quote:Originally posted by Nim: Exactly, and just after hearing "57 years, drifting past outer rim bla bla" she starts getting seizures and begs them to kill her, then wakes up at night. So it could've been part of the dream, it was never confirmed.
It's pretty obvious that the Burke part of her dream really happened: She already knows him in the next scene, after all when she agrees to either A) go along with the mission to get her liscence back or B) testify before the board of inquiry. Depending on what version you watch.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Absolutely, just stating facts here. Technically it's not set in stone, but since they created the Daughter scene, of course their intentions are for the 57-figure to be true.
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Did Ridley Scott really agree to re-insert the deleted scenes into "A L I E N: The Directors Cut"? The scenes that were deleted were deleted for a reason. I think that the movie will suffer if they are put back in. The tension of Ripley's escape from theNostromo will be lost if he re-inserts that scene with Brett and Dallas. And that other scene with Lambert and the Alien, makes the Alien look like he has bad joints. It was better the way they showed the Alien in the theatrical cut. The whole enterprise is just an excuse to get people to go back and see the movie in theaters.
As for "Alien 3", I really didn't like it all. There was no suspense or tension in the film, because how can you feel any sympathy for serial killers and serial rapists. The Alien in that film was doing a public service. As for Ripley, she was an emotional wreck and needed to be put out of her misery as well.
The less said about "Alien Resurrection" the better.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
I agree, Ripley's escape through dark, strobing corridors, while hearing Lambert's death struggle (hyperventilating), that's one of the most unbearable scenes of movie history. That, Dallas' attack and forcing myself to stare at Ben Gardner's head. *slurp*
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Ultra Magnus: "The scenes that were deleted were deleted for a reason."
Not necessarily the Director's Reason. Hence, Director's Cut.
Mr. Scott knows what he does.
I wish I shared your faith. In my opinion, most of the Director's Cuts just don't work and the theatrical cut of the film is often superior. For example, Francis Ford Coppola's recent director's cut of Apocalypse Now,Apocalypse Now Redux. The scene with the Playboy bunnies was totally frivilous and did nothing to move the story along. The theft of Kilgore's surf board, and Kilgore's hunting of the boat to get it back, also started to make Kilgore look totally unrealistic.
The only Director's Cut that I thought that was superior to the theatrical cut was for Blade Runner. But director Scott revised the film so that it was shown as he originally intended. The voice over and the ending were additions that were demanded by the studio.
I've viewed the deleted scenes several times on the "A L I E N: 20th Anniversary Edition" DVD, and I really don't think that they add much to the film. Reinserting the Dallas/Brett scene will also cause continuity problems for James Cameron's "Aliens".
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Mr. Scott has a reputation as a miracle worker though..
i think that any continuity problems would be a moot point, it would be enjoyable to watch a film thinking not of its affects on a franchise, but instead thinking of its quality as a stand-alone production (my Enterprise train of thought, at times)
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Re: Triton's post: Yes, but technically they're just saying "This is how we intended it to be from the beginning". Kind of like reading "History of Middle Earth" and in it Tolkien's original notes and plans for shaping his work.
-------------------- "I'm nigh-invulnerable when I'm blasting!" Mel Gibson, X-Men
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Personally, I much prefer the original version of Blade Runner: I had to track down on old VHS copy to see it though. Lousy Directors Cut! THey could have just included BOTH versions on DVD, y'know!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
It's really something the viewers should decide though. Blade Runner's original version has been unavialable for quite some time now. In any format.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Triton: Reinserting the Dallas/Brett scene will also cause continuity problems for James Cameron's "Aliens".
Well, I suppose you could make the argument that, in an emergency, warrior xenomorphs are capable of creating eggs out of raw materials (people). Otherwise they would have no way of propogating the species if the Queen is killed.
In fact, maybe the warrior drones, in the absence of a Queen, instinctively create a Queen egg out of a poor hapless victim. In that way, everyone wins. Apart from the victim. And the reason that there were two people being converted is that it takes tow bodies worth of resources to create a Queen egg. Or perhaps they make a Queen, and a drone to protect it while it is an infant.
