Reviewed by: David Kerr
What does the Bible say about intelligent life on other planets? Answer
Are we alone in the universe? Answer
Does Scripture refer to life in space? Answer
Questions and Answers about The Origin of Life
Cloning: Right or wrong? Answer
Death in the Bible
GAY—What’s wrong with being gay? Answer
Homosexual behavior versus the Bible: Are people born gay? Does homosexuality harm anyone? Is it anyone’s business? Are homosexual and heterosexual relationships equally valid?
What about gays needs to change? Answer
It may not be what you think.
How does viewing violence in movies affect the family? Answer
|Featuring||Sigourney Weaver (Ellen Ripley), Winona Ryder (Annalee Call), Dominique Pinon (Vriess), Ron Perlman (Johner), Gary Dourdan (Christie), Michael Wincott (Frank Elgyn), Kim Flowers (Sabra Hillard), Dan Hedaya (Gen. Martin Perez), See all »|
|Producer||Brandywine Productions, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Bill Badalato, Gordon Carroll, David Giler, Walter Hill, Sigourney Weaver|
|Distributor||Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation|
Usually I enjoy bad movies because they are great to laugh at—but when the bad movie in question is a sequel to my all-time favorite movie “ALIENS” it’s not funny at all. It is sad and upsetting. Granted, “Alien: Resurrection” is better than the squalid “Alien 3,” but not by much.
To sum up the plot, in the first “Alien”, Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) met with the first infamous alien, and in “Aliens” she met more. These aliens are hideous, viscous creatures that live inside a person and explode through their chest. In “Alien 3,” Ripley gets infected by a queen alien (one that can lay eggs) and then dies. 200 years later in “Alien: Resurrection”, Ripley is brought back to life through cloning. Not just a clone, mind you, a clone that is half Ripley, half alien. To top it off, her clone has a queen alien in it. It is left a complete mystery as to how cloning someone from their DNA could make an extra alien, and why Ripley is half an alien is an even bigger mystery. Of course, mayhem ensues when the aliens are bred and break out of their cages, and everyone dies except the heroes. Nothing you haven’t seen before.
“Alien: Resurrection” may not live up to its predecessors, but the sequel has better effects. Right? Wrong! Ten years after “Aliens” and the effects are *worse*. The aliens look like they are covered in metallic black moss, they move like jerky robots, and make lion sounds. Since when did the aliens sound exactly like zoo animals? The queen bears little resemblance to an actual queen and is not realistic whatsoever. Yet these bad effects are nothing as compared to the “new” alien (called a Newborn) at the end of the movie. Is there a more unimaginative alien in Hollywood? None that I can think of! Add to that many leaps of logic, such as aliens dodging bullets, people holding their breath for five minutes under water, and a totally unbelievable end scene and you have one frustrating movie.
There are a few scenes that are interesting, such as the fate of the Newborn and when Ripley meets her failed clones. Suffice it to say this latter scene makes a strong case for euthanasia. Ugh. This film is definitely not for kids under eighteen. This is not nearly as scary as the recent “Event Horizon” but it has more than its fair share of blood and guts. The Lord’s name is taken in vain, there is nudity (non-sexual), and there is what may be a sex scene between Ripley and an alien. Christians should definitely avoid this movie unless they know for sure that they can handle this kind of content.
See list of Relevant Issues—questions-and-answers.