Which Aliens film made you look forward to a sequel the most?

Started by Perfect-Organism, Nov 04, 2018, 11:55:36 PM

Which Aliens film made you look forward to a sequel the most?

Alien
Aliens
Alien 3
Alien Resurrection
Prometheus
Alien Covenant
Alien vs Predator
Aliens vs Predator Requiem
Author
Which Aliens film made you look forward to a sequel the most? (Read 12,165 times)

The Old One

The Old One

#105
No.

Voodoo Magic

For Educational Purposes.
Terminator Vault- Page 96-97

How Arnold was the one who got Cameron to flesh out a sequel story, bringing it up every time they met. How they brainstormed ideas about T2 taking place entirely in the Future War, introducing a female Terminator, introducing two new Arnold Terminators bad and good, bringing Kyle back, and so on.




The Old One

The Old One

#107
Fair enough, I had a different interpretation from the James Cameron quote listed previously.
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

Perfect-Organism

Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
Fair enough, I had a different interpretation from the James Cameron quote listed previously.
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)

2 of the Alien films have an outcome which is positive for the main heroine.  It is obvious that James Cameron came in with a reverence and respect for the first film.  The third film takes the established tone of the films and destroys it, effectively terminating the forward momentum of the series.  As a result, we have Alien: Resurrection which in a way retcons Alien 3 by bringing Ripley back to life in some strange way.  The other film attempts involve silly monster vs. monster films (AVP, AVP:R) and the token prequels.  But any forward momentum to continue the story going forward?  Non-existent.  For over 2 decades already.

Alien 3 was the exception to the style of the series and derailed the franchise.  Mind you, I still love Alien 3 as some sort of alternate uber-dark film, but a better sequel to Aliens will hopefully be done soon.   :-*

Necronomicon II


The Old One

The Old One

#110
@Perfect-Organism


Quote from: The Old One on May 28, 2018, 06:40:00 AM
Check out my review on The Cold Forge.

But the simple fact is good stuff gets discussed less often, rare is the discussion of the places the Alien universe could go with fantastic content coming out at the minute in Tristan Jones work on Defiance- which should've, like Dead Orbit been entirely penned by the one artist. For some reason the merits of this new stuff seems to be mostly ignored in favour regurgitation of the Neill Blomkamp topic.

That's why I react like someone bit me on the arm whenever, an alternative A3 is brought up because the discussion ends up inevitably being a never ending blackhole of "Hicks and Newt tho..."
Alien Theory's YT channel is currently disappointingly fuelling that fire with the abysmal "Welcome to ERF" saga at the moment, rather than literally anything else.

Quote from: The Old One on Nov 11, 2018, 12:48:10 AM
Until Ridley Scott kicks the bucket, or Sigourney Weaver does.

I think it's disingenuous to say that all Neill wanted was Powerloaders,
but I will say that I believe he doesn't understand the series
and that from the ideas he presented- what he did want was trite.

I think neither Scott or Blomkamp hit the nail on the head, Scott in writers he's hired or
the Alien being of the cosmic unknown inherently.
But he gets that it's an unrelenting rape monster in a world that's utterly f**ked where the company
can and will exploit you.
You can't always get a happy ending, that requires the same as in IRL- luck and perseverance.

& I think he was far closer to the mark than N.B's track record indicates (In writing, directing, concept)
N.B would've been.

Quote from: The Old One on Jan 06, 2019, 09:18:04 PM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jan 06, 2019, 08:28:45 AM
Quote from: The Old One on Jan 06, 2019, 07:27:12 AM
No, I believe the AC is genuinely superior for a number of reasons-

I want a comprehensive list.

Spoiler

Seeing Clemens walk alone, immediately establishes him as a loner to the audience-
even amongst "his own people" -the imagery of Ripley covered in oil and insects also;
immediately defines both the idea that nothing is sacred here and she's covered in insects.
It's beautiful cinematography. Beautiful location establishment. Heroic.

Seeing Andrews type reflected in the monitor both establishes him as an authority figure
and the overseer before he utters a word.
The ADR works better here with the overhead shot of the EEV,
because now it makes sense that what
Frank says sounds like it's coming from a distance;
rather than the camera being right up in his face.

