The Alien Thread (discussion, etc.)

I watched the first three films (trying to give Alien 3 another chance), haven't seen the fourth since I suffered through it in the theater (along with fellow member MilkManX).

Seriously, what a massive waste of a great story/property. Don't even bring up AvP.

This series desperately needs someone to do like Bryan Singer did with Superman, retcon the last two turds and pick up the story a ways from where Aliens left off.
It doesn't even necessarily have to involve Ripley directly, but an older Newt could be an awesome main character.

Besides all that, I love the 2003 director's cut of Alien, and of course Aliens is just a nearly flawless action/horror piece that is still one rocking flick over 20 years later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

This series desperately needs someone to do like Bryan Singer did with Superman, retcon the last two turds and pick up the story a ways from where Aliens left off.

---

Do you realize what a bad idea that is?

I cant even believe you said it its so bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nesagwa

Do you realize what a bad idea that is?

I cant even believe you said it its so bad.

---

What's your idea, oh holy beard?
Rub it and come up with something, or actually explain why its a bad idea.
Otherwise, you're just spinning your hippie wheels.

PS-I still owe you a hammo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

What's your idea, oh holy beard?
Rub it and come up with something, or actually explain why its a bad idea.
Otherwise, you're just spinning your hippie wheels.

PS-I still owe you a hammo.

---

I dont know about you, but I dont really trust anyone to ruin Alien or Predator even more than they already have. Or god forbid pretend any of the sequals happened and we end up with a remake of the first one with the same title ala The Omen, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, etc etc etc.

Just not a good idea.

PS. Whats a hammo?

Alien is incredible in that it's nearing 30 years old and yet it still looks like a realistic environment. It's amazing what Scott and his crew were able to achieve with special effects circa '78.

I haven't seen Aliens since I was like 7, I am a horrible person and acknowledge this. Sad thing is, I've been telling myself I'm going to rent it since Halloween. I'm such a procrastinator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nesagwa

PS. Whats a hammo?

---

A burger.

AVP was shit Ricky Bobby(aka mmx) :D

The only one I've never seen is 3. How is that compared to the rest?

AvP was crap, let's hope the next one won't be AvP2

'Earth War' on celluloid would be the shit.

:(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nesagwa

I dont know about you, but I dont really trust anyone to ruin Alien or Predator even more than they already have.

PS. Whats a hammo?

---

This is exactly why I say remove the tumors of the series (3&4), start fresh.
It honestly can't do worse than 3. I think I hate it more so because even though AR is a total, stupid mess, at least it doesn't negate my emotional investment in the previous film by killing off two thirds of the survivors in their sleep, then spending the next 2 hours in a brown prison environment with lots of angry British inmates and Roc before showing Ripley commit suicide.

I literally hadn't seen Alien 3 since its debut at the theater. I'd heard that the expanded edition on the Quadrilogy was a better film, but honestly, watching it right after Aliens last night, there's damn near no redeeming features about it whatsoever.

It's like I'm right back to my vintage DIE FINCHER DIE! state I was in before I saw Seven or Fight Club.

Nice thread Loopz.

I'll always maintain Alien is better than Aliens.

I prefer Ridley Scott's style to Cameron's with the Alien creature.

He created an atmosphere that I feel Cameron was simply unable to do. I think being stuck on the Nostromo with a lone Alien that no one knows about is infinitely more terrifying than the overkill of Aliens. The Alien loses its uniqueness in the second film because there are so many of them. The mystery behind the creature suddenly goes out the window. It's something I didn't like about the second. I think too many people get caught up with the action in the second film. As a result they completely miss the lack of psychological fear in it. I mean, there is some, but the comparison between the first and second is striking in this area.

Then again I also contribute the love for the second one a result of the James Cameron dick sucking that seems to run so rampant these days. I like some of his stuff, but I just think he has become vastly over-rated. Don't take it as an "I hate James Cameron" diatribe. I like some of his stuff, but lets not forget that this is the same guy who gave us Titanic.

Alien 3 is watchable. It's not the best obviously. It pales compared to Alien and Aliens.

Alien Resurrection is basically an unwatchable piece of shit that had no business being made.

