will there or will there ever be a cut of alien 3 that actually makes sense and ansers the questions like why the hell is there 2 face huggers and why is one of them massive.
No.
there was 1 superfacehugger wich was able to put 2 embryos: a queen and a drone
Quote from: Der_Meister on Jan 05, 2008, 03:23:58 PM
there was 1 superfacehugger wich was able to put 2 embryos: a queen and a drone
The So called Super Facehugger
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbinarybonsai.com%2Fsitesdir%2Faliens%2Fimages%2Fa3cutpics5big.jpg&hash=161e72b0738fe21e80f6ecc21ae9395c6bfbf700)
The Special Edition of Alien 3 fills in alot of gaps, such as why two hosts were impregnated with alien embryos, it also adds in a good 20 minutes or so of extra footage...you'll never look at the film quite the same way again after watching that version.
Quote from: Stalker on Jan 05, 2008, 04:29:22 PM
The Special Edition of Alien 3 fills in alot of gaps, such as why two hosts were impregnated with alien embryos, it also adds in a good 20 minutes or so of extra footage...you'll never look at the film quite the same way again after watching that version.
That is so true :D
Review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8aLxLEMS98
QuoteThe Special Edition of Alien 3 fills in alot of gaps, such as why two hosts were impregnated with alien embryos,
And creates others - like how did two huggers come from one egg? And why was the host dead prior to embryo birth?
There was only a single facehugger, although as mentioned earlier, it was a "super-facehugger" which can implant embryos into two separate hosts. As far as the burster coming out of the already-dead Ox, there's no reason to say that it hadn't only recently died, leaving the burster plenty of time prior to mature & grow, as we saw it was already in its infant adult stage when it finally emerged.
QuoteThere was only a single facehugger, although as mentioned earlier, it was a "super-facehugger" which can implant embryos into two separate hosts.
Go watch the title sequence again.
QuoteAs far as the burster coming out of the already-dead Ox, there's no reason to say that it hadn't only recently died, leaving the burster plenty of time prior to mature & grow, as we saw it was already in its infant adult stage when it finally emerged.
Ergo - it's a gap.
Why would I need to watch the titles again? I already know full-well what happens.
So you didn't notice it's not a super hugger then?
The opening titles are the same between the two cuts of the film, but the super-facehugger is only emphasized in the Special Edition version. You can clearly see it when Murphy picks it up off the ground at the end of the slaughter-house scene, around the 25 minute mark of the movie.
It is clearly far larger than any other facehugger seen, as its body alone completely dwarfs Murphy's head, & by zooming in, you can also see the webbing between its legs. The fact that a normal hugger was shown during the opening credits of the Special Edition was a mere inconsistency.
One could simply argue that husk is a normal facehugger since unlike the original intentions it is never shown up close.
I'm with SM. It was a regular facehugger, unless one believes its simply easier to have an entire unaltered opening sequence shot with a regular facehugger and an out of focuse shot later in the movie of the superfacehugger and thus it must have been a superfacehugger all along. Don't think that was the editor's intention in the assembly cut, and I'd wager that it was the opposite intention that kept the superfacehugger from being shown up close.
Regular audience isn't going to know of the superfacehugger, thus to them or other untrained eyes, thats what they see when Murphy picks it up.
Here's the shot in the movie from a different angle...that's clearly not a normal facehugger:
Super-facehugger (http://binarybonsai.com/sitesdir/aliens/images/a3cutpics6big.jpg)
Yet thats not what I remember the shot being. Might be the same scene, but I recall it a more head on angle with a different hue for the hugger at a much further distance from the camera.
But until tomorrow when my eyelids don't feel like they have dumbells glued to them, I'll take your word for it.
The exact shot in the film was slightly different, as you said, further away & from a more frontal angle. That picture is more than likely a production shot from when they were filming the scene, it's much closer & from a different angle, but it is legitimate, & does show the hugger in greater detail than it is seen in the movie.
QuoteThe fact that a normal hugger was shown during the opening credits of the Special Edition was a mere inconsistency.
And that is mere opinion.
The fact is there's two different huggers in the film and since their presence is unexplained it's a "gap".
To be completely honest, the two versions of the film contradict each other, such as how in the Theatrical version, the victim is a dog, wheras an ox is implanted with an embryo instead in the Special Edition, not to mention that there is no evidence of a super-facehugger in the Theatrical version, wheras it is clearly emphasized in the Special Edition. Due to such inconsistencies, alot of it is down to personal opinion on what is really going on.
