Aliens

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. (03/03/2009)

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. (21/04/2005)

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. (27/01/2004)

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. (10/02/2007)

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.). (13/04/2003)