Modern vs. Aristotelian Metaphysics

I am fascinated at how far Democritus was before his time. Two thousand years before Galileo sprung forth "modern" philosophy, Democritus basically wrote the blueprint. Without the scientific aid of his modern successors, he somehow came up with a logical metaphysical view of the world. From what I have read, atomism and the corpuscular theory are fundamentally identical. However, Democritus was soon criticized by Aristotle, whereas Galileo was rather proceeded by Descartes. Thus, ancient philosophy took one direction in the fork in the road, while modern philosophy took the other path.
This distinct deviation brings forth a few questions. In my ethics class, I’ve read a little of Alasdair MacIntyre’s After Virtue. In this work, he argues that modern morality is a failure, because of the lost significance of the more real Aristotelian ethics. He argued that modern philosophers abandoned everything that gave ethics a rational basis, namely teleology. Modernists devised theories devoid of social, political, divine, or teleological criteria. Therefore, without a firm base from which to compose a sound philosophy, modern ideas fall short.
This brings forth the thought that perhaps Modern metaphysics is a falsely constructed version of the more real Aristotelian model. Aristotle criticized Democritus for taking meaning, teleology, and mind/soul out of reality. What if Aristotle was right? Maybe there is some form of metaphysics that can account for everything Aristotle desired. I don’t think that Aristotle’s metaphysical views are necessarily correct, but I am definitely not sure about modern philosophers either. I wonder if there is some middle ground between the physical modern version and Aristotle’s teleological version.