Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
It looks as if Prometheus could also feature the prequel to Alien's infamous panty shot.
Oh Ridley, you old cad.
Oh Ridley, you old cad.
I totally agree. Aliens is a piece of cinematic history. But it's the thematic differences that ultimately seperate the two for my personal taste. Cameron made a film that Cameron does best; an action adventure with a cast of clearly defined (if simple) characters, ripe with one liners and very memorable set pieces. He did something that was a polar opposite to Alien, turning the action and presentation dial to 11, and creating one of the most memorable action horror films ever made. It's absolutely excellent and I don't deny that.
But it's his thematic choices that makes it a lesser film than Alien for me personally. I much, much prefer the slower, brooding tension and horror of Alien, the less 'cinematic', punchy cinematography, the drawn out pacing, and the far, far more natural flowing dialogue.
Ultimately nearly everything I love about the series came from Scott, not Cameron. I liked his portrayal of the xenomorph much more. I preferred his characterisation of Ripley. I loved the horror, and the overall atmosphere surrounding LV-426.
I feel Aliens sticks in peoples minds more because it's a better mass market action film. Its a summer blockbuster, and a very, very good one. Similar to Terminator, it has that iconic Cameron touch to the presentation and adventure that you just cant ignore. But for me, Alien will always be the film Alien, and Cameron's work, as good as it might be, a lesser experience.
The dialogue part is what stood out the most for me, during my most recent viewing of the entire series, a few years back. It does devolve into the usual action movie one liners in the sequels, whereas the first movie had those conversations and arguments that didn't feel (and in some cases probably weren't) scripted. I think that contributed quite a bit to the "lived in" feeling of the ship. Those people felt like... well, people.I much, much prefer the slower, brooding tension and horror of Alien, the less 'cinematic', punchy cinematography, the drawn out pacing, and the far, far more natural flowing dialogue.
Ultimately nearly everything I love about the series came from Scott, not Cameron. I liked his portrayal of the xenomorph much more. I preferred his characterisation of Ripley. I loved the horror, and the overall atmosphere surrounding LV-426.
This has probably been discussed but I wonder, are the "Predators" part of the official canon of the Alien series?
This looks cool. As a prequel, I could watch this if I've never seen Alien, right?
I guess? It still remains to be seen how much the two will really have in common. You should still jump on Alien though if you've never seen it.This looks cool. As a prequel, I could watch this if I've never seen Alien, right?
I thought Fassbender was the android here? He looks like a flawless sex-bot (lol)
If it gives you solace, Theron is South African and Weyland Corp. is actually British.
We can put a man on the moon but we can't make a sexy spacesuit. This isn't the America I voted for!
MIT is currently producing biosuits for manned mission to Mars. Century of technical advancement will increase their sexyness.![]()
![]()
Prometheus crew are also using biosuits, just to protect them from the mild hostile elements on LV426.
Random question: In Aliens, how exactly were the xenomorphs determining who to abduct and who to kill?
edit:
Wait, maybe they only killed armed threats? Did they kill the corporate guy?
It's a play on the start of ALIEN which has a similar sound.
It sounded like old piping! Plus if you guys listen carefully, it sounds more like screams as well. It totally fits.
They didn't kill the corporate guy in the deleted scenes... but in the original cut we can pretend his head got and extra hole.
We can put a man on the moon but we can't make a sexy spacesuit. This isn't the America I voted for!
In case someone is reading this thread without seeing that movie, you should spoiler that.
Yeah I like in Alien how many shades of 'life' there are.
Humans
Human-looking Android
Human-facilitating MOTHER system on Nostromo
Semi-living spaceship with Space Jockey embedded in it
Alien
Not to mention the cat. Such a clever movie. I agree too with whomever said that the whole cast is strong and that you don't even know who the 'main' character is (certainly could be Dallas) until the end.
