I kind of enjoyed Alien: Romulus. It’s a solid, workmanlike ‘haunted house in space’ movie — creepy, scary, and, unfortunately, familiar. If you like Alien, you’ll like Alien: Romulus because at it’s heart it’s exactly the same movie with different set dressing.
I had the leisure to think about what I was seeing, since the plot wasn’t much of a distraction, and I found myself wondering about the biology of the xenomorphs. There’s a lot of silliness there. One small thing I noticed was how slow and awkward the xenomorphs are. No real predator would stop and vogue in front of its prey, slowly opening its jaws to extend a second set of jaws while hissing and dripping. It’s become an indispensable trope in these movies, and sure, it’s intended to slowly ramp up the tension, but that’s not how predators act.
I feed spiders twice a week. Here’s how they act: they take their time prepping. They go on alert when something stumbles into their web, orienting themselves and rising up on their legs and paying close attention. That could be a terrifying moment in the scary movie, with that moment of tension, but when it is time to attack, they don’t delay — they move fast. They dart forward, immobilize the prey with more silk or a swift bite. They don’t stupidly pose prior to trying to disable the big creature they want to eat.
Maybe you’re not acquainted with spiders. I’ve also been attacked by a dog. It did not run up to my leg, stop, cock its head, snarl, and then slowly try to bite my calf (try, because I pedaled my bike and got away). If you’re making your living by killing your food, you don’t make it a cinematic experience, you get the business over with as quickly as possible.
Another thing that bugged me was all the slime. I don’t object to wet puppets, but the action is all taking place on a big metal ship. Where is all that water dripping off these aliens coming from? Wouldn’t a ship be equipped with dehumidifiers to extract all that water out of the environment? I know there were several scenes with partially flooded chambers, but why? I’m sure condensation is an issue in a ship, but in the future, ships in the vacuum of space don’t need to conserve air and water? How nice for them.
I’m not going to try to address the energetic cost of synthesizing and containing a highly reactive substance in their blood that has the ability dissolve its way through multiple levels of a metal spaceship.
Maybe xenomorphs are more like cats with mice, and the posing is their equivalent of playing with their food.
Saw it opening night. While I thought the first half had potential, it quickly became just a copy of Alien, I think the writers got lazy and/or decided that nostalgia and fan service would carry the rest of the movie,
The shitty thing is I love the Alien Universe for its mix of dystopian “cassette-tape” futurism and cosmic horror. The first two movies are among my favorite films, but it all turned to crap with Alien 3 and it’s never been able to get its act together since.
And don’t get me started about Prometheus.
Delay is a common trope in Bond movies as well. The bad guy, who has captured Bond and is going to kill him, puts him in some ridiculous contraption designed to kill sometime in the future giving Bond time to escape. To wit, Goldfinger slicing Bond in two on a laser cutting table, rather than just putting a gun to his head and pulling the trigger.
Akira MacKenzie — “I think the writers got lazy and/or…” Hollywood writers don’t get that much leeway. I think it’s the execs who got lazy and decided a retread would pay for itself and make some money. And while it’s probably not a blockbuster, at least two of the 4 people on this thread so far have paid to see it. That’s not a bad start.
But, PZ, you must recognize that the entire public experience (read as POLITICS) has become sleazy performance art: Slowly posing and threatening, growling and lying in front of the camera.
Politics as performance art: In one of the legs of ‘the trousers of time’ (borrowing a term from Terry Pratchett) politicians evolve into slimy things that lay eggs.
The first Alien was quite original and had to clear several hurdles to be made in all its glory, instead of just being one of hundreds of films appropriate for MST3000.
As ‘haunted house in space’ it was excellent avoiding most tropes. You did not even know in advance who the final survivor would be.
.
Much later The Titan Find (also shown under many other titles) with Klaus Kinski was the only of the numerous cheap copies to be somewhat watchable. Which still put it ahead of the prequels.
The three-hour 1972 Solaris has a lot of existential horror, in that the protagonist has to face his own bad conscience and grief made flesh.
(Soderberghs later version was workmanlike but… it is like watching 2010 after you have seen Kubrick’s 2001)
In a business that requires multimillion dollar profits on a multimillion dollar investment, originality is an extremely rare and extravagant luxury.
On an alien related note, I remember from an old Aliens RPG (1986/87) that the aliens had acidic blood because they stored their body energy like car batteries rather than biologically as fats. Their bodies could use alternate means of power absorption, like photoelectric, electric induction etc for power, with food and other materials for body repair. Biomass was only required for producing new aliens and live ones if that alien wanted to achieve Queen. The extreme acidity was just a useful side effect, particularly for hive defence since their own bodies and structures were acid proof.
