Alien: Romulus - Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 вер 2024
- Let me know what you thought of Alien: Romulus
note: it's 1979 not 1997. got that mixed up! we say numbers the other way around in German and got that wrong. whoops
Ranked Alien List: boxd.it/xMlfU
Our Website: quietonsetpodc...
Buy Stuff on Amazon & we get a kickback: amzn.to/3RU8dGN
Podcast: / @quietonsetpodcast
Gaming: / @quietonsetgaming
Clips: / @quietonsetpodcastclips
VODs: / @quietonsetvods
Twitch: / quietonsetpodcast
Support Us On Patreon:
/ quietonsetpodcast
🎧 Apple: shorturl.at/dioW4
🎧 Spotify: shorturl.at/efhnP
🎧 Google: shorturl.at/apuP3
Join our Discord: / discord
Letterboxd: letterboxd.com...
Twitter: / grafewan
Instagram: / ewangraf
#alien #alienromulus #caileespaeny - Розваги
Couple of notes from what I see people are talking about in the comments:
- I misspoke with the release date year of the original film. Yes, I was aware that it released in 1979 and not 1997. I get them mixed up sometimes because in first language (German) it's said the other way round. dumb mistake and I missed it in editing.
- ALIENS - for those who love the film to death Romulus is not gonna come close to that 'classic status. It's just a personal preference and maybe not the best way to avoid overhyping or overselling the film.
1979 not 1997
Millenials!
@@guyblack yeah my bad I misspoke. Major L.
I was just gonna say that.
Saw it yesterday, it was a rehash for Gen Z; nothing more. Movie was just okay. I was in my early 20's when the first Alien movie came out, it set a standard. No new ground was broken here. I didn't care about any of the characters but they were good actors. I loved Prometheus, it made you think on a wider level.
@@mr.b4444 Prometheus wins Best Picture next to this
Correction.... this is not Ridley Scott's property Ridley Scott did not write the story Ridley Scott simply was tasked to direct a cinematic storytelling depiction of somebody else's property and creation.... Ridley Scott absolutely did not invent alien pyramid he's also someone that does not care about the lore and looks at it completely differently than other people. His name is always on a producing credit because it's probably part of his original contract the guy doesn't know any more about alien than you do. You want to talk to somebody about aliens go talk to James Cameron..... that jerk actually created and made that film release Scott just did a wonderful job directing somebody else's property you got to get that mess right we're not even 10 seconds into it bro
I mean... To say sir Ridley Scott doesn't know anything about aliens... He's made three films and was heavily involved in the production of aliens as well as alien Romulus, and almost got Niel Bloomkamps alien film made... He's gotta know a little bit.
As long as the final act doesnt have a half human alien breed il love this film lol
If there is, my profile pic might turn green
😶
Um.. .😅
I heard that there is
@@patrict527 noooooooo!!!! Lol iv heard the final act is dark amd twisted but having an new breed had already been done and wasnt good at all.for me im hoping they all die brutally after being set up by the weyland company then connecting to aliens as it ends
Any body who rates this above the 2nd one whether I agree with them or not only speaks volumes about this movie. IThe second is my favorite of all time , I really cannot wait to see this !
Need to get Cameron to produce Aliens 2 after this tie up story after with Colonial Marines investigating missing crew...
Nah
@@gerardcrabb4556 Aliens Rivers of Pain is a great film to be made
No. Cameron can stay away.
Great review, wish I didn’t know a legacy character was in it but excited nonetheless
Just saw this movie yesterday:
Pros:
0. Sweet cinematography and camera angles, OK CGI.
1. This is a genuine horror flick, minus the good soundtrack. It uses natural organic sound to imply terror in a pretty decent way.
2. First part of the film is decent and utilizes memberries in a familiary horror movie way specific to the original IP.
3. Implies ideas(such as relationships and sex) instead of showing or directly narrating them which leaves the audience to utilize their imagination.
