But who WAS Lovecraft? What prompted him to write his works? And how can we tie his life up with that of Arthur Machen for the deleted scenes in the Blu-Ray extras?
I saw Alien on first release in 1979. I was 22. I spent my teenage years ploughing through my dad's collection of Astounding Science Fiction mags from the 50s. That period, just before the space age, saw a huge outpouring of ideas and plots for science fiction. So I had a pretty good grounding in the genre. I never thought of Alien as a science fiction movie. The plot, what there was of it, didn't really need to be set on a spaceship in the future. It could have been a crazy lion on a ship. Alien is a fantastic, visceral journey. On first watch I felt relieved that it was over. And I absolutely "got it" as a film about an unfortunate but not entirely accidental encounter between humans and a highly intelligent parasite. The back story was the corporate intention to bring the parasite to Earth and study it. Aliens developed that back story and, to a certain extent, so did Alien 3. Since then the "franchise" has thrashed around and has now mutated towards a grand vision about origin of species. Later films are trying to tell a story. There was no story in Alien. I think that's why so many people love it. Like Ash, we admire its purity. And I think there's a delicious irony. If the original plot pointed at big business exploiting that primordial 1979 alien for its own ends that is exactly what is playing out. It's just that it's the film industry doing the exploitation rather than Weyland Yutani.
They did the same with Hellraiser. You open the box, they come and "tear your soul apart" even if you open the box unwittingly. In 2 they give pinhead a backstory and make him human, which utterly destroys the menace of the cenobites.
That's what I liked about Aliens so much; James Cameron approached it from a different angle, but with respect to the source material. It felt like an organic transition and was, story wise at least, a continuation of the Ripley narrative. Alien 3, which I enjoyed more than many, again didn't drift too far from the narrative established up to this point but, for me, didn't have the same cinematic impact as the first two. And whilst I have enjoyed every other Alien film since, I do find myself shaking my head sometimes at the artistic license that has caused the franchise to drift away from what made the first two films so good: the enigma that surrounds the parasite and our relationship with it.
What I thought made Alien scary was that the monster was a perfect killing machine waiting to kill again. It's kind of existential in a way; a biological machine that will kill you because it exists and because you exist. The engineers in Prometheus removed this nihilistic terror, because it introduces a reason and creators.
What irks me is that everybody who reviews, writes or talks about the "new" "alien" movies, always goes on about answearing questions. Prometheus was supposed to answer questions, did it answear questions or didn't it, are we left with questions, and now covenant: questions, questions, questions. But the truth is. There were no questions. There were speculations, hints, guesses, but nobody actually had questions that needed to be answered. There are no questions. I keep hearing this "it will answear questions, it will finally answear all the questions". I had no questions, and I'd rather they didn't force themselves to answear any.
I presume Collins also gave Alien a five star review which implies he regards both as 'essentially' flawless or perfect films. If anyone can argue why Alien Covenant IS a flawless or perfect film, I'd love to hear it...
StrokeMeYouInsolentHumanCuzIAmACat Exactly! The most depressing thing about Covenant was that the Alien wasn't scary. It was secondary, an afterthought, a byproduct, a waste...
The mystery of the all the different things in the original Alien was great. Why you'd want to explain that is beyond me. As soon as you reveal everything behind the mysteries of your universe your universe becomes boring. There's no longer any room for speculation from the fans. It has been explained and can now be forgotten.
"I admire its purity" - said android Ash. Perfectly fits with my feeling about original Scott's Alien. I can't say that about Redley's prequels. He is like George Lucas now, only with better artistic eye.
Deckard, Ford's character, was confirmed to be a replicant in both the series of books and by Ridley Scott. The question is whether he is a Nexus 6 without a date predetermined for his death or not.
You know you're going to be disappointed Mark. As long as Covenant makes money, there'll be more exposition, more back story, less and less mystery until the films come to resemble Open University lectures.
I find it bizarre the logical leaps I've seen from a lot of hardcore Alien fans, to criticise Covenant for providing backstory and breaking the illusion and mystery of the Alien... who then by turns handwave away criticism of Aliens and ignore the problems with the various sequels and spin-offs. The problem with Alien is that for anyone not old enough to have seen Alien in the cinema, there is no such thing as the "pure untainted Alien mystery" I grew up in the 80s and first saw Alien in the early 90s AFTER having seen Aliens, (because Aliens was shown on TV all the time and Alien wasn't) But more than that, I also grew up reading Alien, Aliens & AvPs comics, novels, and later even videogames. There have been umpteen origins for the alien creature in the surrounding universe, and while that's unknown to most people, it's also true that to most people, the origin doesn't diminish the horror of the creature. The alien may have been coaxed into creation, from a black WMD goo created by the Engineers, by David, but the unstoppable virus-like spread of the alien is unchanged. If anything Covenant sees a welcome return of the hellishly powerful Alien, nigh on unstoppable, and not the cannon-fodder of Cameron, or the comedy camp of Jeunet. It's a flawed film, but actually, it's not a bad one.
Backstory always takes the unknown element away. The part you fill with your imagination. I remember when Christopher Nolan was doing press for The Dark Knight and he spoke of Michael Mann's Manhunter as a touchstone for creating the deliberate ambiguity surrounding the Joker, with no apparent origin. In Manhunter, Lektor is just sat there in the cell with little detail of who he is or what he's done. But utterly terrifying - "Would you like to leave you home phone number?". The Joker in The Dark Knight was the same, ripping through the film with no explanation. Like the shark in Jaws, or the Alien. Backstory totally dilutes horror.
Nailed my issues with both Prometheus and, especially, Covenant. Both are so very unnecessary, both are so pretentious because they're trying to make this backstory seem so grandiose and important, when it's ultimately just hollow shlock about a pretentious android who's gone off the deep end because it has daddy issues. If David ends up being the Space Jockey in the original Alien, I'm going to be very upset.
Mabye they will do a special re-release and add in David to the original alien. have him hiding under tables and around corners from the main events :L
I mean this is the very definition of retconning, if David the orginal space jockey in Alien, it makes no sense, i know we're talking hypothetically here, but that would negate all that we know and what the movie tells us. That thing was fossilizied, meaning it was sure as hell older than a few years. Then we kinda know that facehuggers avoid androids, probably because they are not viable hosts; sooo i don't know man, this is starting to be more and more dissapointing. I was always curious about the space jockeys and what role they have in all of this, but after Prometheus and Alien Covenant, i wish we didn't find out....
But Prometheus was created to exist within the alien universe but to actually move away from the alien series in its own direction. The themes (in my opinion) were interesting and fresh, despite it's flaws. The set up for the sequel was all there and we didn't need any more Xenomorphs but unfortunately Scott decided to bow to studio and fan pressure and make an ''Alien' film after Prometheus was bashed. The result is a film that kind of buries both parts of the franchise and I'm disappointed because I wanted to see Shaw's journey and to see the engineers motives for creating and destroying life.
Paul Dennett, this is why prequels fail. They always change the given original source material. Anyone who has watched Alien will know that the "space Jockey" is not wearing a mask as his open mouth is clearly visible below the tube.
I get the impression that Ridley is making it up as he goes along but he did tease during Prometheus interviews that the engineers are themselves the creations of another being/god. I doubt he'll go down this avenue though it would be cool if that guy in the chair is something new.
I largely agree, save for a very key point; Alien was *not* just an accidental meeting of species. After interrogating Ash the remaining crew discover that the Nostromo was rerouted to LV426 specifically to return the lifeform for study. Now you can argue that the backstory writes itself and that the compelling nature of WHY this was important was best left to the imagination of the viewer, in which case the prequel films are indeed needless. But there was an impetus. There was a reason the crew landed on the planet.
I agree with you here. what stood out most with this film, and to me demonstrating your points, was the chest-burster scene in the Alien temple. It began with Billy Crudups character taking leave of his scenes, with the eventual emergence of the little alien from his chest. leaving the camera lingering on the wee CGI Alien as it stood there looking fairly cute for waaaay too long. it actually had a few people in the theater laughing. the whole scene became fairly comedic, but without the charm of Aliens. people were laughing at the film not with it. I think this scene made it clear to me the filmmakers were caught up in the amazing design of the alien and wanting to show it off at any cost to story/tone or setting. i also thought the CGI coupled with long drawn out shots of it rendered it a relatively be-nine a threat. it never felt like it had weight or presence to me when it was on-screen. it was frustrating as it stood out in sharp contrast to the fairly awesome sets and locations in the film. The absolute lack of mystery in terms of the story was a bit irritating as well. every twist and turn was so painfully obvious from the get-go, and i think it felt a bit like the story was just there to get the alien on-screen. i mean as soon as they introduced Walter who honestly didn't know what was going to happen? Mabye the next film will jump the shark entirely and have a baby Ripley being saved by her parents or making friends with a baby groot style alien!
Tbf Alien has the whole sub plot with Ash that makes it quite clear it's not a random intersection of species but rather the crew were deliberately sent to encounter the lifeform.
Prometheus was flawed but very underrated and for all it's faults it tried something new and had interesting ideas. Alien covenant is an artistic compromise to a hyper critical internet culture that savaged Prometheus. Fanboys got their xenos back....and it's more diminished than ever.
I enjoyed Prometheus a lot more on repeated watches. A director's cut with the missing scenes could help it further. As Mark Kermode said, it's scale and ideas were it's best feature.
