Aliens (1986, Written and Directed by James Cameron)
It’s not a totally comfortable experience when a sequel surpasses its original; some laugh, some cry, some practice denial. It happens so much in the video game world that it’s almost expected, but in movies it’s a rare breed. I understand why people want to cling to Ridley Scott’s “Alien:” it’s a groundbreaking film, especially from a visual standpoint, and a truly horrifying one. But like it or not, James Cameron’s sequel is better. “Aliens” is a sweat drenched masterpiece, the kind of breathless science fiction action piece that leaves its audience wrung out on the floor in front of the TV. It’s corny in places and no one would mistake the dialogue for Shakespeare, but the actors give the material fire, the enemy is truly terrifying, and James directs with uncanny precision. You simply don’t make an action/horror flick any better than this.
There are several ways to make a great sequel, but Cameron picked perhaps the riskiest one: genre switch. Deciding that no one can or should re-do what the original accomplished, the young director decided to up the ante and move the series into new waters. The studio loved it, but there was understandable hesitation from the fans: the original was so unusual in its fondness for slow tension, and now the sequel was going to be some mindless “Rambo II” knock off?
The truth is, when you think of the “Alien” franchise, most of what occurs to you comes at least equally from “Aliens” and “Alien,” and in some cases predominantly the former. Never is this more true than with lead character Ripley, as essayed by Sigourney Weaver. In “Alien,” Ripley is just another crew member, and she survives the movie because she is cautious and lucky; nothing made her the distinctly feminist legend she would become (in fact, she was switched from a male character at the 11th hour). Ripley in “Aliens,” however, is a three dimensional human being, a woman isolated in time who must face her destiny and reclaim her soul from the nightmares of the past. This is a stronger, more involving story arc than anything Ridley Scott provided, and on those grounds alone “Aliens” leaps ahead of its progenitor. “Alien” is a classic, I have no intention of trampling on that, but “Aliens” is the film that gave us Ripley as we know her.
Let’s just bug out and call it even, OK? What are we talkin about this for?
Like almost all the films on this list, “Aliens” finds a way to be meaningful on a deeper level. Much has been made about the parallels with Vietnam, but Cameron very lightly approaches the comparison, letting it sink in without hammering it. Rather than try to preach (a mistake he comes closer to in “Avatar”), James evokes every conflict with an indigenous society in world history, from the Romans against the Germanic tribes to the British against the Indians. What is constant in so many of these battles is the human capacity to overwhelm superior technological force simply by knowing the land, or adopting more primal tactics, even wanting the victory more. The marines in “Aliens” find themselves on the business end of all three: they don’t know their territory, they aren’t prepared for the suicidal M.O. of their opponents, and they can’t match the aliens’ conviction. These creatures kill because it is their deepest, most primal desire to do so; the humans, by contrast, are weak and unsure of themselves, and all the fancy gear in the world cannot protect them.
The theme is broader than war, too, it’s about technology versus nature. It’s the classic irony that the human species encounters everywhere from the Titanic to Katrina: no matter how advanced we get, the beasts can still beat us. “Aliens,” at its core, is about realizing that no amount of clever gadgetry can protect you; if you want to survive, you have to fight for it with your own two hands. It’s a story that anyone can relate to, it works on a variety of levels, and yet it still allows for a breezy, focused, high-octane action/thriller.
Just tell me one thing, Burke: you’re going out there to destroy them, right? Not to study. Not to bring back.
The script is like the Sistene Chapel of 80s action films: yes it has the corny and over-defined characters, but damned if they don’t all experience a unique and interesting arc that makes them work. At the center of the film are three key performances that make it happen: the first is Bill Paxton in the somewhat minor role as Hudson. One of the most rewarding arcs in the film, Hudson begins as a trash-talking macho man, but ten seconds in a foxhole against his new opponents reveals him as a coward. Paxton, an almost obnoxiously reliable performer, somehow keeps us fond of Hudson at every stage, and we’re rooting for him as he manages to pulls himself together and find some courage in the third act.
(Note the contrast!)
The second is Michael Biehn as Corporal Dwayne Hicks, a quiet soldier we don’t really notice at the beginning of the film, who becomes invaluable once everything goes to hell. A common theme in “Aliens” is combat’s ability to shave away the outward appearance of a person and show you who they really are. Hicks is quiet and almost creepy while orbiting the planet, and we don’t particularly care for him. When the aliens show up, however, he is a rock, a cool-headed team leader with a strong sense of right and wrong. It’s no surprise that he and Ripley begin to feel some romantic attraction, not that they have much time to do anything about it.
And of course, the third is Ripley, as essayed in an Academy Award nominated performance by Sigourney Weaver. I have little to add in terms of commentary about her work because it’s note-perfect. Ripley is a complete character, we know everything about her from her mannerisms to her deepest fears. One transition in particular strikes me as powerful: Ripley has a tender moment with Newt (the young orphaned girl they find in the colony), reassuring her that everything is going to be all right. Slam cut to the very next scene, and Ripley is smoking a cigarette and sarcastically berating one of the members of the team. The contrast between the two has a jarring effect of the viewer, but of course, it is this very duality that we adore about Ripley. She possesses all the tenderness and warmth we associate with a stereotypical mother, and yet her blue-collar background makes her tough as a coffin nail. I’ve often said that Ripley is something of a feminist Holy Grail, because she is strong and self-assured without sacrificing her femininity. Cameron and Weaver deserve a great deal of credit for making this happen.
I wanna introduce you to a personal friend of mine. This is an M41A pulse rifle.
I’ve noticed something during the writing of this list: suspense movies are hard to quantify in words. When I want to explain why “Aliens” is so great, I can say that it’s “suspenseful” and “exciting” and “scary,” but these are adjectives. How do I prove that a movie like this leaves you exhausted at the closing credits? Perhaps I can’t. No matter, my word will have to be good enough. This movie left me curled in the fetal position on my couch; not from pop-outs or scares, but from sheer psychological exhaustion. “Aliens” is a long, desperate struggle against an unstoppable foe, and so compelling is its construction that the audience is yanked right into the heart of the experience. I wasn’t sitting in my living room anymore, I was dug into the trenches with the Marines, narrowly escaping the maw of death with only a sliver of my sanity. The term “suspension of disbelief” was coined to describe exactly this, a grown man screaming at imaginary characters on a screen.
Like so many films on this list, “Aliens” has it all: the suspense, the excitement, and the deeper resonance. It’s living proof that Hollywood entertainment doesn’t need to be dumb, that you can load your running time full of spectacle and still create developed characters and a credible narrative. James Cameron put the world on notice with this film, announcing that it was no longer okay for sequels to sulk in the corner and lower expectations.
0 Responses to “Number 17”