Alien Covenant Fan Reviews

[SGS756]

A covenant is an agreement that can be made between a nation or people. In the context of the new film from Ridley Scott, it's the name of the colony ship bound for a distant planet to repopulate and start a new life for humankind in the cosmos. The original Alien film was many things. Crucially, it was a narrative of feeble human choices resulting in the unveiling of a creature that acidly twisted the knife into the very notions of morality and compassion and replaced it with a savage survival instinct. This was demonstrated by way of a terrifying life cycle, that felt in equal parts- biologically credible and sexually transgressive. The aptly named Covenant continues this tradition of the horrific entangled web of events being spun by problematic judgements.

A reluctantly stern captain of faith impulsively responds to a human distress call and brashly thinks the sourced planet to be much more habitable for the two thousand colonists than a rigorously simulated and scientifically mapped out planet further out in space. The central antagonist of the picture arrogantly proclaims he loved a woman who showed him compassion and sees fit to still experiment on her for the sole purpose of curiosity. If Alien Covenant is about anything, then it is about the delusional egotism in leadership and creation.

For a film that bestows the central creature of the accoladed horror franchise to title status again, the Xenomorphs prove to be the most problematic aspect of the picture. Essentially, there is no dimension added to the creature's life cycle or a new manner in which we could perceive them.

In Aliens, the sheer multiplicity of their race come from an Alien Queen, and they function as a nightmarish subversion of a truism parents tell their children, encapsulated when Newt says to Ripley- "My mummy always said there were no monsters, no real ones, but there are." In Alien 3, the lone Xenomorph has an animalistic fury as it takes on the attributes of its non-human host resulting in the tense and frenetic point of views shots in the tail end of the picture. At the same time, the creature is seen as the embodiment of divine punishment by the prisoners of Fury 161 who create a nihilistic and cruel religion to deal with their crimes. In Alien Resurrection, there is a human/Xenomorph hybrid as Ripley's DNA is replicated and modified. Even the woeful Alien Vs Predator movies had some sense of creativity in melding both creatures into an amusingly hissing new creation complete with dreadlocks and a new set of jaws.

In Covenant, the Xenomorph have lost their majestic sense of terror that came from their ability to be simultaneously horrifying and striking in their design. Additionally, the subtext of their attacks playing on fears of rape and male pregnancy become clumsy overt text as David (Michael Fassbender) lures the unsuspecting Captain Oram (Billy Crudup) to his lair. When asked what his creations need to be successful, the android retorts in a matter of fact manner- "A Mother."

The best sequence involving the creature is when it attacks a couple during a heightened moment of passion in a running shower cubicle. Ridley Scott's framing is impeccable as the Alien is seen through a mirror as it violently lunges at the male partner. The aftermath is the Xenomorph looking as though it was kissing Upworth (Callie Hernandez) and a darkly comic moment as blood gushes over the female crew member in what seems like an ironic twist of climaxing. As good as the sequence is, it does represent a sobering moment for the series; as it seemingly sinks into the slasher movie genre waters that it once transcended so masterfully.

From the ashes of the Xenomorph's mediocrity, the android David arises to become the malevolent heart of the series. In Prometheus Fassbender's performance subverted the Pinocchio portrait of an artificially intelligent being with a seemingly aloof and obedient nature that hid ominous intentions which occasionally manifested themselves in his wry sense of humour. In Covenant, Fassbender takes David to new heights of passion and all-consuming arrogance.

