Movie Review: “Alien: Romulus”

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

I realize that I’m very late to the scene with this review of “Alien: Romulus,” but I just happened to see it on streaming Thursday night. Now, I would consider myself a fan of sci-fi, but not a die-hard fan of every movie in the “Alien” franchise. I watched the original “Alien” on broadcast TV when I was a small boy, and for the longest time there were many aspects which confused me. I was also not huge into horror, so the movie was not a priority. As I’ve re-watched it, the details have fallen into place and it is a much more enjoyable film. I also originally saw “Aliens” on broadcast TV, and have always liked it much better than the original. Having re-watched both films, I can appreciate them for their own strengths. “Alien” is more of a slow-burn, and “Aliens” is more of an action flick. Looking back, I have never seen an “Alien” movie in the movie theater. I just was too young to see the originals, and in my adult life I had too many other priorities.

Over the years, I have tried watching the other sequels, but they didn’t really hold up to the first two. I feel like I’ve never finished “Alien 3,” and while I’ve watched “Alien: Resurrection” on DVD, I didn’t care for it much. I think that the minds behind this franchise have tried hard to take it in many different directions but, much like other classic films, its been hard to top the first two originals.

This brings me to “Alien: Romulus,” which I really did want to see in the movie theater, especially when I heard some of the reactions of the people who saw it. Not everybody liked it, however, and I heard a few negative reviews, so perhaps its better that I saved my money. Still, there was probably something lost when I watched it on my iPad Thursday night.

The feelings I have about this movie when I think about it, is that it felt like a live-action cartoon. That is to say, that it had a strong story overall, but there were bits of it that didn’t make sense. But, not in a way that confused my 12-year-old brain.

Going into any “Alien” movie, you can expect certain elements: There will be Xenomorphs, chest bursters, and a group of people who will fight to survive and escape. This movie, however, leans so much into these and other elements that you could safely call it fan service. Others might say that the movie was paying homage. This wouldn’t be so questionable if it had a strong story otherwise.

One element is how it fits into the lore of the “Alien” franchise. With there having been several sequels and, I think, two prequels, “Romulus” takes place after the events of “Alien.” So that makes it a sequel-prequel and the “Rogue One,” of the Alien franchise of movies. The problem, then, is that telling a story where another group encounters the Xenomorph changes the context of the other films. When “Aliens” was released, the Xenomorphs were still very mysterious, and in fact the events of the movie are kicked off by colonists who do not understand what they are dealing with on the surface of the planet. If you take “Romulus” into account, then it might change what we understand about the world during “Aliens.”

Getting past all of that, the movie has an intriguing start. It’s two main characters, Raine and Andy, live on a planet which is owned and operated by Weyland-Yutani, a company which has played a role in almost all of the Alien movies. The colonists there are practically slaves. Raine and Andy want to change this by moving to a different planet which is outside of the company’s control. But, Raine’s time there has been conveniently extended.

Her friends reach out to her with a plan, however. They can travel to the different planet, but first they need to get cryo tubes so that they can sleep during the trip. They know of a derelict ship in the system which they can get the cryo tubes from, and then head off on their journey. This sets up the plot of the movie as a heist, which feels different.

The “ship” they were looking for turns out to be a Weyland-Yutani space station which slowly on a course which will send it crashing into the ring of debris around their home planet. This leaves them with time to get what they need, and then get out. Andy, I almost forgot to mention, is an android. They brought him along because he is able to unlock sections of the station. But, of course, things go awry when their actions unleash the xenomorphs.

The movie continues to check all of the right boxes, making it a bonafide part of the “Alien” franchise. But, I can’t help but wonder if this might have worked under a different context. Perhaps, with a different type of alien. Because other than the lore, the xenomorphs really are just monsters to be run away from or shot. I thought of the cut scenes from “StarCraft,” a video game which borrowed heavily from the “Alien” movies, and could see how this could have been made into a StarCraft movie. Or, put into any universe where you want to tell a horror story about people going up against alien monsters.

But, that isn’t the only problem with this film. This movie tries to reference so many of the moments from the previous movies, that it barely feels original. Do you remember when Ripley shouted, “Get away from her, you bitch?” Well, that’s in there, for some reason. So is the black goo. So, that’s part of its lore now, too.

I think that the producers are trying to tell a broader story which fits around the events in the original films. Why was the Nostromo re-routed to investigate a transmission? That film gave an adequate explanation, but now the prequels and this film seem to be saying there was a lot more going on. Maybe it is fascinating to zoom back and fill in the gaps around the story of the first film, but I don’t know that it is really needed. “Alien” and “Aliens” worked because they told simple, engaging stories with interesting characters. I would think that you would want new fans of the franchise to experience these movies the same as people did in 1979 and 1985, respectively. But, now the newer movies have introduced plot elements that threaten to change what those original movies were about. It’s all becoming too convoluted.

Overall, it is difficult what Hollywood is trying to accomplish with all of these reboots, sequels, re-imaginings, and prequels. It’s as if its not enough to have one classic or successful movie, they need to make more money by releasing a duplicate or variation on a theme. I’ll admit that it can be cool seeing something from the 1970’s or 1980’s, upgrading it with current movie making techniques, and then watching the scenes play out on the screen, but I’m also craving a movie with strong characters and a good plotline. More and more, I’ve begun to wonder if Hollywood isn’t sacrifice good storytelling for eye-popping special effects. Making movies more about eye candy than storytelling. But, the truth is that movie directors of the 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s were inspired by the limitations of special effects. They leaned on better characters or stories, as well as the “less is more” approach. When Steven Spielberg made “JAWS,” he showed less of the shark because the animatronic shark would only look good in certain shots. I’m guessing that when “Alien” was produced, they didn’t show the Xenomorph as often because it helped to create tension.

So, overall, “Alien: Romulus” is an okay film, and a good return to the Alien universe. I just wish that it might have been handled a little differently, and more emphasis put on originality and character development.

Just to help illustrate what I’m talking about, a couple of months ago I watched an original animation on YouTube which told a story set in the Alien universe with completely different characters, but a familiar set up of the Xenomorph running amok and killing almost everybody who was on board. There were familiar elements, and even references to the movies, but at the same time it was something that felt new and original. In some ways, it took risks with its storytelling, and it paid off. This is something that Hollywood needs to take note on, perhaps as a reminder.