Director:
James CameronGuión:
James CameronCámara:
Adrian BiddleMúsica:
James HornerReparto:
Sigourney Weaver, Carrie Henn, Michael Biehn, Paul Reiser, Lance Henriksen, Bill Paxton, William Hope, Jenette Goldstein, Al Matthews, Mark Rolston (más)Streaming (4)
Sinopsis(1)
Tras abandonar la Nostromo unos segundos antes de su destrucción, Ripley ha permanecido 57 años a la deriva por el espacio. Cuando por fin es rescatada, descubre que el planeta LV-426 ha sido clonizado durante su hibernación. Como los colonizadores no han encontrado nada extraño en los 20 años que llevan sobre ese planeta, la historia de Ripley acerca del alienígena es recibida con incredulidad. Pero cuando se pierde la comunicación con LV-426, la Compañía contacta con Ripley y le ruega que acompañe a un equipo de expertos al planeta. En un principio ella se niega, pero en el fondo sabe que el único modo de acabar con la pesadilla que le espera cada vez que cierra los ojos es volver a enfrentarse a ella. (20th Century Fox España)
(más)Reseñas (14)
Mientras que en Alien, el octavo pasajero, Ridley Scott enfrentó a investigadores indefensos contra un horror invisible, en la secuela, en la secuela, James Cameron enfrentó a marines armados hasta las orejas contra un enjambre de horrores, visibles en toda su «belleza». El miedo desarmante fue sustituido por la acción adrenalítica desarmante. A Aliens se le podría reprochar en el contexto de la primera película su falta de intimidad terrorífica, pero aquí el director la sustituye por con un aluvión de ideas geniales, una trama cargada y llena de escenas inéditas y su típica perfección técnica. Es un espectáculo de ciencia ficción de referencia, lleno de acción y tensión, que hiela la sangre. Darle menos de 5* dentro del género sería una barbaridad. P.S.: La versión del Director's Cut, en la que seguimos a los habitantes de la base antes de que la tripulación de Ripley aterrice en el planeta, definitivamente no quita tensión y misterio a la película («¿Qué ha pasado aquí?»), simplemente estiliza en una posición diferente («¿Qué les ha pasado?»). Y le da un significado más amplio a algunas historias.
()
Cameron took it radically in his own way and plays on a rather belligerent string. Compared to the first film, there’s less atmosphere and mystery, but the suspense hasn't disappeared and James shows his immense talent and sense of perfectionism in his second big film (not counting Piranha...ahem.).
()
Great film, but I like Scott’s atmospheric first part better.
()
James Cameron is a very wise and clever man. The way he was able to gracefully bridge Scott's horror film (the 57-year time gap, the nightmares, the colonization of the planet) to his own vision of an alien encounter is admirable. It’s an impressive action ride that is unrivaled across all weight categories. It’s built on ingenious editing, (now legendary) sound, and of course, a bunch of marines who, apart from an amazing arsenal, also spew a bunch of catchphrases that should be carved into the most expensive marble. This simply fascinates me even after more than twenty years. To this day I still wonder how something like this film could have ever been made... for me, this is James Cameron's best film and think what you will about it, but that's about all you can do.
()
A really good action film, even one of the best. It has perfect craftsmanship, but compared to the original Alien, it's just too uniform and predictable. Cameron is undoubtedly a great fachman, but one sees through Aliens very quickly. Still, some of the ideas are unforgettable (for example, cameras in the soldiers' helmets). High above standard in the genre. And after seeing the SE I can only add another star. The excellent atmosphere is guaranteed by both the added additions (e.g. Newt and Ripley's deep relationship is much more logical) and the excellent THX packaging... I enjoyed the atmosphere almost as intensely as I did the first time. :o) Light predictability remained... I'm not so sure about the uniformity anymore. Of course, from a filmmaking point of view, Cameron did not achieve Scott's vision, but one cannot ignore the fact that his visions predetermined the form of science fiction not only in film.
()
Where Ridley Scott triumphed through the use of a creeping atmosphere, Cameron puts his money on action-packed antics at a seemingly deserted military base. Where Ridley afforded us just as fleeting as possible glimpses of the alien, believing that unseen evil is the most effective, Cameron deploys whole armies of aliens degraded to the role of insectoid cannon fodder. Where Scott has made do with a few actors in what is almost a chamber piece, Cameron gives us a mega production. Hard to say which of them is better. Both are completely different and yet perfect, although each in its own separate genre. But I won’t try to hide the fact that I prefer the movie that uses the singular in its title.
()
Skipping the seemingly unattainably high bar was an impossible task, but James Cameron did what he could. Ripley still works and even Newt, Hicks, or Bishop quickly grew close to my heart. However, I only started to like Aliens after the extended version, which truly gives the right charge to the psychological background of the first half. Its contribution to the additional success with the audience also lies in the timeless action and breathtaking moments full of elegantly deadly villains.
()
When Ridley Scott made Alien in 1979, it was a huge revival of the genre and the rehabilitation of ugly space monsters as props for adventure sci-fi horror films. Despite all this, it took seven long years before the production studio decided to make a sequel, and none other than James Cameron, who gained the reputation of a first-class director after the triumphant release of The Terminator, was entrusted to make it. Cameron's Aliens literally conquered movie theaters in the United States and abroad. It was hailed as the best science fiction film of the year by both fans and critics. I went to see it with high expectations, and my first impression was rather mixed because the horror atmosphere of the first film was absent, and it was much more of a lavishly filmed action war sci-fi drama. However, it was shot with maximum precision, professionalism, and extraordinary creativity. The plot follows a similar scheme to what the viewer experienced in the first film, but Cameron added the motif of the alien queen and a whole community of two hundred aliens, and audiences can enjoy an attack by dozens of monsters at once. The studio approached the production with extraordinary generosity, and the budget allowed for the use of cutting-edge technology for that time, which paid off. The alien queen was operated hydraulically, but two people were also hidden inside her body, and parts of her body were controlled mechanically by ordinary wire. The movement of the creatures was meant to resemble giant insects, reminiscent of both a praying mantis and a centipede. Cameron also filled the screen with a multitude of characters, tough warriors who would be a decoration in any action film. The screenplay cleverly used the motif of a clash between a human woman defending a child and an alien queen defending her offspring. The scene where little Newt turns to Ripley with a cry of "Mommy" is highly emotive. The cocktail of science fiction, horror, and action drama was a complete success. Although I prefer Ridley Scott's style, I have to take my hat off to Cameron's work. Overall impression: 95%. One of the best films in the science fiction genre.