However, the most striking quality that the Irish actor adds to the character is a protracted sense of wistful sadness. In many of David's exchanges with Walter (the newer android model again played by Fassbender), he expresses his love for Dr Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and his misery of not having her around. Even though the sentiments can be read as a ruse because he experimented on Shaw for his creations; there is still a deep-seated sense of love that went unfulfilled. (A starker reading of David's feelings of unrequited love could be read as physical and retain the sexual subtext that the series always has at its core)

The added quality presents David with a fascinating dichotomy. In the opening sequence, the character stands before Michelangelo's David sculpture as he chooses his name in view of his creator- Peter Weyland (Guy Pierce) Through the course of his conversation, David reflects on his creator's mortality and concludes that he will outlive his human master. In many ways, David believes he is a supremely perfect being who has far exceeded humanity yet still revels in the sentiments of man as embodied in his feelings for Shaw. This conflict of egotism and emotion has particular resonance when thinking of it in the context of the beings that David has created. The creation of Xenomorphs could represent a purging of this conflict in lieu of a pure instinct of survival.

As David, Fassbender channels Vincent Price's pomposity and cleverly echoes Rutger Hauer's seductively impassioned portrait of Roy Batty. Whereas, Fassbender imbues Walter with a sense of innocence and discovery that is manifested in many of the interactions he has with David. A particular noteworthy scene has Walter acknowledging the parameters of his programming after learning to play the flute. At this moment, Fassbender's subtle facial expressions of awe, wonder and reflection are endearing to watch.

Equally as compelling is Katherine Waterston's performance as Daniels who repurposes a particular facet of Sigourney Weaver's performance from Alien to interesting effect. In the 1979 picture, Weaver played Ripley with an economical stillness: her physical movements had a purpose, conviction and ultimately conveyed an assuredness about her duties aboard the Nostromo.

Waterston takes this stillness to a much more emphatic place. While her physicality is efficient, there is something also undeniably warm and embracing about it too. In a scene towards the end, Waterson wonderfully encapsulates all these qualities as her solemn reflection on the terrible events of the film turn into a moment of an outward affection as she hugs Tennessee; (Danny McBride) and in so doing they share the losses they have both experienced.

For all its apparent deficiencies, Ridley Scott's sense of scale and grandiosity has not lost its cinematic potency. From the wide angled shots of the Covenant's long corridors to the Pompeii esque scene of mass genocide, you have a mainstream horror picture of utterly deprived beauty. The grislier imagery (which admirably retains a fidelity to the work of HR Giger) such as Shaw's mangled form rival the repellent visual concoctions of Alien Resurrection; the only picture in the franchise that makes one feel as though they want to have a shower after watching.

In essence, Covenant represents a paradigm shift for the Alien series. The creature who travels through vents and hides in the darkest corner of the ship no longer scare us. Instead, the synthetic being and his freedom to experiment while we all sleep gets the heart beating just a little bit faster.

[Butterfly]

Yet another long-time lurker who's decided to step out of the shadows to review this filme here. And dear lord, I NEED to talk about it. There might be some spoilers ahead.

First off, full disclosure: I'm a huge fan of the original quadrilogy, which means I really, really like both Alien³ and Alien: Resurrection. I didn't like Prometheus but I've actually had a pretty fun experience when I saw it for the first time, and it was only after the movie was done that it started to fall apart for me (much unlike many of you, though, I've had a really hard time rewatching it and it most certainly did get worse with time for me). I went into this movie with some pretty low expectations. I didn't like the direction Prometheus was taking the series to and even though this was marketed as an Alien film, I was fully aware that it was going to be, at least partially, a sequel to Prometheus. All in all, I was just feeling giddy with the prospect of seing the franchise's titular creatures on the big screen for the first time along with some grisly deaths and nice Ridley Scott visuals. And possibly something as entertaining and cringe-worthy as the medpod scene from the previous movie.

The positives of A:C: The first 20 minutes or so are very solid. Up until they land on the alien planet there's some nice tension buildup and some very welcomed character moments that feel more believable than anything in Prometheus. The very ending, when a major character has just entered a sleeping pod, is quite effective. All in all, I'd say it's the one scene that properly managed to be scary, and it actually stayed with me after I left the theater. I'm quite surprised to know that the ending was supposed to be different, because the one we've got, in my opinion, is a brilliant final hook waiting for a better movie to be built around it.

Everything else was shockingly bad.