Given the dream-like sequence in the beginning, it can be interpreted as images from some sort of nightmare Ripley was having as her stasis was failing and she was between states. In this guise the normal facehugger can be seen as what Ripley was seeing in her mind (being shes only seen normal ones her half-hallucination would be one, despite it being different.)
So Ripley's stasis is failing, shes semi-conscious and her semi-conscious mind is interpreting whats going on around her, skewed by her memories, paranoias and traumas.
So there was only one facehugger the super-facehugger. That is, if you consider Alien3 SE the canon, which I do just 'cause I like it a lot better.
Yeah, it can be viewed as dreamlike.
For the sake of logic, it would be better to relegate it and the sequel to a dream, but most people on forums don't seem to like that.
It was hoped that the recent edition would have shown that image, but as others said, it's too far away.
Relegate Alien 3 to a dream?
Don't let the iron flatten the wrinkles.
Somewhere in one of the ducmentaries on the Alien3 bonus disc there's an alternate shot of the guy holding up the super-facehugger.... it's more close-up, and sweeping camera angle I believe.
Quote from: Kimarhi on Jan 06, 2008, 05:30:53 PM
Relegate Alien 3 to a dream?
Don't let the iron flatten the wrinkles.
Hell no. AR, maybe but not A3.
I was just saying the opening sequence.... not the whole film. Hell I wasn't even saying that was a dream, just dream-like (rather nightmare-like).
Referring to morphine.
Let's keep everything str8! In the original movie there was only one facehugger and in se there is only one super facehugger 'cause there is only one egg shown. I assume that super facehuggers can morph because of climate or mood.
Quote from: DazAvP01 on Jan 06, 2008, 07:46:31 PM
Somewhere in one of the ducmentaries on the Alien3 bonus disc there's an alternate shot of the guy holding up the super-facehugger.... it's more close-up, and sweeping camera angle I believe.
Correct. It should be noted that the "assembly cut" was put together by the DVD team using editor's notes from the production and had it been done by the actual filmakers, a different angle may have been used. I was actually a little disappointed with some of the choices they made, the version of Golic's death used in the Workprint version worked alot better than the one used in the assembly cut.
Don't get me wrong though, the Special Edition is still an Alien 3 fan's wet dream. ;)
Quote from: Wildbird on Jan 07, 2008, 12:01:07 AM
there is only one super facehugger 'cause there is only one egg shown.
Yes.
Shown.
Could well have been more. :)
Could well have been a tap dancing Balrog too.
or a unicorn playing 3 card Monte
Random Alien 3 question about the Runner Alien. Does anyone know why it is so much larger in it's burster strange than any other Aliens. Not that it is full grown but it is cleary more developed than any other burster when it runs itself away from the Ox/Dog.
As for the quality of the SE to the theatrical cut. I don't have much preference, one over the other. I like some of the added material but i don't think my overall liking of the film changed much upon seeing it.
I don't think there really is an answer as to why it seems more developed (that is: having arms and legs and a formed head w/ secondary jaw). The film reason (ie: why it was done) is to show that this alien is different. The in universe reason, idk, because it was from a dog/ox and the different DNA made the burster develop differently.
I don't think the thing that first emerges from the cavity is the same thing seen shedding it's skin (or it's victims innards) later on.
Quote from: Kimarhi on Jan 08, 2008, 12:57:56 AM
I don't think the thing that first emerges from the cavity is the same thing seen shedding it's skin (or it's victims innards) later on.
It's not, but who ever said it was?
Nobody. But I often hear the, "it's too big too have fit inside the dog," argument over forums. And most people that I have talked to on gg or imdb seem to think it's an error on the part of fincher/editors for not picking it up.
Personally I don't think the thing that leaves the dog, is the same thing scene shedding it's skin immediately thereafter in one of the cuts right before it scampers off.
What is it then? ???
you mean thats no the burster immediately after its left the dog right? Like its grown a little since it burst?
It's actually not as big as it seems, its pretty small. If you still think its too big, you could say it was from the Ox or maybe your theory that the scene is after its grown a bit could work too.
Quote from: Eidotemit on Jan 08, 2008, 07:53:59 AM
you mean thats no the burster immediately after its left the dog right? Like its grown a little since it burst?
Yes.