(I know the EEV is upside down in this shot, but I'm going to say it doesn't matter
as it's honestly hard to tell each side from the other as they lack many defining features,
especially when covered in debris.)

As for the rest of the opening, I just like it better because it's kinder to Newt-
it means that we're on the same page regarding Newt with Ripley because
Clemens could be telling the truth about her drowning in her cryotube unawares.
(Additionally, personally: I prefer to think he is.)
(The shots of Bishop and Hicks are rad too.)

The message confirmation- (I don't think it's in the theatrical release)
is a minor detail that establishes that these aren't just the facility's
private records but that a link with a company or government exists.

No "Who would do this to a dog?"
Almost tongue-in cheek line.
Otherwise I must conclude the dog version's superior-
if only for the shot of the dog barking at the Facehugger.
(And the fact the opening shows a regular Facehugger
on REDACTED's face, it's simpler to conclude that there
are two stowaway Facehuggers. With the Egg shot omitted.)


"Was she your Daughter?"

"No."

I think is also particularly poignant and worth keeping,
because it adds the additional layer of the idea-
that not only is Ripley grieving but she isn't entitled to her grief;
which makes sense in the following scene when Kevin asks
"What is she doing?" Because Ripley's behaviour is strange
if she was Newt's mother, but now additionally so to Clemens
as he is aware she's not in-fact her mother.
Which adds another layer to their interactions and 
Clemens' reluctance in the autopsy.

In this version where Golic has a pivotal role to play;
The scene between Rains, Boggs, Golic and Dillon is important.
Not for Rains and Boggs' sake, although this scene certainly
gives you better insight into their personalities through their
excellent naturalistic performances- but for Dillon and Golic.
It establishes for the latter two a relationship, despite
the fact Dillon is clearly the leader- Golic makes people
uneasy to the point they both openly question his sanity.
Dillon defends Golic, even patting him on the shoulder
as he leaves. This is setup for Golic's "arc" in the story,
importantly it also establishes Dillon's care for Golic so
the "He's never lied to me! He's crazy, he's a fool but he's not a liar!"
doesn't come out of nowhere.

"As I thought, Mr. Aaron. As I thought."  "You called it, sir."
Not immensely important, but good for character.

"Why we're waiting for God to return- and raise his servants to redemption."
I think this and it's musical cue is particularly important, because
it's prefaced with "What are you waiting for?" Ripley's used to rape and death-
by this point, but Dillon shows that's not all he is.
(I'd sound pretentious if I rambled on any longer about this conversation,
suffice to say; I think it highlights the themes of the film in an important way.)

"I've been out here a long time."
"So have I."
Reciprocation people, important for any relationship.  ;D

"I think you owe me an answer. Being in my bed's got nothing to do with it."
Further establishes Clemens as a good, decent person- and intelligent.
Which is good because it means his demise has extra sting.
For both Ripley and the audience.
This is someone she could've opened up to and the moment she dies-
or is about to "You first." The Alien takes that from her, like it takes everything.

"Light a candle for Murphy."
Murphy being good to Golic is a nice little additional detail that adds to his estrangement.

"You screw with me one more time I'll cut you in half."
This is an interesting addition, not for the above quoted line as that's in both versions-
But for the idea that Andrews doesn't want Aaron to see the dissention in the ranks.
Or for the prisoners to know that the relationship between Clemens and Andrews is tepid at best.
Further reinforcing "I don't want ripples in the water." Not for anyone's safety but his own.
Not including Aaron in on the conversation is an indication of why Aaron has the warped view
of Andrews as a good man that he does, when to me this calls into question Andrew's trustworthiness.

"She told me she was part of a combat unit that came to grief, beyond that I assume it's all classified. I haven't pressed her for more."
It's cool that the events of Aliens are both acknowledged and an indication of some real trust Ripley has with Clemens.
Or trust issues depending upon what way you interpret that. (Maybe I just like the line on this one lol.)

"CIGARETTES!"
(Setup)

Eric dropping the plates, sets up that he's prone to break down under pressure-
just like he does when he sets the piston off prematurely later on.
I also like, just personally that Golic is found doing something mundane.
It echoes a serial killer's derangement of treating their acts as though it were any other day.

