Of the 4 Alien sci-fi horror films made so far, starring Sigourney Weaver, what's your favorite one and please say why.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
First one: ambiance and isolation make it work. The same formula is used far more effectivly in Carpenter's The Thing.
The first film is cool because of the questions it raises, including that of what the "spacejockey" is doing with all those eggs. The performances are the most believable of all the Alien movies and Ridley Scott did some groundbreaking visual shots (particularly by NOT showing the whole creature untill the very end).
One thing's for certain: I'm skipping the Aliens vs. Predator movie: it takes place on Earth in 2004 in a arctic underround city with pyramids that the predators built to huny aliens in. A worse concept I could never envison. Aintitcool.com hada review up, but it looks like they were forced to remove it.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
People are probably going to hate me for this but I've always favoured Alien3 for some reason. I think it's because I like rooting for the underdog and you can't get more under-doggy than a bunch of thieves, rapists and all-round nutcases. I won't deny that the first to two movies are superior to the third, but I just really like that one best...despite what it did to poor Newt & Hicks.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I really liked the look of the third film; the prison sets looked the most "real" out of all the films IMO - old-fashioned while still looking high-tech. The ship sets of the other films were similarly industrial high-tech, but the A3 sets were comparatively awesome.
That said, I gotta vote for Aliens as my favorite. Because of the BOOM! and the WHOOSH! and the BLAM BLAM BLAM!!
Mark
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
"Alien", no question about it. Great effects, great-looking Nostromo-interior, wonderful miniatures of the derelict ship and the Nostromo, and the most terrifying horror scenes I ever watched as a kid (dinner scene, the Dallas-tunnel scene, and of course the Lambert-Alien-Parker threesome).
Actually, it's kind of hard to separate the first and second movies, they are so intimately bonded, with LV-426, the derelict ship, the Weyland-Yutani bosses. I would like to edit the two movies together (both Director's Cuts), with just a "many years later"-text between the last shot of the Nostromo-shuttle and the first shot of the same shuttle in "Aliens". Then show it all to a person who's never seen any of it. Hell, I'll pay for the future therapy sessions, just to hear what the person thought of the experience.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Probably a tie between the first two movies. The suspense of the first and the BOOM! and the WHOOSH! and the BLAM BLAM BLAM!! of the second just make for two very different and very good films.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Oh, boy. A "what's your favorite x" topic. I say we take off and nuke the entire thread from orbit. It's the only way to be certain.
Sorry.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Yeah, but you're just a grunt. You can't make that kind of decision. B)
Anyway, Alien for its claustrophobic and desolate atmosphere, Aliens for the all-out carnage. Never cared for 3 or 4.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Aliens. But it has to be the director's cut with all the connections to the first one, where we see the colonists finding the ship and the miniguns running dry in the ventilation ducts.
Plus the badass marines just rule.
Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :
Alien: Liked it. Scary. Very scary, but hey, it was good.
Aliens: This is my personal favourite. Ripley turns the tables and gets to kick ass. They do explain a lot with the queen Alien here, which IMHO is the best MOFO I have ever saw.
Alien3: I'll have to admit, I liked the plot. Aside from the peculiarities in the beginning of the film (how did the alien egg get on the ship when the queen disposed of her sac?). The ending was satisfactory as well. Not great, but understandeable.
Alien Ressurection: God this is horrible for so many reasons 1) why did they have to bring back Ripley? and 2) the hybrid Alien/Human is just, well, not right with the rest of the world as we know it.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
Wait a minute, haven't we already done this thread before? Anyway, Alien3 for me. Because I say so.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nim:
Actually, it's kind of hard to separate the first and second movies, they are so intimately bonded, with LV-426, the derelict ship, the Weyland-Yutani bosses.
Having recently watched the Alien Director's cut in the theatre, I found lots of discrapencies between the first and second movie. In the first movie, LB-426 is a small planetoid with an erratic orbit, not the full blown planet of the second movie. The signal from the derilict ship was picked up almost a whole solar system away by the Nostromo's "mother" but the colonists never noticed it? ...the fuck?
Then there's the physical diffrences beteween the first Alien and those from the second movie....unless the first alien is some kind of sub-class that preps the area for a new hive before the other eggs are hatched. Mabye.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I believe James Cameron has explained somewhere, the answers to all those points.
