Alien Franchise (1979-?)

[Finch]

At least they're now offering all the features from the original releases on top of the stuff from the last set. The deleted footage from the Alien 3 Making Of is also long overdue. Still, I'd only really want the first film (and maybe the third), so I'm going to wait for the individual releases, too.

[perkizitore]

Maybe the individual releases will miss some of the extras, we will have to wait and see.

[matrixschmatrix]

Man, why does everyone hate Alien Resurrection so much? It doesn't really work as part of a franchise, but it's a really lose franchise with a totally different feel to every single movie- and Resurrection is pretty fun as a Joss Whedon/Jeunet overlap.

[colinr0380]

For me it was the flippant, jokey tone to much of the early carnage creating an overly casual attitude to much of the horror - much in the style of Delicatessen and City of Lost Children (where the same 'grim fairy tale' tone is much more appropriate and works wonderfully) but feeling slightly off kilter here as an addition to an ongoing more purely horror-toned series, despite the presence of Dominique Pinon and Ron Perlman to help try to push it more into Jeunet-world.

There are some outstanding moments in there - Ripley confronting all her failed clones is much celebrated (albeit a totally diversionary sequence that feels bolted onto the film at an arbitrary point more to just make a change from the repeated routine of minor characters going off on their own and getting picked off by the aliens) but I like the first confrontation between Ripley and Call in the cell just as much, and of course the underwater sequence that moves into the egg chamber before the survivors are confronted by the locked door is quite nicely paced in its non-stop escalation of action. Weaver is most definitely the best aspect as the ambivalent heroine of the film, and at least makes it interesting to watch, but I can't help but feel whiplashed by the change in tone from the overly bleak Fincher film to this mostly whisper thin on plot, yet overly embellished in design, one.

Maybe this was intentional in order to make the film itself feel like a detached clone of elements and motifs from the previous films, all surface and no depth, as much as the newly cloned Ripley is mostly just standing back and watching the horror without feeling too much solidarity with the other human characters any more (at the same time as finally seeming to come to terms with her long evolving relationship with artificial humans).

Yet whenever I start to feel charitable to the film I remember the way that the ending was radically changed and the (albeit self deprecating) comment that Jeunet made on the commentary track to Amelie that, not knowing any English at the time, he concentrated more on the (overdone) visuals than on the cliched script of Resurrection. It kind of shows!

[Roger Ryan]

Exactly.

Jeunet was making a "Grand Guignol" send-up complete with mad scientist, but it was not a loving one; his contempt for the subject matter seemed obvious. There were good scenes (love Ripley's discovery of the failed clones), but every time I felt an interesting moral/philosophical subtext was being developed, Jeunet would lay on something cute or distracting (the dispatch of Dan Heydaya's character was especially irksome).

[matrixschmatrix]

That's fair, and to some degree it gels with my view of the movie- the expectations set up by the Alien series don't work at all in Resurrection's favor, and at best it's something of an entertaining series of parts more than a whole.

I've started feeling that the same could be said of most of Jeunet's work, and I'm comfortable with that- I really enjoyed Micmacs, but Micmacs is essentially Mousetrap the movie and not anything with a huge amount of meaning. So- Resurrection fits nicely into Jeunet's body of work. I didn't feel like he was contemptuous of the material, but it's clear he's not taking it overly seriously. How could anyone, when the premise of the movie is founded on calling do-over on the heroine's death?

As far as the Alien series itself goes, it's just sort of interesting how hard it is to go from movie to movie without setting up tonal expectations, which are never ever fulfilled- people didn't complain much from Alien to Aliens, but Aliens is a very Cameron-ey militarist clichefest that is also a lot of fun, totally unlike the restrained and elegant Scott movie. And then, of course, Fincher killed off 2/3rds of the survivors before the credits rolled and made Alien 3 into something that would seem more appropriate in a Pitch Black prequel than an Alien sequel.

So, basically- how could Jeunet conceivably not have given the viewer tonal whiplash?

[colinr0380]

I suppose you are right - I like the idea of shifting tones and different directorial voices being brought to an ongoing series (much like on a lower ambition level the Mission: Impossible series, where I had real trouble with John Woo's contribution for a long time, feeling it both empty and far too long winded, until I actually found myself enjoying a lot on a recent re-viewing when I could anticipate and enjoy the longeurs more), and certainly think Resurrection has interesting elements. However those interesting parts can't mask the deep flaws for me, while Alien³ while bleak (probably the only Hollywood film to feature a lingering child autopsy?) and flawed in its own way (the break down near the end into interchangable bald people being chased through identical industrial corridors) hung together more as a satisfying dramatic story.