The tension is much, much superior with the extended version of the Dragon sneaking up
on Clemens and Ripley, with Golic squirming in fear.

"Magnificent." (This is a good, short homage to "Perfect Organism" IMO-
Showing that awe has completely overthrown fear in Golic's mind.)

The shot of the inside of the vent, covered in blood-
whilist Jude mops up is not only a fantastic shot but
is a direct through line to much of the cinematography
and language of the film. The prisoners, the humans-
generally are always filmed from below.
Yet Ripley and the Alien fall from the sky,
with the first three times (Boggs and Rains) Golic,
the Clemens, then Andrews- the Alien descends
from above, from above the dirty existence of the prisoners.

The film's visual language is strengthened by this shot.
And it leads perfectly into what's literally being said;
"The apocalypse is upon us! Let us be ready!
Let your mercy be just!"

"Sounds good to me."
Morse is blaming Ripley, and I think this is good insight
on her state of mind because it shows that maybe she
does blame herself, for the deaths of everyone she couldn't save.
In this way "Morse... Why don't you shut the f**k up?"
Has more poignancy because IMO- he's not just speaking to Morse-
but also Ripley, mirroring later on when Ripley wants to die
but Dillon refuses to let her, because unless both Aliens are dead;
her sacrifice would be totally in vain and bullshit-
then it's more suicide than sacrifice.

Arthur and Troy checking through batteries.
"Nothing much works here!"
"No video surveillance, no f**king ice-cream!"
(I imagine this is one of the repetitions SM refers to but, I must say;
show don't tell is a rule of film and this scene shows.)

The extra footage of the quinitricetyline plan makes sense,
because in this version it actually has a payoff.

More Dillon caring for Ripley in this version, that's good-
not only does it reinforce the relationship between them
and endear us to Dillon but it's a nice little hint at the "reveal."

Visually there's a fantastic addition in that Ripley
helps two of the inmates that attempted to rape her,
Junior whom we can distinguish from his teardrop tattoo
most importantly, sees Ripley doing something for her fellow
man regardless of what happened earlier.
This with guilt, obviously inspires him to take the action he does
and give his life for those of his fellow man.


"Oh Jesus, this makes ten."
Is removed and rightfully so,
I don't believe Dillon would say this
even if the operation was a failure.

The speech honouring them is much more fitting.
For Dillon's character and the bittersweet note
that this sequence ends on.

It's also worth noting that the conversation here
where Aaron doesn't believe in or respect the beliefs
of the prisoners, and Aaron leaving the prisoner
he was with to burn- is part of Aaron's arc
that leads him from "A Company man" to hitting
Michael Bishop over the back of the head with a wrench.

As well as the W-Y transmission's introduction
as foremost the new main problem.
"Permission denied."
Importantly confirms W-Y's intentions to the audience
and the characters.


"No more cigarettes for you."
(CIGARETTES payoff.)
The influence of the Alien,
has completely overthrown Golic's reason at this point,
the film even infers this visually with a reference to a horror classic;
Bela Lugosi's Dracula as Golic's eyes are highlighted before he's dispatched.
f**king fantastic.

"Dillon we've got a teeny weeny problem..."

Then importantly:
Morse's failure to contain Golic is addressed-
as it logically would be.
"Well, I'm out of ideas!"
With Ripley's "morning sickness" cropping up
one final time, third time's the charm.

Ripley disappears, disillusioned-
She finds out about the Queen.

Our heroes are now at their lowest point.
(Which wouldn't have happened had sacrifices not been made
and the creature not been captured in the first place.)
Not only has Ripley lost everyone close to her,
the Alien is loose again and there's two ticking time bombs-
W-Y and the one inside her chest.

Morse's epiphany;
When he remembers the Alien is afraid of fire.
Let's make it to the furnace.
I believe this is important because it's as The Fifth Element would say;
A little light of life, it's a moment of hope the film desperately needs.
The descent between the prisoners reminds me of the
"Parker. Shut up!" scene in Alien, in regards to how they
could possibly kill the Alien. You could take it or leave it.
But I wouldn't leave it.

