User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Prometheus Plot Reveal - Aliens ARE In It  (Read 116164 times)

Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 08:27:23 PM
Reply #435 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:27:23 PM
People who are a bit more action fans love aliens more than alien...its just that simple.

Both films are EPIC...i love aliens too i just like 0.0001% the first alien movie.
The only thing that i didnt like is how easy the aliens were killed at the 2nd movie.
Made the alien creatures to look less frightening and badass in my mind.
To be honest i was scared more of the facehugger scenes than the ones with the alien creatures.
But i guess Cameron couldn't do differently since this was the way he wanted to go.
You know that there are actually people who complain that the Marines are wiped out too easily? Well, you can't please everyone...


SPECIAL FORCES
Feb 06, 2011, 08:29:48 PM
Reply #436 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:29:48 PM
People who are a bit more action fans love aliens more than alien...its just that simple.

Both films are EPIC...i love aliens too i just like 0.0001% the first alien movie.
The only thing that i didnt like is how easy the aliens were killed at the 2nd movie.
Made the alien creatures to look less frightening and badass in my mind.
To be honest i was scared more of the facehugger scenes than the ones with the alien creatures.
But i guess Cameron couldn't do differently since this was the way he wanted to go.
You know that there are actually people who complain that the Marines are wiped out too easily? Well, you can't please everyone...

come on man...you know what i mean....the 1st film made you feel that the alien is invincible and not just an animal as in the 2nd one....i think you know what im trying to say.
As for the marines i think that its good they died so fast....made you feel shocked,made you feel they are in a desperate situation.

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 08:31:52 PM by prodigy211 »

Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 08:36:20 PM
Reply #437 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:36:20 PM
come on man...you know what i mean....the 1st film made you feel that the alien is invincible and not just an animal as in the 2nd one....i think you know what im trying to say.
As for the marines i think that its good they died so fast....made you feel shocked,made you feel they are in a desperate situation.
Of course I know what you mean, just showing the silly dichotomy between some groups. Never saw the original Alien as invincible, it screamed and panicked when hit by gas and was bitch-speared out the rear of the ship. O'Bannon meant for it to be a 'natural animal', the entire reason it was given acid blood was to dissuade people from shooting and killing it, otherwise, they would have simply had it as out-right unkillable, which he thought to be shlocky. Agree, the Marines are in a desperate situation and get their asses handed to them because of the Aliens' ingenuity and ability to overcome obstacles. But really, take the Aliens and compare them to any battle scene in an epic movie, Kingdom of Heaven, Braveheart etc - there isn't a single human in these films who doesn't stop on the battlefield and say, "Shit, these enemies have weapons that can hurt me. I'm pretty stupid for doing this." Historically speaking, I don't think there's been many battles where one combatant hasn't engaged another without the full knowledge that he can be harmed or killed in return. Considering the rarity of no-tech combatants outright defeating armed enemies, I'd consider the fact that the Aliens did quite well [and that's ignoring the fact that they initially opt for subterfuge and stealth when advancing in Operations].

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 08:39:11 PM by Valaquen »

SPECIAL FORCES
Feb 06, 2011, 08:41:12 PM
Reply #438 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:41:12 PM
come on man...you know what i mean....the 1st film made you feel that the alien is invincible and not just an animal as in the 2nd one....i think you know what im trying to say.
As for the marines i think that its good they died so fast....made you feel shocked,made you feel they are in a desperate situation.
Of course I know what you mean, just showing the silly dichotomy between some groups. Never saw the original Alien as invincible, it screamed and panicked when hit by gas and was bitch-speared out the rear of the ship. O'Bannon meant for it to be a 'natural animal', the entire reason it was given acid blood was to dissuade people from shooting and killing it, otherwise, they would have simply had it as out-right unkillable, which he thought to be shlocky. Agree, the Marines are in a desperate situation and get their asses handed to them because of the Aliens' ingenuity and ability to overcome obstacles.

Well yes but Aliens made you understand that with a simple rifle you could easily kill 5-6 aliens if you had a clear shot.....
btw i dont like the fact Ripley in the scene were she meets the queen kills 3-4 aliens so easy.
I know its a small detail but i saw the movie just recently and just remembered it.


Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 08:45:36 PM
Reply #439 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:45:36 PM
Well yes but Aliens made you understand that with a simple rifle you could easily kill 5-6 aliens if you had a clear shot.....
btw i dont like the fact Ripley in the scene were she meets the queen kills 3-4 aliens so easy.
I know its a small detail but i saw the movie just recently and just remembered it.
So you take out a few Aliens, so what? O'Bannon already said [as I quoted on the last page] that the Alien was never intended to be invincible or unstoppable. The rest make sure you get impregnated regardless. That's what happends in war. There are losses on both sides, but the victor is still a victor. Were you annoyed when Ripley blew the Alien away with a speargun? Anyone can take a weapon and blow away someone stronger and faster than them, but that doesn't make the target any weaker than the shooter. And again, considering that the Aliens overcame their limitations and annihilate the marines ...


Sharp Sticks
Feb 06, 2011, 08:46:36 PM
Reply #440 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:46:36 PM
Well yes but Aliens made you understand that with a simple rifle you could easily kill 5-6 aliens if you had a clear shot.....

And you'll still die like a bitch, in unspeakable agony, with your forehead cored out. That is, unless you swallow a grenade first or happen to be the protagonist of a major film franchise.


SPECIAL FORCES
Feb 06, 2011, 08:51:53 PM
Reply #441 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:51:53 PM
Guys hold your horses i love the movie aliens almost the same as the first one....but dont tell me you were frightened the same way each time an alien appeared like the way you were in the 1 movie each time Kane's son appeared.


Sharp Sticks
Feb 06, 2011, 08:57:05 PM
Reply #442 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:57:05 PM
Of course not. Because Alien and Aliens are two completely different types of films. To rate Aliens based on the fright factor is about as fair as rating Alien based on how many 'f**k yeah' moments there were. It does them both a disservice.


Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 08:57:11 PM
Reply #443 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:57:11 PM
Guys hold your horses i love the movie aliens almost the same as the first one....but dont tell me you were frightened the same way each time an alien appeared like the way you were in the 1 movie each time Kane's son appeared.
We're not meaning to accuse you of disliking it, but, I don't know about Sticks, but I feel that the whole 'but Aliens die!' attitude to be silly. And Aliens had my knuckles white, what's not so terrifying about a relentless wall of death that gets over your head and under your feet; that can't be deterred by firepower and will wreak the most horrific death upon you imaginable where you play the part of a living womb? Kane's Son was a slower, graceful being because he had the oppurtunity to be so. Had the Aliens in the sequel acted in a such a way then then they wouldn't have gotten past the colonists, nevermind the marines. Again, it's the themes of the two movies; curious, Lovecraftian horror and heart-shattering terror, [though I've seen Ridley twice deny that Alien was horror, and was instead a 'terror' film]. You can't apply one to the other and I'd hate to see one of the two rehashed in any way. In with Prometheus, I say. it's about time.


DoomRulz
Feb 06, 2011, 08:59:35 PM
Reply #444 on: Feb 06, 2011, 08:59:35 PM
That's exactly my point. The Alien was a very unique creature and was something that no one had ever seen before. It had a new look to it, behaved in a very odd manner, and was just plain scary. Cameron did the exact the opposite and made it into every space alien we've seen a hundred times before.

I don't normally do this, but SiL said it best in an older thread. He makes the point rather clear.

In 1979, we had a psychosexual biomechanical nightmare the likes of which the world had never seen. We had something that was alien. Incomprehensible. It acted in mysterious ways, you couldn't pin a behaviour on it. Its mannerisms and actions were a perversion of humanity and nature. There's even implied rape, or at the very least, some form of horrific mutilation never seen since.

In 1986, oh wait, it's a giant f**king termite.

The Alien's personality was completely changed. It went from dark and mysterious, to a terrestrial insect on steroids. It went from something creepy and unknown, to cannon fodder. It became the ants from Them!. It became the freakin' antithesis of what the original filmmakers had set out to achieve. Where once they tried to make something unique, Cameron set out to make something mundane and derivative.

