1 Clawed Aliens in AVP2

[Xeno]

I never noticed, that there is only one claw, but it is realy so. Maybe the others will be made by CGI.

[Don Dorris]

I never noticed, that there is only one claw, but it is realy so. Maybe the others will be made by CGI.

That seems like a bit of a waste of time.

RIJOENPIAL, it would be silly for us to judge whether to see the film or not based on the AICN review. It was a very early draft of the script that if memory serves was written nearly a year before principle photography began. It was pretty unfair of AICN to review such a draft as it might hurt a film that has since been improved.

[RIJOENPIAL]

I never noticed, that there is only one claw, but it is realy so. Maybe the others will be made by CGI.

That seems like a bit of a waste of time.

RIJOENPIAL, it would be silly for us to judge whether to see the film or not based on the AICN review. It was a very early draft of the script that if memory serves was written nearly a year before principle photography began. It was pretty unfair of AICN to review such a draft as it might hurt a film that has since been improved.

How do you know it was improved? As far as history tells us, no recent sequel met the high expectations it had, so, AVP2 has history against it...and the setting (Aliens in a small town killing its inhabitants) still remains, in clear violation of what was established in Alien, so... At least, PWA had the decency to place AVP's story in a tightly contained environment... Now we have Aliens running loose in the US... So, history and the preposterous setting and inocuous, inexperienced cast and directing crew demonstrates that there are enough signs that it will be bad, although like AVP, proceeds will probably outweigh negative previews, reviews and ops ...It is just a question of sensible realism vs. blind faith, in my book... We will know who will say ' i told you so' in a few months time... but by then, who cares anymore, right? if I am right, the franchises will be dead, so... I better be wrong about this, now wouldn't you agree...?

[RIJOENPIAL]

Also, Lovely man, don't believe everything you read coming from the BS FOX throws up...They are completely biased and manipulative... so I wouldn't put too much faith on what Fox says, if I were you...past experience taught us that...

[Don Dorris]

Firstly, you're right, I don't know it was improved, hence why I used the words 'might hurt' - but then, we don't know it hasn't been improved and if we just base seeing it on the AICN review, we'll never find out. Actually, I'm going to backtrack on that - of course it was improved, at least in theory - otherwise it wouldn't have gone through further drafts...that's what drafting it supposed to be about - improving. Otherwise the shooting script would be that very version.

The irony is, you're saying that sequels never live up to the hype, yet we're talking about one of the few film series where a sequel actually did live up to its predecessor (to some) and is now crowned by some as the best in the series (Aliens). Admittedly, sequels do disappoint, but most a lot of sequels are hyped not only by their own marketing, but by the film that came before it. In this case it only has to live up to AvP, which was pretty poor to begin with. I'm not saying the film will be good...just that we shouldn't base too much off of the AICN review.

[SuicideDoors]

Whilst I think the Alien looks crap one finger or two, it HAS got TWO fingers... It's just the angle:

http://www.alienexperience.com/forum/smf/index.php?topic=2538.165

[RIJOENPIAL]

Firstly, you're right, I don't know it was improved, hence why I used the words 'might hurt' - but then, we don't know it hasn't been improved and if we just base seeing it on the AICN review, we'll never find out. Actually, I'm going to backtrack on that - of course it was improved, at least in theory - otherwise it wouldn't have gone through further drafts...that's what drafting it supposed to be about - improving. Otherwise the shooting script would be that very version.

The irony is, you're saying that sequels never live up to the hype, yet we're talking about one of the few film series where a sequel actually did live up to its predecessor (to some) and is now crowned by some as the best in the series (Aliens). Admittedly, sequels do disappoint, but most a lot of sequels are hyped not only by their own marketing, but by the film that came before it. In this case it only has to live up to AvP, which was pretty poor to begin with. I'm not saying the film will be good...just that we shouldn't base too much off of the AICN review.

...Huh, you don't know that either...let's use common sense, shall we...?: first, the second script is usually the first script with scenes cut, not added...the majority of scripts i've read, from the first to the last, is not an improvemnet, more a retailed script...they keep the scenes that work and remove the ones that don't... when they add, it is usually a mistake, because you can't add scenes without changing the whole script from top to bottom, because of coherence of style, writing and, most of all, cause and effect, and also coherence of character growth... i have rad enough scripts on their various stages to realise that if AICN reviews a first draft that is ON THE WHOLE, bad, it is not changing one scene or two that will make it better, but a complete re-writing... So, the review was on August 2006, right? Principal photography started around that, right? SO, how could they have time to do a rewrite? ALso, we already know a lot remained, characters name, the ex-combatant from the Gulf War and her child Molly...DO you honestly think this last script will ultimately correct the intrinsical flaws that AICN's review pointed out? I have enough moviegoing expreience to know already this has never happened...That was why Fox attacked AICN, it was not because it would lead erroneously the fans, but because it really hit home... AICN reviewed AVP and apart from the original sequence that never made it to the final cut, they were pretty accurate...So back to you... 

