Charlieze Theron and her weird arc did nothing to add to the movie, and the bizarre Lazarus storyline wasn't necessary either. The crazy C-section was interesting, and the various alien elements worked as set pieces but truly the film is a mess. Other than the 'ancient alien' reveal there were too many unexplained oddities to forgive. The swimming eel-like creatures? The giant squid-snake at the end? The monstrous super-powered mutated humans? Too much you-know-what packed into a too long film.
Fassbender and Rapace can't sustain all the extraneous crap.
But it was confusing at times. I was not sure how this one fitted in as a prequel to Alien1, but I thought it was a lead up to the story behind the "derelict spacecraft" and the "engineer sitting at the canon" in the early scenes of Alien 1. And of course, the origins of the Alien on the desolate planet.
I haven't read up about it but I didn't get the meaning of the opening scene where the 'engineer' drinks the concoction with the organisms (contagions?) then goes down the waterfall.
What were the 'engineers' running from then? The creature that resembles the squid alien? or one of their own who gets infected with the same thing that Holloway and Fifield contract? And are they the same thing but at different stages of development? (i.e. the Alien in it's various forms?)
And what of the Alien? Is the Alien that takes the 'engineer' the predecessor of the Alien 1 alien? Does it evolve into the Alien 1 form as we see it when it erupts from the engineer?
if the engineer dies there in the escape pod, who ends up in the cradle canon in the scene from Alien? Why not write the screenplay and have him die there which would lead very nicely into Alien 1? The last bit of dialogue in the movie refers quite nicely to the fact that a message should be sent out to stay away from the planet - fits well with the scene in Alien where they realise the distress signal was in fact a stay-away signal. So why not let the engineer die in the cradle? Why, Mr.Scott?
And what was in the canisters? The aliens in amoebic form? or some other conatagion that would wipe out a race? the weapon of mass destruction? Did i miss it or was there an explanation as to why these creatures wanted to destroy the human race?
too many questions without answers coming out of the movie. The people I watched it with thought the same thing. So for this I scored it low. Maybe it gets addressed in another movie ? Alien Covenant perhaps? (which I will be seeing very soon)
As for the photography, framing, special effects - fantastic.
As for the casting, personally I didn't like the two main actors - Rapace and Marshall Green. Nothing lacking in their acting but they just didn't do it for me like all the casted actors in Alien, Aliens, Aliens 3 and 4 did. IN particular, ALien 1 and 2 were perfectly casted. I thought Idris Elba in particular was well casted, and Fassbender to a degree, and Theron looked absolutely amazing to the point where any xenomorph would have to melt when they saw her.
All in all, entertaining, great effects, but a story full of holes which led to my low score. Interestingly, it doesn't get much screening on free to air in Australia, certainly nowhere near as much as the Alien quadrilogy does.
he film is beautiful and it wants you to see that immediately. The first 1/4 of the movie is pretty much all gorgeous landscape shots. It does follow the general outline of Alien better than you might be remembering the wonderful design is complimented by brilliant acting. A variety of talents from Idris Elba the smooth captain, to Charlize Theron the stoic captain, Michael Fassbender the manipulative android and Guy Pierce as THE Wayland who started all this make up the cast. The story is magnificent and truly left of to the viewer to decipher but the actions of some of these wonderful characters are inexcusable. Why run off from the group? Why take your helmet off? Why play with that white snake? & those aren't the only burning questions because if you don't like the thought of it being a Choose your answer adventure story you will be left wondering; Why did those drawings lead them to a weapons facility? Why did that huge space jockey get so violent immediately? Why did they want to destroy earth?.. apparently in an earlier draft, it was because 2100 years before the Engineers sent one of their own to tutor the humans and they crucified him. Honestly, it's better in ambiguity.
The general consensus was mine initially as well (in 2012), over ambitious - with too little presence of the Xenomorphs. Now, upon rewatch the movie seems better off without them, though some use for the Deacon would have been pleasant. With a few strong female leads the movie manages to deliver side characters with some depth along and an android 100x better than Ash. This film is scary and builds on the mythology of Alien without leaning on the famous creature. This movie makes you think for yourself and never hands you all the answers & with so many questions you my need a rewatch before you can even solidify a decent theory on the subject matter. But it doesn't hold your hand and that's why I give it a 4/5