137 min
7.948
1986
USA
Ripley, the sole survivor of the Nostromo's deadly encounter with the monstrous Alien, returns to Earth after drifting through space in hypersleep for 57 years. Although her story is initially met with skepticism, she agrees to accompany a team of Colonial Marines back to LV-426.
Overview
Reviews
Rob wrote:One of my all time favorites. It still contains some of the drama and suspense of the first but with far more action leading to what I find a far more appealing storyline. As with Cameron's movies he makes you feel for the core characters from the start rather than just a bunch of 'bad ass' marines (Although they are). The progression of Ripley was really defined by this movie the 'brave but scared' Ripley of Alien is gone and a more determined, meaner Ripley emerges with elements of the older nurturing character kept in check with a young girl called Newt. It definitely stands out miles compared to all the other 80's alien-type movies of that decade.
Patrick E. Abe wrote:"Ripley and the Soldiers" can be found in two versions: the short version that cuts from Midway station directly to the Weyland-Yutani hearing, and the "director's cut" which cuts to a waiting room with a wall size "scenery channel" display.
When I first saw the short version, I wondered how Ripley was able to make an immediate connection with Newt. "Sister solidarity" sounded bogus, and the "director's cut" cleared up that mystery.
The more interesting "director's cut" reveals Newt's family on LV-426, a long discussion on what the surviving Marines are facing, and an action sequence featuring the deadly Sentry units.
As Ripley suggested, I.Q.s did drop sharply among the Weyland-Yutani brass, with Carter Burke sending a deadly directive to "Hadley's Hope."
In short: Ripley is living the blue collar life by day and experiencing a recurrent "Alien birth" nightmare at night. Carter Burke and Colonial Marine Lt. Gorman visit her, saying contact has been lost with LV-426. Signing a devil's deal with Weyland-Yutani, Ripley boards the "Sulaco" with a "company" of Colonial Marines. To her horror, an android, "Bishop" is part of the crew, recalling the murderous "Nostromo" science officer, Ash. The trash-talking Colonial Marines give Ripley's tale short shrift, as they prepare for the "Bug Hunt." The armed-to-the-teeth party finds no colonists, but evidence of a battle to the death. Then something streaks out of hiding, pursued by Ripley. "Mewt" is the sole survivor of "Hadley's Hope" who views the soldiers with a disdainful "it won't make any differene." A computer search finds the colonists clustered deep below the power plant.
The Marines descend into the sub-sub-basement level and find out how true Ripley's tale is. After retreating from Hell, the survivors seal themselves off from the "Xenomorphs" as best as they can, dispatching "Bishop" to bring down the other drop ship. The Aliens attack and the soldiers fall one after another, leading to an abduction and a face off in an egg-filled chamber. This sequel is superior to the first movie, and leads to "Ripley and the Convicts." 8/10.
Charles Dance wrote:**The Disney film of the franchise**
A basic shoot 'em up that comes complete with soldiers greasing up and watching each others muscles and also added an annoying kid straight out of Oliver Twist.
Cameron took everything Ridley Scott slowly built up and tossed it in the trash can to make a cheap shot Stallone/ Schwarzenegger style action fiasco.
People who like this one tend to not be fans of horror movies as they complain about the _dark nature_ of the horror film Alien 3 - LOL - and this is precisely the reason Aliens fails as part of the horror franchise that is Alien.
- Charles Dance
John Chard wrote:My mommy always said there were no monsters - no real ones - but there are.
Ripley has been found in deep space by a salvage ship and brought back to a space station to be awoken from her 57 year sleep. Here she is mortified to find that the planet on which herself and her now deceased Nostromo crew found the Alien, LV-426, has been colonised by Weyland-Yutani Company. Suffice to say that when The Company representative, Burke, tells her that all contact is lost, she's not in the least bit surprised. Unable to get anyone to believe her about what happened to the Nostromo crew, Ripley is cajoled into going back to LV-426 with a crack team of space marines to seek, destroy or rescue...