If I'm remembering correctly he said that the gas giant around which LV-426 was orbiting is still there, just that it was never seen in any of the shots. This does make sense since you can't always see Luna from a fixed point on earth, or in orbit but that doesn't mean it has disappeared. Also it looks more like a planet in Aliens because WY have had the atmosphere processors running 24/7 for the last few decades and so the clouds look much more dense. I think he also said that there had been some geological activity around the derelict since the Nostromo left and that Lava flows had damaged it, exposing the egg chamber (note that Newt's parents entered through a gash in the hull, not one of those exhaust orifices like Dallas & co) and also damaged the transmitter which is why there is no more warning beacon.
As for the differences in the Aliens themselves remember that the one we saw in the first movie was less than 24 hours old when Ripley blew it out the airlock. The ones that infested the colony were much older, several months at least. The fact that they were members of a hive and not lone 'scouts' may or may not also be a factor. The aging theory is consistent with the other movies since the creature in Alien3 was also, quite young (a few days at most), smooth headed and looked quite similar the the original, as did all of the captive creatures in Alien 4 who were also only around for a few days at most.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
But LV-426 had rings in the first movie... and going from "planetoid with an erratic orbit" to "planet capable of being terraformed" is a biiiiig reach. Terraforming I could see but changingf a planet's orbit would be impossible (even by Trek's tech standards)
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
LV-426 never had rings. Those were on the gas giant.
As for terraforming, the surface of the planet(oid) still looked windswept and inhospitable, the only real difference being that the air was slightly more breathable. As for the orbit, I don't recall hearing that it was any more stable in Aliens than it was 70 years before hand.
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
It's still a very weird little world, though. According to the footage from the special edition (which was also included in the older LD and DVD releases), the planetoid has a diameter of 1,200 km and a surface gravity of .86g. In order to get that, you need a density of approximately 50 grams per cubic centimeter, or about nine times that of the earth; just what the hell is that world made of, anyway? Maybe Starfleet mines the materials for its warp coils here .
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Compressed iron maybe? Some mineral we've never heard of yet? It's not beyond the bounds of possibility.
Posted by Flying Minister (Member # 1177) on :
Just tossing in a couple pennies here.
The first one was great, and I truly enjoyed it. However, out of all four, I prefer the second. It has that balls to the wall all out blood and guts action that I really like.
Kinda reminded me of a video game without the controller.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Since I'm an old guy, I remember seeing Alien in a packed theatre in St Louis the first week it was out. It was great experience. Lot's of screaming in the audience. I remember thinking of how it carried on the lived-in Star Wars aesthetic to a whole new level. But I was disappointed that we never got a good look at the Alien. If I hadn't read Starlog, I would have had no idea what it looked like.
I saw the second one under similar circumstances. Lots of cheering and screams from the audience. A great roller coaster ride with cool military equipment. I was sitting next to this guy who apologized after the movie because his girlfriend/wife was screaming so much.
I probably like the first slightly better than the second, since I value mood more than action in the movies. But I own both and watch them from time to time. The corporate weasel and the broadly drawn, archtypical Marines get on my nerves a bit. Also, is any one as surprised as I am that Sigourney Weaver was actually nominated for Best Actress for Aliens? The movies don't stand up to logical analysis too well (and the director's cut of Alien mucks it up even more, but who cares.) If the movies do their most important job -- entertainment --I don't worry as much about logic.
Can't say muchabout 3 and 4 other than they bored me to death and I haven't watched them since.
PS: About why the Alien ship in Aliens wasn't putting out a distress beacon. I think there were some effects shots prepared that showed the ship had been damaged/broken up a bit by lava flows/earthquakes.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
The first movie was a great horror story that happened to occur in outer space. I still think its the best with a close second being the second movie. My only gripe with II is there's a big warship just floating overhead completely unmanned. Just don't seem right.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist: My only gripe with II is there's a big warship just floating overhead completely unmanned. Just don't seem right.
I thought that too! Even on Nostromo, most of the crew stayed behind when they investigated an unknown situation. Besides, the Sulaco is HUGE but has a crew of only the one marine platoon?!? That doesnt make much sense....are we to believe that each platoon has it's own warship?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I was under the impression that one platoon was all they NEEDED for an investigatory mission, for which all it could be was "a downed transmitter". They didn't go EXPECTING trouble... If they did, I'm sure the Sulaco could support many more (and the excellent but apocryphal ALIENS tech manual supports this).
Of course, Burke could have swindled someone into sending only one platoon, which would be easier to manage with all the infecting he wanted to do...
Mark
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I think the novel took note of this and explained the lack any extra support onboard being a cost cutting measure. Still, if they hadn't parked the APC just where the Dropship was going to crash then they would have been just fine (nukes, knives, sharp sticks etc.)
Of course the real reason is drama.