Cons:
0. Plot armor, Xenos are given a new and uncharacteristic element of intelligence,
1. Second part of the film, up until the end is a horror flick for chicks (definitely don't expect sex after this, if you watch it with your spouse or girlfriend). Plays on the concepts that women fear, such as single-motherShip, miscarriages, abominations, etc
2. Woke element is not necessarily cringe, yet it is still there and it still bad :)
3. Sexist element is definitely there as well as de-masculinization, men dumb weak, women smart strong.
5. Acid blood floats in a circle in 0G, Xenomorph saves instead of impales but only in an elevator :).
4. Could have gave a more female or androgenic design to the final Hibrid, instead point 3 is repeated.
5. Somewhat bad acting on all parts
6. Final dialogue is what all women Think, when entering a relationship.
TERRIBLE. The ending has an Engineer hybrid that looks like Freddy Krueger crossed with the spider alien from Close Encounters. Tame gore. Alien Resurrection wins Best Picture next to this shlock. Awful 😞 the AI CGI Ash was so uncanny valley I couldn't look away in horror, so I guess yes it was a horror movie after all
So it'll be interesting as it comes out this weekend and I'm going to have to wait a few days before I can go see it because my wife has to actually go take care of her mother this weekend for my surgery so I'm going to have to avoid spoilers the entire weekend to wait for her to get back to go see this thing.
I don't see the massive hate that is allegedly there every time the lead character is a woman or people of color are in the cast etc. Only proves if the movie is good then people will not hate on it.
"À l'aide ! : Gros cumul"...
Quand-même un gros problème avec ce film : si on le découvre de façon autonome, il marche plutôt bien, prend joliment son temps pour installer une ambiance qui va du Passionnant (les plans spatiaux, amples et presque muets) à la Justesse (quand ces personnages expriment être en quête d'un avenir meilleur).
Mis à part quelques lourdeurs narratives et techniques, surtout dans la dernière demi-heure, voilà un Space Opera horrifique d'une bonne tenue.
Et qui s'inscrit plutôt bien dans la filmographie du réalisateur Fede Álvarez, qui comporte aussi bien des huis clos adolescents que des réadaptations de franchises.
Donc on peut en rester là, profiter du spectacle merci au revoir...
Toujours présents ? Alors c'est le moment de discuter des choses qui ne vont pas si bien que ça.
Parce que justement, "Alien" c'est pas n'importe quel film, et ça n'a pas donné lieu à n'importe quelle franchise.
D'abord une sorte d'équivalent de film de Maison Hantée et Slasher techno lovecraftien, mais dans l'espace - tout comme "Star Wars", deux ans avant, faisait du film de (deuxième) Guerre, du Chanbara et du Western mais dans une autre galaxie.
Et tandis que des dérivés en romans, bande-dessinées et jeux vidéos faisaient perdurer cet univers, sans compter des épisodes prequels en mode bastons de comic books ("Alien vs Predator", le premier est sympa) ou autres contes misanthropes ("Prometheus" et "Covenant")...
Chaque nouveaux opus suivant le film de Ridley Scott se distinguaient comme étant aussi bien des suites que des réappropriations personnelles, pour chacun des auteurs qui ont travaillé (durement) dessus : tous n'ont pour point commun que le personnage de Ellen Ripley/Sigourney Weaver, une infection qui commence, un ou deux personnages qui savent ce qui se passe, tout le monde qui meurt salement un par un, un double climax final (on fait tout péter, mais il reste encore une de ces cochonneries) et une poignée de survivants, au mieux.
Les trois suites ont étiré ce canevas jusqu'à plus soif, ne sachant vite plus quoi faire pour rendre à nouveau effrayant ce monstre, dont l'apparence (de gros cafard) n'est plus du tout un secret maintenant... Le multiplier, dévoiler une Reine, tuer l'héroïne, lâcher les clones et les hybrides, c'est déjà le maximum d'idées inédites qu'on puisse ajouter pour qu'on croit encore être dans un film "Alien".
Au delà de ça, ça devient un autre type d'histoire (il est clair que dans ses prequels, Ridley Scott s'intéresse plus à la folie démiurgique, comme le prouve sa propre filmo).
Mais chaque film porte la marque de son auteur (tous de différentes nationalités), et ont tous leur propre personnalité :
- Horreur/Brun pour "Alien"...
- Guerre/Bleu pour "Aliens, le retour"...
- Polar/Orange pour "Alien 3"...
- Super héros (Joss Whedon au scénar !)/Vert pour "Alien la Résurection".
