Alien Resurrection 1997 123movies

Watch: Alien Resurrection 1997 123movies, Full Movie Online – The saga continues 200 years after Ripley sacrificed herself for the sake of humanity. Her erstwhile employers long gone, this time it is the military that resurrects the one-woman killing machine through genetic cloning to extract the alien from within her, but during the process her DNA is fused with the queen and then the aliens escape. Now Ripley must decide where her allegiance lies..
Plot: Two hundred years after Lt. Ripley died, a group of scientists clone her, hoping to breed the ultimate weapon. But the new Ripley is full of surprises … as are the new aliens. Ripley must team with a band of smugglers to keep the creatures from reaching Earth.
Smart Tags: #pregnant_alien #pirate #alien #strong_female_lead #strong_female_character #lesbian_subtext #ellen_ripley_character #female_android #sucked_through_an_opening #gynoid #female_human_alien_hybrid #hybrid #year_2379 #horror_icon #facehugger #wheelchair #black_comedy #aquatic_humanoid #man_kisses_a_man #woman_punches_a_man #woman_swims

Find Alternative – Alien Resurrection 1997, Streaming Links:

123movies | FMmovies | Putlocker | GoMovies | SolarMovie | Soap2day

Ratings:

	6.2/10 Votes: 249,071
	54% | RottenTomatoes
	63/100 | MetaCritic
	N/A Votes: 4036 Popularity: 22.662 | TMDB

Reviews:

A pretty average movie, specially compared to the previous installments in the Alien franchise (even Alien 3). The plot sometimes gets very confusing and none of the characters are memorable. Some of them are even rather cartoonish. The movie seems like a cheat attempt at cash crab, by using a known franchise. I would recommend watching if you are a fan or are looking for a mediocre action/horror movie to watch with friends.

Let sleeping dogs lie?

Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, the makers here basically stick safe to the formula of the series. This time it’s a space station with space pirates and a cloned Ripley (Siggy Weaver of course) – yes! A cloned Ripley, only this time she’s devoid of human compassion – kind of… The gore quota is significantly upped, which makes for some serious sci-fi terror, and some of the imagery crafted is outstanding (a clone lab sequence is shatteringly unforgettable). A tip top cast featuring Ron Perlman, Michael Wincott, Brad Dourif, Dan Hedaya and Winona Ryder, all give good shows, whilst the photography (Darius Khondji/Se7en) and art design (Steve Cooper, Andrew Neskoromny and John M. Dwyer) takes the breath away. Yet come the final straight it loses its way, sinking into a mire of over confidence, topped by a crown of thorns involving an albino baby alien hybrid. Shame that. 6.5/10

A 20 year re-review
I am one of those older (mature) reviewers who can claim to have seen this series in real time, in theatres.

First I will share my recollection of what that was like at the time.

Alien 1 was magnificent. If you were to make a list of the greatest films of all time (and all reviewers do this, if only subconsciously) Alien 1 would be make the list. Alien 2 was doubly astonishing because it was almost as good as Alien 1 and, as any film buff knows, the sequel is rarely if ever that good.

Expectations were high going into Alien 3, the prison planet movie, but the entry was disappointing and for the first time fans started to wonder if the franchise was going to self-destruct.

For this reason, Alien 4, Resurrection, was disappointing in every possible way. It was a weak concept, poorly timed and poorly executed. The template for the story was more “haunted house” than sci-fi. Not only was the story flawed but at the end of the day it ran out of steam after the first 30 minutes and became tedious for the audience, a sin no film should ever commit. All the characters were so unlikable — including to a large extent Weaver’s saucy clone — that even if the audience WANTED to root for a character, there was no one worthy of the effort.

I got hold of the director’s cut and re-reviewed this film because another member posted a review saying this film was unappreciated.

OK, so let’s appreciate it for what it is — a flawed entry that almost destroyed the franchise. The IMDb rating is solid — in other words, this is really a very weak film.

(To date Alien 1 and 2 remain the best of the series. AVP is a remarkably perky little entry that somehow manages to polarize reviewers who either love it or hate. I have re-watched AVP more than any other entry. It is not elegant but it is very very entertaining.)