Agreed, and I think Covenant is falling victim to the same thing, in a different way. There's such hypersensitivity to *any* backstory whatsoever that I think people are projecting things onto it that aren't actually there. *spoilers ahead, obviously* Prometheus has it that the Space Jockey was actually an Engineer, who have a black goo that mutates anything it touches in weird ways. At the end, through a complicated chain of events that goo produces a kind of proto-alien. Covenant has it that David took that goo, experimented with it a lot and refined it into something that results in the big aliens from later movies. So there's an extra level of outside interference that wasn't there before. But the basic idea of a mysterious alien parasite that feeds on whatever touches hasn't really changed, and it doesn't really explain as much as people seem to think.
I would agree with you that it's action sequences are really hampered by bad editing but there are lots of points that I thought were very cool and fresh. Visually, things like the yellow cryosleep pads, the dream VR hook up, the rubix cube type holograms, Fifields 'pups', the giant head sculpture, the flute and weird egg buttons in the engineer ship were all very striking to me and seemed very fresh and 'alien'. It felt just so different in tone and colour to anything in the series before (notice the lushness of some of the colours and you'll see it really contrasts with the heaviness of Alien and Aliens) There's a feeling of wonder at exploration and even hope at times but that soon disappears. The opening introduction to David is just one of my favourite scenes in the whole Alien series (Chopin's Raindrop prelude playing over him moving about the ship and watching Lawrence of Arabia). There's a strangeness and ambiguity about him and I liked a lot of his dialogue in the film. The original 'Engineer speaks' scene is for me one of the best parts of the film in it's uncut form but was botched by editing. The dialogue, I think, is great in that scene and I liked the visual of the engineer hopping into the drivers seat. All in all I felt it was a very flawed but ambitious film that I'm quite fond of. A Director's cut inserting a few scenes would help it further.
Agreed 100% was very disappointed when I watched Covenant the other day to find out that it really wasn't a Prometheus sequel. I think Prometheus had a really exciting ending and one really wanted to see what happens to Shaw and David but that got reduced to a 2 minute flashback in the movie, instead of being the movie. Really sad that we got an alien movie that doesn't really explore any new ideas instead of a true Prometheus sequel.
In a sci-fi context, the backstory for the Alien as furnished by A:Cov is totally sensible. The alien works by horizontal gene transfer - the same reason some bacteria can do similar things to our cells, and vice versa, is because we share 90 % or more of the same genes *a priori* and the genetic mechanisms (DNA, RNA, enzymes, etc) are the same. In a horror context the backstory still works, even if it owes a little too much to other RS universes (particularly Bladerunner) with inherent warnings about the future dangers of AI. David is more than a little bit creepy, isn't he? Like Frankenstein and Norman Bates rolled up into one.
For those who don't want the original Alien ruined (and I don't think this ruins it anymore than the original Pride and Prejudice is sullied for all time by someone's inane decision to add zombies after-the-fact), it would just behoove them to watch the movies in the same order in which they were made. (Skipping, of course, the execrable AvP series).
I'm really ambivalent about the prequels. The Alien fanboy in me says "WOOOO!!!! Another Alien movie! Awesome!!!". But the movie buff in me says "You've just killed Alien"
kermode once again spot on with his pin point analysis. just like midiclorians, when the force was mystic woowoo it worked. once you explain it you make it mundane or weak like a magicians trick. I like the demons in HP Lovecraft stories. They're scary because they don't spare much thought about us, we're insignificant in their grand schemes. When aliens considered us food and hosts and nothing more that was scary and more so because we recognised those attributes in ourselves and our regard for other animals.
Philip Gilfoy Midichlorians are not The Force. It's one of the most misunderstood observations in all of Star Wars. And it was specifically explained that they weren't The Force in the film.
Wait what? It wasn't a random encounter at all, the backstory was already established in the first movie. The ship was send there on companies orders to bring back the species without the crew's knowledge, they replaced the ship's doctor with a robot, crew was expendable. That underlying plot gave the movie extra depth instead of undermining the scarieness, that's not the reason why Covenant is less scary, there are many other obvious reasons imo
For me, covenant clarified that the Prometheus movies are ultimately going to be about David attaining godhood, not the connections to the alien movies. If I'm right, they will wind up being a spinoff series that can be it's own entity separate from the alien movies and the originals will still stand on their own. Many would ask, "then why isn't this a new franchise?" That's just the time we live in, everything needs to be shared universe and driven by continuity. It's not necessarily a good thing but as a lover of the series I'm more than happy to spend more time in this universe, especially with ridley Scott. I really really doubt that this is all going to end with a cgi 25 year old Sigourney weaver or some phoned in scene, "and that's how the eggs got on LV-426" as you've implied. I interpreted the scenes with david and the eggs to simply show that the eggs are the ultimate product of the black goo, not necessarily that David created the specific eggs shown in the original alien. The xenomorph was shown in the end of Prometheus, as well as on a mural on the wall so the alien as shown in Alien 1 definitely doesn't have to derive from David. Also, I believe the planet in Prometheus was a neighboring planet to the one in the original alien so why would david go back to that dead galaxy anyway? Ridley may have story problems but he's not that dumb.
As with many others, I'm a massive Alien fanboy of many many years and I can honestly say that I didn't desire the prequels in any way shape or form. The discovery of the aeons old derelict with the Giger creepy mysterious weirdness within was enough for me and will always be the case. But money will always win over art every time.
I don't think David's Xenomorphs are connected to the original Xenomorphs in the original film. The "space jockey" in the original was killed a long time ago and not less than 12 from David's time. I think the Engineers originally created the xenomorphs millennia ago. David had 10 years access to a builder ship. He could have discovered how they were originally created on the ship database and created his own version for his own reasons.
Bleak, Darwinian, psycho-sexual nihilism is the fundamental subtext of Alien. I agree that to interfere with that is to undermine the experience of the original.
I understand the enjoyment of the simplicity of alien as you describe mark but for me I'm ok with different kinds of stories. I'm 39 I saw alien and aliens when I was about 14 and then I bought the comics which were epic. Many stories. Of which the producers of later films seamed to completely ignore. Aliens genocide for instance was beautiful. Film right there out of 4 comics. I did jump a couple of times in covenant. I thought the obvious David playing Walter was ridiculous. Ridley could have made that a surprise. There were many alien stories Ridley could have told but which one did you want him to tell mark??
Went to see it thought it was ok then went back for a second viewing and came out hating it! I guess I was just happy to see the xenomorphs the first time round
I cannot agree more. I am tired of sequels trying to 'improve' on the original by adding or changing the back story. I am really worried about Blade Runner 2049 being that Blade Runner is probably my favorite film. However, here is the problem, if Alien squeals (and films like it) were not developed in some way we would complain we were just getting the same old thing. I think the lesson is, despite our need for more of the same, we should just be happy with what we first got. AND LEAVE IT AT THAT.
there's a problem with your statement Mr Kermode in that in the original movie there's a conversation between Ripley and the recently disassembled ash that basically say that not only was capturing the creature the whole point of their journey but also the reason for him being on the ship so Weyland Corp obviously did know about the creature
The obvious issue with the Alien prequels is that they both come across as a spec script that had been sat at the bottom of a drawer for a couple of years until the day somebody just added a couple of references to the alien, space jockey and Weyland-Yutani corporation and said "Boom! There's your new Alien movie!" - which immediately reminds me of the first Resident Evil film, which felt like a spec script for some generic zombie film with a couple of references chucked in to make it a Resident Evil film.
First film: space is big and scary prequels: space is really small, full of coincidences and all the scary or technological stuff was made by us or our godly ancestors anyway.
Mate you're forgetting that Alien elludes to a backstory. They stop at the distress signal and the command given to the science officer is to secure the life form, crew expendable. This means that Weyland-Yutani knew the Alien existed and sent them there on purpose. How did they know the Alien existed? Well, maybe some colonists ran into one before...
yeh AFTER finding it...I totally agree with kermode, why not just an alien, that evolved, like tons of creatures on earth did from which it is based but scaled up to 8 feet tall. Got on some ancient ship that had crashed millenia ago... there! We've already has ripley revived 3 times already, and now this prequal bs?
I guess you can interpret it both ways, but the fact that Ash was transferred days before launch and had a secret mission which included the phrase 'crew expendable'... Seems more likely to me that the company knew what they were doing when they sent them there. I seem to remember the crew coming to this conclusion too, after the revelation they're angry that they've been sent there to die.
Totally agree. I also wonder why this tendency is becoming so common? The cinemas are stuffed full of prequels/sequels and unnecessary backstories. Is it just laziness or profitablility? Or could there be some politicial unconscious to these types of films, fulfilling a need of audiences, searching for patterns and conspiracies in an uncertain and unstable world? When did we become so afraid of contingency?
I don't think that knowing the origin of the alien undermines the original. They are still as terrifying as ever when set in the right scene (not on CCTV..) If all that was produced after Alien was the same story over and over everyone would say it was becoming repetitive and dull. I agree there are flaws in both Prometheus and Covenant but I enjoy the intrigue in the story Ridley is trying to put together. Creator becoming victim to the created, how that ties into technological advances. I also agree there is no need to directly link Ripley in this.
