It is depressing to watch an expensive, crafty movie that never soars beyond its cold desire to score the big bucks.
I think this is an old review, because nobody in todays world could possibly think that.
Oct 27 - 12:17 PM
This comment has been removed.
You should stick to films like Waterworld, lots of bangs and explosions! Also, stay away from books, you wouldn't like the concentration involved.
Jun 2 - 09:13 AM
You're unbelievably wrong. Alien/Aliens are simply the best sci-fi horror movies ever. Ever.
Jun 11 - 11:51 AM
For god's sake you can stop ripping on blade runner, you've posted 3 repetitive comments on how much it "sucks." That "Boring" part of the movie you keep yammering on about is called atmosphere you insufferable numbskull, something you wouldn't understand because for you to be engaged in a movie, it has to have either well endowed women,CGI up the wazoo, or lots of guns and explosions! This movie was revolutionary, and blade runner was great so just be quiet!
Jun 11 - 10:06 PM
I actually agree with you on both counts!!
Both were boring, unintelligent, non thought provoking movies.
And agree Blade Runner was the more boring of the two. Both were also painfully slow.
Jul 8 - 05:03 AM
"Alien" wasn't a low budget movie. What the hell are you talking about? It was made on a then-high budget of $11 million: (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=alien.htm). It was made only 2 years after the original "Star Wars", which also had a budget of $11 million: (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=starwars4.htm). Back in the 1970s, these were the big budget blockbusters.
Nov 7 - 12:14 AM
No, Joey Jo Jo, Star Wars was low budget, as said by Lucas himself in the original VHS version of Star Wars...
Nov 25 - 10:23 PM
No, Alex. "Star Wars" was NOT a low budget film. When Lucas stated that he meant in comparison to the sequels, the budget was low. An $11 million dollar budget was not low in the 1970s. "Jaws" was produced only 2 years before "Star Wars" on a $7 million budget (http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jaws.htm), and that sure as hell wasn't considered a low budget movie in 1975.
You want to know an example of a low budget film from that time period? "Rocky". "Rocky" had a budget of $1 million (http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/1976/0RKY1.php). THAT was a small budget. $11 million was an exorbitant budget for a film.
Dec 7 - 12:12 PM
"Stripped of its futuristic setting and pretensions, this film is an oldtime B monster picture. Alien might just as well be about a huge scorpion loose in a haunted house, circa 1953".
What the hell are you talking about? You can't take away significant aspects of a film (i.e. the setting!!!) and then criticise it!
Your petulant and overly-cynical attitude has caused you to completely miss the point of this film. Congratulations, you jackass.
Oct 31 - 10:49 AM
Seriously?? Yes, this review from TIME was written during the original 1979 release (June 4, 1979). Yes, the film received mixed reviews when it was first released. But, is it actually relevant nowadays? "Alien" is now widely considered a stonecold, 4-star classic and one of the greatest movies of all time. Even TIME magazine itself has changed their views on "Alien" from negative to positive, and they also ranked the film #7 on its list of the 25 greatest horror movies. Google:
Top 25 Horror Movies - TIME
This alone should make the original review null and void. Why can't Rotten Tomatoes get with the times??
Other honors for "Alien":
It was entered into the national archives by the Library of Congress:
http://www.loc.gov/film/nfr2002.html
The American Film Institute named "Alien" the 7th greatest sci-fi movie ever made:
http://www.afi.com/10top10/category.aspx?cat=7
Empire Magazine ranked it #33 on its list of the 500 greatest movies:
http://www.empireonline.com/500/91.asp
Total Film placed it on their list of the 100 greatest movies:
http://www.totalfilm.com/features/100-greatest-movies-of-all-time
Film 4 ranked it as the 36th greatest film of all time:
http://www.filmsite.org/filmfour2.html
Nov 7 - 12:05 AM
Time magazine placed this in their top 25 horror movies of all time.
This review can mean only one thing,
Frank Rich is trolling.
Feb 15 - 10:33 PM
No, Frank Rich was just writing the review in 1979, at a time before many critics understood the movie and reappraised it. I'll bet a large sum of money that Rich himself changed his mind subsequently.
Aug 25 - 04:56 PM
Time magazine doesn't like one of the greatest movies ever made and a true sci-fi classic. What a surprise...
(insert eye roll indicating sarcasm here).
Sep 9 - 07:10 AM
Come on Frank, you dissapoint me, Alien is the greatest monster movie ever made...
Sep 13 - 05:01 PM
It's depressing reading this poorly done review, & seeing the tomatometer go down from 100% to a 96%
Sep 14 - 03:44 PM
it is depressing to hear pompous idiots try to put down one of the best horror/sci-fi movies of all time.
Oct 13 - 01:15 PM
Top Critic
Lord Naseby
That is incredibly cynical of you to think that. it goes far beyond that.
Oct 26 - 08:09 AM