Hey, you got your Alien in my Predator!

I love the Alien movies. For anyone who doubts this supposition, I put forward the fact that I just watched Alien vs. Predator: Requiem. It took me three nights, but I got through it. I even kinda enjoyed it, in a third-piece-of-birthday cake kind of way. Its gory, brainless, overdark, shittily acted take on the Alien franchise was like having disappointing but itch-scratchingly satisfying and ultimately guilt-free sex with an old ex-girlfriend...in the morning, all one has to do is forgive one's all-too-familiar inability to say no to life's seedier indulgences. Which, unfortunately, I'm pretty used to doing.

But anyway.

It got me wondering. Everybody always seems to like the idea of a new Alien movie, but after Aliens, they all sort of sucked, didn't they? Don't get me wrong, I love them all anyway, of course, like I love my own children. The first Alien was the golden boy, the CEO, the JFK. Aliens was the buff, harder working athlete with the military pedigree and the cool war stories. The third one was the brainy, balding art school dropout with funky politics. And then there's Alien Resurrection, the fourth brother, the Teddy Kennedy of the clan, who never bothered getting dressed for the day. But even that one stops me when I find it on cable. Somehow the fact that it's not scary or suspenseful or even particularly engaging all make it more charming, like an elementary school play with an absurdly inflated budget. Plus it wasn't directed by Michael Bay.

But the point is, if you were going to actually make a good Alien movie, what would you do? I think we can safely dismiss such initial flashes of inspiration as turning the Alien loose on a commerical airliner, a shopping mall or a French cheese festival.

What made the first one so great? Besides the groundbreaking creature design by H.R. Giger, what are we left with? A realistic cast of characters, for one thing -- grumbling, ball-scratching just-woke-up employees of a massive corporation that could care less about them. In a brilliant stroke, Dan O'Bannon and Ridley Scott decided to introduce a highly ambivalent, very 70s view of technology. They didn't have to--they could've just made Jaws in space--but the decision to introduce artificial intelligence systems and synthetic humans as something that might very well make things worse, is what makes this movie timeless.

So what would it take to make another great Alien movie? How about a big dose of that great late '70s paranoia? Tony Gilroy's Michael Clayton was a great example of how this attitude still lives and breathes just dandy on today's screens. Hell, I think any Alien movie that even tried a little to be brainy and subversive would be a step back in the right direction. Viewed in this context, Alien 3 is a damn masterpiece. See what I mean?

In the end, though, it's people exactly like me who are to blame for the shoddy state of things. We don't hesitate to pay good money to wtach the fifth, eighth or twentieth sequel in an increasingly bankrupt series and sit up all night grieving about how we could spruce it up, bring the magic back, make it breathe again, if only somebody in power would just give us a chance. Although in the end, this is probably just another way of enjoying it. Viewed in this enlightened context, I actually don't feel too bad about it.

And that, my friends, is the beginning of wisdom.