Showing posts with label Michael Biehn. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Biehn. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Alien Series Retrospective (1979-2012)

Image result for alien series logo

In 1979, a sci-fi horror film was released to theaters, with one of the most iconic taglines in film history; ‘In Space, no one can hear you scream’. This tagline was for director Ridley Scott’s classic, Alien, a film that has gone on to become one of the most iconic films of the sci-fi genre while also spawning a highly successful media franchise in the years since. And this weekend, Scott returns to the franchise that he helped create with Alien: Covenant, a follow-up to the franchise’s 2012 ‘prequel’ Prometheus, which he also directed. By the looks of it, this new film is returning to the series’ original roots as an intense sci-fi horror flick. And in honor of its release, today we’ll be looking at the films in the Alien franchise when it was at its highest of highs… and its lowest of lows. Specifically, we’ll be looking at its four initial installments, which starred Sigourney Weaver in the role of Lt. Ellen Ripley, and Prometheus. I won’t be covering the two Alien vs. Predator crossover films that came out in 2004 and 2007, respectively, for multiple reasons. First off, if I did decide to cover these films, I’d have to look at the Predator films as well, and I’m saving that for the upcoming Predator film, directed by Shane Black, which isn’t set to come out until next summer. Also, I’m aware that both AvP films have attracted a generally negative reaction from both critics and audiences. So… I didn’t want to bother with them anyway. Though with that said, I guess that I will have to cover those eventually when I do that Predator post next year. Well, until then, grab your big guns and avoid those alien eggs because here is my look back at the films of the Alien franchise.

ALIEN (1979)

Image result for alien 1979 poster

We start things off, of course, with the original Alien from 1979; Ridley Scott’s classic tale of a spaceship crew who are awoken from stasis to investigate a mysterious transmission from an uncharted planet. This investigation, however, soon results in the crew being hunted by a terrifying alien creature that’s literally ‘birthed’ from one of their own crewmates. While initially polarizing amongst critics upon release, it has since gone on to become one of the most iconic films of the sci-fi genre, and rightfully so as it’s an excellently-made space-set chiller. A lot of this is due to Scott’s direction. His use of long, slow-moving, and uninterrupted takes helps add to the overall suspense, along with the general nature of the film’s setting. The film is primarily set within the dark and cramped confines of the crew’s ship, the Nostromo, and it results in an effectively intense and unsettling atmosphere because of the claustrophobic feeling throughout. Even moments that don’t involve the Alien, like when crew member Ash (Ian Holm) is revealed to be an android, have a great and suspenseful vibe to them. In fact, the Alien doesn’t even appear until just under an hour in. Like I said before, this is a slow-moving film but there’s never a dull moment in this. Thus, it’s easy to see why Alien is still regarded as one of the best films in both the science-fiction and horror genres. While I’m not that big a fan of the latter genre, this film does succeed in being a part of it thanks to Ridley Scott’s excellent direction and a solid cast that includes the likes of Sigourney Weaver, Tom Skerritt, Ian Holm, and John Hurt. Heck, this wouldn’t be the last time that a sci-fi film directed by Scott would overcome initial critical reception to become a seminal classic of the genre… but more on that when Blade Runner 2049 comes out.

Rating: 5/5!

ALIENS (1986)

Image result for aliens 1986 poster

After making a name for himself in 1984 with The Terminator, James Cameron was brought on to write and direct the follow-up to Alien, titled Aliens. However, Cameron faced some scrutiny during production from the primarily British crew, who felt that he was inexperienced for a project of this magnitude. However, upon release, Aliens would go on to become just as beloved as the original Alien. This, of course, leads to the primary debate of the franchise; Alien or Aliens? Me personally, I lean slightly more towards the latter. I’ll admit that this may be because I’m not a big horror fan but this shouldn’t take anything away from Ridley Scott’s masterpiece. As for Aliens, though, while Cameron does lean more towards the action genre in this sci-fi story, it doesn’t mean that he completely shies away from the franchise’s horror roots. There are still some incredibly tense and creepy moments throughout this film along with the same great dark and claustrophobic set designs that the first film had. Ultimately, though, this film is more action-oriented than the first and it delivers on that aspect brilliantly. Plus, this film has arguably the best ensemble cast in the history of the franchise. Of course, it’s all led by Sigourney Weaver as Ripley, who went from being the secondary protagonist of the original film to one of cinema’s most badass action heroines in this film. Heck, she was so good in this film that she got nominated for an Oscar for Best Actress, a rarity for the genre. But the rest of the cast is excellent as well, including Carrie Henn as the scared young girl Newt, who Ripley becomes a surrogate mother to, and Lance Henriksen as this film’s android, Bishop. Even minor characters like Hudson (the late Bill Paxton (RIP); “Game over, man, game over!”) and Vazquez (Jenette Goldstein) are extremely memorable. In short, Aliens is just as much of a masterpiece as its immediate predecessor, but if you forced me to choose one over the other, I’d go with Cameron’s sci-fi action epic.

