Alien (1979)

[slayrrr666]

Part two of my never-ending shame series:

"Alien" is a pretty overrated film.

**SPOILERS**

The crew of the commercial starship Nostromo, headed by Captain Dallas, (Tom Skerritt) overhear a distress call come from a nearby planet. Deciding to investigate, the landing crew sees a large ship off in the distance. Breaking off orders, they decide to investigate the ship. One of them, Kane, (John Hurt) comes back to the ship with some sort of parasite on his face. After waiting for several hours, the parasite finally releases itself and everything seems normal. During dinner that night, however, Kane begins to violently heave and groan, and from inside his stomach bursts forth a tiny alien, who escapes into the bowels of the ship. Trying to investigate what is attacking them, the crew all meet various ends by the mysterious creature. Soon, only Ripley, (Sigourney Weaver) is left, and the deadly secret that the creature holds will be difficult for her to defeat it.

The Good News: To many, this is a classic film. The design for the title creature may be the best thing about it. It is very distinctly outer-spaceish design and the way that it came out is a pretty disturbing sight, and might be one of the greatest shocks of cinema. After knowing that an alien has been lying on a crew-members face, he comes out for dinner and everything seems fine. Suddenly, he begins violently choking and gagging, and he starts to loose control of his movements. The crew has trouble restraining him and keeping him from getting out of control before he can be examined. Suddenly, we notice that his stomach is starting to erupt, and then it just explodes and out comes the title alien. The suspense of the scene comes from the fact that we think he’s alright, then this just comes out of nowhere, and it also features the only violence in the film. This is a pretty dry film, and that may help some with the suspense, because we never know what the alien is fully capable of, and we have to imagine what it’s doing to it’s victims. The claustrophobia that sets in from being so far from help is a nice new idea, as there is finally no place they can go. Miles from help, they have to rely on their instincts to survive, and going up against a violent animal is a no-win situation for many of them, as they are eventually killed by the alien.

The Bad News: Let me just say this one thing that severely damped my viewing of this film: I saw Aliens, the sequel, first, so I didn’t watch this from one film to another continuously. With that being said, this one is so slowing paced several times I had to pinch myself to keep myself awake. It can lead to boredom if viewed at the wrong time of day or energy level. I never really felt any suspense at all, and I was just hoping that the creature would appear sooner and kill them off. For all the talk about it being one of the scariest films ever made, I never got into it. Maybe it had to do with the fact that I didn’t see it as a horror film, but more of a Sci-Fi film. This is a great Sci-Fi film, but it never really did sink in to me as a solid horror film. The attacks probably needed to come a little faster, because this film almost made me fall asleep. This might’ve terrified the audience back then, but I didn’t get into it.

The Final Verdict: This isn’t called a landmark fill for no reason, but I just didn’t enjoy it as much as others have. I think it is very overrated, and the problem I have with it, the slow pace, should not deter you from at least seeking this one. It may not be for everyone, but give it a chance.

Rated R: Violence, Language, and scenes with animals in danger

[spacer]

Complete disagreement.

You said that the pace was too slow and that you got bored and that the violence wasn't scary and concluded the flick was highly overrated.

I believe otherwise. This masterpiece is still underrated.

It might seem slower to many especially younger viewers who prefer faster entertainment, but haven't it appeared to you that the movie with the fast action, rapid clips, cluttered f/x and over-soaked with violence for the sake of violence which often has no other justification is usually a good entertainment just for once, that such a movie is a disposable thing just for one single viewing and no more.
You discard such a flick from your memory like a used napkin and go on to see others like this (maybe Mr&Mrs Smith ).
The pace is indeed slower but it isn't boring, it is building the atmosphere, the suspense.

But recognizing such phenomena as 7-minut attention span and the like or an increasing need for harder and harder stimulants like violence and gore I understand that for many who are 'MTV-clipped' it is impossible to slow a bit and enjoy something less direct and hurried.

To me, otherwise, such fast movies are boring indeed. While films like Alien are a steady joy and can be watched almost endlessly. I hate ads and I go to theater to watch movies not them or any other clips.

P.S. I'm not against all fast action movies but I don't like stupid clip-like quickness without the need and purpose.
For example to me a good example of a logic and enjoyable fast action was Cellular.

[Bartwald]

Cellular is a very good film - here I agree with ya, spacer; as for Alien - I think I agree with slayrrr more. The first film is my favourite in the series but I still think it is just this bit overrated. Perhaps the main reason for my - and slayrrr's - thinking this way is the fact that we saw it too late, not anytime near when it originally premiered, and let's be honest here: it did lose some of the impact throughout all these years.