I remember my friend Will who saw and loved the movie as a kid said that none of the actors were big so nobody in the audience knew who would live until the end. So cool.
I totally agree. Aliens is a piece of cinematic history. But it's the thematic differences that ultimately seperate the two for my personal taste. Cameron made a film that Cameron does best; an action adventure with a cast of clearly defined (if simple) characters, ripe with one liners and very memorable set pieces. He did something that was a polar opposite to Alien, turning the action and presentation dial to 11, and creating one of the most memorable action horror films ever made. It's absolutely excellent and I don't deny that.
But it's his thematic choices that makes it a lesser film than Alien for me personally. I much, much prefer the slower, brooding tension and horror of Alien, the less 'cinematic', punchy cinematography, the drawn out pacing, and the far, far more natural flowing dialogue.
Ultimately nearly everything I love about the series came from Scott, not Cameron. I liked his portrayal of the xenomorph much more. I preferred his characterisation of Ripley. I loved the horror, and the overall atmosphere surrounding LV-426.
I feel Aliens sticks in peoples minds more because it's a better mass market action film. Its a summer blockbuster, and a very, very good one. Similar to Terminator, it has that iconic Cameron touch to the presentation and adventure that you just cant ignore. But for me, Alien will always be the film Alien, and Cameron's work, as good as it might be, a lesser experience.
Change a few words here and there and I'd swear you were talking about Termintor 1 vs 2I totally agree. Aliens is a piece of cinematic history. But it's the thematic differences that ultimately seperate the two for my personal taste. Cameron made a film that Cameron does best; an action adventure with a cast of clearly defined (if simple) characters, ripe with one liners and very memorable set pieces. He did something that was a polar opposite to Alien, turning the action and presentation dial to 11, and creating one of the most memorable action horror films ever made. It's absolutely excellent and I don't deny that.
But it's his thematic choices that makes it a lesser film than Alien for me personally. I much, much prefer the slower, brooding tension and horror of Alien, the less 'cinematic', punchy cinematography, the drawn out pacing, and the far, far more natural flowing dialogue.
Ultimately nearly everything I love about the series came from Scott, not Cameron. I liked his portrayal of the xenomorph much more. I preferred his characterisation of Ripley. I loved the horror, and the overall atmosphere surrounding LV-426.
I feel Aliens sticks in peoples minds more because it's a better mass market action film. Its a summer blockbuster, and a very, very good one. Similar to Terminator, it has that iconic Cameron touch to the presentation and adventure that you just cant ignore. But for me, Alien will always be the film Alien, and Cameron's work, as good as it might be, a lesser experience.
Member>Junior Member
I like the fact that Cameron didn't set out to make a film that tried to mimic Scott's, despite it being a sequel. It has a different feel and different goals, and it succeeds on its own terms, while functioning effectively as a sequel. It's the reason I can't really elevate one film over the other, because each has things I admire so much. I watch Aliens when I want a scary, first rate action/horror film. I watch Alien when I'm in the mood for one of the most effective slow burn, gothic horror movies ever.I totally agree. Aliens is a piece of cinematic history. But it's the thematic differences that ultimately seperate the two for my personal taste. Cameron made a film that Cameron does best; an action adventure with a cast of clearly defined (if simple) characters, ripe with one liners and very memorable set pieces. He did something that was a polar opposite to Alien, turning the action and presentation dial to 11, and creating one of the most memorable action horror films ever made. It's absolutely excellent and I don't deny that.
But it's his thematic choices that makes it a lesser film than Alien for me personally. I much, much prefer the slower, brooding tension and horror of Alien, the less 'cinematic', punchy cinematography, the drawn out pacing, and the far, far more natural flowing dialogue.
Ultimately nearly everything I love about the series came from Scott, not Cameron. I liked his portrayal of the xenomorph much more. I preferred his characterisation of Ripley. I loved the horror, and the overall atmosphere surrounding LV-426.