Voilà où ça coince avec ce "Alien : Romulus" : où est donc sa personnalité ? En a-t-il une, au moins ? De l'aveu même du réalisateur, il a décidé de se la jouer profil bas sur cette franchise, dont il se borne à respecter la vista - et développer son scénario à partir de rogatons de la Saga.
L'effet fonctionne bien, dès le début on croirait se retrouver dans l'univers de cette SF, imperméable à toutes technologies trop modernes et sophistiquées, pour une question de continuité mais aussi car on est chez des ouvriers prolo, sur-exploités et sous-payés. Ça prend son temps pour les présenter, sauf que ce sont maintenant de jeunes personnes.
Originalité (il y rarement de jeunots dans ces films) qui finit par perdre de sa pertinence car ils sont plutôt propres, pas énormément marqués physiquement. Surtout quand c'est Cailee Spaeny qui joue une énième émule de Ripley, avec son look de gamine.
Pas non plus assez dangereux et révoltés ces post-ados, ce qui aurait pu éventuellement justifier la couleur récurrente Rouge de ce film, comme symbole de leur rage face à un horizon bouché, ces grandes entreprises qu'on voudrait bien foutre en l'air au lieu de juste les fuir - la Weyland-Yutani est toujours le grand méchant sans visage (ou bien avec de multiples visages), mais c'est pas encore aujourd'hui qu'on verra un studio faire une critique intelligente ou agressive des gros conglomérats... ni même qu'on les décrirait avec plus d'ambiguïté, de subtilité.
Pas mieux pour les protagonistes, pas très développés que ce soit le sempiternel casse-pieds de service (Spike Fearn), tout comme la pauvre Isabela Merced qui se fait balader dans tous les sens pendant tout le film, sans grande cohérence narrative (un coup boulet, puis victime, puis non, puis menace...).
Pas de chance pour la dynamique de groupe, pour la symbolique sexuelle (ils sont étonnamment chastes) et pour l'empathie envers les personnages, puisque l'histoire repose entièrement sur la relation sœur/frère de Spaeny avec David Jonsson, pas du tout reliée au mythe de Romulus et Rémus (comme pour "Prometheus", c'est une référence un peu pompeuse pour symboliser les expériences scientifiques contre-nature et faussement bénéfiques).
Mais leurs échanges recèlent de beaux moments d'émotion, nous interrogeant sur la voie à suivre entre le pragmatisme le plus froid... et prendre les risques les plus improbables pour sauver ceux à qui on tient.
Qu'est-ce qui fait qu'on est une machine, docile ? Ou bien un être humain, audacieux ?
Une question qu'on pourrait se poser à propos de ce film, qui alterne le froid et le chaud. On a un festival de références qui sonnent justement comme "mécaniques". Moins des récurrences que des citations pour fans avides de jeux de piste et autres clins d'œil rassurants : Jouet d'oiseau buveur et petite tenue (le 1), cheveux mouillés dans l'ascenseur, gros flingue et gros mot (le 2), détournement du logo Fox (le 3), clones et créature "surprise" (le 4, qui était un best-of plus discret)...
Etc etc, il y en a à Chaque scène cruciale, et Álvarez ne les détourne pas, ne les redéfinit pas. Même les prequels sont cités (Ridley Scott veille), que ce soit des éléments scénaristiques, ou bien les scènes à base de chimères biscornues qui étirent inutilement la durée du film.
D'un autre côté on a des scènes d'action et de suspense parmi les meilleures depuis des années, parfois peu cohérentes - on passe son temps à aller et venir dans les mêmes directions (celles où il y a danger), on montre une expérience censée être satisfaisante alors qu'on voit très bien dans un coin le résultat final (et ne citons même pas l'utilisation abusive d'un célèbre personnage, dont la conception factice se justifie à peine).
D'autres fois c'est très excitant, notamment la représentation plus poussée des Face-huggers, l'utilisation de la gravité... Des instants qui arrivent à exister sans être décorrélés du long-métrage, ça fait plaisir à voir.
Mais est-ce ce que ça fait seulement peur, c'est ça qui devrait être le plus important ?
Niveau monstres, non pas trop. Les visions de HR Giger à base d'organes de reproduction, ça ne choque plus autant qu'avant Internet. Et la façon dont on traite l'évolution des créatures est devenue tellement rapide que ça frise le Cartoon (Mel Brooks l'avait-il prédit dans sa "Folle Histoire de l'espace" ?). Il y a là dedans des idées qui ne sont jamais loin d'être ridicules.