I can deal with the fact that this is ostensively a sequel to Prometheus, and the Alien is barely in it. I'd even say this would be a marginally better movie if the Big Chap was not in it at all, because boy oh boy is it completely weightless, both literally, with the bad CGI, and figuratively. The creature itself is introduced after its distant cousin (they call it a neomorph, I figure?) has already done loads and loads of damage whilst having a much more effective life cycle. The proper "Xenomorph" (god, I hate this term) feels almost benign in comparison.

Now, I'm aware that there's been lots of talk about whether they've been using puppets or not in this, and whether people exaggerate when they complain about the overuse of CGI. But dear lord, it's not just that there is obvious way too much CGI when it comes to the creatures, but the scenes with them are not even well shot! There's no attempt to hide the special effects: we see an Alien jumping around and doing all sorts of acrobatics from every possible angle in broad daylight. They've even managed to screw up the chestbuster scene with really awkward angles and dodgy effects. Some of the "neomorph" and chestbuster scene reminded me of the effects in Alien³, except that the camera lingered on them forever, which is much, much worse. The Big Chap shows up in two major action set pieces that feel like they belong in one of the Marvel Movies if they were all directed by Michael Bay. They also kind of look like Playstation 3 cutscenes.

The creatures were so terribly made that a good portion of the audience I was in was giggling whenever an attack or a birth happened. I kind of giggled too.

The movie has zero rhythm and zero suspense. All the kills are instant. I'll be damned if the shower scene lasts over two minutes. And there aren't even any jumpscares either. You just really expect an alien to impale someone, then it empales, and off to the next scene. Even the (very good, from what I could see) gore effects end up feeling like an afterthought because it's all over so quick one can barely register what's just happened. Everything is so instant that they've managed to bring back the Cup Noodles life cycle for the aliens, which EVERYONE complained about in AvP. It's not even that much of an issue because it changes the canon. It's just that it's so ludicrous that it feels like it came out of a parody. There's no willing suspension of disbelief to account for fully a grown alien in 40 seconds.

The performances are alright, with Michael Fassbender doing a good job as expected. To be honest, I'm just kind of disappointed because he didn't chew the scenery a little bit more. It would've fitted the overall B-movie vibe. The info on the origins of the Xenomorph (heh, here I am using that X word again) is not terrible, but much like all the answers we've had about the Space Jockey in Prometheus, it just feels very, very "meh". Speaking of SJ, the scene in which the giant albino civilization makes a perfect argument for the accusation that filmmakers show way too much these days. Had it been simply mentioned by one of the characters, it would end up probably making sense as a plot development. Actually seeing it, though, makes it completely ludicrous.

Oh, and the Covenant crew is very, very dumb. I think it's kind of hilarious that we tend to complain about stereotypical horror movie teenagers being so stupid when it DOES make sense that oversexed teens would be morons. Scientists in a billion dollar mission in space acting like dumb horror movie teens on the other hand is much harder to buy. And these scientists make the biologist from Prometheus look smart.

We didn't even get pretty visuals this time around! Covenant mostly looks like every single big budget Hollywood movie. Totally unremarkable. Here's how I rate the Alien films:

Alien (10)
Aliens (9,5)
Alien³ (9,0)
Alien: Resurrection (9,0)
Prometheus (5,5)
Alien vs. Predator (4,0)
Alien: Covenant  (3,0) (YES, THAT BAD, it's worse than AvP)
Aliens vs. Predator Requiem (0,5) 

[Dirty Harry]

Alien
Aliens
Alien 3
Alien Covenant
Alien Resurrection
Prometheus

[Robopadna]

The performances are alright, with Michael Fassbender doing a good job as expected. To be honest, I'm just kind of disappointed because he didn't chew the scenery a little bit more. It would've fitted the overall B-movie vibe. The info on the origins of the Xenomorph (heh, here I am using that X word again) is not terrible, but much like all the answers we've had about the Space Jockey in Prometheus, it just feels very, very "meh". Speaking of SJ, the scene in which the giant albino civilization makes a perfect argument for the accusation that filmmakers show way too much these days. Had it been simply mentioned by one of the characters, it would end up probably making sense as a plot development. Actually seeing it, though, makes it completely ludicrous.