I feel Aliens sticks in peoples minds more because it's a better mass market action film. Its a summer blockbuster, and a very, very good one. Similar to Terminator, it has that iconic Cameron touch to the presentation and adventure that you just cant ignore. But for me, Alien will always be the film Alien, and Cameron's work, as good as it might be, a lesser experience.
Not always.
Change a few words here and there and I'd swear you were talking about Termintor 1 vs 2
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the genesis/creation of Alien plagued with endless fighting/bickering between the various writers and producers? Tons of dialog was changed, characters re-written and things constantly added/taken away?
I think it's sheer coincidence/luck that the movie turned out as well as it did. It certainly wasn't made to, considering all it's problems during pre-production.
My main gripe with Aliens is that its entire third-act rehashes the end of Alien plot-point for plot-point, which strikes me a lazy and unimaginative (which is a complaint you can lay across Cameron's entire oeuvre unfortunately).
Its also not nearly as well made as Scott's movie; cinematagraphy, production design, and outside of Stan Winston's stunnng work the effects are surprisingly dodgy. Its well a played and directed movie, but again I feel that the original does it better.
That being said, its streets ahead of any of the other sequels and it is a highly entertaining experience in its own right, its just not a classic imho.
Forgive me if I don't take the word of an unemployed member of the Jewish conspiracy.![]()
My main gripe with Aliens is that its entire third-act rehashes the end of Alien plot-point for plot-point, which strikes me a lazy and unimaginative (which is a complaint you can lay across Cameron's entire oeuvre unfortunately).
Its also not nearly as well made as Scott's movie; cinematagraphy, production design, and outside of Stan Winston's stunnng work the effects are surprisingly dodgy. Its well a played and directed movie, but again I feel that the original does it better.
That being said, its streets ahead of any of the other sequels and it is a highly entertaining experience in its own right, its just not a classic imho.
The Alien Vault hardback by Ian Nathans came out this year. I haven't got it yet but it's supposed to be really well produced.This is pretty much how I feel about Aliens. The production design and effects really are dodgy, the plastic seems cheap, and the shots are very flat. Regardless, it's a damned entertaining movie, but for me, it pales in comparison to Alien in terms of film making technique.
A question about the Xenomorphs in the movie: in some scenes they're using models and moving them around in really clunky ways, and at other times they look like they're actors in suits. What I'm wondering is why they didn't just go with the suits through out the film? Unless I'm wrong, it couldn't have been too hard to get a person to wear stilts, contort his body a little and play the alien for a few shoots, just at least to get the reptilian movement right.
Also I've been meaning to get into the production story of Alien. Is there any definitive coffee table book like The Making of The Empire Strikes Back by Rinzler?
The cinematography in Aliens is dodgy?
Are you for serious?
If there's one thing James Cameron is good at, it's knowing where to put the goddamn camera.
Edit: And not a classic?
I wouldn't say dodgy, but I would say unremarkable. Alien is a stupidly gorgeous movie, breathtakingly beautiful and visually timeless. Aliens is none of those things.
I wouldn't say dodgy, but I would say unremarkable. Alien is a stupidly gorgeous movie, breathtakingly beautiful and visually timeless. Aliens is none of those things.
The Alien Vault hardback by Ian Nathans came out this year. I haven't got it yet but it's supposed to be really well produced.
I wouldn't say dodgy, but I would say unremarkable. Alien is a stupidly gorgeous movie, breathtakingly beautiful and visually timeless. Aliens is none of those things.
It isn't a flaw... unless you compare it to Alien. Which is bloody God tier film making.I've just never felt that the film's visuals were one of those flaws.
Also my biggest problem with it. If I recall correctly, you only ever see three aliens on screen at one time as well. So the swarming aspect isn't quite as great as it could be.The thing I hate about Aliens is that Cameron made the xeno less threatening than it was portraed in the first film. They were more like pests that overwhelmed with numbers rather than a cunnng predator.