I rate Alien 7,5/10 which means I really, really like it anyway, but it's not one of those films I'm totally passionate about. Y'know, like Zombie 2, Wrong Turn, The Stuff or, say, Pitch Black.

[Heineken Skywalker]

Man, I don't even know where to begin.
I think my head exploded reading some of the comments made thus far.

First mistake. Watching the sequel first. Why do people do this?
From the getgo, you've ruined the surprise of who survived the first movie. In one scene Ripley goes on to explain to the marines, what happened to Kane. So, you've ruined those surprises as well. Of course when you finally watch the first film things aren't nearly as shocking. You've already been told the basic plot in the sequel.

ALIEN is overrated? Um, no, it's definitely not.
1) Did it scare the hell out of people, especially those who saw it in a theater in '79 and for many years afterwards? Yes, it did.
2) Did it feature state of the art creature, make-up and visual effects? Yes, it did.
3) Did it feature a strong cast of actors, not stars, so that the audience would have no idea who would survive and who would die? Yes, it did. Not to mention that they weren't just a bunch of cliches and cartoons so that the audience was actually attached emotionally in their fates.
4) It features at least two or three great unnexpected shocking moments, ie: [red]SPOILERS[/red] The facehugger leaping onto Kane's face, the chestburster emerging from Kane, Ash is a robot. Most modern sci-fi/horror movies would be hard-pressed to come up with just one similar shock. Let alone three.
5) Did it influence a great many other films and filmmakers? Absolutely.
6) Did it get ripped off by other films and filmmakers for years to come. Ditto.
7) It was something that is sorely lacking in a lot of modern horror films. An R-rated horror movie with no teenagers in sight. It didn't cater to a teen market. It was an adult movie.
8) Did it feature an unexpected hero? Yes, it did. I think most people would've bet on either Captain Dallas or Parker ultimately emerging victorious.
9) Did it feature one of the most original creature designs, thanks to H.R. Giger, to ever appear on screen? Yes, it did. Not to mention the the rest of the design work on the film, ie: sets, costumes, vehicles, etc. It's all perfect.
10) Did it slowly create a feeling of tension and dread, instead of trying to wow us with lightning quick edits and cuts? Yeah man, that's called building suspense.
11) Did it get Oscar nominations? Yup.
12) Was it succesful enough to spawn a sequel? Yeah, several of them. One of them, ALIENS, is considered a fantastic film in it's own right.
13) Did it make a lot of money at the box office? Why, yes, it even did that.

So, please explain to me, how it is overrated? To me, overrated, is a film that never deserved it's praise or accolades. ALIEN deserves every bit of praise heaped on it.
Sure, I can see how a much younger person seeing it now for the first time, has probably seen much more violent and gorey films in the 26 years since ALIEN premiered. But ALIEN wasn't really about that. It was more about character and building tension.
And no, ALIEN, wasn't completely original. It borrowed from other movies too, especially THE THING, the original, not the Carpenter remake. But at the time of it's release, nobody had ever seen anything like it. A monster on the loose movie, with a much more vast budget and scope, not to mention taking the material so seriously. It was a B-movie in epic movie trappings.
I do feel sorry for a lot of the younger generation who grew up on MTV style lightning quick editing, that when a movie takes it's time in unveiling it's story, it's considered slow and boring.
But hey, I'm glad that you feel JASON X is a classic movie, at least. Now there's an influential and original film.
My vote: 9/10

[slayrrr666]

Heineken, I don't like slow paced movies. I love movies that are very fast and never stop or let up. It's my action-movie roots. Alien was just too slow for me to really get into. Granted, all that stuff is true, but it's just not my cup of tea. Building suspense is great, but let it out every once in a while. After a while, I forgot why I was sitting there in suspense. Nothing really happened to warrant me to sit there clinging to my barca-lounger waiting for something to happen. That's why I called it overrated.
Jason X, while cartoony, is more along the lines of movies I like. I did jump several times during the movie, and it's simplistic plot is something I like about it. Too me, movies that make you think too much are some of the most boring films I've ever sat through. I keep saying this, but it's true: Give me a plot that can sustain 900 minutes, and I'll be happy. Cartoony is better, because you can have fun watching a movie than trying to appreciate something that you really don't care for.

[Bartwald]

Heineken, now calm down, man... I knew that our comments will make you mad but what can we do except being honest here? Alien is overrated TO ME, just because it never gave me the thrills I was promised. And that's it, really.

[spacer]

Hats off before Heineken!!!
Man, you said it.
Full, unconditional agreement!!!