I actually think it was a good idea to show it.  If one more thing is hand waived away with awful dialogue it would be absurd (it already is).  Plus, Ridley apparently does not like to have the characters ask much that he doesn't plan on visually showing.  If he cut that scene out, I bet he would cut out all references to it. 

Put it this way, the characters arrive on an UNEXPLORED planet that is broadcasting a message sent from someone from earth.  They get attacked and are saved by a robot from earth. who leads them to an entire city and civilization, proving there are alien races out there and they landed on a colonized planet.  The main problem being the entire civilization is dead and petrified. 

Throughout it all, the characters show no more interest than they would in a tv show that was on in the background at a party.  They simply don't care and Ridley can't seem to understand why they would.  If he didn't put that scene in it would simply be one more thing the characters would never ask about or reference.

[Jonesy1974]

The performances are alright, with Michael Fassbender doing a good job as expected. To be honest, I'm just kind of disappointed because he didn't chew the scenery a little bit more. It would've fitted the overall B-movie vibe. The info on the origins of the Xenomorph (heh, here I am using that X word again) is not terrible, but much like all the answers we've had about the Space Jockey in Prometheus, it just feels very, very "meh". Speaking of SJ, the scene in which the giant albino civilization makes a perfect argument for the accusation that filmmakers show way too much these days. Had it been simply mentioned by one of the characters, it would end up probably making sense as a plot development. Actually seeing it, though, makes it completely ludicrous.

I actually think it was a good idea to show it.  If one more thing is hand waived away with awful dialogue it would be absurd (it already is).  Plus, Ridley apparently does not like to have the characters ask much that he doesn't plan on visually showing.  If he cut that scene out, I bet he would cut out all references to it. 

Put it this way, the characters arrive on an UNEXPLORED planet that is broadcasting a message sent from someone from earth.  They get attacked and are saved by a robot from earth. who leads them to an entire city and civilization, proving there are alien races out there and they landed on a colonized planet.  The main problem being the entire civilization is dead and petrified. 

Throughout it all, the characters show no more interest than they would in a tv show that was on in the background at a party.  They simply don't care and Ridley can't seem to understand why they would.  If he didn't put that scene in it would simply be one more thing the characters would never ask about or reference.

To be fair, if I had just witnessed a creature just burst out of my mates throat and then slaughter several of my other team members I don't think I'd care about petrified bodies either.

Besides, they may well have discussed it we just didn't need to witness itgem discussing it as it wouldn't be important to the plot.

[robbritton]

A covenant is an agreement that can be made between a nation or people. In the context of the new film from Ridley Scott, it's the name of the colony ship bound for a distant planet to repopulate and start a new life for humankind in the cosmos. The original Alien film was many things. Crucially, it was a narrative of feeble human choices resulting in the unveiling of a creature that acidly twisted the knife into the very notions of morality and compassion and replaced it with a savage survival instinct. This was demonstrated by way of a terrifying life cycle, that felt in equal parts- biologically credible and sexually transgressive. The aptly named Covenant continues this tradition of the horrific entangled web of events being spun by problematic judgements.

A reluctantly stern captain of faith impulsively responds to a human distress call and brashly thinks the sourced planet to be much more habitable for the two thousand colonists than a rigorously simulated and scientifically mapped out planet further out in space. The central antagonist of the picture arrogantly proclaims he loved a woman who showed him compassion and sees fit to still experiment on her for the sole purpose of curiosity. If Alien Covenant is about anything, then it is about the delusional egotism in leadership and creation.

For a film that bestows the central creature of the accoladed horror franchise to title status again, the Xenomorphs prove to be the most problematic aspect of the picture. Essentially, there is no dimension added to the creature's life cycle or a new manner in which we could perceive them.

