with Fede Alvarez’s Alien: Romulus paying homage to the most underrated movie in the franchise during its horrific final act, today I’d like to look back on Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s unfairly maligned Alien: Resurrection and dive into why I think this oddball gem of a film deserves more love.
Like many sequels, the story of Resurrection begins soon after the release of its predecessor. Desperate for a course-correction after the grimdark prison story of Alien³ left audiences feeling frustrated (which was the studio’s own fault, as they sabotaged David Fincher’s vision every step of the way), Fox attempted to recruit established filmmakers like Danny Boyle, Peter Jackson and even David Cronenberg before landing on French director Jean-Pierre Jeunet. While Jeunet is now mostly known for Amélie, he’d made a name for himself in the 90s with dark parables like the criminally underseen Delicatessen and The City of Lost Children – making him the perfect choice to take the Xenomorphs in a novel direction.
Working off a script written by Joss Whedon (who would later repurpose elements of the story in Firefly due to his dissatisfaction with Jeunet’s handling of the material), the filmmaker and his team faced slashed budgets and tight schedules once shooting finally began. Jeunet even required a French-to-English interpreter in order to communicate with the crew, which is why he insisted that the shooting script should be illustrated like a comic-book. Despite these difficulties, Alien: Resurrection would ultimately be released on schedule in November of 1997.
In the finished film, we follow an augmented clone of Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) as she wakes up on a medical research vessel two centuries after the events of Alien³. Using the original Ripley’s infected DNA, military scientists were able to clone a Xenomorph queen and are now conducting experiments on her offspring. When the aliens inevitably escape, Ripley 8 joins forces with an ensemble of mercenaries, soldiers and other survivors (portrayed by a collection of talented actors including Winona Ryder, Ron Perlman and Dominique Pinon) in order to stop the damaged vessel from returning to earth and setting the creatures loose.
SO WHAT WENT WRONG?
Despite the film’s financial success (which can be largely attributed to its ingenious marketing campaign, which also happened to gift us with the first modern first-person-shooter game on consoles), Resurrection was so poorly received that it basically killed off the main franchise. In fact, while Alien³ has a lower score on Rotten Tomatoes, that flick has seen been reevaluated as a misunderstood religious thriller due to the Assembly Cut – a privilege that wasn’t extended to its successor.
One recurring point of criticism was directed at the handling of Ripley’s character arc by bringing Weaver back immediately after a heroic sacrifice. While this doesn’t bother me personally since Ripley 8 is technically a brand-new character that only happens to share some memories with her namesake, I can understand how this addition might piss off Alien fans who were already frustrated with the previous film’s decision to kill off Newt, Hicks and Bishop. This wasn’t helped by Weaver’s explanation that she only agreed to return because they “drove a dump-truck of money” to her house, though she has since admitted that the harrowing scene where she encounters her “sisters” was also a big attraction.
Of course, the most common complaint was about Resurrection’s generally unserious tone, with both fans and critics claiming that the pulpy sci-fi approach didn’t fit the franchise’s somber origins. After all, the rag-tag crew of The Betty felt a lot more like something out of Star Wars than even Aliens’ playful yet realistic colonial marines – and that’s not even mentioning the exaggerated mad science behind the messy plot.
Lastly, there’s the simple matter of this being the fourth entry in a long-running series. The novelty factor of Giger’s monsters was long gone by 1997, with the Xenomorphs having become such a huge part of popular culture (from Contra to Spaceballs) that it was hard for audiences to see them as a genuine threat.
All in all, it was the perfect storm for Resurrection to end up not getting the recognition that it deserved.
THE SILVER LINING
As is often the case with movies that are initially disliked but end up finding their true audience later on, many of the things that critics hated about Alien: Resurrection are precisely what make it an entertaining watch today. In hindsight, the schlocky B-movie tone is a feature, not a bug, and the fact that the film feels nothing like the rest of the franchise is my favorite part of the experience. We’d already seen three other Xenomorph infestations at that point, so if the studio was going to force filmmakers to bring Ripley back for more after her poignant death, they might as well have some fun with it.
From the charming ensemble that makes the flick entertaining even when the Xenomorphs aren’t onscreen (I especially appreciate Perlman, Pinon and Brad Dourif’s contributions to the flick) to the grungy sci-fi aesthetic, there’s a lot of great filmmaking going on here if you can warm up to the new vibe. Hell, the cinematographer even added extra silver particles to the negative development process in order to give the picture a futuristic tinge!
The film also features some of the most genuinely disturbing moments in the entire franchise, with Whedon and Jeunet landing on some unsettling psychosexual story-beats as Ripley deals with malformed clones and a disgusting Xenomorph hybrid child that still haunts my nightmares. Not all of these new elements stick the landing (I’m still on the fence about Ripley 8 empathizing with the aliens), but I appreciate how the filmmakers at least tried to keep things fresh for the third sequel.
Of course, that’s not even mentioning the added brutality, with Resurrection offering up plenty of memorable death scenes and unexpectedly gnarly moments like having a Xenomorph mutilate itself in order to produce acid blood and escape its bonds. These are all enhanced by gritty industrial visuals that make great use of hand-made miniatures and set design – though it’s a shame that the Xenomorph is brought to life through janky CGI.
Alien: Resurrection might not be able to compete with the grounded space-trucker thrills of the original – or even the action/sci-fi blockbuster blend of Cameron’s sequel – but that doesn’t make it a bad movie. It’s simply a different take on the source material. And with modern franchise films being satisfied in simply reliving the glory days of their respective IPs instead of exploring new ideas, I find myself respecting this strange experiment a lot more every time I revisit it.
H.R. Giger himself called Resurrection an excellent film – what better praise could you ask for?
Watching a bad movie doesn’t necessarily have to be a bad experience. Even the worst films can boast a good idea or two, and that’s why we’re trying to look on the bright side with The Silver Lining, where we shine a light on the best parts of traditionally maligned horror flicks.
The post Appreciating the Pulpy Sci-fi Horror of ‘Alien: Resurrection’ appeared first on Bloody Disgusting!.
source https://bloody-disgusting.com/editorials/3826745/editorial-appreciating-the-pulpy-sci-fi-of-alien-resurrection-the-silver-lining/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=editorial-appreciating-the-pulpy-sci-fi-of-alien-resurrection-the-silver-lining
No comments:
Post a Comment