Short answer: No.
The first Alien was a haunted-house movie, which has never been my thing. The second was a war movie (sort of), which I like. The rest just seemed like horror movies, for which I never had any use.
And what’s with that title? It sounds like a Star Trek/Alien crossover where, what…the Romulans try to harness this new “bioweapon” against the Klingons or the Federation? That’d be a fun FAFO scenario…
I agree, 1 and 2 were classics, everything after that was just evidence of the creative decline of Hollywood. I would not want to watch this new one, can’t be bothered.
birgerjohansson@6:
” ‘the trousers of time’ (borrowing a term from Terry Pratchett) ”
Credit where it’s due: he probably got it from ISIRTA:
The phrase “Trousers of Time” probably comes from the 1960’s BBC radio comedy series “I’m Sorry I’ll Read That Again” whose stars went on to be “Monty Python” and “The Goodies”. One series included a Dr Who parody – “Professor Prune and The Electric Time Trousers” (said in a spooky voice with echo effects). The cast travelled the universe in the Time Trousers encountering dreadful jokes: “There’s a library at the end of the left trouserleg”, “Aha! A turnup for the book.”
Digressing even more, one of ISIRTA’s stars went on to be Head of Light Entertainment (Radio), Controller of BBC Radio 2 and BBC Radio 4 and later managing director of BBC Radio. Ironic, considering how much time ISIRTA spent mocking BBC management.
It’s been established from the beginning that xenomorphs are intelligent creatures, on par with humans. They don’t act much like humans because they are not humans, but that doesn’t preclude the possibility of human-like behaviors. They may have a culture, and they may have rituals. They might engage in acts of intimidation or even sadism. We know from the second movie that they use tactics and seek revenge.
Maybe xenomorphs don’t act like predators because they aren’t predators. Maybe they aren’t wild animals defending their territory or preying on humans for food. Maybe they’re conquerors at war with a rival culture (humanity). That we don’t immediately recognize this could easily be because they’re so… alien.
“Alien” is fabulous, “Aliens” entertaining, the rest of the mess is just various degrees of mess (just having HR Giger on board made that first movie, even if it took a few years for him to accept that cinema is “art by committee”: all in all he had come to be proud of the result, compromises and all).
My main beef is the metabolic speed: you see some poor bastard gestating something as large as a Chihuahua in a couple of hours, and THEN the lil’ doggy gets bigger than a NBA player in even less time. And let’s not even mention “Alien Covenant”, whose DVD I unwisely purchased, where the NBA player starts from something snowflake-sized. Run!
Then again, we KNOW this. Sequels are mostly shit, and the higher the number the more they stink. And as long as the audience reward safe, crappy sequels they will keep making them.
The first was a game changer, the second an entertaining blockbuster.
Number three was pointless, the forth useless, Promethius inexcusable. And Covenant, well I haven’t endued enough of it to pass judgement. But I expect that more than a few will have to burn for that one.
Do they no longer have AV Clubs at colleges, where you can see weird and interesting little movies?
RB:
Mythologically, Romulus and Remus were twins who founded Rome.
(Precedes Star Trek)
Ronald, these days we have streaming services. Video on demand.
[meta]
PZ has made it pretty clear he just wants the cinema experience, rather than to sit comfortably at home and being able to pause, rewind, take a break, etc. Be one among the crowd.
(Me, I’m the opposite)
Dark Star (1974) written by John Carpenter and Dan O’Bannon has some elements of Alien because O’Bannon co-wrote that, too. Even though it was very amateurish in its effects it broke many sci-fi and hero tropes and still remains influential.
Romulus is not a bad film. THIS is a bad film (but fun to watch if you are drunk and in the right mood)
“Brandon’s Cult Movie Reviews: CREATURES FROM THE ABYSS”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ej96pMcDmck
Remember, with a different director and without Giger the original Alien could have been like this.
An “Alien” knock-off that is mediocre but not complete shit (it has Klaus Kinski being creepy like hell).
“Brandon’s Cult Movie Reviews: CREATURE”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=XU0sxvcwU4I
Maybe the next official Alien spinoff could have zombie Klaus Kinski?
SF franchises:
Predator 6: Badlands (2025) will have Arnold Schwarzenegger. But there is a 50-50 chance the studio will fuck up this too.
@20, Alan G. Humphries,
I didn’t realize there was some cross-fertilization between Dark Star, one of my favorite SF films, and Alien. But it doesn’t surprise me.