"I was violated. And now I get to be mother of the year."
In addition to what I said earlier on this scene,
it raises the stakes because the implication is that
if this thing gets off Fiorina 161- not Earth,
not humanity, but all life, is at stake-
"wipe out the whole universe" & I believe it,
because this is Sigourney Weaver's best performance.

"This is as good a place as any to take our first steps to Heaven".
The extended speech and score is superior, no explanation required.

(The shot of Aaron looking in the mirror should've stayed.)
For obvious character arc reasons.

Before the chase & bait begins,
there's several tiny scenes showing how the different prisoners
react to their situation, I think that's fairly appropriate-
to get you aqquainted with where everyone is in the tunnels.
Rather than one scene of David criticising the plan.
Although- why not both?

"I think I've found Vincent!"
Speaks for itself doesn't it? lol
Mysterious Mark Vincent.

"Improvising!"
Not necessary but love this scene.
Especially Ripley's reaction.

"And then it's over."
"I'm not a droid!"
"No pictures!"
Included for obvious reasons.

I believe Ripley would pause for contemplation,
so I prefer her death in the AC-
although I think the "You're crazy." Line is... eh.

No chestburster
but no bad slo-mo.
More graceful fall in a cross position.
In tune with the film's thematics.

There you go.
[close]


Quote from: The Old One on May 29, 2018, 03:09:04 AM
An Aliens inspired film, I'd be all for- just not with Sigourney Weaver or Michael Biehn.

I think it would be better if we just established new characters, to me Alien should be like an ongoing anthology series where we don't focus on one group of people/character endlessly surviving the Alien.
The main attraction being that the creative team is different enough to be distinct for each entry.
Think how different Thor Ragnarok is from the Winter Soldier but they both are excellent in their own right.
As I would argue everyone can agree Alien and Aliens are majorly different but both excellent.

They can still do the different stuff, the problem with the Alien films since 1997+ isn't that they haven't got Ellen Ripley but that they aren't good films in their own right. It's the same as the Ridley Scott "The Alien is cooked." Discussion; it's not the ideas but their execution.

Quote from: The Old One on Jan 05, 2019, 06:36:05 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jan 05, 2019, 02:29:42 PM
Quote from: The Old One on Jan 05, 2019, 01:06:42 AM
The discussion's gone on over and over at this point for so long;
that it actually has me in the headspace of wondering,
when the inevitable comes and Sigourney Weaver
passes away will this discussion end?

If that sad day should come,
will you feel proud of yourself for assisting in the prevention effort of us getting one more great Aliens film with Ripley? 
Look in the mirror on that day and say Well Done!

I'd be happy Alien³ wasn't retconned out of continuity for some family friendly trite.
But sad Sigourney Weaver had to die to make it a certainty it'll never happen.

Voodoo Magic

Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

So now, instead of comparing the general consensus good films of the franchise (The Terminator & T2 vs Alien & Aliens), your new comparison conveniently compares the first two Terminator films to the first three Alien films?  And your new phantom rule is because the first two Terminator films are directed by the same person with a similar crew, they are not comparable to the first three Alien films, all while leaving out the third Terminator film that had a different director and crew?

This was never a debate of which franchise has the greater consistency of tone, something where using the same director and crew would definitely have bearing on. Huggsy's statement is the debate, where he said "This is what separates the Alien franchise from Terminator and everything else. Where the good guys win, and everybody feels happy."  In this debate, using the same director or crew or not has 0% bearing on the happy ending argument, nor does it disqualify the comparison.

Now that it has been shown T1 and T3 ends bleakly, you just keep moving the goalpost. They end with hope! Okay all of them didn't, but the first film was a dress rehearsal! It was a part one! It wasn't?  Well, they used the same director and some crew for two films so it doesn't count!  I just think this is a case of Huggsy clearly not thinking a statement through.  Heck, I've been guilty of that. :)

Necronomicon II


Rankles75

Rankles75

#113
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 29, 2019, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

So now, instead of comparing the general consensus good films of the franchise (The Terminator & T2 vs Alien & Aliens), your new comparison conveniently compares the first two Terminator films to the first three Alien films?  And your new phantom rule is because the first two Terminator films are directed by the same person with a similar crew, they are not comparable to the first three Alien films, all while leaving out the third Terminator film that had a different director and crew?