I would prefer to see the Alien franchise dead and buried unless Ridley Scott does another one. He's the only person at this point I would even trust with the character since most directors these days are horribly inept at their jobs.

back when i was younger,
i too thought 3 and 4 weren't particularly good ( 3 in particular )
after all these years,i gotta admit i slightly changed my mind

sure,they are not "aliens"...they go in a completely different direction
but you couldn't have and wouldn't want another "aliens",right ?
not only that : aliens is aliens because 3 and 4 are what they are if you know what i mean

a lot of you are going to disagree and use important words like "blasphemy"
but the one i enjoy less nowadays has got to be alien
sure,it was a masterpiece back in 1980 or so
but it didn't age too well in my opinion

you could say that,somehow,3 is like a "modern alien"

So you want to do the Rocky thing and forget about Tommy Gun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fran

back when i was younger,
i too thought 3 and 4 weren't particularly good ( 3 in particular )

after all these years,i gotta admit i slightly changed my mind

sure,they are not "aliens"...they go in a completely different direction

but you couldn't have and wouldn't want another "aliens",right ?
not only that : aliens is aliens because 3 and 4 are what they are if you know what i mean

a lot of you are going to disagree and use important words like "blasphemy"

but the one of the four i enjoy less has got to be alien

sure,it was a masterpiece back in 1980 or so
but it didn't age too well in my opinion

you could say that,somehow,3 is like a "modern alien"

---

Fran, goddamn that's one hot girl in your sig.
I have to disagree with you massively though.
Check the 2003 Alien director's cut, it speeds the story along without sacrificing any of the tension or ambience. Alien 3 has aged really bad now, especially with the 1992-era CG. I haven't bothered with Alien Resurrection again because like 3, I saw it once in the theater and that was more than enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chunky Lover 53

So you want to do the Rocky thing and forget about Tommy Gun

---

Balboa didn't retcon V.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerousK

Nice thread Loopz.

I'll always maintain Alien is better than Aliens.

I prefer Ridley Scott's style to Cameron's with the Alien creature.

He created an atmosphere that I feel Cameron was simply unable to do. I think being stuck on the Nostromo with a lone Alien that no one knows about is infinitely more terrifying than the overkill of Aliens. The Alien loses its uniqueness in the second film because there are so many of them. The mystery behind the creature suddenly goes out the window. It's something I didn't like about the second. I think too many people get caught up with the action in the second film. As a result they completely miss the lack of psychological fear in it. I mean, there is some, but the comparison between the first and second is striking in this area.

Then again I also contribute the love for the second one a result of the James Cameron dick sucking that seems to run so rampant these days. I like some of his stuff, but I just think he has become vastly over-rated. Don't take it as an "I hate James Cameron" diatribe. I like some of his stuff, but lets not forget that this is the same guy who gave us Titanic.

---

Cameron wasn't 'unable' to do it, he didn't even try the same thing.
He knew what a horror masterpiece Alien was, therefore, he went in a very different direction. It had to be balls out action.

I just think they're apples and oranges man. Both really satisfying, both with very different goals.

James Cameron's body of work isn't flawless by any means (besides Titanic, I wish he'd directed Strange Days himself instead of letting Kathryn Bigelow do it) but I really hope Avatar is a return to form. Hopefully he's done with his decade-long Jacques Cousteau wannabe phase.

Alien was just timeless, Scott did an amazing job all around with the look and feel of the movie.

The footage that was cut out I still wonder if they should have left it in. I'm referring to the scene where the alien actually stands up straight, it was cut because it gave too much of a human feel to the alien.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

Fran, goddamn that's one hot girl in your sig.
I have to disagree with you massively though.
Check the 2003 Alien director's cut, it speeds the story along without sacrificing any of the tension or ambience. Alien 3 has aged really bad now, especially with the 1992-era CG. I haven't bothered with Alien Resurrection again because like 3, I saw it once in the theater and that was more than enough for me.

---

Loopz, I gotta say, the Aliens thing should be layed to rest because you will never find satisfaction in another itteration - it's nigh impossible. IMO ofcourse.

you know the mess that was the making of Alien 3 right? I have a magazine around here that's got an awesome article on how convoluted it was. if Ridley had been allowed to make his vision a reality - where the Alien is akin to an angel of death - I bet we'd be amazed to this very day.