()
Hands down the best installment of this famous franchise. James Cameron confirms his incredible talent and visual sensibility here and imprints the film with his unique directorial style. The action is fantastic, raw and “realistic”. Similarly, the characters are unusually dense and well-developed for this type of sci-fi. The Marine commando is one cool gang, dropping one-liners faster than the bullets from their machine guns. Finally, we get to see the feared monster in all its beauty and power, and it's no longer just “a guy in a costume”. Sigourney Weaver is even more likeable, and her transformation from a timid advisor to a seasoned warrior is brilliant. The minimalist soundtrack and the android Bishop have become legendary. Together with Blade Runner, clearly the best sci-fi films of the 1980s.
()
Although it's out of place, I can't avoid the comparison; as far as I’m concerned, Aliens is more creative and entertaining than the first one. Cameron is amazing, he elevated an already perfect space survival story to the ultimate polished and incredibly balanced action flick. In the manner of the original, it’s almost heart-attack inducingly suspenseful (you almost can't breathe during the sequence before the first contact with the monsters), but at the same time it's adrenaline-fuelled and superbly choreographed terror for film and computer geeks (so it's quite timeless), and still a prime example of how to use film space with maximum efficiency and how to work with characters in an action story where most of them have to gradually disappear, inventing a variety of traps in line with keeping the pace and delaying the climax in favour of a moment of surprise to the point of being outrageously sexy and cool. An amazing Weaver and a brilliant Henriksen. Together with The Dark Knight and T2, the best sequel ever.
()
James Cameron is a master with a capital M, and when he took over the director's chair from Ridley Scott, he certainly didn't do the first Alien a disservice. Cameron doesn’t skimp, in fact, that word may not even be in his vocabulary, and delivers a perfect and technically proficient sequel about alien monsters. Of the cast, Bill Paxton honestly bothered me a lot, but otherwise I have no other complaints. The music is pretty unremarkable, but the sound effects are very good. Just looking at the spaceship or the model of the alien queen made me stare and wonder if the movie was really a quarter century old. All in all, a very good sequel with a lot more monsters, action and technical gadgets.
()
I was always too cool not to take issue with the second installment of the Alien Tetralogy because a) I resented the way it stripped the aliens of their eerie Gigerian mystery and b) I thought it broke from canon in that, unlike the other installments, it didn't focus on the crumbling periphery of humanity's galactic boom but instead placed us on a vast station in Earth orbit or a newly built human colony. The latter does become a crumbling periphery very quickly as a result of alien activity, but what I love about the first, third, and fourth episodes is the unspoken fact of how the human race, in its colonization of the universe, carelessly tosses aside any parts of it that are not lucrative, simply without any interest in cleaning up the mess left behind. And yet I madly enjoyed my last viewing of Aliens as probably the most spectacular military sci-fi of the analog era. The fact that everything we see here is artfully crafted, nicely old-fashioned with dirty paws is accentuated here by the Cameron’s knack or perfectly selling every single screw or bolt of the film perfectly. Not five minutes go by where he doesn't introduce us to some new gadget or weapon. The entire set, costumes, and objects are so fitting it actually makes you want to touch and feel everything. At the same time, the film has fantastic drama, able to move from quiet traumas to showy spectacles, alternating small conflicts (Newt and Ripley vs. the facehuggers) with big ones (machine guns, flamethrowers, dozens of aliens). Not least, then, is the admiration for the duality that runs through almost all of Cameron's films – a technophile director making technophobic films from a male milieu in which women naturally assert themselves. His empathy for Ripley and Newt's relationship contrasted with the Marine figures kind of suggests that Cameron is not only an excellent filmmaker, but imo quite a heartbreaker in his personal life.
()
James Cameron, after the success of the first Terminator, took on the sequel to Alien, and it's worth noting that he approached it in a dramatically different way than Scott. While the first film excelled in minimalism and atmospheric tension, the second installment went all out, delivering an action-packed inferno with no restraint on the alien’s corrosive acid. I’m somewhat amazed that Cameron managed to make such a technically flawless film for under $20 million; it’s an incredible result for the budget. I enjoyed the performances again; Sigourney Weaver as Ripley did not disappoint. Among the supporting characters, Bill Paxton’s loud and hysterical marine stands out the most (if you’re bored, try counting how many times he says "man"—you won’t be able to keep track :D). Michael Biehn as Sergeant Hicks was also impressive. For me, the best two scenes in the film are definitely the intense finale with the Queen Alien, which holds up even after many years, and the sequence where Ripley and the little girl are trapped in a room with the facehugger, where the atmosphere was palpable. Overall, it’s an audiovisual gem that I’m happy to revisit, but the first film's oppressive mood affected me more. Aliens gets an 8.5/10.
()
Maybe not as mysterious and full of unanticipated scares as Scott's first, but all the more action-packed and briskly paced sequel to Alien from James Cameron. Qualitatively, I think the first two are on the same level, though each in a slightly different way. :)) 100%
()
Anuncio