It sounds odd that I had never seen True Lies until just a few months ago. I always had a little tinge of interest in it, but until recently, I just never capitalized upon it. I do think James Cameron has done some marvelous work over the years, and it’s nice to see that he did take the chance to do something more fun-filled after a lot of films of thematic heaviness. While I didn’t love True Lies, it does have its great strengths and unfortunate weaknesses wrapped up in a very entertaining spy thriller.
Special agent Harry Tasker (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is a top spy in the ultra-secret Omega Sector – although to his wife Helen (Jaime Lee Curtis), he’s just a boring computer salesman. When Harry’s two lives unexpectedly collide, both he and Helen find themselves in the clutches of international terrorists, fighting to save not only their marriage, but their lives.
In what I believe is a rare occurrence, I actually agree with Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert about this film, in most part. The opening and ending are great, exciting, engaging action excellence, but the middle section is drawn out and throws the film off the rails a little. This is in relation to the entire Bill Paxton segment where Harry Tasker learns that Helen has been seeing another man on the side who feeds her false stories of him being a secret agent. Paxton’s character turns out to be a sleazy used car salesman conning women with his tales of international espionage and intrigue, and Harry proceeds to use his resources to pull one over on the guy while attempting to inject some excitement into his marriage via subterfuge. This segment is not a bad idea, but the fact is that it is dragged out for over thirty minutes and runs through some overly long comedic bits. There is so much that could have been done to chop this down considerably and make it far more snappy and to the point.
I hate to keep being proven right about my reservations about James Cameron’s lax storytelling post-The Terminator, but the evidence keeps surfacing with every film of his I see. When he had a tight, restrictive budget forcing him to be innovative in a constrained run time, he put together a film of tight rhythm and energy. Once he was given larger and larger budgets, and was allowed to indulge himself on screen, he began to slow down the pace of his films with extended second acts that could have definitely been tightened up for a more punchy experience. The other problem with this divergence in focus is that the actual plot with our villains vanishes for the entire time the film is concerned with this marital infidelity plot. With such a thrilling action chase scene to build up the film’s villain, the movie wholly shifts focus away from that plot, and a lot like the T-1000 in Terminator 2, the actual villain is completely absent for most of the second act of the movie. He only reappears when the movie realizes it needs another action sequence. If Cameron could have found a way to keep both the action centric terrorist / secret agent and married life plots going by interweaving them, I believe that would have been great, but it’s ultimately much more compartmentalized until the third act arrives.
Regardless, Cameron is still able to direct some of the best action sequences to date. The opening escape sequence is explosive and smart with the right amount of wit and sly humor. Indeed, I was vastly impressed with the chase sequence that starts off with a public bathroom fight and shootout, and then, sees the film’s villain, Aziz, take off on a motorcycle and Harry pursues him on horseback. They gallop and zoom through Washington, D.C. streets, stores, a shopping mall, elevators, and a high rise balcony. Cameron pushes this sequence to the absolute most fun hilt, and it proves to be very original and imaginative. The climax of the film with the helicopter rescue from the out of control limousine, and then, the fighter jet explosive awesomeness really makes this one of the biggest Schwarzenegger action spectacles ever. These are some of the most incredible action sequences that either James Cameron or Arnold Schwarzenegger have ever been involved in, and they deserve to been seen by any serious action movie fan.
And Arnold Schwarzenegger really does seem to do some of his best, most dynamic work with James Cameron. The two clearly work so perfectly together based on a very trusted friendship and collaboration. This time out, Arnold gets to be more light hearted and fun. Harry Tasker is a clever character who thinks on his feet, and improvises some tight scenarios with suave charisma. By no doubt, there are some James Bond comparisons you could make, but that can be done with nearly any secret agent action movie. Harry’s a light-hearted, caring family man who is not nearly as adept at his home life as he is in espionage.
Jamie Lee Curtis is really fun and solid as Harry’s wife. We get to see her go from this simple, wholesome, innocent woman to a more empowered, assertive character. Yeah, Helen has to liberate herself with a sexy striptease, but it’s really just done in good fun in the film’s context. Helen is attracted to Bill Paxton’s character because he tells her exciting stories of peril and danger, and so, Harry chooses to give her an adventure of her own. Curtis really embraces the role in all its facets giving us a sweet character that is able to rise to the task of danger and peril.