I agree alot with Fran actually - in particular about Alien Resurrection - in terms of it being an offshoot sci fi film nd not a legit sequel. it has alot of ideas at work there, and in the very least it's an enjoyable action sci fi movie with a nod to 80s films of the type. I mean it's far more imaginative than anything else at the time or right now.

but the first 2 are platinum whereas 3 is copper and 4 is gold plated. AvP is plastic with made in china written along the side.




there are a few dirctors I would love to take up the challenge but then the question would be - why? there has to be more quality sci fi/horror without having to dig up the past. and I don't mean based on comics/videogames either - I mean new stuff with new ideas.

there just isn't and that's the biggest shame.

now - videogames based around the franchise - well made one's would be amazing.

by the way, I really enjoy reading scripts and this one is really fantastic (because it is):
http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Alien.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

Cameron wasn't 'unable' to do it, he didn't even try the same thing.
He knew what a horror masterpiece Alien was, therefore, he went in a very different direction. It had to be balls out action.

I just think they're apples and oranges man. Both really satisfying, both with very different goals.

James Cameron's body of work isn't flawless by any means (besides Titanic, I wish he'd directed Strange Days himself instead of letting Kathryn Bigelow do it) but I really hope Avatar is a return to form. Hopefully he's done with his decade-long Jacques Cousteau wannabe phase.

---

Strange Days worked for me. the lead was a sublime choice, great actor..

i like alien better than aliens.
two great movies in general though. no need to nitpick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

Cameron wasn't 'unable' to do it, he didn't even try the same thing.
He knew what a horror masterpiece Alien was, therefore, he went in a very different direction. It had to be balls out action.

I just think they're apples and oranges man. Both really satisfying, both with very different goals.

James Cameron's body of work isn't flawless by any means (besides Titanic, I wish he'd directed Strange Days himself instead of letting Kathryn Bigelow do it) but I really hope Avatar is a return to form. Hopefully he's done with his decade-long Jacques Cousteau wannabe phase.

---

Why did it have to be balls out action?

This is a train of thought I've never quite understood from Aliens lovers.

They seem to think that this was the only direction the series could have gone.

I can grant that some more action was probably needed for a sequel to Alien. But there comes a point where there is such a thing as too much action, which I do believe is the case with Aliens. Sure you do have the whole Ripley/Newt surrogate mother/surrogate daughter theme running through the film, which isn't by any means a bad part to the story.

My gripes with Aliens goes back to what I said about what Ridley Scott did in Alien. He introduced the character and set a certain stage for what the creature was about. He created a feeling of anxiety in Alien. Cameron comes along, goes in another completely different direction that basically shits on what Ridley Scott did in terms of character/creature development.

Also, let's not forget Cameron's choice of film stock for Aliens. Atrocious choice at the time given the amount of grain present in many scenes. I do recall someone mentioning to me that Cameron does regret having used the film stock he did.

It's been 21 years now since Aliens. In terms of aging, I also feel Aliens has not aged as well as Alien has. With the minor exception of the computers used in Alien, the rest of the film has aged phenomenally well given that it is a sci-fi film, and many are products of the time in which they were created. As a result they look dated within 20 years or so of the initial theatrical release. Alien has managed to look constantly good over the years...nearly 30 years later I have trouble believing this film was in fact released in 1979. James Cameron sci-fi films as they age seem to be very much products of the time period in which they were shot in, which I think can hurt how sci-fi films look down the road. The Terminator and Terminator 2 are also glaring examples of this. You watch Terminator, it looks like the 1980s, hell even the special effects look 1980s. T2 which is one of my favorite films ever captures 1990-1991 very well. But I was watching it the other day and I couldn't help but think that it hasn't aged quite as well as I would haved like it to. It doesn't have a timeless quality to it like say Alien, where to someone watching it who doesn't know when it was filmed, can't quite put an exact date on it. Aliens unfortunately doesn't fall into the category of Alien with regard to this.

Of course this probably has come off in some degree like an "I hate Aliens" post.

I like the film very much, but I just stopped thinking that it was better than Alien a long time ago.

