Alien(s)?
Why Aliens is a great sequel, and why I don’t like it
Aliens is alright. It’s a dead decent movie. But I cannot profess to understand its legendary status. While Alien is amorphous Lovecraftian horror, this is… a sci-fi adventure with giant insects? The reptilian predator of the first film has become arthropodal cannon fodder in the hands of James Cameron. Maybe it deserves its place within the science-fiction-action canon — but it certainly cannot compare with the cinematic greats (among which I count Alien). Can it?
A film review is often a record of prejudices and whims. A good film review should both record and strive beyond idiosyncracy to give a fuller account of a movie’s success. Thus, I will try to view more objectively what James Cameron is doing in relation to Ridley Scott’s film: how he pushes the franchise in a new direction, and by doing so crafts a stellar sequel.
My primary objection to Aliens is that it cashes out too cheaply all the thrills of the original instalment. The xenomorph of the first movie is a perfect predator, belonging to a technologically advanced and ancient race, and representing the apex of evolution. The second film takes all this mystery and terror and dissolves it in a fury of flame and bullets. Similarly the shock of seeing an alien burst through the breast of a human becomes gimmicky because of overuse. The instinct for more which drives action films creates in this case a movie that is overfilled with tension and scares and killing, and which fizzles into tedium by the end, blasting an emotional crater in the franchise which it takes two movies to dig out of.
Besides the fact that made it difficult to recover the franchise, this is an excellent sequel. It takes just enough ideas from the original film to maintain continuity and the sense of a shared universe, without overburdening itself in recreating the highly original atmosphere of the first. Crucially we still have xenomorphs, who still like to lay eggs in their victims which burst through their chests at inopportune moments. There are many shared plot points (spoiler warning!), notably the efforts of the greedy Company to obtain alien matter at any cost; there are also more minor inclusions such as going back for an innocent and defenseless creature (first a cat, now a little girl), the race against a self-destruct timer, the false sense of security and the subsequent realisation of a stowaway alien, and the very satisfying blasting of a xenomorph out of an airlock. (Aliens even features another gratuitious shot of Sigourney Weaver in her underclothes.) These elements are used mostly to good effect, creating an emotional resonance with the first film.
Indispensable to the efforts of continuity and emotional accumulation are of course the heroic efforts of Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver). In both films she is tough, resourceful, and sympathetic. In Aliens she battles with PTSD, which, being the calibre of heroine she is, and realising she must not linger to avoid the film running overtime, she quickly shrugs off. She even very briefly (for about five seconds) grapples with the realisation that she has been asleep for 57 years, and that likely her whole family is dead or dying. Those two sarcastic comments aside, it is Ripley who is at the emotional heart of these two films. It is Ripley versus the Alien, in two entirely different situations. But it is not so much about Ripley herself as about what she represents in extremis: a persistent, defiant humanity, part of the Manichean conflict of human versus alien which Cameron amply brings to light.
What makes Cameron’s sequel successful is that it takes up select elements of the first film, and combines them with new ideas to create a totally different but still recognisable movie. Cameron makes the Alien franchise his own. This is accomplished most obviously through genre transmutation, morphing sci-fi horror into action/adventure. This shift is navigated skillfully and seamlessly. He brings with him all the accoutrements of the genre: the love plot between Ripley and Colonel Hicks, which is suitably subtle and suggestive; the tough gang of ‘grunts’, whose main weapons are crude humour and foul language (and who unfortunately ring false); the innocent life at stake in the form of Newt, who Ripley forms a deep emotional connection with, probably motivated by the loss of her own daughter; and the heroic sacrifices of Vasquez and Bishop. The dynamic web of relationships which emerges, especially from the marines, creates a film which is perhaps emotionally richer, and certainly more diverse, than the first.
Another important inclusion is the red herring of Bishop, who we expect to launch into a spree of murder at any moment, and who distracts us from Ash’s machinations. Cameron’s deception pays off when Bishop saves Newt from being swallowed into space, a moment rendered touching and almost tragic by the aspersions cast upon him by Ripley. He is one of various red herrings scattered throughout the film that ramp up tension; others include frequent shots of ammunition counters that ultimately end up not being relevant.
The boldest and most interesting theme of Aliens is that of motherhood. It is established through the relationship of Ripley and Newt, and comes to fruition when Ripley confronts the Alien brood mother. Ellen’s slow retreat from the nest is marked by an unspoken understanding: both figures will do anything to protect their ‘babies’. Neither is willing to attack, knowing the risk it exposes their ‘children’ to. Only once Newt is relatively safe does Ripley fire. This to me is a betrayal of mutual understanding — the implicit deal, forged in a moment of silence and a sharing of gazes, was that both would leave the others’ ‘child’ unharmed. This is significant as the only moment where the possibility of intelligence is ascribed to the xenomorph, where the aliens’ unthinking animal aggression is paused. In this moment the film promises to make something more of the Aliens, until this hope is burned and blasted into bits by its protagonist. Nonetheless, this scene is crucial in developing the conflict of this film into one not only borne out of individual self-preservation, but empathy, maternity, and an entire species’ struggle for survival. The stakes could not be higher.
Cameron employs great technical skill at a minute level to achieve this film. Alien relies on hiding the alien from us as much as possible; Aliens exposes us fully to the biological prowess of the xenomorph, made possible by the impressive animatronics operating under their glossy surfaces. Most astounding is the fight between the power loader and Alien Queen: they crash into each other with weight, and we can almost feel the ground shake beneath us. The set design immerses us in spaceship and space base alike. It is these details that create a visceral feast.
Aliens expanded my notion of what a sequel is. A sequel is not just a logical continuation of plot. A good sequel is rather a reinvention of its progenitor, while keeping the ‘thisness’ of the original intact; it should add a new dimension to the premise of the franchise. Aliens is according to these criteria highly successful.
While I can admit the excellence of a film I initally disliked, I am unable to bring myself to like it. As arbitrary and cliched as it sounds, this is not my type of movie. And that’s okay. One does not have to like everything that is ‘good’. There is something important in this realisation.