Whilst I agree, I enjoyed Alien Covenant and Prometheus. But don't blame Ridley Scott; his original intention was for a follow up to Prometheus, but for the plot to deviate even further away from the Alien saga. Prometheus certainly wasn't perfect but I liked how it attempted to answer small questions yet pose even bigger newer questions. An intriguing new mystery. I'm in the minority, however. The audience for the most part didn't want to be made to think, as blunt as that may sound. So Ridley Scott changed his stance. Whether or not it was audience pressure, studio pressure or both, I think there was pressure for this to be a bit more by-the-numbers.
I agree with the general point Mark makes. Why does everything have to be swamped in backstory these days, and 'prequeled' to death? Alien works because of the simple hunted/hunter dynamic - the whys and wherefores are all pushed to the background, and Aliens ramps up the action but stays true to that dynamic. This is why they work well. By the same token it's why Darth Vader worked best in Parts 4-6 of Star Wars - the world didn't need to see him behave like a sulky teen in 1-3 beforehand to understand his fall, the explanations given by characters like Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda in the original films were sufficient.
I think you missed something about alien. the whole mystery surrounding it hinted that there was a story to it and the robot and wayland yutani knew about it. there's plenty of people here that agree with MK though so each to their own. i think youre all missing something though..
I feel that Mark has misunderstood a little about Covenant. I love the originals and I love the mystery of the Alien. What I have been interested to know is, since Scott always felt that the Alien was a weapon of war, why was it created/was it created. For me that is what Covenant is about, and these prequel films. I agree with Mark about the nature of sequels and Prequels, and how they can rob something from the originals. However, I do not feel that Covenant is trying to give the Alien any purpose, it is rather explaining how it came to be-it doesn't have a motive, it still just lives, eats, and makes baby monsters-it still has no reason to kill except it is what it is. I will admit for me Covenant is not a perfect film, it's attempts to somehow critique religion and also ask questions over what is perfection do seem a little misplaced in a sci-fi B movie, but the film is not, as Mark suggests, trying to give a motive to the Alien, rather is it trying to explain where it comes from, which I personally find very interesting. Why was it created, if created at all is an interesting question, and I am happy it's being explored, although I think smarter solutions to that question are out there although they are not used in the film. For me Covenant's problem is it want to be one thing while being forced to be another to be commercial.
Absolutely. The original idea that some other species, far more advanced than we were, had originally succumed to this threat was enough. But people clung on to that image.. and indeed the image from Predator 2.. to make a story that wasnt there
Looks like this review was done on the throne :) The original Alien and Aliens were great largely for their simplicity. Alien was great as it was very Lovecraftian, the fear of the unknown, the cyclopean space jockey craft, etc. With Scott's visuals back in '79 this made a great Sci Fi horror film. By adding all this backstory (in 2 films as well...) its reduced the awe and fear factor of the Alien, which really seems to have become irrelevant in the sequels. Like many modern remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels, reboopresequels, it feels like a missed opportunity.
I agree with you on this Mark. I still really enjoyed the film as I decided to look past some of the story aspects delivered to us by Prometheus. I'm hoping David's creatures do not related to the original ALIEN. Prometheus still had a mural. Which illustrates a Xenomorph like creature and life cycle.
I have yet to watch this but I felt the same as Mark when Rob Zombie decided to give Michael Myers a back story as misunderstood trailer trash. The whole brilliance of John Carpenter's original was that Myers only reason for murder was that he was born pure evil, which is far more terrifying.
The thing is, complaining that it overexploits the original Alien is a moot point, as "Alien" is a franchise with a great many elements across film/games/books/comics, people want to know the answers, regardless of how is effects the origin of the franchise as a "pure" experience. I say all this as an outsider who's only seen Prometheus.
I loved Alien and quite liked Alien: Covenant. Would've preferred more detail about the Engineers and slightly less Alien. Goes without saying all the technical elements of the film were great (bar some cliche horror tropes and silly crew members). Gotta disagree that I don't think Alien: Covenant demystifies the reason why aliens attack humans - they do because they attack anything. It does demystify, or begin to at least as I don't think it was conclusive, where they came from. I think the alien we see in this film is a few steps away from the alien in Alien (quicker gestation period, much larger, faster).
Its a shame Prometheus and then Covenant went down the whole god and existentialism route. The original Alien with Giger's nightmarish designs lended itself more to Jungian pyschology....the idea of the demon inside us, the avoidance of our shadow.
Bit like the Star Wars saga then. Ep 4 worked because we didn't know who dearth Vader was so if you watch them in order then the "I am your father" line doesn't work
Mark, your annoyed about the potential of Ripley being connected to a back story in the next film. She was tied to a back story from the opening scenes of Alien. They didn't just land on a planet and discover the alien. They were sent their by the ships computer, Mother and the Weyland corporation. This is the back story she is already tied to and it continues as a theme through the film regards the crew being expendable and the company wanting the xenomorph. Why, probably as they already know about it.
The first sequel, Aliens, though by a different director, also didn't try to create a back story (or get mystical) sticking effectively to just a roller coaster ride of horror and thrills.
Oh so glad I found someone old enough to remember being in theatre for Alien like Myself. Dude it's a scary Alien flick. That was all I needed! I liked Prometheus and found it an enjoyable film, with just a hint of the Xeno back story. What I wanted to see was a side story of another race evolving with the engineer's that's what Prometheus 2 should of been about. And, then 3 could tie end very loosely to Alien.
Totally agree regarding the Exorcist and the point you are making about prequel / sequels undermining the core of a film when branching into franchise. However, I have to disagree regarding Alien: Covenant... Yes, in Alien and Aliens this creature with no context was terrifying, we had questions but essentially it needed a host and wanted to kill / feast... But for me knowing that before the events in those films it was a human obsession and experimentation with creation that in a nutshell, put that thing on that ship. I know its far fetched, but its cinema...and starwars... if we stick a fantasy genre on the film are we allowed to stop nitpicking at the logistics of make believe world building? More to the point, I don't believe what the writers have done with Prometheus and Covenant detracts from the core of Alien, but is likely to affect people's perception of Alien and Aliens. For me that shows narrow mindedness. Just because we see the aliens history doesn't mean they didn't already have it. Remaking the same film on a story based level would have been slated, but I believe there is an expectation for the filmmakers to envoke the same feelings and nostaglia from an Alien film. With Covenant I wanted to see something fresh in that universe, we've already exhausted all scare tactics from that creature with 4 films so what potency does it still have? I think it was a smart choice to not dwell on that side of the universe and focus on David and the idea of creation and conflict leading to our demise. Fascinating sci fi concept in itself. This is a differnet narrative, different film and aside from the original films, stand alone as some cool films. I predict that, and to a greater extent than with Prometheus, people will come round to what is good about this film, once they can lay aside there idea of what an alien film is and should be
Scott needs to drop this whole engineer idea. It's just dripping with self-indulgence and over importance. The mystery of the space jockey is one of the enduring joys of the original film and I prefer the more fitting interpretation that it is some alien explorer who fell foul of its curiosity
100% agree,the alien needs no back story,let's just accept that the Alien species is out there and anyone unfortunate enough to cross there path is in trouble! Job done!
I liked Covenant a whole lot but one thing disturbs me about it, the fact that Ridley Scott himself said that he changed tack after criticism of Prometheus on social media. This contributes to a feeling that the story was rushed a bit (hence the thoughtless jettisoning of Shaw after the first film was essentially all about her). Should a director be so easily swayed, particularly a legend such as Scott?
*** SPOILER IN MY QUESTION HERE *** ***************** There were two neomorphs. One that escaped the burning ship and one that burst out of his mouth. I take it that it's presumed the one to attack them in the field was the one that escaped the burning ship and the one that climbed into the citadel was the mouth escaping one. Question... I don't recall seeing it being killed in the field, so what happened to it? Did it just run off to die?
Here's a rule that the world of fiction needs to remember. It's okay to have mystery. It's okay for things to be unknown. Not everything needs to be explained fully.
All the "depth" of Scott's past sci-fi work has always been incidental and usually thanks to happy accidents between writers and designers. Now because of the legacy of his work he seems to believe he's some kind of philosophical genius, when in reality the themes and questions of these new films are mind-boggling in their flat simplicity.
Warning: Spoilers ahead... I think there are parts of this story missing...like at what point after Shaw sent the message and put to her to sleep in the prologue did he decide to experiment on her, at what point did he crash the Juggernaut, and why did he crash it only to maroon himself there and even in the final few moments, I felt it was awkward, like Daniels realises David pulled the old switcheroo when he repsonds to her in his English accent...and this might have been edited out. I thought the fact he didn't know about the cabin was a weak reveal...even though the whole thing was obvious from the moment he left the planet...apart from the intentional oversight that David should have a wound from Daniels' nail... Also did David purposely cut his own hair and change it to match Walter's because he was perhaps planning to take his place the whole time? I mean he's got long blonde hair, he had blonde hair in Prometheus, then halfway through Alien: Covenant he's got the same hairdo as Walter. I'm convinced there's a lot edited out of this release. Honestly I wanted to like this movie so much but there were moments I wanted to burst with laughter, especially when the fully formed Xenomorph emerged from Cpt Oram's chest...and then started mimicking David. This was hilarious and I was waiting for it to grab a hat and cane like in Spaceballs. James Franco getting burnt to a crisp was also hilarious and the the flute/recorder "fingering" dialogue was ridiculous, he might was well have said "You blow my flute and I'll work your holes". The dumbest characters in a movie in a long time, predictable and I guess re-wrote its own lore as the Space Jockey in the original movie is supposed to be ancient, yet has a ship full of eggs (and the mural in Prometheus appears to show a face hugger)...even though David's experiments on Shaw are supposed to be responsible for them? You could argue that the black goo will always eventually re-write DNA so David did not actually create the Xenomorph's but followed what the Engineer's had done before, but that is some convoluted nonsense in an already convoluted story about creations turning against their creators. Ridley me this? Scott has lost the plot.