Now, it does seem to take the right director to craft Tom Arnold’s humor down the correct path. Surely, many have found him annoying or obnoxious elsewhere, but he really hits all the comedy beats just right. He never pushes it over the edge, and doesn’t come off like a buffoon, which would have been extremely easy to fall into. Him and Schwarzenegger have very good chemistry playing off of one another lightly and naturally.
On the far more serious side, Art Malik has a great threatening look of intensity to him that perfectly aids him as the film’s villain, Salim Abu Aziz. He’s an excellent fit for this ruthless, violent radical terrorist who consistently proves to be a major adversary to contend with. He truly added the serious counterweight the film required to the light hearted tone it employs throughout. His partner in crime is Tia Carrere’s Juno Skinner, a slight femme fatale that catches Harry’s attention early on. Surely, Carrere has never been a great actress, but she does quite good work under Cameron’s direction being charming and alluring when necessary as well as cutthroat and vile when the facades are dropped.
In some smaller roles, you’ve got Charlton Heston in a solid, brief appearance as the head of Omega Sector baring a nasty scar and eye patch. This sort of shows that True Lies is not taking itself too seriously. It’s allowing a little satire and jokiness to seep into the flavor of the picture. Also, Eliza Dushku appears in an early role as Dana Tasker, Harry and Helen’s daughter, and she does a great job showcasing a lot of tough attitude and dimension she would come to be known for. Everyone in this cast really does a fine, respectable job with Cameron’s material. It’s both a fact of good casting and solid directing.
This was James Cameron’s follow-up to Terminator 2 after he took a few years off, and in that time, visual effects continued to evolve a little. Largely, the digital effects work is very subtle not requiring anything so innovative as a liquid metal cyborg assassin. Yet, it’s interesting to see that today, you’d like see those Harrier fighter jets done mostly as CGI in most shots, but here, we get the real thing on film and it looks exponentially superior to any digital effect. The green screen shots are about as good as they get, and Cameron uses as many practical elements to give the action set pieces a very realistic weight. This is just how digital effects should be used – to aid and enhance the practicals in addition to achieving what little practicals cannot achieve. The use of practical effects adds more realistic weight to everything that I immensely appreciate.
True Lies is a very entertaining film with a fun mixture of concepts that is much lighter than your typical James Cameron fare. I think every idea he had here is solid and when it clicks, it excels beyond expectations. That is essentially the action-centric plot aspects, and while the humor is greatly well done, it dragged down the middle of the film. I honestly feel that humor works best when it’s snappy, sharp, and punctuated correctly. The comedy segments of True Lies are drawn out too long, and diverge the film away from its more exciting aspects. I believe the script could have been tightened up in that second act by shortening some of these sequences, and resulting in a sharper and more to the point second act. I do like the idea of showing the light-hearted suburban home life of this international secret agent, and the fun marital twists and turns that Harry and Helen take. However, I feel the film eventually forgets to meld its ideas together for a long period, and diverges away from the action film aspects for too long. Just when the secret agent plot was getting interesting and truly exciting, it ditches it for a good half an hour.
Regardless, I would still recommend True Lies. As I said, the action sequences are spectacular on every level showcasing the best of what Arnold can do, and demonstrating that James Cameron is one of the best directors of action out there. His dynamic visual style is wonderfully realized by Russell Carpenter’s exceptional cinematography. He didn’t work with Cameron on any other picture, but that would be hard to tell because the film has all of Cameron’s visual signatures. The blue, moody tones and great camera work with excellent close-up shots and push-ins all punctuate what you expect from James Cameron, and Carpenter truly hits it all dead on the mark. There is plenty of entertainment value to gain from True Lies, but even despite the R rating, it’s fairly light on graphic violence. So, in a way it appears more tame than previous Cameron or Schwarzenegger action films, but for the lighter tone used here, it seems more appropriate. As I said, I feel the film could benefit greatly from a tightening up of its humor, or at least, allow the secret agent action plot and the family life comedy to interweave in that second act. As it stands, the film veers off track for a good thirty minutes in the middle, and doesn’t get back on track until the terrorists burst back into the film in a rather unexplained fashion. It’s all good stuff from start to finish, but I just feel it would have worked better in a tighter package.
There seems to be an idea out there somewhere, I don’t know where it came from, that Predator 2 is a markedly inferior sequel. This is wholly unjustified. Surely, everyone has their own opinions on how this measures up to the original classic, but to me, this is a great follow-up which expands on the ideas and premise in exciting new ways. Predator 2 contains numerous admirable qualities, and is helmed by a director with a great eye for sleek visuals. Anything it doesn’t recreate from the original it replaces with a higher energy and larger scale action.