Rating: 5/5!

ALIEN 3 (1992)

Image result for alien 3 poster

I’ve talked about this film before in my Directorial Retrospective on its director, David Fincher, way back in 2014 so I won’t repeat myself too much here. Bottom line; Alien 3 was, unfortunately, a disappointing follow-up to the first two Alien films, namely because it went through one of the most tumultuous productions of all time. Several writers and directors were brought in to try and figure out its overall plot, from William Gibson’s HIV-influenced storyline to Vincent Ward’s concept of a ‘wooden’ planet that held a monastery. Ultimately, David Fincher was brought in to direct; sadly, his directorial debut put him through hell. He was given little time to prepare and didn’t have a full script when filming began. To make matters worse, the studio blocked many of his ideas during the shoot; thus, it’s easy to see why Fincher has since disowned the film. I don’t blame him; the primary flaws of the film aren’t his fault. Alien 3 makes the questionable decision of going down a dark and gloomy route that goes against the optimistic ending of the previous film. Case in point, the opening scene sees most of the surviving cast of the previous film killed off, with Ripley being forced into an all-male prison. Of course, Fincher is well-known nowadays for his dreary thrillers but here, it just doesn’t translate as well. The supporting characters are all bland, partially because they’re predominantly a collection of similar-looking bald white men. Not to mention, these are all murderers, rapists, etc.; they’re not exactly a sympathetic bunch. Thankfully, Sigourney Weaver is still great as always as Ripley and the film’s ending is a highlight, as Ripley sacrifices herself when she learns that an Alien has manifested within her to keep the Weyland Corporation, the primary ‘evil corporation’ of the franchise, from using it for nefarious purposes. Had it not been for the next installment of the series, this would’ve at least ended the franchise on a decent note despite the film that it came from.

But now, let’s talk about the film’s alternate cut. Each of the first four Alien films has gotten a ‘Special Edition’ released over the years. But while the first two films didn’t add ‘that’ much to their Special Editions (though James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver have expressed preference towards the ‘Special Edition’ of Aliens for having more depth to it), the ‘Assembly Cut’ of Alien 3 adds in 30-plus minutes of material to try and improve upon the original theatrical cut. And for the most part, it does manage to do that. Some additions are welcome aesthetic changes, like having Ripley end up on the prison planet’s beach instead of being found in the crashed ship (which fixes a few plot-holes from the theatrical cut) and having the Alien emerge from an ox instead of a dog. But then there are some additions that improve the narrative, like a greater focus on the inmates’ religious beliefs and how Ripley’s arrival puts that into chaos, allowing for some additional character development for some of the main inmates. Crazed inmate Golic (Paul McGann), particularly, is focused on more in this version of the film as we see him become fascinated with the alien, so much so that he begins to compromise the protagonists’ efforts to destroy it. However, despite the improvements that it makes over the clearly truncated Theatrical Cut, I still can’t go as far as to say that it completely saves the film. Parts of it are still a chore to sit through, especially considering that the extended cut is almost two-and-a-half hours long. In conclusion, if you’re going to watch Alien 3, stick to the ‘Assembly Cut’ as it’s more in line with what Fincher was going for. Still, it isn’t enough to save the film, which will easily go down as one of the most hellish productions in film history, from being a mediocre conclusion to the Alien trilogy, a designation which lasted five years until…

Ratings: Theatrical Cut: 1.5/5 Assembly Cut: 2.5/5

ALIEN: RESURRECTION (1997)