Anyone looking for a decent Alien sequel should try playing Alien Isolation. The story is great, it slots nicely into the world of the first film (following Ripley's daugther 20 years after the events of Alien) and like the original, the Alien is not the center of the story, it's a constant menace but at no point is it explained or explored... plus it's flippin terrifying to play...
Alien Covenant is an allegory of the need to replicate freedom from anti. The story about David's opposition to hierarchy is the depth of understanding that to oppose hierarchy is the paradox of needing to replicate hierarchy, which is why David's status as a villain is nuanced. If a reason of a device can be opposed, is it sensible if the device itself can also be opposed if the basis of the device is to allow the reason to be opposed? Alien Covenant is the notion that symbolism is a defunct concept, and the movie is actually opposed to art as well. Unlike the original Alien, Alien Covenant is the intelligence of being an equality between art and artist which despite needing the anti (1979 Alien) is able to oppose the means without being a paradox. David's story of attacking hierarchy is a very artistic and reasonable precursor to the original Alien
jtar7242 The difference being George Lucas had an epic story which did work but it was badly directed. Scott has a shitty, lazy story which is well directed.
Mark, so well said, very balanced and articulate as always. I couldn't agree more. For me, the premise of Alien and for it to be truly 'Alien' in every context is for the xeno/space jockey entities to exist beyond our universe and scope of understanding, that's where the primal survival instincts, fear, and helplessness exist, and why it has endured, because we can all relate to and fear that unknown darkness. And now Ridley wants to explain it all away by stating it's actually all just a man made machine, made and influenced? It destroys the enigma and legacy of the Alien universe completely. At least Prometheus had strength of vision and scope to attempt to bring something new to the screen. The engineers ARE interesting. Anyways. I have been watching and enjoying your reviews since the 90's. What I want to know is... have you ever thought about writing a screenplay or at least pitching a story ideA?!? Come on!! It would be great!!!
Ridley listened I think to some of the people that wanted to go back and find out what the spaceship was and the eggs, by the way not naming names but also worked on the original Alien. But right there is the big mistake. Mr Scott should have searched more for a script that gave the original the respect it deserved. But what do I know.
I guess I may have felt different if i watched Alien in the cinema back in the day. But i really enjoyed covenant, i would even argue its as good as any other alien film. David didnt create the pathogen, that would have been stupid, he has manipulated it and used it for his own creation, which I like as an idea
"You hold the flute, i'll do the fingering". OO-ER missus, I should cocoa, ding dong, woof-woof. Best part of the film, fell asleep twice after that, although bombing the Engineers out of existence earlier did have a genuine cathartic value to it. 8¬) At this point the Xenomorph is a brightly, well lit toy, merchandise to be sold, it's original value cinematically completely thrown away, It hasn't been remotely scary for over a quarter of a century. It's little more than a chucky doll on the shelf of a comic shop.
best uncut for ages. I like the zardoz comparison (boorman directed that and exorcist 2). as an aside, I don't actually think exorcist 2 is as bad as people say. it's certainly not the worst film ever made.
Money. That's why the Xenomorph gets the "Darth Vader in Rogue One" treatment...make them look awesome, it's what the spreadsheets tell us that people wanted from Prometheus!
Yatsura2 what the hell? I liked Prometheus. Also I can explain lesser quality in alien covenant from the first...worse characters, worse dialogue, no tension and lack of originality. Now crawl back to your hole.
I quite liked the idea of David and his meddling with the mutagen but to tie it back to Rippley is just too much of a tie in, we really dont need an explanation for everything some things are nice but others can be left to the imagination. David really has been the most interesting character from the last two movies so i think they should consider losing the Rippley substitute and putting in someone with a different perspective ... maybe a child that could be pretty darn scary.
Well said Mr Kermode. I suggest people check out 'What is real?' CZcams channel though for an esoteric perspective of Alien Covenant and many other movies and true message they are conveying to the audience. Interesting perspective.
Dear Mark, I think I have to contradict you here: Alien was so scary, not because the monster had "no reason", but because the reasons remained unclear. All the backstory is left to the imagination of the viewer. How is it possible that an alien parasite can thrive on human beings? What is the backstory of the spaceship? Who was the pilot? What did the pilot look like? I think, Scott's ambitions to explain everything in detail is the point, why the last two movies don't work. He is replacing mystery and wonder with badly written lore. It almost feels like he is producing his own fan fictions.
I actually didn't mind it to my surprise, I personally found Prometheus the way you described Alien: Covenant, "full of portent" and didn't really back up it's ideas in any meaningful ways (plus it was littered with irritations such as Rapace running away from a rolling ship in the direction it's rolling). I had some major gripes with the film though, the main one being the Aliens being CGI and poor CGI at that. One of the satisfyingly disturbing features of the xenomorph is the glistening, dripping with KY Jelly exterior which you see sparingly and adds to the horror. In this they just had a big CGI bug monster and the tension is decreased by seeing it all the time in its poor CGI state. All of this being said I feel you have made too much of a point of Alien itself not having a backstory. As others have stated here the inclusion of Ash's secret mission to retrieve the Alien "crew expendable" to me heavily implies that the company knows exactly what is there which in itself implies some backstory and adds to the corporate evil of "the company". Whether this backstory needed to be explored (and particularly why this needed to be explored in the absurd Prometheus xenomorph/life creating goop backstory rather than simply finding the ship for the first time) is another discussion entirely. If you simply object to the existence of these films I completely understand your position but I feel your reasoning isn't sound with regards to Alien lacking backstory.
I hope they don’t do the same with Gremlins, where we discover that after all this the Mogwai was just an genetic experiment which was created by crossing a Ragdoll cat with a Koala Bear.
I disagree. They're not just a parasite, they're an engineered weapon. Even parasites try to reach some kind of symbiosis. The aliens would just wipe out every planet they came upon. That idea still stands up, but I agree any extra back story kind of spoils it.
I adore Alien, it's my favourite film of all time bar none, and I both agree and disagree with you on this. I agree that the original Alien concept is terrifying in its obscurity, and the fact we don't know where it came from or why it does what it does is quite sinister, but I don't fully agree that Prometheus and Covenant are detrimental to that in the same way as you mention. I think that the backstory of the prequels add a different layer of sinisterness, in that they explore the human/android machinations that lead to the aliens being created, and I personally find that backstory intriguing and ominous in a diffferent way to the creatures themselves. The aliens are still terrifying parasites, and their behaviour isn't changed by the human/android backstory, and so I don't quite feel like it steps on Alien's toes in the same way as Exorcist 2 did with The Exorcist. We know from Alien that Weyland-Yutani are aware of the xenomorph's existence, as they deliberately wake the Nostromo to investigate the distress signal, so to me it doesn't harm the original movie to investigate their links to the creature a little more in the prequels. Having said that, I fully agree that tying Ripley in with characters from the prequel would be a mistake. Her story needs to start in Alien.
Taking out that camera showed a flash of intelligence and insight, but thats all it was, a flash. There was absolutely no subtlety or stealth in its actions, it just sprinted about the place being hyperactive and loud.
Feels like a whole film has been missed out, didn't Ridley wish to make these to explore the Space jockey's origins? Ok, some say we will get answers in the next one to the Promethus questions - I highly doubt it, those answers have long gone & are locked up somewhere in the mind of Damon Lindelof, mixed in with the answers & better ending to Lost.
"The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown."
- HP Lovecraft
the master of horror
Thank you. At least someone gets it. AI...
But who WAS Lovecraft? What prompted him to write his works? And how can we tie his life up with that of Arthur Machen for the deleted scenes in the Blu-Ray extras?
I saw Alien on first release in 1979. I was 22. I spent my teenage years ploughing through my dad's collection of Astounding Science Fiction mags from the 50s. That period, just before the space age, saw a huge outpouring of ideas and plots for science fiction. So I had a pretty good grounding in the genre. I never thought of Alien as a science fiction movie. The plot, what there was of it, didn't really need to be set on a spaceship in the future. It could have been a crazy lion on a ship. Alien is a fantastic, visceral journey. On first watch I felt relieved that it was over. And I absolutely "got it" as a film about an unfortunate but not entirely accidental encounter between humans and a highly intelligent parasite. The back story was the corporate intention to bring the parasite to Earth and study it.
Aliens developed that back story and, to a certain extent, so did Alien 3. Since then the "franchise" has thrashed around and has now mutated towards a grand vision about origin of species. Later films are trying to tell a story. There was no story in Alien. I think that's why so many people love it. Like Ash, we admire its purity.
And I think there's a delicious irony. If the original plot pointed at big business exploiting that primordial 1979 alien for its own ends that is exactly what is playing out. It's just that it's the film industry doing the exploitation rather than Weyland Yutani.
They did the same with Hellraiser. You open the box, they come and "tear your soul apart" even if you open the box unwittingly. In 2 they give pinhead a backstory and make him human, which utterly destroys the menace of the cenobites.
