I took last Monday off work and snuck into a film critics only morning screening of A:C. I had resisted the hype so far, but as I entered the theater I couldn't help but feel super fanboy-ish. That feeling did not last through to the end of the film... Sigh. Here my couple of cents.
To start, one my main issues with the film is this - during the first 20 minutes of Alien, we are introduced to an entire fictional universe through a few sets, costumes, blinking lights, corridors etc. - and it feels alive, lived in, it feels real, even though some of the technology depicted was dated even at the time of filming.
In Covenant, right from the very first shof of the ship, I was aware I was watching a movie - and not in a good way. The set design of film is a step in the wrong direction IMHO, sort of like a meld of Prometheus & Alien elements, that seems a little jarring at times.
The pacing is all over the place - there are exposition parts that could be shorter, and action set pieces that seemed to last seconds and I couldn't tell exactly what was happening - overall, I think the film would benefit from a longer running time, giving each element of the film its due.
The effects were also all over the place - some things were done extremely well, while others reminded me of movies 10+ years older - for example, there's a scene early on involving the ship that reminded me of the effects of 1998's Star Trek Insurrection.
As Mark Kermode said, somewhere along the line in this franchise, the people inhabiting this universe stopped talking like regular people in extraordinary situations. Even on the much maligned Alien: Resurrection, the dialogue felt more natural, most of the time - probably because the film did not wish to make some sort of grand, 'high brow' statement, as Scott is obviously trying to make both here and in Prometheus.
And we finally arrive at my biggest problem - which originates with Prometheus. Now a lot of people have complained about this, and I was willing to give the creators the benefit of the doubt, that they wished to and had found a way to dig themselves out of the Prometheus hole, but I'm afraid most people talking of 'George Lucas/midichlorian' syndrome were correct.
The original Alien was scary because it was a black box - we didn't know where it came from, or how it came to be, we didn't know the full extent of its intelligence, or its motives, beyond self propagation - in a sense, it was random, like a natural disaster, a virus or an earthquake. It just happened - and the human characters were there at the wrong place and at the wrong time, having to deal with this unstoppable force of nature as best as they could.
I believe that the entire concept behind these newer films, starting with Prometheus, while introducing a few interesting ideas, ultimately detracts from the menace and mystery of the 'perfect organism' - it demystifies the Alien. In an entire galaxy full of possibilities, most of which would be incomprehensible to a mere human,once again, a terrible and unknowable threat like the xenomorph is inextricably linked with the existence of human beings.
But for me, the xenomorph has always been there, wether humans existed or not. It doesn't care about us. We're not its creators, nor do we play a role in its evolution, much like an ant doesn't determine the course of an avalanche... It's been there long before humans first climbed down from the trees and it'll probably outlive us as a race. It was just... there, on LV-426, and perhaps other parts of the galaxy, and by accident was discovered by the crew of the Nostromo... And this is why it's so effective - why a guy in a suit could produce nightmares. So in my opinion this retconning of the Alien universe ultimately unravels some of the most basic foundations upon which this franchise has been built.
And don't get me started on the tired/overdone 'rogue AI discovering consciousness' trope that Scott is so keen on 'exploring' in these movies... It's like a poor man's version of Westworld (which wasn't even hard scifi, just more intelligent in dealing with the subject). Even Scott himself dealt with the subject more delicately and interestingly in Blade Runner. Take the entire opening scene, which felt like a deleted scene from Prometheus - 'hey people, check this out, this is our villain now, so here's a little scene demonstrating his quest to create etc.'. The film would be much better had it started off in space, like previous Alien films.
In the end, all of these criticisms would be moot, if the end result made me simply not care about them. But it didn't.
I always believed there are two kinds of movies - there's the kind of movie where, despite a ton of issues, there's someone somewhere on the planet that thinks its the greatest achievement in cinematic history, even if by objective standards this isnt' true. Let's skip the Alien films in this example, let's take Star Trek... The Wrath of Khan - a great film, indeed. Is it the best film of all time? I think not. But do I get why it could be the best film of all time for some folks? Yes I do.
And then there's the second kind of film, which may not be 'bad', it may even be quite good - but you just know, as the credits roll, that the film you just saw will never be someone's favorite film of all time. Not even for its creators (Ridley et. al.). Covenant is sadly the second kind of film, and that's what disappoints me the most. I can't see anyone in 10 years worshipping this film like people do with Alien, or even Alien 3. Not even quoting certain lines, like fans do with the much maligned A:R.
I hope I'm proven wrong, and that repeat viewings will make me appreciate it more. It's not a bad film, but it's not a very good one either - and it somehow feels a bit 'by the numbers', like there was not a lot of enthusiasm behind it, a sort of 'film by committee' mentality, which worries me regarding potential sequels. We'll see...