Some perspectives on Alien: Resurrection
The Auteurist Perspective – The most unorthodox way of viewing this picture is as a kind of formalist exercise. Jean-Pierre Jeunet has talked about his desire to make a film tailored exactly to the format of a Hollywood action movie, even going so far as to count the number of cuts and camera set-ups in the blockbusters he watched for research. Everything in the movie may be taking place within quotation marks, as in the melodramas of Douglas Sirk or, more obliquely, Gus van Sant’s ‘Psycho’. The film wants to be both an archetypal big sci-fi action movie whilst simultaneously a pastiche of the form. The gorgeously overblown shot of Ripley and Call standing amid the clouds at the film’s close certainly suggests a playful tweaking of blockbuster bombast. However, the ‘Alien’ series may not be the most appropriate place for this experiment; the series is far more defined by spaces and silences than by frenetic action of the Bruckheimer variety. Even James Cameron’s ‘Aliens’ is surprisingly slow in its build-up; by contrast, Resurrection’s relentless pace becomes oddly monotonous and the film loses the distinctive texture Jeunet brings to it.

The Whedonite Perspective – The problems with the script are mostly additions or changes to Joss Whedon’s original (which is available online). Whedon rightly made Ripley’s resurrection the backbone for the story, finding new things to do with a character many believed had reached the end of her life, both literally and creatively. He also carefully fleshed out the supporting characters just enough to keep them interesting. There are small problems even in his original script – Purviss is sidelined when his predicament demands imaginative exploration, and the narrative is more linear than you’d expect from this writer. But it’s the feeble alterations that damage the film – reducing characters like Hillard (in particular) to cyphers, changing the ending so the audience never gets to see earth (the only place, as Whedon instinctively understood, that the climax could possibly take place), and removing a lot of the texture of the setting, like the marijuana fields. ‘I’m a stranger here myself’ should have been one of the great closing lines in movie history, up there with ‘Tomorrow is another day’ and ‘Shut up and deal’, but the dialogue (Whedon’s great strength) is mangled by a director working in his second language, and who seems to be paying more attention to the lighting anyway.

The Cynical Perspective – The ‘Alien’ series is, by this point, a cash cow that everyone involved wants to milk until it bleeds. ‘Alien3’ ended Ripley’s story with an unflinching finality that ‘Resurrection’ can only cheapen, no matter how good it is. The hiring of a cult french director is a sop to the critics who lionise Scott and Fincher’s contributions – and whilst prior instalments were filmed in England, this production was mounted in LA, for the convenience of everyone involved. It wouldn’t do to make too much of an effort on what is, after all, the latest sausage on the string. The suits’ only concern is the opening weekend; hence Winona, shoehorned in just in case Sigourney’s box office draw is waning.

The Aesthetic Perspective – John Frizzell’s score is the fourth classic in a row for the series; both lushly romantic and queasily menacing, it gives the film its own distinctive flavour. The production design is bold and distinctive, with perhaps a hint of playful parody (the sickly green light, the mad scientist outfits, the giant glass jars in the lab); the film looks like a comic strip version of its predecessors. Some of the direction is highly effective – the underwater sequence is devastatingly beautiful. The problem is the slightly over-ripe grotesquerie Jeunet brings out in the material, particularly in the way the cast is shot (Dominique Pinon looks like a malevolent garden gnome, Dan Hedaya resembles a sweaty gendarme). It sits uneasily with the straightforward disaster movie plot. The biggest miscalculation on the production front, however, is the Newborn. The thinking behind it – to give it an expressive face and thus complicate Ripley’s (and our) emotional response to it – is sound enough, but it doesn’t really come off in the finished creature, which looks like moldy old tissues clinging to a pipe-cleaner frame. Whedon’s original conception of a white, red-veined alien of the traditional design might have worked more effectively, although even that might not have survived the aesthetic indignity of its impossible demise, getting sucked into space as a string of alien linguine.

Other Information:

Original Language en
Runtime 1 hr 49 min (109 min), 1 hr 56 min (116 min) (2003 Special Edition)
Budget 70000000
Revenue 162000000
Status Released
Rated R
Genre Action, Horror, Sci-Fi
Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet
Writer Dan O’Bannon, Ronald Shusett, Joss Whedon
Actors Sigourney Weaver, Winona Ryder, Dominique Pinon
Country United States
Awards 7 wins & 21 nominations
Production Company N/A
Website N/A

Technical Information:

Sound Mix DTS, Dolby Digital
Aspect Ratio 2.39 : 1
Camera Aaton 35-III, Panavision Primo Lenses, Panavision Panaflex Platinum, Panavision Primo Lenses
Laboratory DeLuxe, Hollywood (CA), USA (prints), Technicolor, Hollywood (CA), USA (also prints)
Film Length 2,980 m (Sweden), 3,054 m
Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision 500T 5279, Eastman EXR 200T 5293)
Cinematographic Process Super 35
Printed Film Format 35 mm (anamorphic)