In the urban jungles of Los Angeles, Detective Lieutenant Mike Harrigan’s (Danny Glover) police force is at war with drug lords and gangs. But just as Harrigan admits he’s losing the fight, one by one, gang lords are killed by a mysterious, fierce adversary with almost supernatural powers – the Predator. Before long, the vicious creature begins to hunt the hunters – Harrigan’s men. Now, Harrigan doesn’t just want to bring the creature in – he wants to bring it down. However, he is hindered along the way by government Special Agent Peter Keyes (Gary Busey) who has a shady motive to his secretive investigation who knows more about this ultimate hunter than Harrigan even suspects.
Surely, you would think going from Arnold Schwarzenegger to Danny Glover would be a strange swerve. I always imagined that if this was made a few years later that it would be Wesley Snipes as Mike Harrigan, but I’ll be damned if Glover doesn’t deliver here. The character is designed as a seasoned cop who’s been fighting this unrelenting war on the Los Angeles streets for a long time. He’s dogged, inventive, and is a cop who plays by his own rules, taking a backseat to no one. Glover portrays this with the rugged determination of a consummate street cop. He doesn’t like the politics that get rammed down his throat, and he slickly, yet passionately sticks it back in their faces. However, he is wholly loyal to his team, and treats them with respect as comrades in arms because they are fighting a war. Glover also demonstrates the emotional depth of Harrigan when his closest friend, Danny Archuleta portrayed by Rubén Blades, is gruesomely killed by the Predator. The flashes of enraged vengeance, and the heartfelt moment at the gravesite show Glover had the talent and skill for this role, which also demanded a lot from him physically. He greatly delivers on that end, too. I think making him a distinctly different protagonist than Dutch was the right way to go.
Many will indeed enjoy Bill Paxton’s performance as the jokey Jerry Lambert. He’s the newest member of Harrigan’s team known as “The Lone Ranger.” He’s a guy that’s gotten a lot of ego stroking and glory, but he quickly becomes an enthusiastic team player. This is Paxton at his full charismatic and comedic richness. He adds the levity to break up the grisly heaviness of the film. The rest of the supporting cast is filled out by Rubén Blades and Maria Conchita Alonso as the seasoned members of Harrigan’s team. Both bring their top level enthusiasm and talent adding to the cast’s vibrancy. Then, we get the late, great original king of trash television Morton Downey, Jr. as the appropriately cast tabloid sleaze-miester Tony Pope. He’s puts in a fantastically entertaining performance.
Now, Arnold Schwarzenegger was approached to return for this film, but he turned it down to do Terminator 2. Thus, his role was rewritten as Peter Keyes and re-cast with Gary Busey. I think this was an equally beneficial turn of events. The story works supremely better not knowing what Keyes’ agenda is, and allowing for him to be an adversary and foil for Harrigan. Busey does an excellent job bringing forth his signature energy and leaning Keyes towards the smarmy, shady side. He’s smart and cunning, but still a self-serving government agent who cares more about his findings for the military than Harrigan’s war on violent gang crime.
Also, I love the Jamaican gang here. They are totally savage and chilling with King Willie being fantastically awesome. He brings the mysticism into the fold with a wickedly cool scene opposite Harrigan, but also, a greatly visualized confrontation with the Predator. Calvin Lockhart is so awesome in this role. The theatricality, mystique, and powerful presence he brings entirely does justice to his Royal Shakespeare Company roots. He delivers my favorite performance of the movie. Knowing that director Stephen Hopkins was born in Jamaica, it doesn’t surprise me how rich and memorable these characters are here.
The visual effects are distinctly improved from the first movie. The Predator vision is the most obvious example as the infrared and other modes have more distinct color separation and possibly are of a higher resolution. The optical effects of the Predator’s cloak are used more dynamically and are integrated into more complex environments. We see it in more motion and detail. My favorite effects shots in the whole movie are when the Predator squares off with King Willie. First off, the tracking shot of the cloaked feet walking through the water is brilliant work, and then, the reveal of the Predator in the rippling puddle is awesome. Seeing how these are done in the featurettes on the Special Edition DVD are astounding and what I’ve always loved about movie magic. These striking, innovative images are largely due to do director Stephen Hopkins’ great visual style.