Pour les sursauts, c'est du classique à base de hors-champ et d'arrière-plans - et oui c'est plutôt bien fait.
Et pour ce qui est des thématiques de la Saga, pas non plus de quoi faire des cauchemars, pleurants sur la mort prochaine de l'Humanité.. le film remplissant suffisamment son contrat de Grand Huit avant de ralentir (pour de vrai) et finir tranquillement, avec un reste d'optimisme.
La catharsis est accomplie, pas énorme mais assez agréable pour le spectateur lambda... et pour remettre la Saga sur les rails, sur grand écran comme sur le petit (d'ailleurs ça a failli être un film de plateforme).
Un opus de bon élève, qui imite et se transforme un peu...
Comment appeller ce film ? Un Tainíamorphe ?
Kay was the most mercilessly tormented character in the movie...she was suffered so much...hoped she survived later...but..that thing wanted a Freezie Pop so much.
They're bringing back Jonesy?
they already spoiled it in one of the tv spots. you can hear him talk. you can watch that if you want the spoiler lol.
Dude if its ahead of Aliens then it is a classic, and the franchise is in good hands.
Better than Aliens? Bold position Bro.
It's really not, I just saw it with my dad tonight. It's a 6 or 7 out of ten. Alien, I would give a 10+, and Aliens a 10.
@@aaroncadena4097 Better than everything after Aliens, but not in the same class as the first two. Sorry 😔. They're impossible acts to follow, let's face it.
@@aaroncadena4097 You'll see for yourself on Friday. It's not in the class as the first two films...but is better than everything else since then. It's a 7 out of ten movie.
Slowwwww. Fell asleep 4 times. A bunch of street taggers in space? Really? Great set design and creature effects.
Photocopied ending.
Not sure how much horror you watch, but I doubt it will be "too much", but I have a horror catalogue of so many great films from psychological to body horror of all qualities. Looking forward to this.
No, if you watch a lot of Horror it will be hopefully just the right amount. Nothing too crazy but for those who appreciate good body horror in doses it's a nice treat. The Substance is incredible for that though if you don't have it on your radar yet.
great review!
I'm still excited for this movie. Can't wait to watch it but I'm starting to think it might be corny and not as good as I'm hoping it will be. I know the only review that matters is your own but I'm reading positive reviews from early viewers who also gave positive reviews to other movies I thought were lame.
Hope you enjoy it. Expectations are always a tricky thing but yeah everyone's got their own taste. Give us an update when you've seen it!
Yep you’ve figured it out. When a film gets a flood of overwhelmingly positive early reviews, you know its bullshit.
@@teenageapocalypseusa5368 i mean this isn't The Flash or anything 😅 but like I say in the review I think lots of people are gonna like it less than me
Modern.....there goes my hope for a good movie
So if it’s better than Aliens in your eyes, what would you rate it out of 10?
I'd rate Aliens a 9/10 as well. For me it comes down to reference not being the biggest Action fan so I prefer good Horror.
Great review
Well I'm guessing it's Bishop or his human counterpart that shows up... Michael Fassbender wouldn't need de -aging to return as David. Ian Holm is DEAD of they were bringing back some kind of ASH 2.0. it would not be through de-aging, but deepfake. Anyone else I could think of would be maybe Paul Reiser as Burke but that feels more out of place or else he would be a child. Unless Sigourney is playing her own daughter. That would be stupid and angering.
1979
Oh my bad! Switched those around on accident.
Fess up... Who's the legacy character?
Ash I think but his character name in the movie is Rook. That’s a rumor I heard from several people so I’m guessing it’s probably legit.
Is it better than Covenant ?
Everything is better than Covenant and Prometheus.
@@leetleteapot9617 For me personally Prometheus was better than any of the Alien movies
So much better then Covenant. I refuse to acknowledge Covenant, I hate it!
@@Tomas91709I hated Prometheus. I am rewatching Prometheus and Covenant today though. Maybe my opinion will change
You don't even know the year Alien was made! How to trust your review? Immediate block
thanks for the block!
Dude you just gave the ending away mentioning face huggers towards the end 🤦🏾♂
No, I was talking about the creature design not the face huggers at the end. But again, I don't wanna say more to give anything away.
