The same beverage we've been imbibing since 1979, only poured into a new, leakier container, Romulus is efficiently (re)packaged by co-writer and director Fede Alvarez, and for about 90 minutes or so, is a mildly diverting Greatest Hits package of familiar series plot points and imagery, but, like Jean Pierre Jeunet's Alien Resurrection, it goes into the toilet alarmingly fast in the last half-hour, trashing whatever good aspects preceded it. Alvarez generates some solid tension in spots, and Benjamin Wallfisch's score does a good job remixing motifs from Goldsmith, Horner, and even Harry Gregson-Williams' fine Prometheus theme, but the movie's "final boss" is every bit as misconceived (pun definitely intended) as that ludicrous "Newborn" from Resurrection, and thus what should be a terse climax devolves into unintentional comedy. Add to that an obligatory Deepfaked "cameo" from a now-deceased actor (which makes little logical sense) and a cast of generically-pretty twentysomethings who look like fetuses compared to the salty space truckers from Ridley Scott's original film (or the motley crew of grizzled Marines from Cameron's sequel), and you've got a movie that plays more like a franchise museum tour (or luxe videogame) than a compelling narrative. There are some fitful moments of creativity (especially a nifty zero-G "thread the needle" sequence), but, coming from the gifted Alvarez, this is a major letdown that makes 2022's Prey seem like a masterwork in comparison.
Monterey Jack wrote: ↑Fri Aug 16, 2024 8:17 pm
The same beverage we've been imbibing since 1979, only poured into a new, leakier container...
So, it's merely another "requel" (to use Andy's term)?
Sequels have the potential to be original and compelling (Bond is proof of that), but why must movies these days forever repurpose stale tropes? Audiences are coming to see the brand, not (necessarily) the same story.
Though I will be honest, Prey, didn't really deliver for me (and likewise offered little that was new -- and even cribbed the end credits design from Prisoner of Azkaban!).
Paul MacLean wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2024 10:34 am
Sequels have the potential to be original and compelling (Bond is proof of that), but why must movies these days forever repurpose stale tropes? Audiences are coming to see the brand, not (necessarily) the same story.
There's a moment where a character delivers one of the most memorable lines from the franchise, but does so in one of the most rote, passionless deliveries imaginable. And it doesn't even make sense! Why would he say that? What would inspire him to say that? Oh, that's right, geeks who enact this GIF whenever they hear a familiar line repurposed in a franchise sequel...
The big issue is -- what ELSE can you do with this series? It's like any long running horror franchise. They're all variations on the "old dark house" with a monster running around. Unless the monster starts singing and dancing, your options are limited. Reviews have been all over the map and I'm going Tuesday, but my expectations are pretty low.
Again, I'll never forgive Ridley Scott for pushing his way back into this series, making it "his" franchise again, and canceling the one sequel the fans overwhelmingly wanted to see -- Blomklamp's ALIENS sequel that was going to bring back Sigourney and throw ALIEN3 out the window, bring back Newt as an adult female lead, etc.
Instead Scott made ALIEN COVENANT which is really one of the worst films of his career and destroyed any of the good things PROMETHEUS managed to do!
AndyDursin wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2024 10:47 am
Again, I'll never forgive Ridley Scott for pushing his way back into this series, making it "his" franchise again, and canceling the one sequel the fans overwhelmingly wanted to see -- Blomklamp's ALIENS sequel that was going to bring back Sigourney and throw ALIEN3 out the window, bring back Newt as an adult female lead, etc.
The ONE "legacy sequel" fans have been begging to see for the last 32 years, and we didn't get it.
Sometimes I wonder why they keep trying to wring momey out of this series, because the last time an installment was genuinely liked by the public was in 1986.
TaranofPrydain wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2024 2:38 pm
Sometimes I wonder why they keep trying to wring momey out of this series, because the last time an installment was genuinely liked by the public was in 1986.
It seems to me studios would rather bank on a property they own, than take a chance on something new.
I can only speak as a viewer, but most of my truly memorable experiences in the cinema were When I was watching something new and different (be it Star Wars, Blade Runner, Ghostbusters, Amadeus, etc.).
It's gonna take all of the actors from worn-out franchises from the late 70s through the mid-90s being dead before we're finally purged of the "requel" crap, and even then studios will just deepfake dead actors to keep them going a little while longer.