Teamed with regular director of photography Peter Levy, Hopkins gives Predator 2 its own unique visual sleekness. It has a great use of dynamic, intriguing angles. The action is captured remarkably well, and we even get a few scenes of atmospheric, moody lighting. Two of the best shot scenes are, first, inside the slaughterhouse bathed in blue light where the Predators assaults Keyes’ team, and then, the entire climax inside the Predator spacecraft. Counterbalancing that blue with a largely orange color scheme there is another sign of Hopkins’ great visual sensibilities. Beyond just the color schemes, these sequences have great use of sweeping cranes and steadicams shots enhancing the production and artistic value of the film.
This new Predator is recognizable, but has a bit different look and feel to him. He feels more brazen. He’s taking bigger chances, and taking on greater numbers. Hunting in a major metropolitan area means he’s attracting more attention to his work. So, he’s not as calculated, in general, but when he finds a prey he really likes, such as Harrigan, he takes his time to study him. He also taunts Harrigan as if he’s issuing an honorable challenge. I very much like that the filmmakers did this to show, even subtly, that this is another unique individual with his own personality, but with the same objective. It’s also great seeing the arsenal expand with the telescoping spear, the projectile net, and the flying disc. It gives the impression of a larger safari at hand where he’s equipped for bigger game. Kevin Peter Hall, yet again, does an awesome, exceptional job overall. He defined this role so perfectly, and it is a terrible shame that his life ended only a few years later. However, what he did laid the template for others to succeed him in this franchise.
The strengths of Predator 2 is that it is much more energetic and diversely entertaining than the original. The pace is faster as there is more going on here between the gang wars, Peter Keyes’ shady dealings, and Harrigan’s own dogged investigation. The action sequences are bigger and more dynamic allowing for a higher body count, but not as much gore. The film originally gained an NC-17 rating, but likely, Fox panicked and did more aggressive editing to secure an R rating. There is still blood abound and plenty of violence, but far less cadavers begin ripped apart. What we do see in that regard is obscured or done in heavy shadow. So, it ups the energy and action, but reduces the graphic content a little.
I would agree that these characters are not quite as captivating as those in the original. Neither film delves deeply into their characters, but it’s just the nature of battle hardened soldiers in a ominous jungle versus tough, seasoned cops on the streets of Los Angeles. One if inherently more intriguing than the other. There’s a little more levity in this film akin to a wisecracking John McClane in areas as Harrigan’s fear manifests in a few humorous quips. Since the film focuses more on an energetic pace with a more divided focus, there’s little mystique about the Predator himself. Again, he’s much more blunt and brazen, but you do lose that intensely dramatic build up to the third act. The Peter Keyes subplot sort of veers the emotional drive of Harrigan off-track, and the climax just becomes about having to stop this alien one way or another. There’s no more survival aspect, just hero versus villain. There is some peril throughout the third act, but none of it rivals the dire lethality and immediacy of the first film.
Still, the little teases we get at the end with both the Alien skull in the trophy room, the reveal of the half dozen other Predators onboard the spacecraft, and the flintlock pistol with the engraving of the year 1715 on it lay big seeds for a follow-up. However one might have felt about this movie, it surely left you intrigued to see how the next film could expand on these concepts further, but a proper third movie would not see fruition for another twenty years.
Predator 2 may not hit all the great qualities of the film first, but has entertaining trade-offs making it a more lively, faster paced action film. It again has a solid cast filling their roles with vibrancy. The violence and intense action are enhanced by stylish, sleek visuals and excellent editing. The optical visual effects are stunningly impressive pushing the ambition further, and with more time to plan, Stan Winston Studios developed the Predator further with great new weaponry and a fresh look. Alan Silvestri also returns adding some new flavors to his original themes, and adapting some of the feel to this film’s style and content. I would like to pay tribute to Kevin Peter Hall, Calvin Lockhart, and Stan Winston who have all passed on since this film’s release. All three did stunning work here that deserves notable credit and praise. This franchise, outside of the AVP films, has maintained a fairly steady stream of quality. The screenwriters of the first movie returned to expand on their own concepts, and it was executed very well by a competent and capable director. Predator 2 s definitely worth your while. It’s not as slam bang amazing as the first, but it’s a largely worthy sequel.