Posted by ZARDOZ (Member # 1064) on :
I'm old enough to have seen all these movies in their original release, I remember 'Alien'Being really something in 1979, but now it just seems like an good remake of '"IT!":The Terror from Beyond Space' (1958) Or I guess it would be a "re-imagining" now.
I always liked Cameron's 'Aliens' best, A very exciting film, with good linkage to the first.
'Alien 3' I fell asleep in the theater during this film, and did'nt care! I saw it a year or so later on video. I thought the settings and story, darkly bland and filled with religious overtones, really broke the story line. It's the 'Star Trek V' of Alien movies!
I have a soft spot for 'Alien Resurrection' though. I liked 'City of Lost Children' and Jeunet's other films, and after #3 it was anything goes, so I really looked forward to this one. I like how strange and scary (and buff) Ripley 8 is in this one. Plus the lovely Wynona Ryder and rest of the cast, cool sets, and a freaky but funny script made it entertaining for me.
I hear there may be a fifth movie coming, I think that's about as nessesary as the Forbidden Planet remake, But I'll go check it out anyhow. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
My favorite is the one with John Hurt where the alien bursts outt of his chest and starts singing "Helo my baby! Hello my honey! Hello my ragtime gaaaal....."
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I'm probably one of the 0.5% of the population of Sweden who got that joke, since I had watched Loony Tunes in my childhood. *ribbit*
ZARDOZ: "and a freaky but funny script" This, to me, is the problem with virtually every sequel to an old thriller/horror movie released nowadays. They have to throw in those stupid slapstick-jokes to try and make up for a movie that is neither thrilling nor horrifying. It can get really pathetic sometimes, like the Predator running through a bunch of apartments while fleeing from the pinnacle of earth's military resistance (a fat policeman) and the Predator just happens to disturb an old woman watching "Jeopardy"! So she gets the broom out! LOL!!
Let's just say I don't have any high hopes for "Alien vs Predator". I'll bet that Token Black Soldier #3 (about to die) will grab a Predator's head and give it a nookie.
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
So in a WB cartoon "Re-imagined" the guy in the spacesuit disentigrates a building down to the cornerstone and out of the box jumps...... an Alien embryo? Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Surely someone else here has seen Spaceballs?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yes. But just to make sure we're all talking about the same thing:
The bit in Spaceballs where John Hurt is at the bar (or coffee shop, I forget), and an alien bursts out of his chest is obviously a reference to, er, Alien. The fact that the alien pops out, produces a top hat and cane and starts singing "hello, my baby..." etc is a reference to the frog on the old Loony Tunes cartoons where a, er, frog produces a top hat and cane and starts singing "hello, my baby..."
Everyone together now? Good.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Can we possibly get any MORE obscure here? No? Great.
[ December 09, 2003, 04:41 AM: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Probably.
I'm boring. I favor them in sequential order. Charles S. Dutton is a neat guy.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Just don't bump into him in the street. B)
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
TSN: "Surely someone else here has seen Spaceballs?"
No, see what I meant was that when "Spaceballs" came to Sweden, I was about the only one who appreciated the nod to Michigan J. Frog in that scene, everyone else just went "what the hell?".
Up until the late 80's, Looney Tunes were rather obscure up here, we had mostly Disney, Hanna-Barbera and Universal (Woody Woodpecker) to turn to. They had "Looney Tunes" almost exclusively on video rental when I grew up, which we of course rented aplenty over the years...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Fuck the frog: I laughed so hard when I first saw Spaceballs that I missed the rest of the movie and I never saw the cartoon it refrenced untill years later. It's just such an absurdly funny scene that the refrence isint needed at all.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Y'know, I've always wondered, where did they get the name "Michigan J. Frog"? It was never in the original cartoon. Was it some obscure behind-the-scenes thing from back then, or did they just invent it on a whim in the '90s?
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
No, no, no. Chuckie named him after "The Michigan Rag", a song written for the cartoon in '55. This is still popular culture, albeit ever-so-slightly less so. B)
Posted by WizArtist (Member # 1095) on :
Yeah, he also named "Marvin the Martian" which never appeared in any of the cartoons.
Maybe they would have named the Alien "Allie McBeal" after all.....they have about the same figure.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Her head's not that big.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Her head's not that big. Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
And he says: Why'd you say that twice?
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Jeez, he's got a big smilie. Jeez he's got a big smilie.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
There's a bit of an echo in here, isn't there?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yes. Yes.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
For you, Jase, any time.
...
..
.
any time...
Posted by AVON (Member # 1186) on :
Simple my favourite is the FIRST Movie - original and, best!!! Nuff said!!!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
of the second just make for two very different and very good films.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