Related image

While Alien 3 ended with the death of Ellen Ripley, the studio ended up reviving the franchise half a decade later with Alien: Resurrection. To bring back Sigourney Weaver, the plot involves scientists cloning Ripley, who gains ‘alien’ abilities due to her DNA being mixed with the Alien queen that was first introduced in Aliens. Like its predecessor, this film was primarily developed by a soon-to-be-famous filmmaker; in this case, the film’s writer, Joss Whedon, before he became known for his hit TV shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and way before The Avengers. And like with Fincher and Alien 3, the flaws of Resurrection are not primarily his fault. What we have here is a film that suffers from major tonal inconsistency. Whedon intended for the film to have a tongue-in-cheek feel to it; however, the film’s director, Jean-Pierre Jeunet (Amelie), decided to play everything straight-faced. Thus, the film maintains a ‘serious’ tone throughout despite various moments that are extremely over-the-top, especially those that involve Brad Dourif as one of the scientists in charge of the whole process. This over-the-top nature also extends to the cast. Sigourney Weaver is still just as great as she’s always been as Ripley but the rest of the cast is hit-and-miss because many are just hamming it up. And while the supporting characters are more memorable than the ones from Alien 3, they’re still a generally expendable group. Overall, Alien: Resurrection is more ‘enjoyable’ than Alien 3, partially because it doesn’t carry the same grim tone. However, the film’s tone is all over the place, resulting in unintentionally hilarious moments that were trying to be serious. Thus, what was intended to be a better conclusion to the series than its predecessor just made the whole situation worse.

Rating: 2/5

PROMETHEUS (2012)

Image result for prometheus poster

And finally, we conclude with the film that has become one of the most polarizing films in recent years; the pseudo-prequel to the Alien franchise, Prometheus. Ridley Scott returned to direct this film which, for the record, is not technically a prequel to the original Alien. It takes place in the same general universe as the other films but it is, ultimately, its own thing (e.g. this film does not take place on the same planet visited in the original Alien, despite the clear similarities). And to the film’s credit, it does a solid job of being its own separate story in this larger universe. Its overall plot, which delves into the mystery of humanity’s origins, is a fascinating one and I wouldn’t say that there’s a dull moment in the entire film. The production design is fantastic, particularly due to Scott emphasizing the use of as many practical effects as possible. And the film’s ensemble cast is solid as well, particularly Noomi Rapace as main protagonist Dr. Elizabeth Shaw, a much different kind of character compared to Ripley, Michael Fassbender as the enigmatic android David, and Idris Elba as the ship’s charismatic captain, Janek. But while the film is well-made on a technical level, its writing has been the main source of its polarizing response. Many have criticized the film for bringing up tons of questions that went unanswered. My thoughts on the matter? Well, I do agree that there are some plotlines that were only given vague explanations, like why the crew comes across a gigantic statue of a head during their mission. I think it’s safe to say that the ambition of the filmmakers might’ve surpassed what they could do in just one film. However, from the looks of it, Alien: Covenant will at least answer some of the unexplained mysteries that this film explored. And overall, I wasn’t too bothered by some of the more mysterious elements of the plot; I’d argue it makes the whole film more interesting. Thus, you can say that, overall, I’m still in the camp that likes this film. Admittedly, it may partially have to do with the fact that I have a personal connection to this film because it’s the first R-rated film I ever saw in theaters, but I do think that it’s still worth checking out if admittedly more for its technical aspects than the writing.

Rating: Way back in 2012, my first year on this blog, I had reviewed this film and gave it a 4.5/5 rating. Upon re-watch, I decided to lower that initial rating down to a 4/5 rating, which is still a strong rating on my scale.


"Final report of the commercial starship Nostromo, third officer reporting. The other members of the crew — Kane, Lambert, Parker, Brett, Ash and Captain Dallas — are dead. Cargo and ship destroyed. I should reach the frontier in about six weeks. With a little luck, the network will pick me up. This is Ripley, last survivor of the Nostromo, signing off."