It was an ambitious prospect to develop a sequel to Ridley Scott’s 1979 science fiction horror classic Alien. However, Twentieth Century Fox was highly pleased with what burgeoning filmmaker James Cameron was putting to paper that they waited until he finished production on The Terminator to have him complete that script. It became a huge blockbuster hit in the summer of 1986, and earned several nominations and awards. Unfortunately, for me, there has always been something about this film I never quite liked, something that made it nowhere near as great as people made it out to be. Add to that the disdain I’ve developed in recent years for James Cameron. I don’t think he makes films as good as he thinks he does, he has a huge unwarranted ego, and his pioneering of 3D digital technology really burns me. I hate the trend, and I hate Cameron for igniting it. I will truly brush these feelings aside, and critique this film as it is to pinpoint my issues with it. There’s plenty for me to deconstruct here.
Lieutenant Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), the sole survivor of the alien attack on the mining ship Nostromo, is awakened by a salvage ship after drifting through space in cryo-sleep for fifty-seven years in her escape pod. After her rescue, officials at the Weyland-Yutani Corporation (regularly referred to as “The Company”) give her a cold reception by revoking her flight license. Much to her horror, they reveal that planet LV-426, where her crew discovered the alien, has since been colonized without incident. However, when communication with the colony is lost, Ripley initially refuses to help, but her recurring nightmares and coxing by a representative of the Company, Carter Burke (Paul Reiser), convince her to accompany a group of Colonial Marines to investigate the situation. What awaits them all is a swarm of Xenomorphs that have infested the colony, the likes of which these marines are not prepared for, but Ripley will ultimately not be deterred from confronting and destroying the horror that haunts her.
I hate to start off on a bad note because there are highly admirable qualities to credit in this film, but this is an exploration of me understanding what I haven’t like about this film for so long. Only now, by way of actually analyzing the film, can I pinpoint those reasons. However, that doesn’t mean I have all bad things to say of it, but let me get the nagging issues out of the way first.
I feel Aliens is downgraded by its aesthetics. Part of that problem was the choice of film stock used in the Kodak Eastman type that was only in use for a very brief period of time. The reasons for that begin with excessive grain and ends with a difficulty in processing blue screen effects. Aliens is a very grainy film, and in addition to that, has very bleached out colors. The color palette is very flat. Blacks aren’t black, and with a film of this sort, creating light and shadow contrast is very important. This creates a rather visually bland presentation that fails to match the highly atmospheric quality of Ridley Scott’s 1979 original. I believe that some of these problems have been rectified on the Blu Ray release which Cameron himself supervised. I wish I could view that version so that, maybe, some of my gripes with the film would evaporate. However, that’s not all, but I will cover those later when I address the visual effects.
I have to take issue with some of the characterizations in this film. Sigourney Weaver, Paul Reiser, Lance Henriksen, & Michael Biehn are all excellent, and inhabit their roles well. Their roles are also well written and well conceived. Them, I have no issues with. It’s the arrogant, chest pounding, and sometime weak-willed Colonial Marines. Yes, they are big, colorful characters that are memorable and quotable. That doesn’t mean they’re well conceived characters. For example, let’s compare these marines to the elite team from Predator. A group that is memorable, quotable, full of personality, but also, not a bunch of guys you’d ever want to cross. They are not arrogant, just confident, but know how to respect a dangerous situation when they enter it. They operate like a cohesive unit, follow orders, have great respect for one another, and keep their mission objective clearly in view. They get the job done, and never flex any ego. The marines from Aliens do nothing but talk tough and act as if they’re invincible bad asses. I understand the intent of showing them as if they believe themselves to be so great that nothing can best them, and then, get dropped into a situation of a cold, hard reality check. The same thing happens in Predator, and I think it’s done better in that film because you see how realistically capable these soldiers are. They’re the real deal, and when you see that these seriously experienced, professional soldiers are afraid of what’s out there, it sells the situation even more. As for that reality check shocking the marines down to size? You still have Bill Paxton’s Hudson acting like a buffoon all the way through the film. Someone of this weak will and lack of backbone would never make it into any military organization today, and Hudson does more to sell the incompetence of this team than anything else. These marines also don’t follow orders when they’re given, and instead, subscribe to foolish, egotistical behavior to satisfy their own ignorant bravado. It’s the character I have issue with, not Paxton. I believe Bill Paxton to be a very good actor that eventually was given to chance to break out of this buffoonish stereotype, and that was a very thankful turns of events.