Again though this might be because Ripley is still taking an active part in the story in the Fincher film, whereas in the Jeunet she has really no connection to or motivating drive behind any actions she performs (except maybe an inbuilt survival instinct and trace memory of her fights with the aliens to motivate), which is part of what makes the film feel so strange and off kilter. The film touches on her ambivalence between the intermingled human and alien sides, but this too seems to resolve itself in the much criticised 'newborn' sequence which threatens to turn this grand epic saga into little more than a spat between two half-siblings while the other characters can only try to get out of harm's way - in a strange sense anticipating the 'Vs' films which follow.

Ending the film with the escape ship crashing onto the desolate far-far-future Earth would have either highlighted this theme or compounded the flaws, but as it stands now I find the ending superficially triumphant yet somehow lacking and slightly hollow with many of the interesting issues that were raised left unsatisfyingly unresolved.

But compared to the Alien Vs Predator films it at least has a distinctive voice and style, even if it is not one which I personally found worked particularly well! (Though I have a theory that Paul W.S. Anderson is very savvy in creating films that knock-off well worn themes in a slick, easily digestible and quickly forgettable 'fast food' manner, then handing these franchises over to other directors who make his earlier films look better by comparison! Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem, the Mortal Kombat sequel and the second and third Resident Evil films being cases in point. But that's a whole different subject!)

[flyonthewall2983]

Full specs and box art for the six-disc Blu-ray set are up at IGN. It is due October 25 in the U.K., October 26 in the U.S., and November 3 in Australia. U.S. MSRP is listed as $139.99, but I'm not sure if that is for the standard edition or the one with the big plastic alien thing. I'm not even going to bother posting all the specs here. Suffice it to say that there are two cuts of each film, audio commentaries for each, isolated scores for each, and two discs worth of additional supplements. It looks like just about everything from previous DVD and laserdisc sets is included.

I may wait until the first two films are available separately, but I've got to give Fox an 'A' for effort.

The standard set is listed at 97.99 at Amazon. I gotta say I am glad that this release is as comprehensive as it is when it comes to extras. It gives Fox no excuse to rehash another set with more features somewhere down the road. At least I hope it does.

[perkizitore]

I am glad that they started releasing upgrades in HD only (i am sure some fans that haven't made the jump to blu-ray, would grab this only for the extras).

[Roger Ryan]

I didn't feel like he was contemptuous of the material, but it's clear he's not taking it overly seriously.

"Contempt" was probably too strong a word, so I think your assessment is more accurate. The film betrayed a certain amount of disinterest on Jeunet's part that I don't find in his other projects. He clearly loved AMELIE and, while his other films may lack a certain depth, there is a joy in the creation that Jeunet displays almost every time out. RESURRECTION doesn't have this and, like Lynch trying to wrestle with DUNE, I think Jeunet was simply the wrong director for the film.

Fincher, of course, disowns ALIEN 3 and yet I find the alternate "work print" to be a substantially better film than the theatrical release. I also think ALIEN 3 is more in line with Scott's first entry in the franchise and really wraps up the initial "trilogy" quite well. While it is common to acknowledge Cameron's "director's cut" as superior, I prefer the extended/altered cuts of all four films over their original versions (although not Jeunet's alternate opening credit sequence!).

[Finch]

I prefer the extended/altered cuts of all four films over their original versions (although not Jeunet's alternate opening credit sequence!).

Even of the first one? I saw the "Director's Cut" at the cinema and absolutely wasn't convinced by the argument that it flows better or enhances the experience. If anything, I felt the opposite on both counts: it seemed longer despite being a minute shorter than the original cut, and the additions did not in my opinion add up to anything worthwhile. The one exception would be the discovery of Dallas but the problem with that scene is that it hurts the momentum of the portion within the final third where Ripley escapes from the Nostromo.

Still not seen the workprint of Alien 3. I find the theatrical cut deeply flawed but fascinating (and personally much preferable to Cameron's overly testoterone-driven shoot em up) and with a handful of the series' best scenes in it. I'd like to hear from someone who was lukewarm on Alien 3's theatrical cut and seen the workprint if they thought it raised the film to another level.

[perkizitore]

I am wondering when they will announce the reboot of the series...

[Matt]

I am wondering when they will announce the reboot of the series...

I predict they will announce it last year.

[perkizitore]

I swear i've seen this somewhere before, but i forgot about it...

[Roger Ryan]

I'd like to hear from someone who was lukewarm on Alien 3's theatrical cut and seen the workprint if they thought it raised the film to another level.