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Terminator Franchise Retrospective


A new ‘Terminator’ film is on the horizon in the form of ‘Terminator: Genisys’… and yes, that spelling of the subtitle is intentional. And the fact that I had to highlight that should give you an idea of the general apprehension of most film fans in regards to this upcoming film and some of the creative choices that have been made for it. Personally I’m looking forward to the film as I am a fan of the franchise and contrary to public opinion, I don’t think it looks bad at all. I even like the idea of the film going back to the story of the first film but doing a new take on it through the creation of an alternate universe a la the new ‘Star Trek’ films. But at the same time, I do recognize that this definitely is one of those films that could go either way. But there was recently a video released where the series’ original creator James Cameron stated that he enjoyed the film, stating that it is “extremely respectful of the first two movies”. So if James Cameron, the same guy who hasn’t been involved with the franchise for years and was critical of both of the previous two ‘Terminator’ sequels, says that this new film is good, then I think it’ll at least be solid and not the ‘disaster’ that most film fans on the internet are predicting it to be. Perhaps one of the reasons for this unease towards the film is the fact that the ‘Terminator’ franchise is one of those film franchises that has arguably gone on for longer than it needed to be.

It all started back in the early 80’s before James Cameron was known as the director of the two highest-grossing films of all time, ‘Titanic’ and ‘Avatar’. Back then, his only major directing credit was for the 1981 B-movie ‘Piranha II: The Spawning’. Heck, he wasn’t even the original director of the film… and he was even fired by the producer just a few weeks into the shoot. But if there was anything good that came out of working on that film for Cameron, it is that during the film’s release, he had a nightmare about being chased by a metallic endoskeleton. This led him to develop the story of ‘The Terminator’, which was released in 1984. Produced for just $6.4 million, the film went on to become one of the most iconic sci-fi films of all time, followed by an equally successful and beloved sequel in 1991. The sequel ended up tying up all loose ends, resulting in what would’ve been a proper ending to the series… that is, until Hollywood decided to bring the franchise back, which it did in 2003 by retconning the ending of the second film so that the franchise could continue, hence why we are here today with the newest film set to come out in a few days. So today, in honor of the upcoming release, it’s time to look back upon the last four ‘Terminator’ films, the two from Cameron and the two that were produced without his input.

THE TERMINATOR (1984)


While all three of its sequels are firmly rooted in the sci-fi action genre, the first ‘Terminator’ actually goes down a different route. After all, as noted earlier, part of Cameron’s inspiration for the film basically came from a nightmare he had so as a result, the original ‘Terminator’ film is sort of a sci-fi horror film with its premise of a young woman named Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) being chased by an unstoppable human-looking cyborg known as the Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) with only Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn), a soldier from the future, to protect her so that she can give birth to the future leader of the resistance, John Connor. This terrifying premise is executed perfectly not only in the writing but also through the film’s noir-like style with its darker-lit environments. All in all, this is one low-budget sci-fi film that uses its low-budget status to great effect. Arnold Schwarzenegger is perfectly cast in what would become the most iconic role of his career and both Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn do excellent jobs as well. All in all, what James Cameron has since referred to as his ‘first film’ (not ‘Piranha II’) still stands as one of the absolute best films of the sci-fi genre, and it did it all with a minimal budget.

Rating: 5/5!

TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY (1991)


It’s rare when you have a sequel that’s not only as good as the original film, but is arguably the better film. Don’t get me wrong… the first ‘Terminator’ is still a fantastic film, no doubt about that. But at the end of the day, I do prefer the second film, which is much more action-based compared to the horror-like premise of the first film. ‘Judgement Day’ is basically the first film but with a budget that allows Cameron to go all out with the action sequences and effects. As such, the film’s action sequences are excellent and the visuals are quite impressive for the time as the film ended up being one of the pioneers of the use of CGI alongside films like ‘Jurassic Park’. But what really makes ‘Terminator 2’ stand out more so than its action and visuals is Cameron’s exceptional writing which adds plenty of layers to both the story and the characters. Cameron perfectly captures the paranoia of the impending doomsday, Judgement Day, through the eyes of the main characters; Sarah in how much she has changed since her first encounter with a Terminator and her drive to stop Judgement Day from happening, John in coming to terms with his destiny while facing the same situation his mother endured before (except in this case Robert Patrick’s T-1000 is arguably an even more intimidating antagonist than Arnold’s T-800 due to his more ‘unsuspecting’ nature), and so on. But amidst all of that, the film still manages to find moments of levity, namely through the father-son relationship between John and the T-800 that was programmed to protect him. And that is ultimately why ‘Terminator 2: Judgement Day’ is not only one of the best sequels of all time, but quite frankly also one of the best films of all time as it perfectly balances its action with its storytelling to produce a true cinematic masterpiece.

