The case for Alien Resurrection.

No, come back!! I don't think its half as bad as some would have you believe. The look of the film I think perfectly clashes with what was happening in Europe at the time, 1996-1997. Yes I know it was filmed in the US but it had a European director and mostly crew. Hard to believe now, but Europe at this time was a pretty glitzy, glamourous place to be. Think New York in the 1970s. So I think the flashy art-house look of Resurrection is influenced by this. So it works, if you know your late 20th Century history, on that level, as a piece and look reflecting the times. The storyline...well yes the storyline was kind of clunky but this IS science-fiction, not based-on-a-true-story. We're constantly asked to believe quite fantastical things when watching films of this genre. The casting I think was solid too, capable of delivering the lines with vigour and conviction. Another criticism is that its a bit jokey and played for laughs at times. Guess what? I don't want to be depressed every time I watch a movie! Winona Ryder was very believable as an android and Ron Perlman I think came close to stealing the movie. The 'newborn' however I have issue with. I don't think it was ever quite believable and is slightly clumsy, a view at least partly shared by the creative people when you watch the making-of on the Quadrilogy. They could probably have thought of something better. Apart from that, what's not to like? Don't be snobby. Its not Shakespeare because, duh, its not supposed to be! As a piece of bright, occasionally dumb and enjoyable work where you don't have to tax your brain too much it hits the spot. As an entry-level movie to the series and mythology it works too. *Puts on tin hat* let the debate begin!!