We set out yesterday to see Scrubs actor Zach Braff's Garden State, warned off of Alien vs. Predator by bad reviews . . . and then wound up seeing AvP anyway. The line to get into Garden State was enormous, probably because it had been receiving quite a bit of press the past month or so. Since Phoenix seems to get everything well after the rest of the country does, and it has also been a pretty dry summer for intelligent movie-going fare, this led to a run on the only theater in town showing the film. Being somewhat picky on where we get to sit, especially in non-stadium style seating theaters, as this one was, we decided we were better off waiting until next weekend. We were, however, still in the mood to see something - and that left our second choice, which is really only my choice - Alien vs. Predator - because Alissa has no interest in it whatsoever. What a compromise for her - we leave the house with the promise of seeing a gentle, thought-provoking "nice" movie and instead wind up seeing bug-guts being splattered about. I am blessed to have such an understanding wife, especially after seeing AvP . . .
The important thing to remember here is that I'm not a casual fan of the four Alien-based movies. No, I love this series, even the much-maligned - deservedly so - Alien Resurrection. Well, okay, I just "tolerate" the presence of Resurrection in the Alien canon. Also important to consider is that I'm not so big a fan of the two Predator movies - I haven't even seen P2, and haven't seen the original in more years than my two hands can count. So maybe I'm a bit biased. Predator, to me, is just an action flick with a foe that happens to be an alien being. Alien and the three that followed it are sci-fi thriller/horror, the first film being an exquisite study of mounting tension with minimal actual use of the adversary. I also feel the alien creature of these movies to be one of the most frightening and well-imagined cinema has ever had on offer. I am biased.
Artist HR Giger's disturbingly erotic artwork proved fertile for usage in a horror flick. The alien creature plays to our deepest fears of nasty insects, especially things like cockroaches - skittering about all slimy and shiny, everpresent and seemingly unstoppable. An egg hatches an eight-legged spider-like creature that latches itself onto the unwitting face of its victim, plants a seed in the depths of the victim's innards that presumably mixes some of the host's DNA with its own, falls off, spent and now useless, and a day or so later a vicious little projectile launches forth from the victim's chest. Scampering off quickly, the creature matures, unseen, and reemerges large, so very much larger than we last saw it - and hungry, very hungry.
Article comments
1 - RJ
Let's see...
- Alien vs. Predator
- Freddy vs. Jason
How about:
Tommyknockers vs. Michael Myers?
Fire in the Sky vs. Firestarter?
Cujo vs. Benji? (My money's on Cujo...)
;)
2 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
Great revuew Tom. totally agree on the difference between alien and predator - atmospheric horror compared to action flick nonsense. In saying that, though, i love both predator flicks. That's one of the coolest baddies of all ever, right there. This should have been amazing, but no, lets get the fella what did resident evil and soldier.
ugh. oh well.
3 - visualsimplicity
Sorry to hear that you passed up Garden State for this movie. Although I haven't seen AVP, I have seen Garden State, and I highly doubt AVP would live up to Garden State. That is one superb movie with humor and heart. Highly recommend it.
4 - Richard
Predator 2 made the assumption that Predators make regular visits to earth, by giving Danny Glover the flintlock pistol. Just to fill you in since you admit not seeing P2
5 - Tom Johnson
VS: I'm looking forward to seeing it this weekend - I have no doubt whatsoever that it'll be far superior to AvP. :-)
Richard: thanks for that - I will have to rent P2 to catch up on what I've missed. I don't think it'll change how I feel about AvP, but I've seen enough comments that P2 is enjoyable, if definitely not quite P1.
6 - JR
...Ripley is "resurrected" from her DNA and somehow winds up with a bit of the alien DNA in her, too, since she had been carrying a Queen Alien inside of her through the third film, which she took to her death in molten lead. Intriguing, maybe, but not very well done - DNA just doesn't work like that.
Maybe it does. I mean, I'm not sure exactly what the premise was in the film; but some evidence has been found of spontaneous "horizontal gene transfer" occurring between species, with bacteria or viruses as vectors. It's a particular concern with genetically modified organisms, because those are created by artificially transferring genes; and transplanted DNA may be more prone to transfer spontaneously. Wasn't there some hint in the films that those aliens were genetically engineered?
I'm not sure if acids can dissolve metal, though. I thought there was something about the bond structure that makes that impossible.
7 - Tom Johnson
JR: that's in intriguing bit of info. Maybe that's what they're trying to suggest in the film, but they never explicitly say so. They just say they got DNA from Ripley's blood and cloned her (the horrible evidence of failed attempts is shown a couple of times, if you recall.) However, I think it's more that Whedon wasn't really thinking of reality when he used the DNA idea - I think it was just convenient and he didn't even consider that people would immediately question that. Had they done some more exposition about it, it might have fit well, but as it is it just doesn't gel. However, I allowed my disbelief to be suspended because it did allow Ripley to become intriguingly bonded with her Alien "offspring" of sorts.
See? That's why even Resurrection remains intriguing, even if it is generally considered a failure - AvP surely won't spawn this kind of thought long after it's disappeared from the silver screen.