Seems like crap
Is it better than Aliens? Wow. Got excited.
For many it won't be though 👆🏼 just personal taste as someone who often likes Horror more than Action. So take that with a grain of salt
Im not sure you can even compare the two flicks. Aliens is 1986, Romulus is 2024. Totally different timelines, circumstances, ideology. I know I know its the same 'Universe', but still. I think comparing (ranking) the two are pointless. Its not about which one is 'better' - its about serving continuity. Does Romulus serve continuity? Hell yes!
@@tamastarczy6262 yeah I agree I don't care for ranking them much either. Glad there's so many great ones in the franchise though! :)
The only people who could think this is better than Aliens are the same people who said the latest terminator film was better than Terminator 2. Cha-ching.
@@teenageapocalypseusa5368 yeah, maybe you are right!!:))
Yikes.
Dude spoilers wtf!
Maybe you could have just turned off the video 💀🤦
People my age (54) will scream heresy at your rating it better than ALIENS but ALIENS was a let-down even to Ridley Scott, who complained that Cameron made a Hollywood action flick that killed the "unique" horror slow burn of ALIEN (the same complaint Coppola levied at himself over APOCALYPSE NOW was that he had made a Hollywood action spectacle instead of HEART OF DARKNESS in 'Nam). Both are great films but I agree with you and frankly, when I saw TERMINATOR 2 as a teen it was a major letdown for me as TERMINATOR was a great horror movie and to see the time-traveling cyborg assassin recast into a father figure for an annoying brat... ugh. If anyone doubts Cameron is a Hollywood guy, let me remind he praised TERMINATOR GENISYS out the wazoo as a "renaissance.' If had half a brain he would let Fede direct the next TERMINATOR movie.
Yeah I mean I'd rank Romulus and Aliens both a 9/10. I just don't like the army bits in Aliens but I felt like Romulus is a nice mix between that Hollywood action thing a sequel requires and a couple of great horror bits in there too.
Definitely give Fede the rains to Terminator.
Ridley didn’t do shit for Alien as far as creativity, he just directed it. Cameron directed and wrote that movie as well as came up with the creativity for making it. Scott doesn’t know anything about the aliens.
@@rogerpowers3891 Yeah he "just directed it." Lord. The guy originally set to direct it, Robert Aldrich, wanted to use a shaved orangutan for the xenomorph. When Ridley was directing BLADE RUNNER Cameron was writing and directing "Piranha II: The Spawning" (Still the best flying piranha movie ever made. BWHAHWAHA!!!!). Cameron wrote the RAMBO script that Stallone thankfully shitcanned. Cameron had Rambo in the mental psyche ward of a VA hospital (victimology horseshit) and later running around with a comic sidekick played by John Travolta for crying out loud.
When BLADE RUNNER underperformed at the box office guess who called Ridley Scott to praise it as unique and edgy? James Cameron.
Scott's critique of ALIENS was that it would be hard to make the xenomorph frightening again, it had become and action thing now. The same fate happened to PREDATOR. BTW, Ripley shot ALIEN for half as much money as Cameron did ALIENS. You only get something like John Carpenter's THE THING and 1979's ALIEN once in a lifetime.
@@EwanGraf Ditto. ALIENS is a helluva movie, I'm every bit with Tarantino in his UA-cam commentary on it, I had the exact same experience of it. But I thought ARMAGEDDON and INDEPENDENCE DAY were hellacious too. MASTERPIECE I reserve for films like John Carpenter's THE THING, ALIEN, THE EXORCIST, SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. Having said that, I'll take ALIENS any day over what came after. It was Weaver who killed it. She is rabidly anti-gun and as producer of ALIEN 3 demanded the rewrite of William Gibson's script (ALIENS on steroids) be tossed and that ALIEN 3 have no guns. When actors become producers and/or directors the result is usually a valentine to themselves, which is what ALIEN 3 was. Weaver's thespian rivals (the actors playing Hicks, Biship, and Newt) are killed off opening curtain and Weaver cast herself as JOAN OF ARC martyr with arms outstretched like Christ in her death scene, which she demanded. She said the franchise would die with her character. She must've wanted another house in Malibu though, because she came out to produce and star in ALIEN RESURRECTION, another valentine to herself, she's as butch as ever in that one.