[ September 22, 2003, 03:14 AM: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Triton: Reinserting the Dallas/Brett scene will also cause continuity problems for James Cameron's "Aliens".
Well, I suppose you could make the argument that, in an emergency, warrior xenomorphs are capable of creating eggs out of raw materials (people). Otherwise they would have no way of propogating the species if the Queen is killed.
In fact, maybe the warrior drones, in the absence of a Queen, instinctively create a Queen egg out of a poor hapless victim. In that way, everyone wins. Apart from the victim. And the reason that there were two people being converted is that it takes tow bodies worth of resources to create a Queen egg. Or perhaps they make a Queen, and a drone to protect it while it is an infant.
Surprisingly this scene is referred to in the Alien3 novel. It supposes, as you do that an isolated drone/warrior can force a reproductive cycle by converting potential hosts into eggs. This of course would be a very limited way of maintaining a species since it basically halves their birthrate, at least until a Queen is born. The Aliens book also has what I presume is a reference to this encounter with the rudimentary nest. It's when the Marines first encounter the walls covered with the secretions, Ripley notes that she's seen something like this before, just knowhere near on that scale.
In regards to how Queens are created, the Aliens novel has some disscussion that draws comparisons with terrestrial bees. If I recall, it states that in a Bee hive it's the drones who decide to make a new Queen, not the Queen herself. Apparantly they do this by feeding a normal developing larva with a substance called "Royal Jelly". In the case of the Alien this would mean a worker would insert this substance (presumably a mix of growth hormones and/or specialised genetic material) into an egg which would in turn filter through to the facehugger, changing the makeup of the embryo within to eventually become a Queen.
This would make more sense than the Queen wilfully producing a "Queen-Egg" or the statistical occasionally proposed option of having one such egg randomly produced every so often. For one thing it offers the greater chance for survival of the hive if, so long as there is at least one egg and some hosts, there can a hive.
In regards to how long a single Alien can live, I'm heard Ridley Scott suppose that they are very short lived (as little as a few days) because of the rate that they grow and that there darkening colour is due to some form of brusing as the creature ages. Aliens have shown that they can of course live for at least a few months, although they might require reletively long periods of hibernation as evidenced by the behavior of the nest in ALIENS. They're certianly not immortal since there are no Xenomorphs in evidence onboard the deralict and we know that at least one was spawned there (though I shudder to think how formidable THAT particular incarnation would have been, given the size of it's host.) The eggs on the other hand are another matter since it's not clear if the spores seen in the deralict's hold are natuallry long lived (remember the body had been there long enough to be fossilised) or if the 'laser-mist' was responsible. The latter only makes sense if the ship was, as Ridley Scott has suggested, intentionally transporting the spores as bio-weapons. While that seams to be the accepted interpertation, it might be worth bearing in mind that in the original book Ash decode more of the message than is shown in the film. From that he supposes that the other aliens were noble explorers who picked up the eggs and (obviously) failed to realise how dangerous they were before it was to late, their final act being to force the ship down on an uninhabited planet and set up an automatic warning beacon to prevent the Xenomorphs from spreading. Either explanation is valid as I see it, although the evidence is stacked in favour of the former. I suppose you could say that Ash was intentionally misleading the crew since: -
1. They might not have been so eager to let Kane back inside if they knew that face-hugger was as good as un-exploded ordinance. 2. It's not like anyone else was really qualified to contradict his findings.
posted
I'd have to wonder why they'd purposefully set down somewhere if they were trying to keep people from finding the eggs. Couldn't they just, oh, fly into a sun?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Omega: I'd have to wonder why they'd purposefully set down somewhere if they were trying to keep people from finding the eggs. Couldn't they just, oh, fly into a sun?
The ship may have been slightly out of the pilot's control after the alien burst from it's chest.
Something I've always considered to be possible is that the Alien from the first film is some kind of "king" that secures the new hive for the Queen and eggs. It would explain the physical diffrences between the first Alien and the more ant-like versions of the second movie. (other than VFX limitations, that is) It's also concievable that the alien from the first movie would have developed into a Queen (much like some frogs and fish change sexes if there's no female around).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