It's not apples to oranges because it's the same goddamn property being used. By that argument we should judge Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection in a different light because the directors of those two films were looking to do something different. Sure they may have been, but they completely bastardized the entire property as a result. Well, not Alien 3 as much, but Alien Resurrection did it overwhelmingly.

Anyhow I will shut up at this point since this post might have become a bit difficult to follow. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerousK

Nice thread Loopz.

I'll always maintain Alien is better than Aliens.

I prefer Ridley Scott's style to Cameron's with the Alien creature.

He created an atmosphere that I feel Cameron was simply unable to do. I think being stuck on the Nostromo with a lone Alien that no one knows about is infinitely more terrifying than the overkill of Aliens. The Alien loses its uniqueness in the second film because there are so many of them. The mystery behind the creature suddenly goes out the window. It's something I didn't like about the second. I think too many people get caught up with the action in the second film. As a result they completely miss the lack of psychological fear in it. I mean, there is some, but the comparison between the first and second is striking in this area.

Then again I also contribute the love for the second one a result of the James Cameron dick sucking that seems to run so rampant these days. I like some of his stuff, but I just think he has become vastly over-rated. Don't take it as an "I hate James Cameron" diatribe. I like some of his stuff, but lets not forget that this is the same guy who gave us Titanic.

Alien 3 is watchable. It's not the best obviously. It pales compared to Alien and Aliens.

Alien Resurrection is basically an unwatchable piece of shit that had no business being made.

I would prefer to see the Alien franchise dead and buried unless Ridley Scott does another one. He's the only person at this point I would even trust with the character since most directors these days are horribly inept at their jobs.

---

Titanic was the highest grossing film of all time for years after it's release. Somebody liked it (women :D ).

And Alien 3 is definitely the turd of the series. I enjoyed Alien Resurrection more than 3, even though I hated the way they brought Ripley back from the dead. Xenomorph DNA, hmmph. :angry:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ki_atsushi

Titanic was the highest grossing film of all time for years after it's release. Somebody liked it (women :D ).

And Alien 3 is definitely the turd of the series. I enjoyed Alien Resurrection more than 3, even though I hated the way they brought Ripley back from the dead. Xenomorph DNA, hmmph. :angry:

---

Titanic was in theaters for almost three years as well. They rereleased that shit like twice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nesagwa

Titanic was in theaters for almost three years as well. They rereleased that shit like twice.

---

Good point. I guess those ladies couldn't get enough. My mom even bought that movie on VHS when it came out, and she rarely ever buys movies. Must be something subliminal going on in there. :eek_2:

Don't talk to me about Alien 3, I'm still pissed they had Hicks die, by, what was it again, choking on his own saliva?

Jesus christ, I was pissed right at the start of the movie when they have 2 of the 3 humans die right off the bat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

Don't talk to me about Alien 3, I'm still pissed they had Hicks die, by, what was it again, choking on his own saliva?

Jesus christ, I was pissed right at the start of the movie when they have 2 of the 3 humans die right off the bat.

---

Yeah, and how did Newt die again? It's been so long since I've seen that turd of a movie...

I'm not sure, it was some equally stupid way.

Lungs collapsed or some shit?

I remember I was young as hell when I saw it on TV, and I pissed that "Hey, wait a minute, these guys went through hell and back to escape, and they die LIKE THIS? WHAT?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

I'm not sure, it was some equally stupid way.

Lungs collapsed or some shit?

I remember I was young as hell when I saw it on TV, and I pissed that "Hey, wait a minute, these guys went through hell and back to escape, and they die LIKE THIS? WHAT?"

---

God Dammit, Alien 3 really is such a piece of shit. I don't think I could ever sit through it again, even though I'm curious about it (haven't seen it in over 10 years).

How did Ripley survive then? Superior lungs? :spock:

Oh shit, I just read up on the movie. Brings up horrid memories.

I mixed them up.

Hicks was impaled by some shit, and Newt drowned in her spit, and Bishop's pod was destroyed.

Hicks was the shit man, and it was such a copout to kill them all off except Ripley.

It's like they wanted to scratch the entire storyline, and what better way than to kill everyone you didn't write a part for? :rolleyes:

Alien is the best. Also one of the best horror/sci fi films ever made.