That's what I liked about Aliens so much; James Cameron approached it from a different angle, but with respect to the source material. It felt like an organic transition and was, story wise at least, a continuation of the Ripley narrative. Alien 3, which I enjoyed more than many, again didn't drift too far from the narrative established up to this point but, for me, didn't have the same cinematic impact as the first two. And whilst I have enjoyed every other Alien film since, I do find myself shaking my head sometimes at the artistic license that has caused the franchise to drift away from what made the first two films so good: the enigma that surrounds the parasite and our relationship with it.
Exactly, Aliens is an entirely different beast, but it sure as hell pays respect to the original movie.
Well said
"If we know everything, we fear nothing."
Matt Post Exactly.
What I thought made Alien scary was that the monster was a perfect killing machine waiting to kill again. It's kind of existential in a way; a biological machine that will kill you because it exists and because you exist. The engineers in Prometheus removed this nihilistic terror, because it introduces a reason and creators.
What irks me is that everybody who reviews, writes or talks about the "new" "alien" movies, always goes on about answearing questions. Prometheus was supposed to answer questions, did it answear questions or didn't it, are we left with questions, and now covenant: questions, questions, questions. But the truth is. There were no questions. There were speculations, hints, guesses, but nobody actually had questions that needed to be answered. There are no questions. I keep hearing this "it will answear questions, it will finally answear all the questions". I had no questions, and I'd rather they didn't force themselves to answear any.
Kermode always speaks the tru tru. How Robbie Collins can give Covenant FIVE STARS is beyond me...
Robbie understands against the grain of all critics. Respect for that.
I presume Collins also gave Alien a five star review which implies he regards both as 'essentially' flawless or perfect films. If anyone can argue why Alien Covenant IS a flawless or perfect film, I'd love to hear it...
DreStation 2 "speaks the tru tru." What a bizarre reference to put to a Kermode vlog.
Cudgel Thy Brain Haha I don't know what came over me! The spirit of Tom Hanks in Cloud Atlas must reside inside me somehow..
StrokeMeYouInsolentHumanCuzIAmACat Exactly! The most depressing thing about Covenant was that the Alien wasn't scary. It was secondary, an afterthought, a byproduct, a waste...
The mystery of the all the different things in the original Alien was great. Why you'd want to explain that is beyond me. As soon as you reveal everything behind the mysteries of your universe your universe becomes boring. There's no longer any room for speculation from the fans. It has been explained and can now be forgotten.
You very succinctly stated one of the reasons I had an issue with both Prometheus and Alien Covenant but had trouble clearly expressing. Great video.
"I admire its purity" - said android Ash. Perfectly fits with my feeling about original Scott's Alien. I can't say that about Redley's prequels. He is like George Lucas now, only with better artistic eye.
I am worried about Blade Runner 2049. Seeing Harrison Ford aged surely ruins the open ending of whether or not he was a replicant?
I think replicant exteriors were organic, so there's no reason really why Deckard couldn't age exteriorly.
Hadn't his human status already been confirmed by Scott years ago?
Deckard, Ford's character, was confirmed to be a replicant in both the series of books and by Ridley Scott. The question is whether he is a Nexus 6 without a date predetermined for his death or not.
theory is that he's playing the real Deckard who the replicant was based off.
Deckard could still be a replicant.
I heard a theory Leto wants him because it will allow him to create replicants that live longer.
You know you're going to be disappointed Mark. As long as Covenant makes money, there'll be more exposition, more back story, less and less mystery until the films come to resemble Open University lectures.
I find it bizarre the logical leaps I've seen from a lot of hardcore Alien fans, to criticise Covenant for providing backstory and breaking the illusion and mystery of the Alien... who then by turns handwave away criticism of Aliens and ignore the problems with the various sequels and spin-offs.
The problem with Alien is that for anyone not old enough to have seen Alien in the cinema, there is no such thing as the "pure untainted Alien mystery"
I grew up in the 80s and first saw Alien in the early 90s AFTER having seen Aliens, (because Aliens was shown on TV all the time and Alien wasn't) But more than that, I also grew up reading Alien, Aliens & AvPs comics, novels, and later even videogames.
There have been umpteen origins for the alien creature in the surrounding universe, and while that's unknown to most people, it's also true that to most people, the origin doesn't diminish the horror of the creature.
The alien may have been coaxed into creation, from a black WMD goo created by the Engineers, by David, but the unstoppable virus-like spread of the alien is unchanged. If anything Covenant sees a welcome return of the hellishly powerful Alien, nigh on unstoppable, and not the cannon-fodder of Cameron, or the comedy camp of Jeunet.
It's a flawed film, but actually, it's not a bad one.
Spot on! Let a mystery remain a mystery!
It's a bit sad that all the trailer footage they show at the end of this video doesn't even appear in Alien: Covenant.
Backstory always takes the unknown element away. The part you fill with your imagination. I remember when Christopher Nolan was doing press for The Dark Knight and he spoke of Michael Mann's Manhunter as a touchstone for creating the deliberate ambiguity surrounding the Joker, with no apparent origin. In Manhunter, Lektor is just sat there in the cell with little detail of who he is or what he's done. But utterly terrifying - "Would you like to leave you home phone number?". The Joker in The Dark Knight was the same, ripping through the film with no explanation. Like the shark in Jaws, or the Alien. Backstory totally dilutes horror.
Nailed my issues with both Prometheus and, especially, Covenant. Both are so very unnecessary, both are so pretentious because they're trying to make this backstory seem so grandiose and important, when it's ultimately just hollow shlock about a pretentious android who's gone off the deep end because it has daddy issues.
If David ends up being the Space Jockey in the original Alien, I'm going to be very upset.
Mabye they will do a special re-release and add in David to the original alien. have him hiding under tables and around corners from the main events :L
I mean this is the very definition of retconning, if David the orginal space jockey in Alien, it makes no sense, i know we're talking hypothetically here, but that would negate all that we know and what the movie tells us.
That thing was fossilizied, meaning it was sure as hell older than a few years.
Then we kinda know that facehuggers avoid androids, probably because they are not viable hosts; sooo i don't know man, this is starting to be more and more dissapointing.
I was always curious about the space jockeys and what role they have in all of this, but after Prometheus and Alien Covenant, i wish we didn't find out....
But Prometheus was created to exist within the alien universe but to actually move away from the alien series in its own direction. The themes (in my opinion) were interesting and fresh, despite it's flaws. The set up for the sequel was all there and we didn't need any more Xenomorphs but unfortunately Scott decided to bow to studio and fan pressure and make an ''Alien' film after Prometheus was bashed. The result is a film that kind of buries both parts of the franchise and I'm disappointed because I wanted to see Shaw's journey and to see the engineers motives for creating and destroying life.
Paul Dennett, this is why prequels fail. They always change the given original source material. Anyone who has watched Alien will know that the "space Jockey" is not wearing a mask as his open mouth is clearly visible below the tube.
I get the impression that Ridley is making it up as he goes along but he did tease during Prometheus interviews that the engineers are themselves the creations of another being/god. I doubt he'll go down this avenue though it would be cool if that guy in the chair is something new.
Nailed it, Mr. K!
I largely agree, save for a very key point; Alien was *not* just an accidental meeting of species. After interrogating Ash the remaining crew discover that the Nostromo was rerouted to LV426 specifically to return the lifeform for study.
Now you can argue that the backstory writes itself and that the compelling nature of WHY this was important was best left to the imagination of the viewer, in which case the prequel films are indeed needless. But there was an impetus. There was a reason the crew landed on the planet.
That is why Heath Ledger's Joker is one of scariest, strongest antagonist in cinematic history. No back story, total chaos.
It was; "Jaws in space".
But surely we need to know where the Shark came from? What grievances did it have? And what might trigger it?
I agree with you here. what stood out most with this film, and to me demonstrating your points, was the chest-burster scene in the Alien temple. It began with Billy Crudups character taking leave of his scenes, with the eventual emergence of the little alien from his chest. leaving the camera lingering on the wee CGI Alien as it stood there looking fairly cute for waaaay too long. it actually had a few people in the theater laughing. the whole scene became fairly comedic, but without the charm of Aliens. people were laughing at the film not with it.
I think this scene made it clear to me the filmmakers were caught up in the amazing design of the alien and wanting to show it off at any cost to story/tone or setting. i also thought the CGI coupled with long drawn out shots of it rendered it a relatively be-nine a threat. it never felt like it had weight or presence to me when it was on-screen. it was frustrating as it stood out in sharp contrast to the fairly awesome sets and locations in the film.
The absolute lack of mystery in terms of the story was a bit irritating as well. every twist and turn was so painfully obvious from the get-go, and i think it felt a bit like the story was just there to get the alien on-screen. i mean as soon as they introduced Walter who honestly didn't know what was going to happen?
Mabye the next film will jump the shark entirely and have a baby Ripley being saved by her parents or making friends with a baby groot style alien!
Tbf Alien has the whole sub plot with Ash that makes it quite clear it's not a random intersection of species but rather the crew were deliberately sent to encounter the lifeform.
Prometheus was flawed but very underrated and for all it's faults it tried something new and had interesting ideas. Alien covenant is an artistic compromise to a hyper critical internet culture that savaged Prometheus. Fanboys got their xenos back....and it's more diminished than ever.
BOSIE321 Great comment and absolutely true.
I enjoyed Prometheus a lot more on repeated watches. A director's cut with the missing scenes could help it further. As Mark Kermode said, it's scale and ideas were it's best feature.
Agreed, and I think Covenant is falling victim to the same thing, in a different way.
