Quote from: DoomRulz on May 20, 2009, 04:17:37 PM
We get at least 4-5 body shots of the Alien, which is more than we did in the first movie.
yet we still see less. We either see them in light for split second or in the shadows with baclight like this
QuoteKane's Son never used the elephant/peacock squeal that Cameron's film popularized.
No EXACTLY the same, but it squeeked as well. The Elephant/peacock sound was used very little. Nitpicking trivial differences in sounds is just nitpicking. Fact is they both squeeked with high pitched sound. Look, I see you obviously dont like the movie. And im not here to change anybody's mind because I respect everyone's opinion. Just dont pick trivial stuff or untrue facts to bring it down. Be fair and give it a fair trial
QuoteBut a reason for doing so was made explicit. They were being cocooned for the purpose of growing the Hive. In Alien, the Alien's behaviour was more bizzare because it would behave more erratically. Case in point: it killed Brett who posed no threat to it, yet kept Dallas alive for a purpose we discover only in the Director's Cut. It killed Parker who was a definite threat, and whatever it did to Lambert is left to our own imagination.
Not really, its the same thing. In both alien and aliens, Alien killed some and abducted others. Those abducted were coccooned for the purposes of reproduction. Same thing in both movies.
Quotehttp://Aliens did do more. It gave us the Queen which showed us where the eggs come from and it also showed us how the Aliens actually live. All Alien did was give us egg-->chestburster-->drone. We got nothing more.
Which is showing a new lifecycle, just like I said. it didnt change anything since the original cycle was dropped from the movie. And Alien was the FIRST movie. How awful woyuld that be for a movie to do everything at once? introduce the basic organism first, then eventually evolve the story in the next movie
QuoteAnd therein lies the problem. The creators of the original film wanted to produce something that was totally new; something the audience had never seen before. It was fresh and scary because it's behaviour was so random.
As much as I love Alien, Im not blind. There were millions of monsters in/from space movies. What amde Alien different was the design and great presentation. But the idea was centuries old.
QuoteThen along comes Jim Bob, and turns the Alien into something we've seen a hundred times before: a screaming space bug.
Then along comes JIm and turns the name into a major franchsie wihcih continues today with the same logo and same sucessful ideas. He lands Aliens on Time Magazine cover and creates scifi classic. And one of the reasons is because it wowed the audiences cause no one has ever seen anything before. Again, youre saying like monster from space was a uniqye idea - it wasnt, it was ar from it. And one way or another, it has no bearing on how great each of the movie is. Despite the generic idea, Alien is a masterpiece because of the presentation. The presentation is what counts
QuoteI agree, and I also think his portrayal of the Alien was way better than Cameron's.
Meaning? how is Alien different from Aliens in the second movie behavior wise?