If they didn't want to explore the creature further, then don't make a sequel, which was gonna be done regardless [with marines and loadsa Aliens a Giler/Hill mandate, by the by]. If they wanted another singular floating Alien, then remake or create a derivative sequel to the first. If you go to see a sequel to a film you're either going to get an exploration of the wider universe or a derivative rehash [and being a sequel, you should be well aware of what you're paying for]. Egg-morph aside, Cameron followed on from what his predeccesors set down, and every single one of them to a T was pleased with what he done. Any 'bah! the Alien's been disrespected!' feelings come solely from fans and honestly, I care more for the feelings of the film-makers than for the sea of subjectivism and ignorance you can find in fan-circles.

'I was stuck on one point; once they got the thing on the spaceship, I wanted to avoid the cliche of bullets bouncing off of it: the indestructible monster, I mean, that's the ancient cliche, right? "You can't stop it, bullets won't stop it." Not at all. I wanted the thing to be, in every respect, a natural animal, which means, yes, if you shoot it, it'll die.'
Dan O'Bannon.


'Once I had gotten the Alien inside the ship, I encountered a narrative problem, namely, why didn't they just kill the thing? ... Generations of writers before me had resorted to, "Bullets won't stop it!" which is, of course, the big gest groaner of all time. Bullets will stop anything ... Though deadly, the critter was as vulnerable as any other animal to having holes drilled in it.'
Dan O'Bannon.


Remembering of course, that the original Alien screamed like a bitch when sprayed by hot air in the Narcissus and was blasted by a speargun. I reckon high velocity, caseless, 1200RPM death dealers will leave a scratch.

EDIT: I think that, in the wake of Halo and the Starship Troopers movie, may here have either forgotten or are too young to recall that space marines vs a horde of vicious Aliens had rarely, if ever, been put to film before.

I think you're misreading fans' frustration. No one's saying the Alien is invincible or invulnerable to conventional forms of dying. The problem was that in Aliens, the creature started to behave in a manner that wasn't consistent with the mystery we got in the first film. It just became a generic space monster like the ones before it.

The reason they couldn't kill it on the Nostromo was simply because the crew didn't really have the means to. Why would a mining ship have firearms?

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 09:01:19 PM by DoomRulz »

Sharp Sticks
Feb 06, 2011, 09:00:13 PM
Reply #445 on: Feb 06, 2011, 09:00:13 PM
We're not meaning to accuse you of disliking it, but, I don't know about Sticks, but I feel that the whole 'but Aliens die!' attitude to be silly. And Aliens had my knuckles white, what's not so terrifying about a relentless wall of death that gets over your head and under your feet; that can't be deterred by firepower and will wreak the most horrific death upon you imaginable where you play the part of a living womb? Kane's Son was a slower, graceful being because he had the oppurtunity to be so. Had the Aliens in the sequel acted in a such a way then then they wouldn't have gotten past the colonists, nevermind the marines. Again, it's the themes of the two movies; curious, Lovecraftian horror and heart-shattering terror, [though I've seen Ridley twice deny that Alien was horror, and was instead a 'terror' film]. You can't apply one to the other and I'd hate to see one of the two rehashed in any way. In with Prometheus, I say. it's about time.

Trust me Val, I'm with you on every point.

The reason they couldn't kill it on the Nostromo was simply because the crew didn't really have the means to. Why would a mining ship have firearms?

They did have guns. They show up in a couple scenes on the table, and in production photos. They were just smart enough not to use them.

That was the whole point of acid for blood.

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 09:03:24 PM by Sharp Sticks »

Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 09:04:20 PM
Reply #446 on: Feb 06, 2011, 09:04:20 PM
The reason they couldn't kill it on the Nostromo was simply because the crew didn't really have the means to. Why would a mining ship have firearms?

They did have guns. They show up in a couple scenes on the table, and in production photos. They were just smart enough not to use them.

That was the whole point of acid for blood.
Yup, the Nostromo crew did have guns. Kanes wields one in a cut scene in the egg silo. I have a photo of their guns somewhere.

EDIT: Guns!



« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 09:06:49 PM by Valaquen »

Gash
Feb 06, 2011, 09:07:31 PM
Reply #447 on: Feb 06, 2011, 09:07:31 PM
I know it might be implied that the aliens overcome obstacles to defeat the marines but last time I watched Aliens I was struck that it's really the marines incompetence that's their downfall. The ill disciplined amongst them take inappropriate weapons into the cocoon/reactor area, start blasting indiscriminately, spraying acid over their colleagues and getting blown up by their own grenades. Later when they think they've sealed themselves in the colony they forget about the crawlspace in the ceiling. It all makes for effective set pieces, and is probably not far from reality if a bunch of cocky marines found themselves facing a perceived less advanced foe (hence the Vietnam analogies), but I'm not convinced it makes the aliens look like they have some unfathomable intelligence behind their motives.

And in truth it's probably only the attack on Lambert, and mystery of the Space Jockey that hints at an underlying intelligence in the original film. Plus Ash's final remarks in the novelisation. But these few things seem to make a huge difference in perception. To me at least.

Also, just interpretation choices. Aliens springing through the air don't look as terrifying as that slow glide towards Lambert.

It's very hard to put it down to one thing, it's not just the bug/queen debate, all I know is that there is something in the Aliens interpretation that hasn't captured the essence of Kane's Son. Maybe it's as simple as the fact that Kane's Son had a fizzing sound, like it brought the air alive with menace and a mounting tension that had to snap.

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 09:13:08 PM by Gash »

SPECIAL FORCES
Feb 06, 2011, 09:09:14 PM
Reply #448 on: Feb 06, 2011, 09:09:14 PM
Im not trying to argue about the alien physiology or how powerful they are ect.
Im just saying from a movie viewer perspective who knows nothing about the creature.
Of course now i know all about the alien universe,i play the games,read ect.
But try to imagine a guy that knows nothing.
Im sure he will get the idea too that the alien creatures in alien 2 seem a little bit less menacing than the 1st alien
not because they are not badass or strong but because of the script they face trained marines with guns.
In the 1st movie everytime the alien appeared you were like ''OMG THEY ARE f**kED''
but in aliens it was their number that made you feel the marines are f**ked.
I cant explain it otherwise...i know these are 2 different movies but thats Cameron's choice to go from horror to horror-action.
I just try to say how the alien is been viewed in each movie.


***i respect you both guys i just state my opinion

« Last Edit: Feb 06, 2011, 09:13:01 PM by prodigy211 »

Valaquen
Feb 06, 2011, 09:13:00 PM
Reply #449 on: Feb 06, 2011, 09:13:00 PM
I know it might be implied that the aliens overcome obstacles to defeat the marines but last time I watched Aliens I was struck that it's really the marines incompetence that's their downfall. The ill disciplined amongst them take inappropriate weapons into the cocoon/reactor area, start blasting indiscriminately, spraying acid over their colleagues and getting blown up by their own grenades. Later when they think they've sealed themselves in the colony they forget about the crawlspace in the ceiling. It all makes for effective set pieces, and is probably not far from reality if a bunch of cocky marines found themselves facing a perceived less advanced foe (hence the Vietnam analogies), but I'm not convinced it makes the aliens look like they have some unfathomable intelligence behind their motives.

And in truth it's probably only the attack on Lambert, and mystery of the Space Jockey that hints at an underlying intelligence in the original film. Plus Ash's final remarks in the novelisation. But these few things seem to make a huge difference in perception. To me at least.

Also, just interpretation choices. Aliens springing through the air don't look as terrifying as that slow glide towards Lambert.

It's very hard to put it down to one thing, it's not just the bug/queen debate, all I know is that there is something in the Aliens interpretation that hasn't captured the essence of Kane's Son. Maybe it's a simple as the fact that Kane's Son had a fizzing sound, like it brought the air alive with menace and a mounting tension that had to snap.
I think that's tantamount to saying that Brett/Dallas etc died because they didn't know what they were dealing with. Brett died because he couldn't move his ass out of the way, Dallas because he was [bravely] foolish, Parker and Lambert because they couldn't bring themselves to move, and such. Again that's the horror aspect. They almost literally don't know what they're looking at, and the marines are likewise overconfident. "They're animals, man!" Oh no! They find that out the hard way. Kane's Son did have some excellent sound going on though, the heart beat is a subtle clue to its presence.


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube RSS Feed