This was never a debate of which franchise has the greater consistency of tone, something where using the same director and crew would definitely have bearing on. Huggsy's statement is the debate, where he said "This is what separates the Alien franchise from Terminator and everything else. Where the good guys win, and everybody feels happy."  In this debate, using the same director or crew or not has 0% bearing on the happy ending argument, nor does it disqualify the comparison.

Now that it has been shown T1 and T3 ends bleakly, you just keep moving the goalpost. They end with hope! Okay all of them didn't, but the first film was a dress rehearsal! It was a part one! It wasn't?  Well, they used the same director and some crew for two films so it doesn't count!  I just think this is a case of Huggsy clearly not thinking a statement through.  Heck, I've been guilty of that. :)

There's no point trying to argue with The Old One. She cant be bargained with, she can't be reasoned with, she doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and she absolutely will not stop...EVER, untill you agree with her...

Voodoo Magic

Quote from: Rankles75 on Jan 29, 2019, 03:19:57 PM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 29, 2019, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

So now, instead of comparing the general consensus good films of the franchise (The Terminator & T2 vs Alien & Aliens), your new comparison conveniently compares the first two Terminator films to the first three Alien films?  And your new phantom rule is because the first two Terminator films are directed by the same person with a similar crew, they are not comparable to the first three Alien films, all while leaving out the third Terminator film that had a different director and crew?

This was never a debate of which franchise has the greater consistency of tone, something where using the same director and crew would definitely have bearing on. Huggsy's statement is the debate, where he said "This is what separates the Alien franchise from Terminator and everything else. Where the good guys win, and everybody feels happy."  In this debate, using the same director or crew or not has 0% bearing on the happy ending argument, nor does it disqualify the comparison.

Now that it has been shown T1 and T3 ends bleakly, you just keep moving the goalpost. They end with hope! Okay all of them didn't, but the first film was a dress rehearsal! It was a part one! It wasn't?  Well, they used the same director and some crew for two films so it doesn't count!  I just think this is a case of Huggsy clearly not thinking a statement through.  Heck, I've been guilty of that. :)

There's no point trying to argue with The Old One. He cant be bargained with, he can't be reasoned with, he doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and he absolutely will not stop...EVER, untill you agree with him...

It's her... but I do like the way how you packaged your point. ;D

Rankles75

Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 29, 2019, 03:35:52 PM
Quote from: Rankles75 on Jan 29, 2019, 03:19:57 PM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 29, 2019, 01:48:22 PM
Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

So now, instead of comparing the general consensus good films of the franchise (The Terminator & T2 vs Alien & Aliens), your new comparison conveniently compares the first two Terminator films to the first three Alien films?  And your new phantom rule is because the first two Terminator films are directed by the same person with a similar crew, they are not comparable to the first three Alien films, all while leaving out the third Terminator film that had a different director and crew?

This was never a debate of which franchise has the greater consistency of tone, something where using the same director and crew would definitely have bearing on. Huggsy's statement is the debate, where he said "This is what separates the Alien franchise from Terminator and everything else. Where the good guys win, and everybody feels happy."  In this debate, using the same director or crew or not has 0% bearing on the happy ending argument, nor does it disqualify the comparison.

Now that it has been shown T1 and T3 ends bleakly, you just keep moving the goalpost. They end with hope! Okay all of them didn't, but the first film was a dress rehearsal! It was a part one! It wasn't?  Well, they used the same director and some crew for two films so it doesn't count!  I just think this is a case of Huggsy clearly not thinking a statement through.  Heck, I've been guilty of that. :)

There's no point trying to argue with The Old One. He cant be bargained with, he can't be reasoned with, he doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and he absolutely will not stop...EVER, untill you agree with him...

It's her... but I do like the way how you packaged your point. ;D

Really? Well shut my mouth. Always had TOO down as a stuffy 50 year old professor type, don't really know why. Edited for accuracy...

