My worst film of 2017

So here we go again. And this time I am going to do things a little bit differently. There will be a top 15 as with the last two years, but to make things a bit easier (mainly for me in turns of writing) I am going to break it up into three parts: numbers 15-11, then 10-6 and finally 5-1.
But to start with, previously when I have talked about the worst films of the year it has only been a couple of sentences. This year, I have made an effort to justify a worst film and made it a post itself...well, more like a big rant. Oh boy, was this film bad. Here is a quick clue, in the immortal words of the late Bill Paxton - "Game over, man. Game over..."

My worst film of 2017 - Alien: Covenant 

I must say my initial response upon leaving the cinema was one of conflicting emotions. Much later though, after allowing the dust to settle, I felt more disappointed and betrayed. I now understand how so many people must have felt after they saw Prometheus. Here is the most damming criticism I can give - whatever you thought about it, Prometheus is a better film that this. The plot was too similar to the original Alien: answering a distress call in the middle of space, going down to a strange planet, having something bad happen to one or two crew-members and then the Xenomorph turns up and goes on a rampage.

I was expecting more from this film and questioned whether or not Ridley Scott could continue his good form following the success of The Martian. One of the key things that film had going for it was its script, similar to many of the other successful films that Scott has made such as Alien, Blade Runner and Thelma & Louise (N.B. I did not mention Gladiator because that is more of an action and visual spectacle). Yet in Alien: Covenant, ironically, there is this line from the lead character Daniels (Katerine Waterston): "There's so much here that doesn't make sense". The dialogue was far more relatable and believable and made more sense in Alien...and that was from 1979. As, more importantly, were the characters. These characters have no set-up or characterization. We are expected to know who they are and their backstory if we were bothered to watch all the promo videos and such on social media and YouTube. I just felt no attachment to them at all. In fact, James Franco is in more of the promo videos than he is the actual movie.

Plus, there is so much self-important backstory to drive you round the bend; even more than what there was in Prometheus. We know Ridley Scott wants these films to think about where it is humans came from, but he also said there were complaints on social media about the lack of Xenomorphs in Prometheus. That film was never meant to be about them and as a result he has now been dictated by people's nostalgia. So with Alien: Covenant, let's get rid of all the mystery and intrigue that surrounded the origins of the Xenomorphs. What was great about Alien was when the Nostromo's crew land on LV-426 they know nothing about this species that they have come across on this crashed ship. All they know is that some kind of parasite has wiped out all life on-board, before it eventually moves onto humans. All these events in all the films should not be woven together. And this film allegedly takes place 18 years before the events of Alien. Mr. Scott, don't you dare attempt to tie these jigsaw pieces that do not fit together, and are doing no favours at all, to the legend that is Ellen Ripley.

I wanted to like this film more than I ended up doing so. There were some minor positives: the performances from Katherine Waterston, Danny McBride and Michael Fassbender (just a shame their characters were just stereotypes); the world that Ridley Scott created (something that he has always been good at; he is more of a technician than an actor's director), twinned with the cinematography and the sound effects.

So if I was to rank all the movies in the Alien franchise (not including the two Alien vs. Predator films because they are just awful), it would look something like this - Alien, Aliens, a very deep chasm, then Prometheus and then a three-way tie between Alien: Covenant, Alien³ and Alien: Resurrection.

This does seem to be a franchise that does not want to give up easily. Scott has said that there are several more films to go before everything is tied up. Several more ways to kill another cinematic masterpiece's legacy. First the Terminator franchise, now Alien; both of these should have stopped after number two in their series. The only way you could possibly be overwhelmed and amazed by anything in Alien: Covenant is if you had never seen any of the other films before. A month or so earlier, Life was released in cinemas and one of the standout quotes in the reviews was IndieWire describing it as "Alien meets Gravity"; they gave it four stars. I avoided that film because it looked too much like a rip-off of Alien. However, from what I understand from the critics it has more originality than Alien: Covenant. And, here is my final nail in the coffin; we had to put Neill Blomkamp's Alien film (the fifth in the franchise) on hold because of this and that has promised to finally give Ripley's story a dignified conclusion, along with the returns of Corporal Hicks and Newt. Which would you rather see?

The original was meant to be like Halloween, The Exorcist and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre but in space and this film feels like the awful Michael Bay-produced modern-day remake...Or worse, like Ridley Scott is taking a leaf out of the book of George Lucas...[Shudder].

Dishonourable mentions: Kong: Skull Island and The Mummy

Kong: Skull Island, or as I want to call it, "King Kong meets Apocalypse Now"...literally. 1970s’ setting with Vietnam War in the background – check. Helicopters blaring loud music – it is Black Sabbath’s Paranoid instead of Ride of the Valkyries, but still check. Natives worship character like a god – check. And there is even John C. Reilly pretending to be Dennis Hopper. That is all; I have to be careful what I say about this as its director, Jordan Vogt-Roberts, did not appear to be a fan of the CinemaSins critique.
It does not seem like that long ago since we got Peter Jackson's King Kong. And we all know what is coming next...a crossover with Godzilla, possibly in 2019. Do we really need another crossover film?

As for “Mummy: Impossible”, they wanted this to be the start of a cinematic dark universe, with remakes of the classic monster movies from the 1930s and 40s. It was a flop, both commercially and critically. They tried to run before they could walk, concentrating on the future films rather than the one they were making. And it has put any future Dark Universe films in jeopardy. It just looked like a generic Tom Cruise film, although at no point does it have the 'Tom Cruise riding a motorcycle' cliché, with parts stolen from Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Evil Dead, An American Werewolf in London, The Avengers and much of George Romero’s catalogue of work. It follows every modern-day movie trend (zombies, Mission: Impossible-style action, super-heroes, etc.), with no uniqueness to it. And I do not know about all of you guys, but I am a little bit bored with zombies now. The not-so-good version of The Mummy with Brendan Fraser is more memorable…and that featured outdated CGI effects from 1999...and some not-so-good sequels and spinoffs...and a cartoon series.
And what was the deal with Russell Crowe and his character? Apart from another terrible British accent...

And now, breathe. That felt good, getting that off my chest. Normal service will be resumed shortly.