[RIJOENPIAL]

Oh, and I was talking about RECENT sequels, not Aliens to Alien, or Alien 3 to Aliens, or Pred 2 to Pred...



But that is what conversation is for, to fill in the blanks and to correct takes on what people think we were meaning by saying this or that...

[Don Dorris]

...Huh, you don't know that either...let's use common sense, shall we...?: first, the second script is usually the first script with scenes cut, not added...the majority of scripts i've read, from the first to the last, is not an improvemnet, more a retailed script...they keep the scenes that work and remove the ones that don't...

Hence they're trying to improve it.

So, the review was on August 2006, right? Principal photography started around that, right? SO, how could they have time to do a rewrite?

Because the review was done in august, but the script was older, the review states it dates from the previous year and the strauses have since said that the script was outdated even when it was reviewed.

ALso, we already know a lot remained, characters name, the ex-combatant from the Gulf War and her child Molly...DO you honestly think this last script will ultimately correct the intrinsical flaws that AICN's review pointed out? I have enough moviegoing expreience to know already this has never happened...That was why Fox attacked AICN, it was not because it would lead erroneously the fans, but because it really hit home... AICN reviewed AVP and apart from the original sequence that never made it to the final cut, they were pretty accurate...So back to you... 

The number of aliens has since changed, as has the Texas setting. The K-Mart sequence has been removed. For all we know an entire rewrite has been done, but has kept the same characters and certain settings. We simply don't know yet.

You don't know why Fox attacked AICN.

All I can say about the original AvP and AICN is that as bad as AvP was, AICN made it sound even worse than it actually was.

[uhhhhh]

Maybe it is one finger only on stunt suits (for any/no reason)?

[Darkness]

So, the review was on August 2006, right? Principal photography started around that, right? SO, how could they have time to do a rewrite?

Because the review was done in august, but the script was older, the review states it dates from the previous year and the strauses have since said that the script was outdated even when it was reviewed.

Okay, the facts are: AICN reviewed the script in April 2006. The script was dated December 2005. Shooting began in September 2006. It's been rewritten two or three times since then.

[RIJOENPIAL]

...And still it looks like basura... So, they really have no excuse, have they? I know that ususally in blockbuster movies, they tend to choose a 'cheap' cast, but this is just ridiculous... This is a TV cast, for cripes sake... and the Aliens and Predator still look bad...the mask shorter than the face is just for starters... and it still looks a lot like the first draft: the sewers, the characters, the sole Predator against a town of them... and if there is no Queen, then where will the facehuggers come from...they will be just ripped to shreds by the 2, 3 Aliens that resulted from the initial facehuggers? This doesn't sound lika a memorable story at all, and the cast...Dios mio... it is more than enough to keep people away from the movie... SO, with all these shortcomings already so evident, i don't see why people still mainatin this will be better than AVP or any good at all... It sounds like it will be a special-FX heavy B-movie...nothing more... Shane Salerno is not a good writer, not by a long shot, and with the budget limitations (resulting in a cast so pathetic I am having second thoughts about going and see the movie... ) clearly handicapping the movie, it is not naysaying at all, just being a sensible moviegoer that does not want to be used by Fox as sheep... Also, if your facts are right, Darkness, they actually had a lot of time to rewrite the movie and STILL they maintained it on Earth, in a small town setting, with human banal characters just meat for the grinder, exactly the same structure but with a cosmetic change...
The more news I get about the movie, the less inclined I am to go and see this movie... I hope this will change until December, but I doubt it... IF AVP2 is a direct continuation of AVP, they will have to explain how a ship already out of Erath's orbit can crash down and STILL maintain its cloaking active... they will have to explain how in a crash like that, an Alien or predalien will survive, not to mention any eggs or Predalien that will survive to initiate the rukus... and you believe they will have credible reasons for this?! So, darkness, I don't believe a word Fox and the Bros. say, because they say whatever they want us to hear, trying ever so clumsily to keep us interested in seeing this sequel... And I have never seen a good sequel from an average movie... especially in the last 10, 15 years... maybe it is just me...       

[Newsfop]

How do you know it was improved? As far as history tells us, no recent sequel met the high expectations it had, so, AVP2 has history against it...

You're absolutely right. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Casino Royale and Shrek 2 did horrible at the box office and absolutely nobody liked them one bit. 

[RIJOENPIAL]

How do you know it was improved? As far as history tells us, no recent sequel met the high expectations it had, so, AVP2 has history against it...

You're absolutely right. Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith, Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Casino Royale and Shrek 2 did horrible at the box office and absolutely nobody liked them one bit. 

Huh, I hate to disagree with someone who agreed with me, but about the last part of your reasoning, you should check this site:

http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross?region=world-wide

The third installment of Lord of the Rings did great at the boxoffice; so did Casino Royale, comparing the cost vs. revenue...   

[Pvt. Hicks]

He was being sarcastic.