There's such hypersensitivity to *any* backstory whatsoever that I think people are projecting things onto it that aren't actually there.
*spoilers ahead, obviously*
Prometheus has it that the Space Jockey was actually an Engineer, who have a black goo that mutates anything it touches in weird ways. At the end, through a complicated chain of events that goo produces a kind of proto-alien.
Covenant has it that David took that goo, experimented with it a lot and refined it into something that results in the big aliens from later movies.
So there's an extra level of outside interference that wasn't there before. But the basic idea of a mysterious alien parasite that feeds on whatever touches hasn't really changed, and it doesn't really explain as much as people seem to think.
I would agree with you that it's action sequences are really hampered by bad editing but there are lots of points that I thought were very cool and fresh. Visually, things like the yellow cryosleep pads, the dream VR hook up, the rubix cube type holograms, Fifields 'pups', the giant head sculpture, the flute and weird egg buttons in the engineer ship were all very striking to me and seemed very fresh and 'alien'. It felt just so different in tone and colour to anything in the series before (notice the lushness of some of the colours and you'll see it really contrasts with the heaviness of Alien and Aliens) There's a feeling of wonder at exploration and even hope at times but that soon disappears. The opening introduction to David is just one of my favourite scenes in the whole Alien series (Chopin's Raindrop prelude playing over him moving about the ship and watching Lawrence of Arabia). There's a strangeness and ambiguity about him and I liked a lot of his dialogue in the film. The original 'Engineer speaks' scene is for me one of the best parts of the film in it's uncut form but was botched by editing. The dialogue, I think, is great in that scene and I liked the visual of the engineer hopping into the drivers seat. All in all I felt it was a very flawed but ambitious film that I'm quite fond of. A Director's cut inserting a few scenes would help it further.
Agreed 100% was very disappointed when I watched Covenant the other day to find out that it really wasn't a Prometheus sequel. I think Prometheus had a really exciting ending and one really wanted to see what happens to Shaw and David but that got reduced to a 2 minute flashback in the movie, instead of being the movie.
Really sad that we got an alien movie that doesn't really explore any new ideas instead of a true Prometheus sequel.
In a sci-fi context, the backstory for the Alien as furnished by A:Cov is totally sensible. The alien works by horizontal gene transfer - the same reason some bacteria can do similar things to our cells, and vice versa, is because we share 90 % or more of the same genes *a priori* and the genetic mechanisms (DNA, RNA, enzymes, etc) are the same. In a horror context the backstory still works, even if it owes a little too much to other RS universes (particularly Bladerunner) with inherent warnings about the future dangers of AI. David is more than a little bit creepy, isn't he? Like Frankenstein and Norman Bates rolled up into one.
For those who don't want the original Alien ruined (and I don't think this ruins it anymore than the original Pride and Prejudice is sullied for all time by someone's inane decision to add zombies after-the-fact), it would just behoove them to watch the movies in the same order in which they were made. (Skipping, of course, the execrable AvP series).
I'm really ambivalent about the prequels. The Alien fanboy in me says "WOOOO!!!! Another Alien movie! Awesome!!!". But the movie buff in me says "You've just killed Alien"
kermode once again spot on with his pin point analysis. just like midiclorians, when the force was mystic woowoo it worked. once you explain it you make it mundane or weak like a magicians trick. I like the demons in HP Lovecraft stories. They're scary because they don't spare much thought about us, we're insignificant in their grand schemes. When aliens considered us food and hosts and nothing more that was scary and more so because we recognised those attributes in ourselves and our regard for other animals.
Philip Gilfoy Midichlorians are not The Force. It's one of the most misunderstood observations in all of Star Wars. And it was specifically explained that they weren't The Force in the film.
Wait what? It wasn't a random encounter at all, the backstory was already established in the first movie. The ship was send there on companies orders to bring back the species without the crew's knowledge, they replaced the ship's doctor with a robot, crew was expendable.
That underlying plot gave the movie extra depth instead of undermining the scarieness, that's not the reason why Covenant is less scary, there are many other obvious reasons imo
I understand where Mark is coming from. But its still a class above most big budget movies these days. I really enjoyed it.
For me, covenant clarified that the Prometheus movies are ultimately going to be about David attaining godhood, not the connections to the alien movies. If I'm right, they will wind up being a spinoff series that can be it's own entity separate from the alien movies and the originals will still stand on their own. Many would ask, "then why isn't this a new franchise?" That's just the time we live in, everything needs to be shared universe and driven by continuity. It's not necessarily a good thing but as a lover of the series I'm more than happy to spend more time in this universe, especially with ridley Scott.
I really really doubt that this is all going to end with a cgi 25 year old Sigourney weaver or some phoned in scene, "and that's how the eggs got on LV-426" as you've implied. I interpreted the scenes with david and the eggs to simply show that the eggs are the ultimate product of the black goo, not necessarily that David created the specific eggs shown in the original alien. The xenomorph was shown in the end of Prometheus, as well as on a mural on the wall so the alien as shown in Alien 1 definitely doesn't have to derive from David. Also, I believe the planet in Prometheus was a neighboring planet to the one in the original alien so why would david go back to that dead galaxy anyway? Ridley may have story problems but he's not that dumb.
As with many others, I'm a massive Alien fanboy of many many years and I can honestly say that I didn't desire the prequels in any way shape or form. The discovery of the aeons old derelict with the Giger creepy mysterious weirdness within was enough for me and will always be the case. But money will always win over art every time.
Thumbs up before I started watching it. You know Mark is going to talk sense.
I don't think David's Xenomorphs are connected to the original Xenomorphs in the original film. The "space jockey" in the original was killed a long time ago and not less than 12 from David's time. I think the Engineers originally created the xenomorphs millennia ago. David had 10 years access to a builder ship. He could have discovered how they were originally created on the ship database and created his own version for his own reasons.
Bleak, Darwinian, psycho-sexual nihilism is the fundamental subtext of Alien.
I agree that to interfere with that is to undermine the experience of the original.
I understand the enjoyment of the simplicity of alien as you describe mark but for me I'm ok with different kinds of stories. I'm 39 I saw alien and aliens when I was about 14 and then I bought the comics which were epic. Many stories. Of which the producers of later films seamed to completely ignore. Aliens genocide for instance was beautiful. Film right there out of 4 comics. I did jump a couple of times in covenant. I thought the obvious David playing Walter was ridiculous. Ridley could have made that a surprise.
There were many alien stories Ridley could have told but which one did you want him to tell mark??
Went to see it thought it was ok then went back for a second viewing and came out hating it! I guess I was just happy to see the xenomorphs the first time round
I cannot agree more. I am tired of sequels trying to 'improve' on the original by adding or changing the back story. I am really worried about Blade Runner 2049 being that Blade Runner is probably my favorite film. However, here is the problem, if Alien squeals (and films like it) were not developed in some way we would complain we were just getting the same old thing. I think the lesson is, despite our need for more of the same, we should just be happy with what we first got. AND LEAVE IT AT THAT.
there's a problem with your statement Mr Kermode in that in the original movie there's a conversation between Ripley and the recently disassembled ash that basically say that not only was capturing the creature the whole point of their journey but also the reason for him being on the ship so Weyland Corp obviously did know about the creature
The obvious issue with the Alien prequels is that they both come across as a spec script that had been sat at the bottom of a drawer for a couple of years until the day somebody just added a couple of references to the alien, space jockey and Weyland-Yutani corporation and said "Boom! There's your new Alien movie!" - which immediately reminds me of the first Resident Evil film, which felt like a spec script for some generic zombie film with a couple of references chucked in to make it a Resident Evil film.
First film: space is big and scary
prequels: space is really small, full of coincidences and all the scary or technological stuff was made by us or our godly ancestors anyway.
Mate you're forgetting that Alien elludes to a backstory. They stop at the distress signal and the command given to the science officer is to secure the life form, crew expendable. This means that Weyland-Yutani knew the Alien existed and sent them there on purpose. How did they know the Alien existed? Well, maybe some colonists ran into one before...
Excellent point..!
rodster6 yeah possible, but Ash stated that they thought it had possible military applications so seems like they knew it was destructive in some way.
yeh AFTER finding it...I totally agree with kermode, why not just an alien, that evolved, like tons of creatures on earth did from which it is based but scaled up to 8 feet tall. Got on some ancient ship that had crashed millenia ago... there! We've already has ripley revived 3 times already, and now this prequal bs?
I guess you can interpret it both ways, but the fact that Ash was transferred days before launch and had a secret mission which included the phrase 'crew expendable'... Seems more likely to me that the company knew what they were doing when they sent them there. I seem to remember the crew coming to this conclusion too, after the revelation they're angry that they've been sent there to die.
You should actually tweet Mark this. Its a really good point.
Totally agree. I also wonder why this tendency is becoming so common? The cinemas are stuffed full of prequels/sequels and unnecessary backstories. Is it just laziness or profitablility? Or could there be some politicial unconscious to these types of films, fulfilling a need of audiences, searching for patterns and conspiracies in an uncertain and unstable world? When did we become so afraid of contingency?
I don't think that knowing the origin of the alien undermines the original. They are still as terrifying as ever when set in the right scene (not on CCTV..) If all that was produced after Alien was the same story over and over everyone would say it was becoming repetitive and dull. I agree there are flaws in both Prometheus and Covenant but I enjoy the intrigue in the story Ridley is trying to put together. Creator becoming victim to the created, how that ties into technological advances. I also agree there is no need to directly link Ripley in this.