Quote from: Kimarhi on Jan 08, 2008, 05:28:34 AM
Nobody. But I often hear the, "it's too big too have fit inside the dog," argument over forums. And most people that I have talked to on gg or imdb seem to think it's an error on the part of fincher/editors for not picking it up.
Personally I don't think the thing that leaves the dog, is the same thing scene shedding it's skin immediately thereafter in one of the cuts right before it scampers off.
Well, I mean, what do you expect? He was in a terrible position, and couldnt edit much, and production was a nightmare.
The alien has already molted once when it attacks Murphy (hence the skin he finds), so it's bigger than what emerged from the ox (dog). But it still isn't fully developed yet - it's still an immature alien. This is evident when looking at it's exoskeleton: it isn't completely formed yet, which is probably why it relied on spitting at Murphy rather than physically attacking him.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FAdult_Fiorina003.jpg&hash=e9b8a4bb8780fdbc9dd6cb8a43117f3a7e854250)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FAdult_Fiorina004.jpg&hash=594b799549a55f374c33095618549f221c90997d)
Quote from: Thedus on Jan 08, 2008, 07:07:08 PM
The alien has already molted once when it attacks Murphy (hence the skin he finds), so it's bigger than what emerged from the ox (dog). But it still isn't fully developed yet - it's still an immature alien. This is evident when looking at it's exoskeleton: it isn't completely formed yet, which is probably why it relied on spitting at Murphy rather than physically attacking him.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Adult_Fiorina003.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Adult_Fiorina004.jpg
Yes, he looked rather fragile there, didnt he? If only they had some pulse rifles...
Not that shot, the shot almost immediately after it's birth where it is standing on shaky legs shedding it's skin/victims innards (as people who want to say that this alien is the same size it was when it emerged are want to say).
They are definitely not the same size. The alien is smaller when it is first born. When it kills Murphy it's somewhere between that and a full adult.
Looking at the behind the scenes footage the 1:1 scale burster rod puppet stands about as high as a full grown man's knees. The alien in the above screen caps is not that rod puppet.
This is the shot before murphy. Right before it scampers away from the dog corpse.
Comparing the burster with the young adult that Murphy finds we can see subtle differences in the alien - implying that it's grown. Even if we ignore that the fact Murphy finds a shed skin is indication that the alien is getting larger.
Here are some shots before it scampers away after emerging. Sorry, I don't have any screen caps from the theatrical release at the moment. But I believe the same puppet was used, the scene was just re-edited and spliced into new shots with a dog.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FChest_Fiorina011.jpg&hash=46588fe5062ff4a9fa1a57eb940db4bb587781fe)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FChest_Fiorina010.jpg&hash=e62ef6e908147eb6cdc214599cce84a5503df49a)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FChest_Fiorina012.jpg&hash=da853f48c30749091f1fd869ed2493e6b62073a6)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FChest_Fiorina013.jpg&hash=740480a48357548d609638835191babd354d04b4)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv502%2FThedus%2Fscreencaps%2FChest_Fiorina015.jpg&hash=34d3200388f61249ad48e168df947e69e0d198ca)
Thats rather big for being a chestburster, dont you think?
Yes it is. It's HUGE!
I don't remember it it's ever legitimately explained as to why ADI made it so big (probably related to puppetry and articulation), but from a biological stand point it might be that the alien embryo will develop to a point that its host body can accommodate. Meaning that an ox has a much larger area of development in its chest than a human does, so an alien embryo is able to gestate a little longer to allow for further development. Basically the idea that some organisms can grow to match its environment. However, its probably more related to the fact that an ox is much larger than a human, its young are larger than human offspring, therefore an alien born of an ox would be larger than an alien born of a human.
I don't know how to explain the development inside of the ox, but isn't in possible that the chestburser in Alien 3's theatrical cut developed that way because of the canine life cyle? Dogs develop in a much shorter time than what humans require. Perhaps the Alien chestburster is more larval in creatures such as ourselves and is prone to overdevelop in creatures whose young develop faster than the human infant. We've already seen it established that they take host traits from an embryonic stage. Perhaps the chestburster stage is no different from the adult stage in acquiring host traits.
Quote from: The Chibi Kiriyama on Jan 08, 2008, 09:25:10 PM
I don't know how to explain the development inside of the ox, but isn't in possible that the chestburser in Alien 3's theatrical cut developed that way because of the canine life cyle? Dogs develop in a much shorter time than what humans require. Perhaps the Alien chestburster is more larval in creatures such as ourselves and is prone to overdevelop in creatures whose young develop faster than the human infant.