Necronomicon II

Necronomicon II

#116
Quote from: Huggs on Jan 27, 2019, 11:36:17 PM
1. I think Aliens is a far better Cameron movie than anything he'd make nowadays, but it's still a Cameron movie. If he didn't like Alien 3, that makes me appreciate it even more. He liked Terminator Genisys, he made Avatar, and (in my opinion) butchered Titanic for the sake of money. I could care less what he thinks about it.

2. Fox and their judgment have been very much questionable. Predators 2010 must've been some kind of fluke, because just about everything since the early 90's has been (in my opinion) pretty rough. AVP 1&2, Resurrection, The Scott Prequels, Predators and The Predator. For many people, It's been a crap-fest. This latest effort with The Predator was just another nail in an already rotting coffin.

3. I agree that it's enough with the Ripleys. Sigourney is not the Arnold Terminator, and even that needed to stop some time ago. There are only so many times you should be able to go up against these things and live. Giving her superpowers was bad enough. I understand that a paycheck's a paycheck, but for goodness sake they're not called Ripley, Ripleys, and Ripley 3. No more than Hammond is the focus of Jurassic Park or Hooper the focus of Jaws. The focus is the Shark, the Dinosaur, the Alien. These are the constants. They kill the characters and either they or their spawn somehow survive to wreak havoc another day.

4. Alien 3 can't be really be considered a franchise killer when that's probably where the franchise was meant to end in the first place. Everything went off the rails with Resurrection because there was nowhere else to logically go. Ripley was dead, LV-426 was nuked, the eggs and derelict likely destroyed and the last surviving specimen (to Ripley's knowledge) died with her. Magically reproducing them both from samples in Resurrection was a colossal stretch of the imagination. But Alien 3? I don't believe so.

Alien 3 was not the grandiose sequel to Cameron's movie that people wanted. I get that. It took Cameron's narrative and smashed it against the rocks. But I see and respect what it did and what it stood for. It didn't give people what they wanted, it gave them what was proper according to the established narrative. This was a xenomorph problem. There would be no storybook endings, no new families, no new life. Ripley was leaving purgatory and ascending to heaven, and was snatched back down into the pits of hell. She was broken in every possible way, and she made her peace with the inevitability of it all. There is no surviving them. Nobody lives, not for long.

Her fate was dark and cold and cruel in every possible way that it could be. This is what separates the Alien franchise from Terminator and everything else. Where the good guys win, and everybody feels happy. Cameron did a cool thing, but he did what he was supposed to do as a director, which was to make a successful movie that attracted attention and money by embracing spectacle, clichés and a feel good ending.

Fincher made an Alien movie. He knew this isn't a big/loud thing. It's an intimate affair. It's close quarters body horror with sexual connotations.

This is Alien. This is the Giger Beast. You're gonna suffer, then you're gonna die.

That's how it ended for everyone else, and that's the only way it could ever end for Ripley.

Alien 3 a franchise killer? I think not. It was merely the logical and inevitable end to a character arc.

Devin Faraci was/is a garbage human but he wrote some solid pieces from time to time, fans hardly ever bring up the aids allegory element in Alien 3 -  https://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/02/19/why-newt-and-hicks-had-to-die-in-alien-3


"If we failed to do one thing it was to take people out of their everyday life. Actually, my dentist, as he was drilling my teeth, was giving me his thesis on the things wrong with this film and he said, "You know, when you go out of this movie you haven't gotten away from AIDS, you haven't gotten away from the race riots, you haven't gotten away from your fear of other cultures.'"

"We failed to give people the broad, safe entertainment that, in the United States at least, they seem to want. They want to go to the cinema and get away from it all. We tried to bring it down to right here and now, to make a movie about 1990. If we had just gone out and done a shoot 'em up we would have cheapened the thing in the long run. Instead we did something weird and f**ked up out there. I just think in terms of the world boxoffice we may have chosen wrong." - David Fincher

Nah you chose right mate. ;D

The Old One

The Old One

#117
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Jan 29, 2019, 01:48:22 PM
...

Voodoo Magic...

Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
Fair enough, I had a different interpretation from the James Cameron quote listed previously.
I want to be clear though, I don't believe the two series are comparable.

