Alien: Covenant (2017) Dir: Ridley Scott

Instagram post:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DNQfYsZNgRQ/?igsh=MXdydTZ2MnQ3cW01Yg==

This sequel to 2012's acclaimed 'Alien' precursor; 'Prometheus', is the film in the main franchise that I've seen the least, that being once. I remember thinking it was okay, but, having left it a few years now, it felt like a good time to revisit this second chapter in Ridley Scott's science fiction horror prequel odyssey. I had only revisited the aforementioned predecessor to the film recently, so the story was still very fresh in my mind, which I was sure would help this film's case greatly.

Much like both the previous film and indeed Scott's wider filmography, the cinematography was extensive and beautiful, albeit to a lesser extent than 'Prometheus'. If I were to complain about one aspect of the visuals, it would be the heavy reliance on CGI at various points, which took away a little of the novelty and realistic feel that one gets from the xenomorphs and their various evolutions.

This film had some very big ideas about the 'Alien' universe, and Scott clearly had a vision of what he wanted to show his audience, but it was not executed anywhere near as well as it could or should have been. The film spends so much of its runtime trying to justify its own, as well as its predecessor's, existence, and only with mixed success. This constant need to validate itself ends up being to the film's detriment, although it does actually help 'Prometheus' greatly.

It had even more religious imagery than in 'Prometheus', but it was far less cohesive, and extremely on the nose. What I did like about the film's themes and imagery, was how it addressed the Frankenstein-esque horror of creation, and the abominations it can form. I liked how it explored the notion of 'playing God' - just because science can, doesn't mean science should. It's a potent, if not unique, message.

Michael Fassbender's double duty performances are good, but nowhere near as strong as his epic turn in 'Prometheus', which was a real shame. Both of his characters lacked the punch and identity that his previous performance had been so full of. I liked the ideological differences between his two characters, but the way these divergences were explored was just a bit weird.

Katherine Waterston had some absolutely brilliant scenes, but her character, much like 'Shaw' in the previous film, failed to feel as endearing or interesting as either 'Ripley' or 'Rain' in the other 'Alien' films. I will say, however, that I did like Waterston's acting, and I definitely preferred her to Noomi Rapace from the last film, but she suffered because of the messy writing of the rest of the film.

The supporting cast for this film was nowhere near as notable as in other films in the franchise, although I do think that both Billy Crudup and Danny McBride deserve mentions for their performances, because both were legitimately very good, in my opinion. I would have loved to have seen more of McBride, but I understand why his character had a limited role.

Overall, I think it's fair to day that this is one of the weaker films in the franchise, although I would still rank it higher than 'Alien: Resurrection', despite actually enjoying that one more from an entertainment perspective. As I illuded to above, this film has a tremendous and vast imagination for what it could be, and what it wants to say, but it doesn't quite have the words to describe itself in as eloquent or as effective a way as it would like.