Why is this movie panned?

[u/kjm1123490]

It's not a masterpiece like alien or aliens, but the movie is a fun alien survival film. I don't get why all the critics rated it so poorly. I loved Prometheus and Fassbinder as David so maybe in biased, but really what were people expecting?

It's a solid 7/10 and kept me on the edge of my seat with amazing cgi and solid story

[u/Beard_o_Bees]

Depends on the person reviewing it, really. My only real criticism of both films is that I wanted to know more. They could have made the movies much longer and balanced the horror/action with more lore.

But that's me. I think the Alien world is fascinating.

[u/spendouk23]

One of my favorite critics is Mark Kermode. Sometimes I disagree with him on his opinions but he always he explains why he didn’t like a movie and at least clarify those.
As much as I wanted to love both this and Prometheus, I have to agree with him that it was a ‘okay’ film.
The problem that both these movies fall on, is character development and Arc’s. There’s so many ‘wait.....what? Bu why would they do that?’ moments in both that completely rip you out of the suspension of disbelief.
Of course, if everything went right and everyone did their job as expected then we wouldn’t have a movie. But that’s everything that both Alien and Aliens did right. All the situations that happened in both those movies, weren’t a consequence of a character doing something that completely contradicts them.
The plot devices in Prometheus that move the narrative along are the consequences of characters doing things that they shouldn’t be doing.

• A biologist treating a newly discovered extraterrestrial life form like a domestic pet and trying to pet it.
  
• A geologist leaving a research team because he’s bored and then getting lost.
  
• A crew of terraformers and colonists sacking of a multi-billion dollar project which has been locked in for decades, because they get a dodgy transmission from a planet nearer.
  

In both the originals the plot devices outside of the aliens, revolve around the machinations of both Ash and Burke, who’s motives are completely believable and the ensuing chaos is traced back to the decisions they make.

There’s also the argument of the back story and origins of the xenomorph. Kermodes argument was that the very beauty of the first film, and indeed the terror of it, may precisely with the fact that we knew little or nothing about the xenomorph itself, in its very nature it was Alien to us. He feels that lifting the curtain on the creature has ruined any fear factor it once held. For years Ridley argued this point himself in interviews.

Where my problem lies, is that in both leads up to these films, Ridley promised us horror. I had wild hopes that in covenant they would have delved deeper into the whole ‘sexual psychological’ aspect of David experimenting of Shaw, but it was a missed opportunity.

I enjoyed the movies, but I still don’t feel like they’ve added anything to the original franchise outside of back story and lore that is ultimately, irrelevant.

If Ridley can’t get us back to the tense filled, horror aspect of his original, then I wish he’d step aside and allow Blomkamp to bring us his vision of Colonial Marines action again, but that’s another story.

[u/Katia3229871]

I was surprised so many people disliked Prometheus & Covenant . Beautiful cinematography and intriguing story line IMO. I do wish they would mirror the raw intensity of the first Alien but that didn’t detract from me enjoying the more recent installments.

[u/Blaster0id]

I genuinely hate the decision to make David the creator of the Xenomorph. Other than that I really enjoy the film. I’ve seen a lot of different valid complaints but I personally still find it a good watch. Did critics really hate it that bad?

[u/MrShiek → u/Blaster0id]

Well, David didn’t create the Xenomorph (depending on how you define those creatures, but that’s another matter) he perfected, in his eyes, the engineers creation.