What really downgrade the quality of this film, for me, are the visual effects. Keep in mind that James Cameron comes from a visual effects background as I point out these issues. Firstly, and briefly, the use of rear screen projection backgrounds come off as low grade. Even George Lucas tried using this in Star Wars, but when he saw how bad it looked, he swore it off never to be attempted again. Cameron uses it here instead of blue screen effects, likely, because of the aforementioned crappy film stock he chose to use. Again, this is from a filmmaker who started in visual effects. Next up, the miniature vehicle photography is not convincing. Miniatures are small and lightweight, but the photography of them is meant to fool you into perceiving them as full-sized versions that weigh, sometimes, thousands of pounds. Filmmakers tend to shoot them at a higher frame rate that when transferred to 24 frames per second, create a slower moving object with a lot of mass to it to sell their realism. Here, all the vehicles and ships move about with no realistic weight. They fly around or drive across the planet’s surface with no gravity or mass about them. The drop ship banks, lands, and takes off like a radio controlled toy. The armored personnel carrier throttles around and bangs into corridors like a go-cart. Something with a lot of mass, like these vehicles should have, would maneuver slower with bigger, wider movements. More mass means more power is needed to propel them. Think of how an eighteen wheeler, a humvee, or a helicopter move. They maneuver slower than lighter weight vehicles, but that is not translated into this film. I also have had this exact same problem with the future war sequences in Cameron’s Terminator films. SkyNet’s huge Hunter-Killer gun ships flying through the air and making hair-point turns always looked incredibly awkward and unrealistic to me.
An extension of all this is the lack of visual atmosphere used to hide the limitations of sets, miniatures, and visual effects. Ridley Scott and his team achieved this visual disguise greatly with Alien using light, shadow, and smoke to disguise any budgetary limitations, or to blend miniatures, live action, and visual effects into a seamless whole. Clearly, something Scott continued on with in Blade Runner. The bonus of this in Alien is that it created a rock solid mysterious horror atmosphere that intensifies the overall unsettling nature of the movie. Here, you can see the lack of depth and scope in the shot where you know it’s a soundstage set when it’s supposed to be a convincing alien planet landscape. I’d expect that from an old episode of Star Trek that didn’t have the budget or technical knowledge to disguise these production shortcomings. I would not expect that from a film that had an even BIGGER budget than Ridley Scott’s film which achieved better results on a smaller budget. Again, James Cameron comes from a background of visual effects where he should know how to blur those lines, but what is displayed here would not at all reflect that experience.
James Horner’s score is somewhat mixed for me. The cues he uses for the marines early on are very thin and weak. His snare drum track sounds like a demo recording done in someone’s garage. Again, I have to refer to Predator as Alan Silvestri really brought a powerful, meaty militaristic theme to that film. Since Aliens really is more of a science fiction action picture than a horror genre creation, I can’t critique a lack of suspenseful cues, but it could’ve helped. The score services the big action moments well, but despite what praise it has been given in decades past, I never found it all that compelling or exceptional.
Sigourney Weaver surely earned the respect and praise she received from her performance in this film. The evolution of Ellen Ripley here is entirely on the mark. Being the sole survivor of such a horrific experience, she would be a haunted woman waking up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat, and be determined to see this species wiped out of existence. She’s traumatized, but is able to battle through that. She takes her fear, and uses it to focus her eventual leadership skills. You constantly see her battle against her intense fear in order to see her real world nightmare end. Weaver also projects a warm, motherly sensibility while caring for the equally traumatized Newt. The makeshift family they create with Hicks is rather brilliant.
Speaking of which, Michael Biehn brings his great, natural humanity to Corporal Hicks. He shows the character to be a natural leader with confidence, decisiveness, and intelligence. Hicks is definitely the guy that will have your back all the way. Just as he was in The Terminator, Biehn shines through as a wonderfully dynamic and emotionally powerful actor. His warmth and chemistry with Sigourney strikes the right, soft chord. They work extremely well together with a mutual respect that penetrates through the screen. I’m not sure that the original casting choice of James Remar would’ve embodied those qualities so strongly or naturally. Michael Biehn was an amazing, fortunate happenstance in this instance.