How do you make a sequel to one of the finest, most loved modern era films ever? This was something that director James Cameron must have pondered on many a dark night once he had agreed to make Aliens. The answer was to rightly not copy the format so brilliantly laid down by Ridley Scott and his team for Alien, but to embrace its mood and enhance it with thrills spills and exhilaration. This was only Cameron's third feature length movie, and here he was working with the crew who had made Scott's movie so special. Also writing as well as directing, this could have gone very wrong indeed, but Cameron rose to the challenge admirably and set up his marker on how his film would succeed. Keep the premise simple and seamlessly connected to Scott's film, and lets have more. Not just one bad ass acid bleeding alien, but an army of them, and their mother too!
They mostly come at night - mostly.
Where Alien was a splicing of sci-fi wonderment and basic horror terrors, Aliens is a blend of war film staples to compliment both of those earlier picture things. Thus in keeping with Cameron's more is more work in progress skeleton. Another thing that Cameron instinctively called right was to make Aliens about Ripley (Sigorney Weaver simply brilliant), it's her story. Be it a parental thread or a feminist heroine fighting off the phallic hoards, cinema got in Ripley's extension one of its finest and strongest female characters ever (Weaver was nominated for Best Actress but lost out to Marlee Matlin for Children of a Lesser God).
Thematically Aliens has been pored over in regards to metaphors about Vietnam, foreign policy and corporate greed at any cost, and rest assured that Aliens isn't merely one big excuse for a shoot them up bonanza. But realistically, and explaining why it was such a huge box office success, it's with the thrills and terror that Aliens most succeeds. The action scenes are slick and at times breath taking, and the tension is often palpable. None more so as we enter the film at the half way point, because here we realise that we have characters to care about. Blood, brains and brawn, all led by a heroine of considerable guile and guts. 10/10
AmazoniaNOTAmazon wrote:How Disappointing !
This movie, Aliens (1986) is a real fiasco. Especially compared to Alien (1979).
James Cameron ruined the spirit and soul of Alien for several reasons.
The first one, according to me, is that, unlike Alien, he is using too many characters. Almost all of the actors are lacking of charism, even Sigourney Weaver.
The soldiers show more muscles than intelligence and this is not reality, it is almost ridiculous.
I do not understand why Cameron did that. It's unbelievable for a director who made in 1984 Terminator and in 1991 Terminator 2.
The second one, is the length of the movie : about 2h20mn. Too long, much too long.
The third one is the lack of entertainment. I'm sorry, but, compared to Alien, this film cannot hold the comparison.
It lacks of depth, and sometimes, it is better not to shoot a second part of a blockbuster.
I recently watched Chinatown (1974), Rosemary's Baby (1968), Alien (1979), Fatal Attraction (1987) and all of them were great, but not Aliens.
Repo Jack wrote:How do you do a followup to a classic like Alien? GIve it to James Cameron to amp it up to 10 with a bazillion aliens and a fantastic performance by Sigourney Reaver.
r96sk wrote:A better sequel to 'Alien' than I was expecting.
'Aliens' - love the creativity, guys! - is a minute jot off the original but it remains a thoroughly enjoyable film - despite a slightly longer run time, which pleasantly doesn't hamper events. Sigourney Weaver is terrific again; I can see why these films launched her career.
I will say parts of this 1986 flick are a tad repetitive from the original and a few bits are predictable, e.g. the arcs of Lance Henriksen's Bishop and Paul Reiser's Carter, but when judged overall it's another entertaining release from this franchise.
I look forward to seeing if they made it a hat-trick with 'Alien³'.