Whilst I agree, I enjoyed Alien Covenant and Prometheus. But don't blame Ridley Scott; his original intention was for a follow up to Prometheus, but for the plot to deviate even further away from the Alien saga. Prometheus certainly wasn't perfect but I liked how it attempted to answer small questions yet pose even bigger newer questions. An intriguing new mystery. I'm in the minority, however. The audience for the most part didn't want to be made to think, as blunt as that may sound. So Ridley Scott changed his stance. Whether or not it was audience pressure, studio pressure or both, I think there was pressure for this to be a bit more by-the-numbers.
I agree with the general point Mark makes. Why does everything have to be swamped in backstory these days, and 'prequeled' to death? Alien works because of the simple hunted/hunter dynamic - the whys and wherefores are all pushed to the background, and Aliens ramps up the action but stays true to that dynamic. This is why they work well. By the same token it's why Darth Vader worked best in Parts 4-6 of Star Wars - the world didn't need to see him behave like a sulky teen in 1-3 beforehand to understand his fall, the explanations given by characters like Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda in the original films were sufficient.
I think you missed something about alien. the whole mystery surrounding it hinted that there was a story to it and the robot and wayland yutani knew about it. there's plenty of people here that agree with MK though so each to their own. i think youre all missing something though..
Oh look, here's Mark talking about The Exorcist again...
I feel that Mark has misunderstood a little about Covenant. I love the originals and I love the mystery of the Alien. What I have been interested to know is, since Scott always felt that the Alien was a weapon of war, why was it created/was it created. For me that is what Covenant is about, and these prequel films. I agree with Mark about the nature of sequels and Prequels, and how they can rob something from the originals. However, I do not feel that Covenant is trying to give the Alien any purpose, it is rather explaining how it came to be-it doesn't have a motive, it still just lives, eats, and makes baby monsters-it still has no reason to kill except it is what it is. I will admit for me Covenant is not a perfect film, it's attempts to somehow critique religion and also ask questions over what is perfection do seem a little misplaced in a sci-fi B movie, but the film is not, as Mark suggests, trying to give a motive to the Alien, rather is it trying to explain where it comes from, which I personally find very interesting. Why was it created, if created at all is an interesting question, and I am happy it's being explored, although I think smarter solutions to that question are out there although they are not used in the film. For me Covenant's problem is it want to be one thing while being forced to be another to be commercial.
Absolutely. The original idea that some other species, far more advanced than we were, had originally succumed to this threat was enough. But people clung on to that image.. and indeed the image from Predator 2.. to make a story that wasnt there
Looks like this review was done on the throne :)
The original Alien and Aliens were great largely for their simplicity. Alien was great as it was very Lovecraftian, the fear of the unknown, the cyclopean space jockey craft, etc. With Scott's visuals back in '79 this made a great Sci Fi horror film.
By adding all this backstory (in 2 films as well...) its reduced the awe and fear factor of the Alien, which really seems to have become irrelevant in the sequels.
Like many modern remakes, reboots, sequels, prequels, reboopresequels, it feels like a missed opportunity.
I agree with you on this Mark. I still really enjoyed the film as I decided to look past some of the story aspects delivered to us by Prometheus. I'm hoping David's creatures do not related to the original ALIEN. Prometheus still had a mural. Which illustrates a Xenomorph like creature and life cycle.
I have yet to watch this but I felt the same as Mark when Rob Zombie decided to give Michael Myers a back story as misunderstood trailer trash. The whole brilliance of John Carpenter's original was that Myers only reason for murder was that he was born pure evil, which is far more terrifying.
Awesome video Mark. Couldn't agree more, this was a great explanation.
The thing is, complaining that it overexploits the original Alien is a moot point, as "Alien" is a franchise with a great many elements across film/games/books/comics, people want to know the answers, regardless of how is effects the origin of the franchise as a "pure" experience.
I say all this as an outsider who's only seen Prometheus.
Thank you for this video.
I loved Alien and quite liked Alien: Covenant. Would've preferred more detail about the Engineers and slightly less Alien. Goes without saying all the technical elements of the film were great (bar some cliche horror tropes and silly crew members). Gotta disagree that I don't think Alien: Covenant demystifies the reason why aliens attack humans - they do because they attack anything. It does demystify, or begin to at least as I don't think it was conclusive, where they came from. I think the alien we see in this film is a few steps away from the alien in Alien (quicker gestation period, much larger, faster).
Its a shame Prometheus and then Covenant went down the whole god and existentialism route. The original Alien with Giger's nightmarish designs lended itself more to Jungian pyschology....the idea of the demon inside us, the avoidance of our shadow.
Bit like the Star Wars saga then. Ep 4 worked because we didn't know who dearth Vader was so if you watch them in order then the "I am your father" line doesn't work
Saw it in Imax, I really loved that scene surroding the clip. But, yeah Mark you're on point.
It's a parasite, we are food and that's it.
Brilliant
Mark, your annoyed about the potential of Ripley being connected to a back story in the next film. She was tied to a back story from the opening scenes of Alien. They didn't just land on a planet and discover the alien. They were sent their by the ships computer, Mother and the Weyland corporation. This is the back story she is already tied to and it continues as a theme through the film regards the crew being expendable and the company wanting the xenomorph. Why, probably as they already know about it.
The first sequel, Aliens, though by a different director, also didn't try to create a back story (or get mystical) sticking effectively to just a roller coaster ride of horror and thrills.
Oh so glad I found someone old enough to remember being in theatre for Alien like Myself. Dude it's a scary Alien flick. That was all I needed! I liked Prometheus and found it an enjoyable film, with just a hint of the Xeno back story. What I wanted to see was a side story of another race evolving with the engineer's that's what Prometheus 2 should of been about. And, then 3 could tie end very loosely to Alien.
Totally agree regarding the Exorcist and the point you are making about prequel / sequels undermining the core of a film when branching into franchise. However, I have to disagree regarding Alien: Covenant... Yes, in Alien and Aliens this creature with no context was terrifying, we had questions but essentially it needed a host and wanted to kill / feast... But for me knowing that before the events in those films it was a human obsession and experimentation with creation that in a nutshell, put that thing on that ship. I know its far fetched, but its cinema...and starwars... if we stick a fantasy genre on the film are we allowed to stop nitpicking at the logistics of make believe world building? More to the point, I don't believe what the writers have done with Prometheus and Covenant detracts from the core of Alien, but is likely to affect people's perception of Alien and Aliens. For me that shows narrow mindedness. Just because we see the aliens history doesn't mean they didn't already have it. Remaking the same film on a story based level would have been slated, but I believe there is an expectation for the filmmakers to envoke the same feelings and nostaglia from an Alien film. With Covenant I wanted to see something fresh in that universe, we've already exhausted all scare tactics from that creature with 4 films so what potency does it still have? I think it was a smart choice to not dwell on that side of the universe and focus on David and the idea of creation and conflict leading to our demise. Fascinating sci fi concept in itself. This is a differnet narrative, different film and aside from the original films, stand alone as some cool films. I predict that, and to a greater extent than with Prometheus, people will come round to what is good about this film, once they can lay aside there idea of what an alien film is and should be
Scott needs to drop this whole engineer idea. It's just dripping with self-indulgence and over importance. The mystery of the space jockey is one of the enduring joys of the original film and I prefer the more fitting interpretation that it is some alien explorer who fell foul of its curiosity
100% agree,the alien needs no back story,let's just accept that the Alien species is out there and anyone unfortunate enough to cross there path is in trouble! Job done!
I liked Covenant a whole lot but one thing disturbs me about it, the fact that Ridley Scott himself said that he changed tack after criticism of Prometheus on social media. This contributes to a feeling that the story was rushed a bit (hence the thoughtless jettisoning of Shaw after the first film was essentially all about her).
Should a director be so easily swayed, particularly a legend such as Scott?
*** SPOILER IN MY QUESTION HERE ***
*****************
There were two neomorphs. One that escaped the burning ship and one that burst out of his mouth. I take it that it's presumed the one to attack them in the field was the one that escaped the burning ship and the one that climbed into the citadel was the mouth escaping one. Question... I don't recall seeing it being killed in the field, so what happened to it? Did it just run off to die?
Here's a rule that the world of fiction needs to remember.
It's okay to have mystery. It's okay for things to be unknown.
Not everything needs to be explained fully.
All the "depth" of Scott's past sci-fi work has always been incidental and usually thanks to happy accidents between writers and designers. Now because of the legacy of his work he seems to believe he's some kind of philosophical genius, when in reality the themes and questions of these new films are mind-boggling in their flat simplicity.
Alien Covenant is an allegory of an original and its replication being used as replications
Warning: Spoilers ahead...
I think there are parts of this story missing...like at what point after Shaw sent the message and put to her to sleep in the prologue did he decide to experiment on her, at what point did he crash the Juggernaut, and why did he crash it only to maroon himself there and even in the final few moments, I felt it was awkward, like Daniels realises David pulled the old switcheroo when he repsonds to her in his English accent...and this might have been edited out. I thought the fact he didn't know about the cabin was a weak reveal...even though the whole thing was obvious from the moment he left the planet...apart from the intentional oversight that David should have a wound from Daniels' nail...