Dark Star is the only SF film I’ve ever seen which captures the tedium of space travel. The realism that space travel would require years of doing nothing while travelling between systems, or months of doing nothing while travelling within a system. The motivation for every character action in Dark Star is that the characters are trying to combat boredom. There is a little of that tedium in Alien as well, mainly in the opening sequence. I wouldn’t call Dark Star a great cinematographic experience, it’s frankly a terrible movie, but it has it’s points. In a lot of ways it reflect the reality of space travel a lot better than other SF movies.
Um…yeah, John, but (even more mythologically, but also canonically), Romulus was also one of the Romulans’ home planets. Hence my question.
Pentagon Alien Hunter: Why I Know We are Not Alone or Safe
Seriously? They’re not even going to mention that those videos were debunked by NASA and others, and found to be easily explainable by such photographic phenomena as parallax and bokeh?
?
I found a nice summary of many ways to ruin science fiction films, apart from wearing out a franchise by sequels.
Terry talks movies: “10 Science Fiction Movies I Hate… And Why!”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=CBZ48sUMfpY
Better to go to the original than to a derivative allusion, in my estimation.
Also, Romulans and Vulcans were once the same people.
(Twins, almost, no?)
—
Notice the name Nostromo in the original film?
(Also Italian)
On-topic, I personally share the general sentiments hitherto-expressed herein; that is, the first movie was great.
The second, well, competent but meh.
The third, well, that was the last one I have watched.
(Really, should have left it at the first, but obviously franchises are the thing)
—
I have zero interest in this one.
That noted, I did see this puff-piece recently:
[Very cogent, very media-savvy, is how Ridley comes across]
birgerjohansson@8:
Hey! 2010 was a great movie!
Peter Hyams was a perfectly competent director, and he had the advantage of ample communication via e-mail with Arthur C. Clarke during the scriptwriting, casting, and filming period; there are a lot of great touches, like the rugged design of the Leonov, and the wonderful recreations of the models and sets originally seen in 2001. The novel is economically condensed for the dimensions of the movie (as there is too much in the novel to retain all of it). Hyams even has a humorous backwards glance with a magazine cover showing Clarke facing off against Kubrick (Clarke also appears in a cameo).
But 2010 isn’t a patch on the earlier film.
Same thing, really.
More of the same.
Some people like it, some people don’t.
—
LCD.
Movies are mostly made to make money.
(Sometimes not, but those are the exception)
Franchises make money until they don’t.
#17
Only Romulus founded Rome.
Ah, right, fernando. Been a while since I read about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romulus_and_Remus#Overview
“When they were young adults, they became involved in a dispute between supporters of Numitor and Amulius. As a result, Remus was taken prisoner and brought to Alba Longa. Both his grandfather and the king suspected his true identity. Romulus, meanwhile, had organized an effort to free his brother and set out with help for the city. During this time, they learned of their past and joined forces with their grandfather to restore him to the throne. Amulius was killed and Numitor was reinstated as king of Alba. The twins set out to build a city of their own.
After arriving back in the area of the seven hills, they disagreed about the hill upon which to build. Romulus preferred the Palatine Hill, above the Lupercal; Remus preferred the Aventine Hill. When they could not resolve the dispute, they agreed to seek the gods’ approval through a contest of augury. Remus saw 6 auspicious birds, but Romulus saw 12 and claimed to have won divine approval. They disputed the result; Remus insulted Romulus’ new city and was killed, either by Romulus or by one of his supporters.[4] Romulus then went on to found the city of Rome, its institutions, government, military, and religious traditions. He reigned for many years as its first king.”
Epic!
I’m not going to see it. I find the idea of people dying for the sake of corporation greed depressingly realistic. That’s what drives every goddamn alien film. Even the fucking game. (the game was actually really good, it works great as a horror game).
I just read the latest Murderbot novel. In that universe, Secunit combat involves them running at each other very fast whilst shooting everything they have. Then beating the shit out of each other until one sustains too much damage. Despite how they’re treated Secunits surprisingly like humans.
John @28:
It’s the nickname of a character in the eponymous novel by Joseph Conrad. The action takes place in and around the fictional city of Sulaco (the name of the ship in Aliens).
I thought Alien 3 was well-made, but blithely killing off Newt and Hicks was unforgiveable. I nearly walked out the first time I saw it.
It’s been established from the beginning that xenomorphs are intelligent creatures, on par with humans…
Meh, yes and no. They seem (from what little I’ve seen at least) intelligent enough to anticipate human actions and stay a few steps ahead of their victims, but they also have no technology of their own, and don’t seem to do much actual talking, and act more like predators playing with their prey than sentient creatures working toward any sort of objective.