The Movie Mob wrote:**Overall : Aliens is an unparalleled essential that any sci-fi or horror fan needs to see.**
The original Alien (1979) set a new standard for sci-fi horror due to the fantastic vision and directing of the legendary director Ridley Scott. How could a green rookie director with just a handful of directing credits hope to top that? James Cameron found a way! Aliens improves on its predecessor in every way. Instead of a crew of civilian pilots fighting to survive a single alien, Cameron pits a squad of hardened space marines against an alien infestation. The experience, training, and advanced weaponry fail to protect them from the onslaught of alien xenomorphs, increasing the horror and hopelessness of the film. Cameron's camera work and perspective increase the tension, regularly showing the struggling survivors from the viewpoint of the stalking alien predator. The special effects, the action, the scale, the cast, the directing, the horror, and every other element of Aliens improve on the masterpiece of the original and result in the absolute gold standard of sci-fi horror.
Wuchak wrote:**_One of the best monster movies_**
I prefer James Cameron's "Aliens" (1986) to its predecessor, Ridley Scott's "Alien" (1979), mainly because the story is more compelling. People often say "Aliens" is more of an action film than "Alien," but it's not a mindless action film and, in fact, the action doesn't even start until a FULL HOUR into its 2 hour and 18 minutes runtime (the extended cut runs about 16 minutes longer). The best horror/action movies take this route -- taking their time to build character and suspense before unleashing the horrific mayhem.
Some complain about the screaming little girl, Newt, but -- hey -- she's a little girl and I think the situation calls for this sort of response. Others complain that Bill Paxton is too whiny as one of the Marines, but isn't this the way SOME people respond when facing overwhelming defeat -- even hardened militarists -- particularly by hideous extraterrestrial monsters? Another complaint is that the Marines are depicted as dumb, arrogant "oo-rah" types, but I used to be a Marine and this was the way the over-the-top ones acted and, furthermore, these are the kinds of Marines that would qualify for such a dangerous mission -- the (over)confident wackjobs who would get the job done and done right.
The initial confrontation with the aliens at the hour mark is one of the most horrific sequences in cinematic history; and the Marines are thoroughly humbled. The rest of the film shows the surviving group literally sweating-it-out trying to figure out how to get off the planet alive where annihilating the creatures becomes a secondary objective.
Ripley's motherly love for Newt is a good addition and it humanizes Ripley (Sigourney Weaver). The sequences with the alien Queen make for a dynamic and extended climax. Also, Lance Henriksen is notable as the "artificial human" and Paul Reiser as an effective love-to-hate quasi-villain.
On the downside, the film is noticeably setbound, but that's par for the course for these types of sci-fi films, e.g. Star Trek. Another negative -- for me at least -- is that the film features no curvy babes, but this was the case with the first film as well, so it's to be expected. Besides, I think the female crew is more believable without someone like Juno Temple or Megan Fox aboard, lol.
The bottom line is that "Aliens" is easily one of the greatest monster films of all time, surpassing even the first film in the series and leagues better than the next two.
GRADE: A
BryceSpencer wrote:**Even BETTER Than The First!**
I LOVED this movie! The intense action, the gripping horror, the characters, the aliens, the ascetic...everything. And it takes its time to give us all the little hints and clues from the first film as we venture into this thrilling ride. Though I have much respect for Ridley Scott's first Alien film, this one just takes it to a whole new level in a way the first never could. THIS is how it's done.
BryceSpencer wrote:I LOVED this movie! I honestly rank this movie even higher than the first. The intense action, the gripping horror, the characters, the aliens, the ascetic...everything. And it takes its time to give us all the little hints and clues from the first film as we venture into this thrilling ride. Though I have much respect for Ridley Scott's first Alien film, this one just takes it to a whole new level in a way the first never could. THIS is how it's done.
GenerationofSwine wrote:I have a simple policy: if the movie entertains like it's supposed to, I give it 10 stars...
...That being said:
I'm going to give you two words: "Space Marines" That's right, "space marines" I can almost see the pitch for this. We are going to take the Alien movie, the classic horror movie in space...and we are going to turn it into an action movie in space and completely change the direction of the franchise to the point where people are going to be hesitant to go back to the horror in space formula that worked for alien.