Aliens is great for what it is.(one of the greatest action movies of all time)

Alien 3 is not as bad as the rep. it has gotten over the years. Still not great by any means.

AR is total shit.

AvP is unwatchable garbage.

No more sequals no remakes, it should have died after 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

Oh shit, I just read up on the movie. Brings up horrid memories.

I mixed them up.

Hicks was impaled by some shit, and Newt drowned in her spit, and Bishop's pod was destroyed.

Hicks was the shit man, and it was such a copout to kill them all off except Ripley.

It's like they wanted to scratch the entire storyline, and what better way than to kill everyone you didn't write a part for? :rolleyes:

---

Agreed. Pretty lame to kill off all the characters. Were they afraid the other actors would want too much money to star in the sequel or what? :mad:

nice post even if I don't agree with it. about the aging of a film - I think if more theatres showed older films (including sci fi) you'd be able to appreciate what they where doing back then - I think the cinematic experience is unique and cannot be replicated in the home - especially when you're watching actual 35mm footage from a reel. appreciation of classic film is acute when viewed in the cinema. when seen in the context of cinema I think you can recapture what appeared to have been lost over 30 and more years.
maybe it's just me, but I would kill to watch Alien or Aliens - or T2 at the cinema on original format - not just because I'm a fan (a casual fan of T2 infact) - but because it's the scope that adds the depth that creates the time warp

/wizkid on crack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DangerousK

Why did it have to be balls out action?

This is a train of thought I've never quite understood from Aliens lovers.

They seem to think that this was the only direction the series could have gone.

I can grant that some more action was probably needed for a sequel to Alien. But there comes a point where there is such a thing as too much action, which I do believe is the case with Aliens. Sure you do have the whole Ripley/Newt surrogate mother/surrogate daughter theme running through the film, which isn't by any means a bad part to the story.

My gripes with Aliens goes back to what I said about what Ridley Scott did in Alien. He introduced the character and set a certain stage for what the creature was about. He created a feeling of anxiety in Alien. Cameron comes along, goes in another completely different direction that basically shits on what Ridley Scott did in terms of character/creature development.

Also, let's not forget Cameron's choice of film stock for Aliens. Atrocious choice at the time given the amount of grain present in many scenes. I do recall someone mentioning to me that Cameron does regret having used the film stock he did.

It's been 21 years now since Aliens. In terms of aging, I also feel Aliens has not aged as well as Alien has. With the minor exception of the computers used in Alien, the rest of the film has aged phenomenally well given that it is a sci-fi film, and many are products of the time in which they were created. As a result they look dated within 20 years or so of the initial theatrical release. Alien has managed to look constantly good over the years...nearly 30 years later I have trouble believing this film was in fact released in 1979. James Cameron sci-fi films as they age seem to be very much products of the time period in which they were shot in, which I think can hurt how sci-fi films look down the road. The Terminator and Terminator 2 are also glaring examples of this. You watch Terminator, it looks like the 1980s, hell even the special effects look 1980s. T2 which is one of my favorite films ever captures 1990-1991 very well. But I was watching it the other day and I couldn't help but think that it hasn't aged quite as well as I would haved like it to. It doesn't have a timeless quality to it like say Alien, where to someone watching it who doesn't know when it was filmed, can't quite put an exact date on it. Aliens unfortunately doesn't fall into the category of Alien with regard to this.

Of course this probably has come off in some degree like an "I hate Aliens" post.

I like the film very much, but I just stopped thinking that it was better than Alien a long time ago.

It's not apples to oranges because it's the same goddamn property being used. By that argument we should judge Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection in a different light because the directors of those two films were looking to do something different. Sure they may have been, but they completely bastardized the entire property as a result. Well, not Alien 3 as much, but Alien Resurrection did it overwhelmingly.

Anyhow I will shut up at this point since this post might have become a bit difficult to follow. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DevilRedeemed

maybe it's just me, but I would kill to watch Alien or Aliens - or T2 at the cinema on original format - not just because I'm a fan (a casual fan of T2 infact) - but because it's the scope that adds the depth that creates the time warp.