Rating: 5/5!

TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES (2003)


‘Terminator 2’ ended on a pretty conclusive note. The Connors, with the help of the T-800, destroyed all traces of Skynet so that Judgement Day could be prevented. There was absolutely no way that the series could continue on after that, right? Well, Hollywood found a way, hence why in 2003, without any involvement whatsoever from James Cameron, ‘Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’ was released. It pulled a major retcon by establishing that the Connors’ efforts in ‘Terminator 2’ only postponed the inevitable doomsday. So with that in mind, you can probably tell that this film is obviously not as well-liked by fans as much as the first two films. But you know what? I actually think this film isn’t that bad; in fact, I’d say it’s quite underrated. Now again, let me be clear. This is easily one of the most unnecessary sequels of all-time. There was no need to continue this franchise after ‘Terminator 2’ because that film tied up pretty much every major loose end and this film instead goes against that by saying that no, that didn’t stop Judgement Day from happening… that and the film does not feature Sarah Connor, killing her off instead prior to the events of the film. This film also re-hashes the same plotline of the previous film (and technically speaking the first as well minus the fact that Kyle Reese was not a Terminator) of a Terminator being sent back in time to kill John Connor and a Guardian Terminator sent back as well to protect him.

But despite all of that, the film itself is still a pretty darn solid sci-fi action flick. The action sequences are still really solid, especially the highway chase where the Terminator crashes through buildings hanging onto a big hook. The humor is emphasized a bit more in this entry than the previous film but I didn’t mind that too much. Yes, I thought the scenes where the Terminator puts on silly glasses and tells a convenience store clerk to ‘talk to the hand’ were actually pretty funny moments. Of course, the return of Arnold Schwarzenegger to his iconic role of the Terminator is very much welcome. I’d also argue that Nick Stahl has been the best John Connor out of all of the actors who have been in the role so far. Sure he spends most of the film looking/acting depressed as hell but I think that actually works well with the character at this point in his life, forced to stay off the grid and haunted by the destiny that awaits him after Judgement Day. So at the end of the day, I actually really liked ‘Terminator 3’. Did it need to be made? No. In being made, did it go against the excellent ending of ‘Terminator 2’ with a shameless retcon that was the only way the series could even continue? Yes. But is it a ‘bad’ film? No, not at all. It is by no means the best entry of the series but it is still pretty darn entertaining and by no means as ‘terrible’ as some on the internet may put it out to be.

Rating: 4/5

TERMINATOR SALVATION (2009)


On a positive note, ‘Terminator Salvation’ is the first entry in the series that actually takes place during the future and does not rehash the same ‘Terminator hunting the Connors’ plotline of the first three films. But the downside? It’s easily the weakest of the first four ‘Terminator’ films. Ultimately this is one of those cases of ‘style over substance’. Director McG, to his credit, does a solid job with the action sequences even under that pesky PG-13 rating that drew red flags amongst hardcore fans even though it’s really not that big of a deal. But the writing on the other hand… is pretty darn weak. The overall story is fairly dull and despite being a ‘Terminator’ film, John Connor actually isn’t even the main character of the film. And while Christian Bale may be one of the best actors working today, the most memorable thing about his turn here in ‘Terminator’ was his infamous rant at cinematographer Shane Hurlbut and that’s about it. Instead, the main character of the film is Marcus Wright, a death row inmate who discovers that he has been turned into a ‘Terminator’. It may just be because Christian Bale’s turn as John Connor didn’t turn out so good, but Sam Worthington is actually one of the bright spots of the film as what is ultimately the more interesting character. Another major standout of the cast is Anton Yelchin as young Kyle Reese, as Yelchin does a great job in capturing the mannerisms of the character as portrayed by Michael Biehn in the original film. ‘Terminator Salvation’ is by no means a ‘terrible’ film but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily ‘great’ either. McG tried his best but lacked the good writing of the first two films. Ultimately though, ‘Terminator Salvation’ is a decent popcorn flick.


Rating: 2.5/5