One has one film-maker and mostly the one crew.
(The Terminator, T2: Judgment Day)

The other has three distinct film-makers, and three crews.
(Alien, Aliens, Alien³)
EDIT:
& Resurrection, four film-makers & crews.

Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Sep 23, 2018, 07:47:02 PM
Terminator movies post-JD aren't even interesting bad. They're just bland garbage.

At least the weaker post Trilogy Alien entries (barring the AVP films of course) are all conceptually interesting.

IMO, I would never include "Terminator ROTM" or "Salvation" when discussing the story of the series, because the first two are a complete package- by the same filmmaker, with the same protagonists; Sarah Connor & The Terminator.

I suppose Huggs statement is incorrect if you want to consider the term franchise literally, as in everything with the "Terminator" stamp on it not the stories people want to engage with. As in the Nightmare Asylum quote, yes I acknowledge the existence of the other sequels but I have no interest in engaging in discussion about them. Which I would with the "lesser" Alien films, Resurrection etc. I didn't acknowledge ROTM as part of the story, when making my argument, the same way I don't consider AVP 2004 part of the Alien story, franchise yes, story no. And I'd wager Huggs wouldn't thought of T3 or T4 or T5, when he made that statement for identical reasons.


/Anyway, can we move on?

Huggs

Quote from: Necronomicon II on Jan 29, 2019, 02:31:53 PM
What have I done.  :D

You?

Oh...uh...yeah. It was...uh...totally you.

(slowly backs into the darkness and disappears).

Voodoo Magic

Quote from: Huggs on Jan 29, 2019, 08:22:54 PM
Quote from: Necronomicon II on Jan 29, 2019, 02:31:53 PM
What have I done.  :D

You?

Oh...uh...yeah. It was...uh...totally you.

(slowly backs into the darkness and disappears).


Hey! Get back here troublemaker!!


Quote from: The Old One on Jan 29, 2019, 07:46:44 PM
IMO, I would never include "Terminator ROTM" or "Salvation" when discussing the story of the series, because the first two are a complete package- by the same filmmaker, with the same protagonists; Sarah Connor & The Terminator.

I suppose Huggs statement is incorrect if you want to consider the term franchise literally, as in everything with the "Terminator" stamp on it not the stories people want to engage with. As in the Nightmare Asylum quote, yes I acknowledge the existence of the other sequels but I have no interest in engaging in discussion about them. Which I would with the "lesser" Alien films, Resurrection etc. I didn't acknowledge ROTM as part of the story, when making my argument, the same way I don't consider AVP 2004 part of the Alien story, franchise yes, story no. And I'd wager Huggs wouldn't thought of T3 or T4 or T5, when he made that statement for identical reasons.


/Anyway, can we move on?


Not very fair I think to counter in a forum, then ask to move on.

To me, if the discussion includes Alien3, it's fair to include Terminator 3. Both have been critically maligned, Alien3 more maligned per Rotten Tomatoes. Both are not considered good films by general audiences. Both have the headline star returning, Arnold and Sigourney. Both continue the story of the main protagonist: Ripley, with Hicks and Newt dead in "Alien3". John Connor, with Sarah Connor dead of cancer in "Terminator 3". It might hurt to hear, but taking our personal preferences out of it, "Alien 3" and "Terminator 3" are very similar in many general ways.

Now who knows what Huggs meant - just the first two Terminator films or the entire franchise. He's remained suspiciously silent.  ;) But if Huggs just wants the compare the great films, i.e. "The Terminator" "T2" vs "Alien" "Aliens" and debate which have the unhappier endings, I'd go the following:

1. The Terminator *unhappiest*
2. Alien
3. Terminator 2
4. Aliens

Yeah, Ripley lost her "Alien" crew members, but at that point her Alien ordeal was won and over. End credits

On the otherhand, the Terminator killed Sarah's mother, killed Matt, killed her best friend Ginger,  killed the father of her baby, and she has to upend her life and get out of the country because a nuclear holocaust is coming, followed by a war with murderous human killing machines. Drives towards a massive storm. End credits.

I see it as no contest, which is why I got into the conversation in the first place. Cheers.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News