---

Alien was released in theaters a coupla years ago, I punch myself in the gut everytime I think about it because I kept putting off seeing it and then it was gone...

I'd love it if there was a theater around here that showed old movies, like a drive in or something. That would be so awesome.

Alright bitches. Nobody... and I mean nobody likes Alien more than me. That first movie is my favorite of all time. Fact. I've seen it at least 50 or so times. I own it on VHS, DVD (twice) and even on PSP... and I don't even own a PSP any more. Alien is a mother fucking masterpiece. Great, likable characters, amazing alien creature, great horror and good sci-fi. I love the "truckers in space" idea. Aliens, while also an amazing movie, just didn't do it for me quite like the first. With that said, it's also a great movie. Both I love for different reasons.

Now the third one... since I'm Alien's bitch, I do like this one, if only for Doctor Clemens (who I thought was a great character). It wasn't until the second DVD set that came out that had an extended version of 3 that I thought it went from pretty good to really damn good. They expanded on the characters a great deal. So, I do enjoy the hell out of the first three.

But my god... AR is total crap, and I've seen THAT about 10 times too... lol. I just can't get into it. I will keep watching because, again, I'm Alien's bitch, but it's just a shame that they made it at all. It was kinda cool and creepy what they did with the whole cloning and DNA stuff, but it was just a bit absurd. I think they were trying to go back to the whole badasses theme that worked so well in 2, and it just fucking failed.

Alien vs Predator is total bullshit. I saw it in theaters on opening night, and I will never see it ever again. What a load of crap.

So, to recap:

I love Alien more than you
The first two movies are amazing
Give three a chance
Fuck you to Alien Res and AvsP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ki_atsushi

Agreed. Pretty lame to kill off all the characters. Were they afraid the other actors would want too much money to star in the sequel or what? :mad:

---

I am pretty sure the director didn't want them in cause the characters would not have fit into the setting with Ripley. Where instead of Ripley being alone with an alien monster in the first movie. She is now surrounded (but alone) by a bunch of rapist and murdering human monsters. Or at least that's what they were shooting for. So having Hicks in the movie would not have worked out great. Although I think Newt still could have played a role.

On a side note in the original script of A3 the prison was supposed to be a sort of monk temple. But the higher ups scrapped the idea.

Ignore Resurrection.
Give 3 a chance, its a pretty decent film.
And then go play AvP2, that game is sechs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.Nemoperson

On a side note in the original script of A3 the prison was supposed to be a sort of monk temple. But the higher ups scrapped the idea.

---

From what I've come to understand, Alien 3 had a ton of re-writes.
It's one of the more classic textbook examples of development hell.
It stretched from a William Gibson treatment which had the Alien as an element in a space-based Cold War threatening the Earth, to outright combat against the bugs on Earth proper (as was alluded to in a very early teaser poster which had the Alien 3 logo above planet Earth), then veered sharply into this stupid prison schtick.

Obviously, real world events prevented the Cold War in space idea from coming to fruition given when the Wall came down, but the outright war on Earth idea (as BIG alluded to) is still an idea many fans are warm to.

At least we can all agree that Resurrection was a big greasy stain on the bowl.

I'm sure AvP2 (the coming film, not the awesome PC title) is going to just make our heads hurt.

My take on Alien(s):

- Alien and Aliens are two of my all-time movie faves, and IMO are the only Alien movies worth mentioning, 3 (alien dogs my ass) and 4 both stink, specially 4, I really wonder what made Sigourney accept her role as some sort of genetic experiment. Horrible, horrible cuts, lighting and special effects, clumsy alien-like creatures, bah humbug. And don't get me started on AvP, the core of the story is quite interesting (Predators bred Aliens for their hunting ceremonies) but that's about it, it's just as silly as the failed attempt to merge two former cash-cows called Freddy and Jason into a new money-making machine...

- The only Aliens version that counts is the theatrical version, the extra scenes simply kill the dense atmosphere Cameron tried to build up, and please don't come up with that "but the auto-cannon scenes are sooo cool" thing, it does not support the movie in any way. Running in the line of fire of two cannons and getting blown to pieces does not fit to the semi-intelligent presentation of the aliens in earlier scenes who attack stealthily, quickly and deadly.