Paul Reiser had some nice breakout roles in the 1980s including his appearances in the first two Beverly Hills Cop movies. Here, I love his performance! Burke is the textbook company man working his public relations angle with a compassionate façade while hiding a smarmy corporate mentality. Reiser plays both ends of that spectrum well, and he allows them to mesh into a cowardly weasel who always seems a slight bit suspicious. At first, he comes off as a genuinely decent fellow, but as the story unfolds, Reiser gradually peels that back as Burke gets closer to his goal. It’s a nicely subtle piece of acting that rides a fine line,, but it surely is effective.
At this point in time, Lance Henriksen was making an impact with some unique, standout performances. Bishop is a career highlight, indeed. “Artificial person” so fits the description of him. He has human qualities, but they are slightly off. Again, subtlety enters the approach with an air of eerie creepiness to the droid Bishop. Not in a malevolent way like Ian Holm’s Ash from the previous film, but as something just uneasy, unsettling about him. At first, he doesn’t appear to be anything but human. However, the more time an audience spends with him, the more these peculiar aspects nag your attention. Because of Ripley’s own unease around a droid, an audience can also gain an uncertainty about him, but it’s great how the relationship between Ellen and Bishop builds towards a place of trust.
Now, James Cameron bringing in Stan Winston and his team was a brilliant, logic move. You would need someone of Winston’s caliber to put together something impressive like the Alien Queen. The improved designs of the egg, facehugger, and chesterburster are excellent bringing more articulation and realism to them all. Now, I don’t have a preference between the original “smooth head” Alien from Ridley Scott’s film or the more “ridged head” Aliens featured here. I think they both work fantastically, and surely suit the demands and lighting aesthetics for their respective films well. Here, the more detailed and ridged craniums give the drones more character with a few little highlights here and there to make them standout more against the darker environments. Stan Winston was a legend in this field, and his contributions made the industry what it is today. He will be missed beyond words due to his passion, personality, skill, and artistry. He left behind a legacy of respect and admiration.
I have zero problems with the story in Aliens. It is a great progression and a smart direction for a sequel. Following Ripley through this journey from a troubled woman trying to avoid her trauma to one who confronts it head on to defeat it with intense courage is a powerful story. She finds her strength through the new emotional bonds she forges with Newt and Hicks. The more action oriented approach is something I don’t have much of an issue with, but a little more suspense and terror could’ve gone a long way here. There are those moments, but they’re more “jump out and scare you” bits instead of finely crafted suspense. Aliens has some exciting sequences that are well conceived. The climax has become a cinematic classic with Ripley squaring off with the Alien Queen in the powerloader. It was a very original, massive crowd pleaser that put Ripley into a great, forceful position.
I’ve only ever watched the Special Edition of Aliens as it is James Cameron’s preferred version of the movie, and while it has all the substantive character depth and proper storytelling elements, it does feel too long at just over two and a half hours. Cameron seems intent on making overly long films that lack the rhythm and pacing he so excellently captured in The Terminator. Once he got a big budget, he started over-bloating his scripts and cutting down on storytelling innovations. Sometimes, the restrictions of a smaller budget and limited resources force a filmmaker into creating a better, tighter product than when they are given access to all the tools with free rein to use them how they wish. I feel that is the case with Jim Cameron. As time went on, he seemed less interested in making compelling stories and more interested in flexing his budgetary ego. I respect the innovations he has motivated in the realm of digital visual effects, but great special effects alone do not make for a great film. However, all he seems interested in is pushing technology forward at the expense of quality storytelling.
All of this began here with Aliens. He still was creating a quality story backed by a few strong, solid actors, but he surely could’ve tightened it up in areas during scripting. Still, what irritates me when watching this film are many of the technical issues with visual effects, rear screen projection, the photography of the miniatures, and the poor choice of film stock. Furthermore, the poorly conceived Colonial Marines, aside from Hicks, are cartoonish buffoons that like to stroke their own egos instead of getting serious in a serious situation. These are all elements that make a substantial negative impact upon the film for me. It has plenty of good qualities to it from the strong lead performances and practical creature effects, but with a film so long, the negatives inevitably linger to repeatedly damage my enjoyment of the movie. Maybe, one day, I will watch the theatrical version and feel differently about that shorter cut, but if I was to judge this the way I intended, it had to be the director’s preferred version. This is an off occasion where I didn’t review the film for the sake of opening people’s eyes or rousing anyone’s interest. It really was just so I could deconstruct what always bothered me about this movie, and see the shortcomings that have prevented my full fledged enjoyment of it. I’m sure many would not perceive these same issues, but if everyone had the same point of view on everything, it would be a very uninteresting world.