There is so little about this film that works at all - a specific moment here or there such as Ripley's encounter with the previous clones perhaps. Winona Ryder is completely miscast and most of the performances are so over the top, even actors you can usually rely on, such as Perlman, fail to inject any sort of interest or emotional connection. Most of the humour falls flat and there is certainly nothing here to scare, with the emphasis on body horror and gore. It doesn't help that the effects look dated and cheap, something that could never be said about the previous entries, even the third. The setup of Ripley's character is initially intriguing, but this version of Ripley is far too removed from the original, meaning the film is unable to rely on the emotional connection to the character from the previous films and the script here is far too weak to make the audience care about what is effectively a new character. Weaver does her best, but this is not Ripley at all - the filmmakers seem to have completely forgotten about what made the character so compelling in the first place, instead choosing to focus on her superhuman abilities that have been passed on to her. An entry that adds little to the series and, given the closure that the third one provides, is perhaps best avoided.

At the end of the last film, we see "Ripley" (Sigourney Weaver) fall headline into a vat of what looks like molten lava, clutching her newborn - determined that neither shall survive. Well, luckily for all concerned, technology roars ahead and 200 years afterwards we have somehow managed to clone her - and her baby. Military plans for the killer beasties are the reason, but as we all know by now - nature finds a way, and after some dodgy DNA sequencing, they face an enemy that presents a terrifying hybrid of alien and human that could threaten Earth itself. It is up to her, whom the aliens still think is one of then, and a disparate bunch of space pirates to try to thwart the creatures - and to survive! This offers quite a shocking indictment of just how state-sponsored science, coupled with militaristic aspirations can lead to some hideous creations but aside from that rather obvious moral imperative, the rest of this is pretty routine. There is no shock left for us to feel; we have seen it all before and just like last time, the folks getting gobbled up are largely deserving of their fates. Winona Ryder's ("Call") adds a little quirkiness to the plot later on, but otherwise this is all just completely forgettable, churned out sci-fi that, though quite quickly paced and complete with some great special effects, offers nothing new.

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

I can't believe how the Alien franchise has been politicized in two directions by the same side of the political debate.

I pointed out Ripley as an example of a strong female lead that everyone loves, and that got me the ire of the cancel culture folks. It's not politically correct to like Ripley when you have worse and more modern strong female leads.

But, I really didn't like "Alien: Resurrection" and that earned me the wrath of the exact same people!!!!

So, I guess the basic rule of thumb is that you are only supposed to like the bad movies to be politically correct?

I don't know how it works.

For those of you that are rational, "Alien: Resurrection" stinks. For starters, Ripley is supposed to be dead. Bringing her back the way they did, well, that's not only an insult to us fans that love her, but to Ripley as well.

Seeing her like that left a sour taste in my mouth.

And though I always loved and will likely always love both Winona Ryder and Ron Perlman, and though they did as good of a job as they could...they couldnt act their way around a horrible script and a terrible premise.

You can't blame the actors for this nightmare. You can see that they are actually trying to salvage something from the mess. In the end, you have to blame it on the fact that this is an Alien movie that no one asked for, and it's a plot that should never have been.

In 1997 this movie was trash. In 2018, however, it's fresh air considering the Alien movies we have now. But still, I'm giving it the 97 rating.

it was over at 3, no need to insult a stellar franchise.

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.