- The score of Aliens is beyond excellent, just like the one of the first movie.

- Fact: I disliked Aliens when I first saw it, took me two more runs to come to love it... I was a die-hard Alien and Ridely Scott traditionalist at that time and had a hard time with Cameron's very American way of making an action movie out of what was a deep horror sci-fi movie, now I even like Aliens a tiny bit more than the first one, at least in terms of entertainment value and "replayability".

- @Spike: Forget it! :)

ah bollocks, I was talking out of my arse when I said 'Ridley's vision for Alien 3' - it was Fincher's and the extended version was infact released. so I'll shut up now.

I enjoyed the first two a lot, among my favorites. 3 wasn't as bad as it was made out to be, 4 was tragic --but on the plus side it killed the director's American film career, which led him to make it all up by making the excellent flick that is Amelie.

I didn't bother with AvP, but I enjoyed both Predators.

I'm all for a retcon, or even a sequel that makes up for 3 and/or 4.

@Spike:

You can keep your title on Alien, but I think I'm more into the series than most here. I went out and tracked down virtually every Dark Horse comic (in graphic novel form) that I can find --including the Aliens series they wrote to take place after Aliens (only to be side swiped by the release of Alien 3 and its plot), and subsequent books which were all pretty decent (a couple are top-notch), and every single Aliens vs. ____ (Superman (1&2), Judge Dredd, Green Lantern, etc...), the Aliens vs. Predator series (stand-alone Predator comics generally suck compared to Aliens, unless it's a" Predator vs. ___"). One of my favs is the bizarre one-off: "Aliens vs. Predator vs. The Terminator". I don't waste time with novels.

But the Xenomorphs could swim in Resurrection! Why is this movie being panned so hard?


:lolz: :tickled:

I was a huge fan of the first two movies as a kid. The xenomorph is just a terrifying creature. The third movie was alright, but I haven't seen it in at least a decade. Resurrection blows, just caught it on tv the other day. I did think the alien/human hybrid was a cool looking, but the entire movie was so dumb.

I was just thinking about how much I love movies like this. Alien(s), Terminator, The Thing. Robocop. Great stuff. I remember I bought some movie hype magazine back in the early 90's and it had an article on how the Alien vs. Predator movie was just around the corner. Supposedly the original script was based on the kickass comics, but it had been in development hell for a while. And it stayed there for about ten more years until we got...well you know...

By the way chachi, I saw T2 in theaters back in the day. That and Batman are the first two movies I can remember seeing in theaters, aside from Ferris Buheler's Day Off and maybe The Fox and The Hound years earlier. Sorry, getting nostalgic here.

I own Alien and Aliens on DVD. I dislike 3 and absolutley hate 4. AVP wasnt very good either. SIGH.

Loopz you always come up with cool ideas that only we appreciate and the people with money to fix never do or fuck it all up. Stop it sir. Thanks.

I like Resurrection. bunch of up tight, highly strung snobs, the lot of you :mad: :make_fac:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MilkManX

Loopz you always come up with cool ideas that only we appreciate and the people with money to fix never do or fuck it all up. Stop it sir. Thanks.

---

Hey man, that's what I do.
Maybe I should get over my writer's block and just pen the fucking thing myself.
I'll need those Aliens Kubrick figures as aids of course.

:tickled:

@Bobak: Was Resurrection's director REALLY the same guy who directed Amelie?
That blows me away. I really enjoyed Amelie. Then again, Fincher did go on to direct Fight Club, although I haven't seen that in a while and I have a funny feeling it has aged a bit badly even in just 8 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

Hey man, that's what I do.
Maybe I should get over my writer's block and just pen the fucking thing myself.
I'll need those Aliens Kubrick figures as aids of course.

:tickled:

@Bobak: Was Resurrection's director REALLY the same guy who directed Amelie?
That blows me away. I really enjoyed Amelie. Then again, Fincher did go on to direct Fight Club, although I haven't seen that in a while and I have a funny feeling it has aged a bit badly even in just 8 years.

---

Which was the same guy that did City of Lost Children, was it not? That's probably where two of the actors came from, no?

I actually enjoyed resurrection

i liked the effects in the first one just like the effects in the thing