In Aliens, the sheer multiplicity of their race come from an Alien Queen, and they function as a nightmarish subversion of a truism parents tell their children, encapsulated when Newt says to Ripley- "My mummy always said there were no monsters, no real ones, but there are." In Alien 3, the lone Xenomorph has an animalistic fury as it takes on the attributes of its non-human host resulting in the tense and frenetic point of views shots in the tail end of the picture. At the same time, the creature is seen as the embodiment of divine punishment by the prisoners of Fury 161 who create a nihilistic and cruel religion to deal with their crimes. In Alien Resurrection, there is a human/Xenomorph hybrid as Ripley's DNA is replicated and modified. Even the woeful Alien Vs Predator movies had some sense of creativity in melding both creatures into an amusingly hissing new creation complete with dreadlocks and a new set of jaws.

In Covenant, the Xenomorph have lost their majestic sense of terror that came from their ability to be simultaneously horrifying and striking in their design. Additionally, the subtext of their attacks playing on fears of rape and male pregnancy become clumsy overt text as David (Michael Fassbender) lures the unsuspecting Captain Oram (Billy Crudup) to his lair. When asked what his creations need to be successful, the android retorts in a matter of fact manner- "A Mother."

The best sequence involving the creature is when it attacks a couple during a heightened moment of passion in a running shower cubicle. Ridley Scott's framing is impeccable as the Alien is seen through a mirror as it violently lunges at the male partner. The aftermath is the Xenomorph looking as though it was kissing Upworth (Callie Hernandez) and a darkly comic moment as blood gushes over the female crew member in what seems like an ironic twist of climaxing. As good as the sequence is, it does represent a sobering moment for the series; as it seemingly sinks into the slasher movie genre waters that it once transcended so masterfully.

From the ashes of the Xenomorph's mediocrity, the android David arises to become the malevolent heart of the series. In Prometheus Fassbender's performance subverted the Pinocchio portrait of an artificially intelligent being with a seemingly aloof and obedient nature that hid ominous intentions which occasionally manifested themselves in his wry sense of humour. In Covenant, Fassbender takes David to new heights of passion and all-consuming arrogance.

However, the most striking quality that the Irish actor adds to the character is a protracted sense of wistful sadness. In many of David's exchanges with Walter (the newer android model again played by Fassbender), he expresses his love for Dr Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and his misery of not having her around. Even though the sentiments can be read as a ruse because he experimented on Shaw for his creations; there is still a deep-seated sense of love that went unfulfilled. (A starker reading of David's feelings of unrequited love could be read as physical and retain the sexual subtext that the series always has at its core)

The added quality presents David with a fascinating dichotomy. In the opening sequence, the character stands before Michelangelo's David sculpture as he chooses his name in view of his creator- Peter Weyland (Guy Pierce) Through the course of his conversation, David reflects on his creator's mortality and concludes that he will outlive his human master. In many ways, David believes he is a supremely perfect being who has far exceeded humanity yet still revels in the sentiments of man as embodied in his feelings for Shaw. This conflict of egotism and emotion has particular resonance when thinking of it in the context of the beings that David has created. The creation of Xenomorphs could represent a purging of this conflict in lieu of a pure instinct of survival.

As David, Fassbender channels Vincent Price's pomposity and cleverly echoes Rutger Hauer's seductively impassioned portrait of Roy Batty. Whereas, Fassbender imbues Walter with a sense of innocence and discovery that is manifested in many of the interactions he has with David. A particular noteworthy scene has Walter acknowledging the parameters of his programming after learning to play the flute. At this moment, Fassbender's subtle facial expressions of awe, wonder and reflection are endearing to watch.

Equally as compelling is Katherine Waterston's performance as Daniels who repurposes a particular facet of Sigourney Weaver's performance from Alien to interesting effect. In the 1979 picture, Weaver played Ripley with an economical stillness: her physical movements had a purpose, conviction and ultimately conveyed an assuredness about her duties aboard the Nostromo.