[Heineken Skywalker]

admin said:

Heineken, now calm down, man... I knew that our comments will make you mad but what can we do except being honest here? Alien is overrated TO ME, just because it never gave me the thrills I was promised. And that's it, really.

Sorry man, but like you, I'm passionate about the movies I love as well. If I can't be honest in how I feel than why bother posting at all?
If all the things I listed were not true, then I might see yours and slayrrr's point. If it was just one more creature on the loose flick, I wouldn't care. But it absolutely is considered a classic of the genre, and I agree wholeheartedly with the critics and audiences who thought so. I know that when people who consider ALIEN overrated also feel that JASON X and WRONG TURN are some of the best movies they've seen, that I'm fighting an uphill battle, but I had to speak my mind too, right?
I guess I most take offense to the word "overrated" when applied to certain movies. It's like checking out the forums over at IMDB where every classic movie undoubtedly has a thread started by some 15 year old that is titled, "This movie is overrated!" or "I don't see what the big deal is!". That kind of shit just burns my ass. It's obvious some of these kids have the attention span of a gnat. Having grown up on MTV and video games they can't be expected to sit through a movie that actually slows down every once in a while for dialogue and anything else that might interrupt the explosions.
Bah! I'm really looking forward to slayrrr's review of PSYCHO. That should be fun.
Oh, and thanks Spacer.

[Quorthon]

And with a single review of Alien, the board is divided!!

So I'm on the Spacer/Heineken camp. Alien is a classic and I love it. Aliens is my favorite, but really, Alien is a horror film, Aliens is a science fiction thriller. So it's not exactly easy to compare the two. They're so different.

And I'm in total agreement with Heineken that IMDB has a lot of kids (and I'm not saying Slayrrr is one of them--hell, I watched pretty much every slasher film franchise in all the wrong orders!) that simply don't know a good horror film if it walked up and took a bite outta their shoulder. I hate, hate when people think "only fast zombies are scary." That burns me up like you wouldn't believe. It pisses me off almost as badly as PG-13 Ring-rip-off horror films!!

I guess I'm the gooey center of horror fans--I like fast paced action, I like slower suspense builders, I like blatant gore, I like implied gore, I just really love horror films. The oldest one I own and have great respect for is Nosferatu (1922)--it's a silent film, and kind of slow, but you really can't beat just how creepy that film is--and the cinematography!! I don't care how many CG graphics or "only in a computer" shots a movie has, chances are, for pure, bare-bone cinematography modern Hollywood often fails in comparison to the art of Nosferatu.

As near as I can tell, I'm one of the few people that can watch a movie after it's initial shocking, surprising, revolutionary release and still get almost the full effect out of it. I still enjoy Them! (1954) and Night of the Living Dead (1968)--and for the latter once did a 6-page report (it's on my website) about how the '68 is superior to the '90 remake.

I guess it's all just in the person. And I dread how stupid people will sound when the next Fly remake comes out. No one, no one will do that better than Cronenberg. Fly 2006? Pointless remake.

Interesting point of view, though, Slayrrr.

[Bartwald]

Thanks goodness I'm way older than 15 'cause I guess I'd be crying my eyes out now "Noooobody understands me... They... they... they are laughing at meeeee!!!"

So you guys go mad when somebody calls Alien overrated, huh? Then feel MY pain: I simply can't stand when somebody's saying that De Palma rips off Hitchcock or that he's inferior to the master; for me it's always "Dude, you just can't notice the magic that lies deep within every De Palma film - and I can't help you with that".

We all suffer, we do. But unless everyone on The Board agrees with me that each and every De Palma film is pure genius, I will keep repeating that Alien disappointed me a bit. Even though - please remember - I liked it a lot, nevertheless.

[Quorthon]

DePalma did take a lot from Hitchcock for Raising Cain....

But Raising Cain holds up pretty well on it's own as a solid, and weird, film.

[Bartwald]

quorthon said:

DePalma did take a lot from Hitchcock for Raising Cain....

He did. But the thing is - he improves on Hitchcock's ideas, not just steals them.

A great film, Raising Cain.

[slayrrr666]

Is that even out, Bart? I've heard some things about it, but can't seem to find it. I'm not going out immediately, I've got my "Never-ending shame" series to finish.

[Quorthon]

I found Raising Cain in Wal-Mart's $5 bin.

Along with a whole bunch of movies I now own!! Hell, Creepshow and The Blob were in there!!

[slayrrr666]

Cool. Thanks Q. After Christmas Spending Spree, in it goes!