I think thats the best way to explain it. I mean, its so developed than a chestburster should be developed.
Well if we're going by the AC, remember it killed the Ox.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 08, 2008, 09:52:22 PM
Well if we're going by the AC, remember it killed the Ox.
That's true, which is why I'm at a loss to try and explain the ox sequence. The dog theory doesn't really apply to cattle.
Quote from: Thedus on Jan 08, 2008, 08:47:09 PM
Comparing the burster with the young adult that Murphy finds we can see subtle differences in the alien - implying that it's grown. Even if we ignore that the fact Murphy finds a shed skin is indication that the alien is getting larger.
Here are some shots before it scampers away after emerging. Sorry, I don't have any screen caps from the theatrical release at the moment. But I believe the same puppet was used, the scene was just re-edited and spliced into new shots with a dog.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Chest_Fiorina011.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Chest_Fiorina010.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Chest_Fiorina012.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Chest_Fiorina013.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/Thedus/screencaps/Chest_Fiorina015.jpg
Try a shot of when the creature first emerges from it's chest and it''s arms are under it's chin, with the ox/dogalien standing shots.
I think it grows in a sequencing of shots is what I've been trying to say.
I don't think the cb initially is as big as the alien shown very soon after. Think the alien tucking it's head and shedding some of it's skin implies that it is growing almost as soon as it shoots out of the dog.
QuoteI think it grows in a sequencing of shots is what I've been trying to say.
I don't.
Is there a point of reference?
If you're going to go OU --> IU then you most assuredly see it two different stages as the puppet for birthing is completely different in shape than the "shooter" puppet, thus verifying a different state.
Quote from: SM on Jan 09, 2008, 04:24:18 AM
QuoteI think it grows in a sequencing of shots is what I've been trying to say.
I don't.
Is there a point of reference?
Little baby buster is notably different shape, then buster shedding skin.
If Xhan is right, then it is true because it's two different makes of the dogalien model.
I do see a difference in the Chestbuster we actually see coming from the Ox, just that as soon as it emerges it seems to be far more developed than any other Alien so soon after birthing.
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jan 09, 2008, 05:25:15 AM
I do see a difference in the Chestbuster we actually see coming from the Ox, just that as soon as it emerges it seems to be far more developed than any other Alien so soon after birthing.
Seems like AVP was right after all, wasnt it? ;)
Yeah, lol, i guess he wasn't so wrong about the timing of the Alien Life Cycle ;)
Of course provided he did see Alien 3 you woul think he would have noticed Bishops red blood @ the end...
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jan 09, 2008, 05:47:07 AM
Yeah, lol, i guess he wasn't so wrong about the timing of the Alien Life Cycle ;)
Of course provided he did see Alien 3 you woul think he would have noticed Bishops red blood @ the end...
It doesnt matter to me that there are two bishops in different time cycles. If you use your head, it makes perfect sense. Doesnt need to be complicated.
Quote from: Khan on Jan 09, 2008, 05:52:54 AM
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jan 09, 2008, 05:47:07 AM
Yeah, lol, i guess he wasn't so wrong about the timing of the Alien Life Cycle ;)
Of course provided he did see Alien 3 you woul think he would have noticed Bishops red blood @ the end...
It doesnt matter to me that there are two bishops in different time cycles. If you use your head, it makes perfect sense. Doesnt need to be complicated.
I don't care to debate the issue of Bishop either. I've made my own sense about it so i'm good with it all. Just so many people complain about it, stating it as one of Anderson's many flaws.
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jan 09, 2008, 05:56:38 AM
Quote from: Khan on Jan 09, 2008, 05:52:54 AM
Quote from: Spidey3121 on Jan 09, 2008, 05:47:07 AM
Yeah, lol, i guess he wasn't so wrong about the timing of the Alien Life Cycle ;)
Of course provided he did see Alien 3 you woul think he would have noticed Bishops red blood @ the end...
It doesnt matter to me that there are two bishops in different time cycles. If you use your head, it makes perfect sense. Doesnt need to be complicated.
I don't care to debate the issue of Bishop either. I've made my own sense about it so i'm good with it all. Just so many people complain about it, stating it as one of Anderson's many flaws.
Yeah, well, time has passed. These films have happened, not much can be done about it. Unless you have the TARDIS... ;)