Also did David purposely cut his own hair and change it to match Walter's because he was perhaps planning to take his place the whole time? I mean he's got long blonde hair, he had blonde hair in Prometheus, then halfway through Alien: Covenant he's got the same hairdo as Walter. I'm convinced there's a lot edited out of this release.
Honestly I wanted to like this movie so much but there were moments I wanted to burst with laughter, especially when the fully formed Xenomorph emerged from Cpt Oram's chest...and then started mimicking David. This was hilarious and I was waiting for it to grab a hat and cane like in Spaceballs. James Franco getting burnt to a crisp was also hilarious and the the flute/recorder "fingering" dialogue was ridiculous, he might was well have said "You blow my flute and I'll work your holes".
The dumbest characters in a movie in a long time, predictable and I guess re-wrote its own lore as the Space Jockey in the original movie is supposed to be ancient, yet has a ship full of eggs (and the mural in Prometheus appears to show a face hugger)...even though David's experiments on Shaw are supposed to be responsible for them? You could argue that the black goo will always eventually re-write DNA so David did not actually create the Xenomorph's but followed what the Engineer's had done before, but that is some convoluted nonsense in an already convoluted story about creations turning against their creators. Ridley me this? Scott has lost the plot.
Very well said
Anyone looking for a decent Alien sequel should try playing Alien Isolation. The story is great, it slots nicely into the world of the first film (following Ripley's daugther 20 years after the events of Alien) and like the original, the Alien is not the center of the story, it's a constant menace but at no point is it explained or explored... plus it's flippin terrifying to play...
Alien Covenant is an allegory of the need to replicate freedom from anti. The story about David's opposition to hierarchy is the depth of understanding that to oppose hierarchy is the paradox of needing to replicate hierarchy, which is why David's status as a villain is nuanced. If a reason of a device can be opposed, is it sensible if the device itself can also be opposed if the basis of the device is to allow the reason to be opposed? Alien Covenant is the notion that symbolism is a defunct concept, and the movie is actually opposed to art as well. Unlike the original Alien, Alien Covenant is the intelligence of being an equality between art and artist which despite needing the anti (1979 Alien) is able to oppose the means without being a paradox. David's story of attacking hierarchy is a very artistic and reasonable precursor to the original Alien
Ridley Scott is on pace to George Lucas his own masterpiece with shitty prequels.
jtar7242 The difference being George Lucas had an epic story which did work but it was badly directed. Scott has a shitty, lazy story which is well directed.
I'm counting three juggernaut ships that have crashed so far. The Intergalactic Administration for Spacecraft Safety would have a field day with them.
Mark, so well said, very balanced and articulate as always. I couldn't agree more. For me, the premise of Alien and for it to be truly 'Alien' in every context is for the xeno/space jockey entities to exist beyond our universe and scope of understanding, that's where the primal survival instincts, fear, and helplessness exist, and why it has endured, because we can all relate to and fear that unknown darkness. And now Ridley wants to explain it all away by stating it's actually all just a man made machine, made and influenced? It destroys the enigma and legacy of the Alien universe completely. At least Prometheus had strength of vision and scope to attempt to bring something new to the screen. The engineers ARE interesting.
Anyways. I have been watching and enjoying your reviews since the 90's. What I want to know is... have you ever thought about writing a screenplay or at least pitching a story ideA?!?
Come on!! It would be great!!!
Mark, why does it all have to be scary? Maybe it can just a great sci-fi universe? With a plethora of films that can cross genres?
Ridley listened I think to some of the people that wanted to go back and find out what the spaceship was and the eggs, by the way not naming names but also worked on the original Alien. But right there is the big mistake. Mr Scott should have searched more for a script that gave the original the respect it deserved. But what do I know.
I guess I may have felt different if i watched Alien in the cinema back in the day. But i really enjoyed covenant, i would even argue its as good as any other alien film. David didnt create the pathogen, that would have been stupid, he has manipulated it and used it for his own creation, which I like as an idea
"You hold the flute, i'll do the fingering".
OO-ER missus, I should cocoa, ding dong, woof-woof.
Best part of the film, fell asleep twice after that, although bombing the Engineers out of existence earlier did have a genuine cathartic value to it. 8¬)
At this point the Xenomorph is a brightly, well lit toy, merchandise to be sold, it's original value cinematically completely thrown away, It hasn't been remotely scary for over a quarter of a century. It's little more than a chucky doll on the shelf of a comic shop.
best uncut for ages. I like the zardoz comparison (boorman directed that and exorcist 2). as an aside, I don't actually think exorcist 2 is as bad as people say. it's certainly not the worst film ever made.
People fear what they don't understand and hate what they can't conquer.
essentially what Ridley Scott has done with alien covenant is remake aspects of previous alien films but to a lesser quality. What is the point??
Money. That's why the Xenomorph gets the "Darth Vader in Rogue One" treatment...make them look awesome, it's what the spreadsheets tell us that people wanted from Prometheus!
Yatsura2 what the hell? I liked Prometheus. Also I can explain lesser quality in alien covenant from the first...worse characters, worse dialogue, no tension and lack of originality. Now crawl back to your hole.
Very well put, wholeheartedly agree.
I quite liked the idea of David and his meddling with the mutagen but to tie it back to Rippley is just too much of a tie in, we really dont need an explanation for everything some things are nice but others can be left to the imagination. David really has been the most interesting character from the last two movies so i think they should consider losing the Rippley substitute and putting in someone with a different perspective ... maybe a child that could be pretty darn scary.
Exactly. Giving an explanation makes the aliens less alien.
Well said Mr Kermode. I suggest people check out 'What is real?' CZcams channel though for an esoteric perspective of Alien Covenant and many other movies and true message they are conveying to the audience. Interesting perspective.
Dear Mark, I think I have to contradict you here: Alien was so scary, not because the monster had "no reason", but because the reasons remained unclear. All the backstory is left to the imagination of the viewer. How is it possible that an alien parasite can thrive on human beings? What is the backstory of the spaceship? Who was the pilot? What did the pilot look like? I think, Scott's ambitions to explain everything in detail is the point, why the last two movies don't work. He is replacing mystery and wonder with badly written lore. It almost feels like he is producing his own fan fictions.
The facehugger is the only parasite, the Alien creature is not a parasite.
Totally agree, I hate it when a franchise tries to stretch the back story beyond any logical coherence.
I actually didn't mind it to my surprise, I personally found Prometheus the way you described Alien: Covenant, "full of portent" and didn't really back up it's ideas in any meaningful ways (plus it was littered with irritations such as Rapace running away from a rolling ship in the direction it's rolling). I had some major gripes with the film though, the main one being the Aliens being CGI and poor CGI at that. One of the satisfyingly disturbing features of the xenomorph is the glistening, dripping with KY Jelly exterior which you see sparingly and adds to the horror. In this they just had a big CGI bug monster and the tension is decreased by seeing it all the time in its poor CGI state.
All of this being said I feel you have made too much of a point of Alien itself not having a backstory. As others have stated here the inclusion of Ash's secret mission to retrieve the Alien "crew expendable" to me heavily implies that the company knows exactly what is there which in itself implies some backstory and adds to the corporate evil of "the company". Whether this backstory needed to be explored (and particularly why this needed to be explored in the absurd Prometheus xenomorph/life creating goop backstory rather than simply finding the ship for the first time) is another discussion entirely. If you simply object to the existence of these films I completely understand your position but I feel your reasoning isn't sound with regards to Alien lacking backstory.
This guy knows his onions.
I hope they don’t do the same with Gremlins, where we discover that after all this the Mogwai was just an genetic experiment which was created by crossing a Ragdoll cat with a Koala Bear.
I disagree. They're not just a parasite, they're an engineered weapon. Even parasites try to reach some kind of symbiosis. The aliens would just wipe out every planet they came upon. That idea still stands up, but I agree any extra back story kind of spoils it.
I adore Alien, it's my favourite film of all time bar none, and I both agree and disagree with you on this. I agree that the original Alien concept is terrifying in its obscurity, and the fact we don't know where it came from or why it does what it does is quite sinister, but I don't fully agree that Prometheus and Covenant are detrimental to that in the same way as you mention. I think that the backstory of the prequels add a different layer of sinisterness, in that they explore the human/android machinations that lead to the aliens being created, and I personally find that backstory intriguing and ominous in a diffferent way to the creatures themselves. The aliens are still terrifying parasites, and their behaviour isn't changed by the human/android backstory, and so I don't quite feel like it steps on Alien's toes in the same way as Exorcist 2 did with The Exorcist. We know from Alien that Weyland-Yutani are aware of the xenomorph's existence, as they deliberately wake the Nostromo to investigate the distress signal, so to me it doesn't harm the original movie to investigate their links to the creature a little more in the prequels. Having said that, I fully agree that tying Ripley in with characters from the prequel would be a mistake. Her story needs to start in Alien.
It also would have helped loads if he kept the Xeno as an intelligent mysterious being instead of a mindless CGI monster on a rampage.
Taking out that camera showed a flash of intelligence and insight, but thats all it was, a flash. There was absolutely no subtlety or stealth in its actions, it just sprinted about the place being hyperactive and loud.
Feels like a whole film has been missed out, didn't Ridley wish to make these to explore the Space jockey's origins? Ok, some say we will get answers in the next one to the Promethus questions - I highly doubt it, those answers have long gone & are locked up somewhere in the mind of Damon Lindelof, mixed in with the answers & better ending to Lost.
I really like David and I wish the movie was more movies about him and less about his aliens.