Waterston takes this stillness to a much more emphatic place. While her physicality is efficient, there is something also undeniably warm and embracing about it too. In a scene towards the end, Waterson wonderfully encapsulates all these qualities as her solemn reflection on the terrible events of the film turn into a moment of an outward affection as she hugs Tennessee; (Danny McBride) and in so doing they share the losses they have both experienced.

For all its apparent deficiencies, Ridley Scott's sense of scale and grandiosity has not lost its cinematic potency. From the wide angled shots of the Covenant's long corridors to the Pompeii esque scene of mass genocide, you have a mainstream horror picture of utterly deprived beauty. The grislier imagery (which admirably retains a fidelity to the work of HR Giger) such as Shaw's mangled form rival the repellent visual concoctions of Alien Resurrection; the only picture in the franchise that makes one feel as though they want to have a shower after watching.

In essence, Covenant represents a paradigm shift for the Alien series. The creature who travels through vents and hides in the darkest corner of the ship no longer scare us. Instead, the synthetic being and his freedom to experiment while we all sleep gets the heart beating just a little bit faster.

This is a wonderful review! You've given voice to a lot of feelings I had while watching it. Wheras with Prometheus, I felt the theorising afterwards wasn't really supported by the film, with this one I feel it can bear the weight very well.

I like it wears the title cleverly, too: the prinicpal antagonist is still a being, alone, in an environment it doesn't belong in, systematically wiping everything out or rebuilding it to it's own design. It's just that the Alien in question is now David.

[Rankles75]

Actually enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Certainly better than Prometheus, although I still question why we need so many movies to tell this particular story. Characters were fleshed out a lot better (except Franco's, obviously), less (and certainly not as glaring) instances of characters doing stupid shit, the Neomorphs are an interesting addition to the Alien mythology and it had a lot more tension than it's predecessor. The clear size and species difference between the Engineers and the Space Jockey in Alien will always be an issue for me, but it didn't spoil my enjoyment of this. After all, we've still got another 2-3 films before that gets definitively answered.

Can understand the criticism of the quick gestation of the chestbursters, though more with Oram than Lope tbh. Iirc, the other characters were sleeping when Lope was killed, so at least a few hours (maybe longer?) could have passed. Oram can only have been infected for a few minutes. It is a bit jarring, but I can see how it's necessary to speed up the life cycle of the Alien for the sake of the film.

Shaw's fate was disappointing, considering she was the main character in Prometheus and we didn't even get a glimpse of her in this. She wasn't exactly a Ripley level character, but I thought there would be more to her story. Daniels and Tennessee were both good characters, but it looks like they'll suffer the same fate.

I sincerely doubt any future additions to the series will ever match the quality of the first two films, but (though it's not saying much) this was definitely better than anything that's come since Aliens imo. Would probably give it 7/10 right now, though would have to see it again to be sure...

[Robopadna]

The performances are alright, with Michael Fassbender doing a good job as expected. To be honest, I'm just kind of disappointed because he didn't chew the scenery a little bit more. It would've fitted the overall B-movie vibe. The info on the origins of the Xenomorph (heh, here I am using that X word again) is not terrible, but much like all the answers we've had about the Space Jockey in Prometheus, it just feels very, very "meh". Speaking of SJ, the scene in which the giant albino civilization makes a perfect argument for the accusation that filmmakers show way too much these days. Had it been simply mentioned by one of the characters, it would end up probably making sense as a plot development. Actually seeing it, though, makes it completely ludicrous.

I actually think it was a good idea to show it.  If one more thing is hand waived away with awful dialogue it would be absurd (it already is).  Plus, Ridley apparently does not like to have the characters ask much that he doesn't plan on visually showing.  If he cut that scene out, I bet he would cut out all references to it. 