Monterey Jack wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2024 9:01 pm
It's gonna take all of the actors from worn-out franchises from the late 70s through the mid-90s being dead before we're finally purged of the "requel" crap, and even then studios will just deepfake dead actors to keep them going a little while longer.
Well, it might be the same beverage you've consumed before, but Fede Alvarez has concocted the tastiest cocktail this series has served up since 1986, so that's at least saying something.
Making amends for Ridley Scott's utterly dreadful "Alien Covenant," a sequel so dismal it rendered his hopeful "Prometheus" completely irrelevant, "Romulus" is a very entertaining homage movie -- and it seems like half of the complaints I'm reading don't seem to understand what the point of this movie is. When you have a line about the "Colonial Marines" and someone asks how they know about that -- and the response is "games and magazines" -- you should know what this movie is doing. This is completely a film that's winking at fans while providing set-pieces both casual viewers and the hardcore can enjoy, and I found it very entertaining on that level -- and, overall, more fun than any other entry in this series since "Aliens" (and if that's not for you, then one can always just replay the first two movies and call it a day).
This is intentionally, by design, a film whose main design is to entertain -- both fans, many of whom I'd imagine will enjoy the throwbacks, and casual viewers, who won't even know they're there. It's not, refreshingly, to set up another franchise, or provide answers to things that didn't need to be explained a la Scott's last two movies. It's absolutely an intentional hodgepodge of set-pieces that riff on nearly everything this franchise has given us: a trip down Ridley Scott's 1979 original, a dash of "Aliens" firepower, even the black goo from "Prometheus" makes an appearance. Then Alvarez has some fun and serves up a suitably festive finale with something we haven't seen before.
It's all wrapped up in a story I found reasonably appealing and a cute heroine in Cailee Spaeny, who does a good job playing a sympathetic "mining girl" just trying to get off a Wayland-Yutani dump and to a better place along with her synthetic android "brother" (an equally good performance by David Jonsson). The opening act actually looks more like Scott's trademark visions of the future than "Blade Runner 2049" and provides a fresh start to what is, admittedly, another trip over familiar "Alien" terrain. Along with a bland assortment of supporting characters (there only as lambs for the slaughter), Spaeny finds an outlet in a broken down company spaceship orbiting their planet and housing a group of lifepods they need to secure for the journey -- alas, the ship is chock full of you-know-whats, stationed there with a familiar looking android with an agenda that doesn't place a priority on human survival.
"Romulus" feels like a theme park "movie ride" or a video game premise where you're weaving in and out of familiar thematic elements from an established property, but what, really, is wrong with that? This "Greatest Hits" package finds Alvarez executing all the set-pieces well, and doing so with a refreshing lack of pretension. Going back over the many dud sequels in this franchise, from Fincher to Jeunet and Scott himself, he succeeds where others failed by celebrating the best elements fans have gravitated towards in a movie that has mixes in fresh elements while providing an ending that thankfully just ends.For all of those reasons, I also found this movie likeable, in a way most of the other pictures in this long-running series haven't been.
They'd be wise to leave it here, too (not unless Sir Ridley is going to finally let Neill Blomkamp make his long-coveted "Aliens" sequel), but after the nightmare finale of "Covenant," where a misguided Scott threw his focus towards a homicidal android in a godawful cliffhanger that will never be resolved, "Romulus" finally provides this series with its own happy ending -- a self-contained tribute movie that hits most of the right notes.
PS - I had no problem at all with the CGI recreation of a dead actor here. It's not supposed to be a human being in the first place, and it's supposed to be a different unit off the same assembly line -- so if you're going to do it, it makes sense with this role. And not only that, but it's used as a well-integrated plot device and is not just there for the sake of tossing it in, so even while -- yes, it looks phony and digital -- I didn't mind it. This movie was not hugely budgeted so the CGI isn't the best -- remember it was supposed to be made for Hulu -- so perhaps if it had a larger budget that element of it could've been better rendered.
That $250 Texas Chainsaw box I reviewed this week had a VHS copy also. Guess it's for the collectors who just want stuff lining shelves (which I have no room for lol).
TaranofPrydain wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2024 3:30 pm
They just announced they are going to be selling a limited run number of copies on VHS. That's certainly something.