And that is kind of what happened. The Alien franchise kind of lost its horror movie cred with Aliens to the point where Alien 3 got a lot of hate for trying to bring back the successful merger of horror and science fiction.
Aliens turned the franchise into a typical science fiction series...and that kind of hurts.
HOWEVER
You still have Ripley and Ripley is still a super cool hero. And Aliens doubles down on her character and brings her from the tough survivor to a tough as nails warrior.
And then you have a great addition of characters that quickly become beloved.
And even if it changed from a horror movie to a basic science fiction movie with space marines, it was still a stellar science fiction movie. It was still stylistic and fun.
So part of me hates Aliens for making that turn from horror to straight science fiction. But the other part of me recognizes it as a a very good movie for what it is with a great cast.
So I'm going to give it 10 out of 10 despite wanting it to be the same kind of film that Alien was. And, at the same time, I want to praise the risk it took for taking the franchise in a new direction.
Filipe Manuel Neto wrote:**A sequel on par with the first film, and one that helped cement the Alien franchise.**
I really liked the movie Alien, the first of this franchise. There is no doubt that it is one of the best and most remarkable horror films ever made, and one of the “fathers” of contemporary sci-fi cinema. This film was thought to give logical continuity to the story started in that film, and I think it couldn't be better than it is. There are many people who consider the film to be excessively dated, with sets and effects that look old. I strongly disagree. It's true that digital and CGI are not here, but if you think about the amount of bad CGI and bad effects that we have to swallow in today's movies, it's really nice to see a movie with effects that work well and look amazing fifty years later. .
When Ripley is saved over fifty years have passed since the events of the initial film. She arrives in a world that has continued to spin while she sleeps, and which does not believe her account. Still, they ask him to return to space when a colony, newly created on the planet where the first Alien was found, suddenly stops communicating. It's pretty clear that someone knows more than they're saying, and that there are, again, very strong interests from a financial point of view. But Ripley will figure it all out in due time.
The film is extraordinary and is completely at the level of its direct predecessor: the script has an excellent development, knows how to involve and capture the public's attention. Okay, there's a similar story, with the return to that planet and the return of the aliens, but the premise that leads to the return is the best and most convincing, and we don't feel tired or downtime. There's a pleasant tension, which deepens as the threat grows, and even when we don't see the xenomorphs, the fact that we know they're around increases that tension and the feeling of threat.
Cameron continues to prove his genius as a director, and manages to extract the best from everyone involved in his project. In particular, the actors. Sigourney Weaver is at the highest level and gives us an anthology work, which will open doors for her as an actress and which will mark her for life. The rest of the cast does not stand out so much, but we can praise the efforts of actors like Michael Biehn, Lance Henriksen, William Hope, Jenette Goldstein and Al Matthews. Carrie Hen, in part, is the weakest link in this cast, as her character only appears to arouse empathy and for us to connect more intensely with what we are seeing. The truth is that the way her character – a child – survives in that situation is frankly implausible, almost an authentic miracle.
Technically, the film is fantastic. It even seems like a new and relatively recent film, if you don't know what you're watching and that it was released in 1986. The cinematography is clean, sharp and there is an excellent filming and editing job. The effects are done the old-fashioned way, without the overwhelming appeal of digital, and they work amazingly well. See, for example, how the droid cut in half looks, how believable and authentic it looks. The alien is effective, menacing and fearsome, it looks like a weapon come to life and not a normal living being.
emre wrote:While Cameron masterfully balances tension and action, he also deepens the film by focusing on character development. Watching Ripley's transformation is a testament to his impressive direction. Additionally, the creature designs and military costumes bring a sense of realism that surpasses its time, drawing the audience into the film's dark and dangerous world. In these aspects, *Aliens* stands as a masterpiece not just for sci-fi fans, but for cinema enthusiasts as well.