Put it this way, the characters arrive on an UNEXPLORED planet that is broadcasting a message sent from someone from earth.  They get attacked and are saved by a robot from earth. who leads them to an entire city and civilization, proving there are alien races out there and they landed on a colonized planet.  The main problem being the entire civilization is dead and petrified. 

Throughout it all, the characters show no more interest than they would in a tv show that was on in the background at a party.  They simply don't care and Ridley can't seem to understand why they would.  If he didn't put that scene in it would simply be one more thing the characters would never ask about or reference.

To be fair, if I had just witnessed a creature just burst out of my mates throat and then slaughter several of my other team members I don't think I'd care about petrified bodies either.

Besides, they may well have discussed it we just didn't need to witness itgem discussing it as it wouldn't be important to the plot.

First, not everyone lost a loved one.  Second, if you watched that happen and then were led into a city full of other dead people you would be EXTRA curious as to how these things died because you already know the planet has some hostile animals/environments and you also do not want to end up dead.  Is it a contagious thing???  The characters certainly don't seem to care If they live or die so the audience doesn't really either.

As an audience you really DO need to see them ask these questions and discuss it.  It makes the audience feel there is a connection to these characters and they are acting much the same way that normal humans react to extreme circumstances.  They focus on self preservation and want the best chance to also not die.  Then, when things go bad, you care when they die because they ALSO cared about what was happening to them.

As it is, you don't really care about anyone in it because no one acts much like a normal human.  They are pretty much sacks of meat used to move the movie from one set piece to another.  You  an tell Ridley doesn't particularly care about them either since he cuts out as much character building as possible and gives anything interesting to the two androids.

In the end, it's very poor writing to not have those interactions on screen unless you really don't want your audience to care about any of your characters.

To clarify, if you just want gore and to see different ways people can suffer or die, then you don't need to care about the characters.  There is no reason to.  I am hoping this series actually DOES want us to care and be somewhat invested in whether or not they live or die.

[Corporal Hicks]

In all fairness, there are some comments of "what the f**k?!" or stuff to that effect when they're walking through the Necropolis to the Citadel. But yeah, there should have been more.

[Robopadna]

In all fairness, there are some comments of "what the f**k?!" or stuff to that effect when they're walking through the Necropolis to the Citadel. But yeah, there should have been more.

And I get that (at least it shows they aren't all emotionless robots) but if you want an audience to care, you have to have your characters act like humans and ask questions any normal human would ask in that situation (a dangerous and confusing one).  And you have to show that to the audience.  You can't be a lazy filmmaker.

Again, if your goal is to make a gore movie though and you are trying to have the audience view every character as a simple means to show a different violent death, then it doesn't really matter.  I think it's pretty clear from these movies that isn't what Scott is trying to go for.  He is just not good at it.

[Snake]

In all fairness, there are some comments of "what the f**k?!" or stuff to that effect when they're walking through the Necropolis to the Citadel. But yeah, there should have been more.

And I get that (at least it shows they aren't all emotionless robots) but if you want an audience to care, you have to have your characters act like humans and ask questions any normal human would ask in that situation (a dangerous and confusing one).  And you have to show that to the audience.  You can't be a lazy filmmaker.

Again, if your goal is to make a gore movie though and you are trying to have the audience view every character as a simple means to show a different violent death, then it doesn't really matter.  I think it's pretty clear from these movies that isn't what Scott is trying to go for.  He is just not good at it.

I think it would have slowed the movie down quite a bit if the characters were going to have an in-depth discussion what happened to the engineers. They didn't know what happened and we wouldn't have gotten any answers as well, so there's no point in such a scene imo. I also would have hated it if we we're going to be spoon-fed once again...it's not being lazy at all.

Come to think of it, they did swear a lot in this movie and it felt a little unnecessary but that's just nitpicking. Totally loved it and I want to see it again ASAP.

[HuDaFuK]

I think it would have slowed the movie down quite a bit if the characters were going to have an in-depth discussion what happened to the engineers.