Well, that would be me. I did see the theatrical version of ALIEN 3 first and was disappointed with what appeared to be lapses in continuity and illogical ideas.

SpoilerShow

I especially disliked the Queen alien bursting out of Ripley as she fell.

I was definitely lukewarm on it.

The work print is about 35 minutes longer, but is quite different altogether. The opening 10 minute set-up is completely altered and much better for the changes. Also, the alien is birthed in a completely different (and more) logical manner than in the theatrical version. A huge set piece in the middle of the film (excised for the theatrical version) clears up a lot of continuity problems (and it's a great, exciting scene - no idea why it would be cut). In a number of instances, the cutting within existing scenes is different and improved, making a couple of alien attacks more suspenseful and frightening (a bit rushed in the theatrical version). The work print isn't able to salvage much of the "anonymous bald guys running around" climax, but at least you feel like you know these guys a bit better.

And yes, I do prefer the "altered" cut of ALIEN to the original, although I recognize that there is little difference between the two. I can understand the idea that the scene where Ripley finds Dallas slows down the climax, but to me it provides a sense of closure between Ripley and the crew and suggests the creature is planning something more horrifying than simply slaughtering everyone. I'm also happy that Scott decided to eliminate an earlier scene where Dallas is repeatedly told "Does Not Compute" by the ship's computer - something I now find pretty hackneyed.

[Finch]

RR, your breakdown of the workprint changes and additions really makes me eager to see it. Given that I was more fascinated than enthused by the theatrical cut, would you recommend a blind-buy of the surely forthcoming (mid-2011 perhaps?) individual re-release? Does it turn Alien 3 into a genuinely good film in your opinion? The only thing from the workprint I can see working against it, is the queen not bursting from Ripley's chest as she falls into the furnace. That should have been kept or inserted.

Interesting take on the Dallas scene. I like it a lot as such but certainly on the single viewing of the Director's Cut, it really struck me as a pace killer.

[Roger Ryan]

I definitely feel the work print version of ALIEN 3 is a better film than the theatrical release. Whether it is a genuinely good film probably depends on how much you like the tone. I was okay with how dark Fincher made this sequel and found the characters interesting (another reason I dislike RESURRECTION is lack of empathy for that bunch of action-movie stereotypes - ALIENS sidesteps this problem somewhat in that Bill Paxton gives a hilarious comic performance). The work print serves the characters better, really enriching Charles Dance's "Clemens" the most, and presents a better-structured film.

The good news is that the "work print" doesn't look like a work print, but a polished finished release with special effects in place, etc. I found the "Queen bursting" moment to be too over-the-top in the theatrical cut, so I'm happier with the subtler treatment in the work print (note: you can switch to the theatrical cut at this point if you'd like - the remaining couple of minutes are the same in both versions).

Ultimately, I would recommend renting it before buying if that's an option. It is fascinating to compare the two versions since there are major differences between them, unlike many "Director's Cut" releases where the changes are negligible.

[mfunk9786]

The UK box is so much cheaper than the U.S. one - does anyone know offhand how Fox tends to handle their international Blu-ray releases re: region coding?

[perkizitore]

Disney and Fox are notorious for region locking their releases.

[Finch]

RR thanks very much for your input, very interesting and helpful to read. I'm going to try and rent the old Quadrilogy disc first but the workprint sounds like much more than just a curiosity. I liked the bleak tone of the film but did find the characters underdeveloped, except for Dance's doctor. So the workprint may just be up my alley. When you say that one can switch to the theatrical cut at desired points, did the Quadrilogy release have seamless branching then?

Our chat also compelled me to check out the film's Wikipedia entry and the description of Vincent Ward's take on the project sounds so wonderful that it pains me somewhat to never be able to see this.

[Roger Ryan]

When you say that one can switch to the theatrical cut at desired points, did the Quadrilogy release have seamless branching then?

Yep, seamless branching for all four films on the Quadrilogy set; really well-done. My only complaint is that Cameron decided that ALIENS didn't need a remastering job so that film has a poorer transfer than the others. A real shame: ALIEN, ALIEN 3 and RESURRECTION are crisp, clean and rich whereas ALIENS has the wobbly, blurry, slightly washed-out look of a late 90s DVD (a state-of-the-art late 90s DVD, mind you, but it should have looked much stronger).

[oldsheperd]

The set is only 97 bucks at Amazon. I'd say that's pretty reasonable.

[perkizitore]

Not really, since the UK set costs only $70.

[mfunk9786]

And for four films in this day and age, even on Blu-ray - both of those prices are startlingly steep.

[perkizitore]

In a few months after release, the UK set will be sold for 18£-25£.