And this is very much like something I’ve seen in both horror movies and alien-invasion movies. In horror, the mad killer is portrayed as someone so insane he had to be locked up in an institution — but also someone inexplicably able to access implausible resources to carry out a cunning plan to lure or abduct victims from all over and do whatever he wants with them in a secure dungeon with no possible avenue of escape or rescue. It’s hard enough for sane longtime wage-earners to pay for an ordinary house, let alone turn it into a private hell-on-earth with multiple layers of booby-traps and no one even noticing anything unusual.
And in alien-invasion movies, the aliens have superior technology to humans and clearly know how to fight and defeat humans — but also act like savage animals who roar and scream and posture but show no sign of having an actual spoken language or being capable of communication, speech, negotiation, demands or diplomacy. It’s like the producers want villains who are smart enough to be hard to defeat, but also savage or insane enough to be really really scary; and aren’t always good at making any of it plausible.
We watched the original again over the weekend, and it holds up pretty well. Nice slow buildup of tension. Some truly beautifully shot scenes. But does it make sense? No, not really. One of those beautifully shot scenes is of a three-story open space in the middle of a spaceship, built of and surrounded by metal, with water literally pouring from the ceiling. What is this room for, apart from looking cool?
But it does look cool, and the movie really does mostly hold up. So no, I don’t think there was much need to make it again.
Scared to death: How intimidation changes ecosystems
^ The article in #41 was from 2013.
How a ‘landscape of fear’ transformed the ecosystem of this African wildlife park (2019)
Divergent predator activity muddies the dynamic landscape of fear (2022)
@ Raging Bee, #39
Sure, but that’s a human perspective on intelligence. Not just human, but one that applies only to part of humanity. Plenty of humans eschew some or even most technology, but that does not imply that they are less intelligent. They feel that they have what they need,
As for talking, they obviously communicate from the second movie on. They coordinate their actions, plan ambushes, withdraw strategically from combat, etc. The queen in the second movie chooses to either seek revenge on those who destroyed her nest, or to commandeer the Sulaco after the nest’s destruction. Possibly both, but either purpose indicates intelligence beyond what we’d consider ‘base animal cunning.’
Pretty much the entirety of Aliens refutes the idea that they’re just “predators playing with their prey.” The xenomorphs engage in coordinated ambushes, bypass technological defenses, and either seek revenge or flee from a technological danger that an animal shouldn’t be able to understand.
Too, keep in mind that xenomorphs don’t eat people. It’s unlikely that they can, given the biology described in the first couple of movies. They use people (and other animals) as incubators, but the young don’t seem to feed on whoever or whatever they gestate within. They seem to have a biological need for warm incubators, but if that’s the case, then why risk damaging them by “playing” with them? That makes no sense for simple-minded animals, but for intelligent creatures looking to break the will and cow their enemies?
If you define intelligence as “thinks just like we do,” then no, xenomorphs aren’t intelligent. But these are aliens. If you broaden the definition of intelligence to account for possibility the alien mind, beings whose natural and cultural evolution is so far removed from what is familiar to us, it seems obvious to me that xenomorphs are intelligent. They obviously have the faculties to reason, plan, and appreciate consequences. They just don’t value the same things humans do, and why should they?
The weirdest thing for me is how they seem to gain bodymass by magic.
Aliens love to “monologue”. ;-)
Reginald Selkirk@26 It’s the same old story. Why would aliens capable of crossing interstellar distances play silly games with Earth people, like buzzing jet fighters? Or doing jump scares of officials in a government UFO program? Unless interstellar travel is so quick and easy that annoying alien teenagers can borrow mom’s space mini van and go play practical jokes on the stupid primitives, and be back for supper. And of course all it would take would be one world leader to decide he was going to reveal the existence of aliens and the jig would be up.
Sure, but that’s a human perspective on intelligence.
No, it’s a human perspective on certain SF and horror movie tropes.
@44. erik333 : The weirdest thing for me is how they seem to gain bodymass by magic.
Hey! Some of us (ok, me) can relate to that!
@#8birgerjohansson & #31Bekenstein Bound & #32. Xanthë : The novels are better. Loved that 2010 book and whole Space Odyssey series as a kid. The Rendezvous with Rama series too. I think I read 2010 first actually long before I saw either movie.
Of course 2001 is a visual classic and iconic and pioneering and different and 2010 isn’t those – but I did enjoy still enjoy it and think it worked okay from memory. Of course I am also biased here being a fan who went out of their way to watch it back when you could borrow video tapes from Blockbuster to view it but still. Anyhow. I liked it.
I haven’t read the comments yet so, maybe, someone has brought this contention up, but don’t cuttlefish put on a light show for their prey? It could be something similar here.
Anyway, xenomorphs aren’t completely natural. They’re the creation of the android David.