Considering how rushed certain parts of the film felt, it could've done with a bit of slowing down to gaze at the surroundings with wonder.

[Snake]

I think it would have slowed the movie down quite a bit if the characters were going to have an in-depth discussion what happened to the engineers.

Considering how rushed certain parts of the film felt, it could've done with a bit of slowing down to gaze at the surroundings with wonder.

I don't think it felt rushed at all, but that's just me. It's not a Stanley Kubrick movie...

[Butterfly]

I actually think it was a good idea to show it.  If one more thing is hand waived away with awful dialogue it would be absurd (it already is).  Plus, Ridley apparently does not like to have the characters ask much that he doesn't plan on visually showing.  If he cut that scene out, I bet he would cut out all references to it. 

Put it this way, the characters arrive on an UNEXPLORED planet that is broadcasting a message sent from someone from earth.  They get attacked and are saved by a robot from earth. who leads them to an entire city and civilization, proving there are alien races out there and they landed on a colonized planet.  The main problem being the entire civilization is dead and petrified. 

Throughout it all, the characters show no more interest than they would in a tv show that was on in the background at a party.  They simply don't care and Ridley can't seem to understand why they would.  If he didn't put that scene in it would simply be one more thing the characters would never ask about or reference.

My issue with the scene is that it feels way too much like a movie construct. I really didn't get a sense that the civilization existed outside of waiting for that ship to arrive. The magnitude of what's happening is so huge (one robot single handedly commiting genocide with a conveniently placed doomsday bioweapon) that it feels like it's a little too much. Basically, I think that seeing it just accentuates how ridiculous this plot point is and breaks willing suspension of disbelief.

I don't understand how showing the attack makes the fact that the characters don't seem to bother about the DEAD ALIEN CIVILIZATION that they've come across less absurd, but you're dead on about pointing this issue out.

I think it would have slowed the movie down quite a bit if the characters were going to have an in-depth discussion what happened to the engineers. They didn't know what happened and we wouldn't have gotten any answers as well, so there's no point in such a scene imo. I also would have hated it if we we're going to be spoon-fed once again...it's not being lazy at all.

Come to think of it, they did swear a lot in this movie and it felt a little unnecessary but that's just nitpicking. Totally loved it and I want to see it again ASAP.

Well, if you're going to tackle all the big questions that thia movie attempts to address, then it's not really a bad idea to slow things down a tad.

[Robopadna]

In all fairness, there are some comments of "what the f**k?!" or stuff to that effect when they're walking through the Necropolis to the Citadel. But yeah, there should have been more.

And I get that (at least it shows they aren't all emotionless robots) but if you want an audience to care, you have to have your characters act like humans and ask questions any normal human would ask in that situation (a dangerous and confusing one).  And you have to show that to the audience.  You can't be a lazy filmmaker.

Again, if your goal is to make a gore movie though and you are trying to have the audience view every character as a simple means to show a different violent death, then it doesn't really matter.  I think it's pretty clear from these movies that isn't what Scott is trying to go for.  He is just not good at it.

I think it would have slowed the movie down quite a bit if the characters were going to have an in-depth discussion what happened to the engineers. They didn't know what happened and we wouldn't have gotten any answers as well, so there's no point in such a scene imo. I also would have hated it if we we're going to be spoon-fed once again...it's not being lazy at all.

Come to think of it, they did swear a lot in this movie and it felt a little unnecessary but that's just nitpicking. Totally loved it and I want to see it again ASAP.

It isn't in depth at all.  It is treating your characters as humans and forming some connection with the audience.  It is incredibly lazy film making to leave all that out.  Those are the most important pieces in establishing your characters as people the audience actually gives a crap about.  It isn't spoon feeding anything.  It's the basics of character development.

Scott has never been good at developing characters really (unless they are incredibly strongly written) and tends to hope the visuals take care of that for him.  He is an expert at that side of things so sometimes it works.  In cases like this and Prometheus, it really hasn't.