Alien3 Legacy Cut

[426Buddy]

Sweet, i just really dig the burster effect on that one.

[Project A34K]

Love the filter for the Alien vision as well. And thank you for listening to the community and leaving the crucial scene with Dillon. If all of the narrative changes you decided on are what's on your site now, this may be the definitive version of Alien 3 for a great number of fans!

Feedback is always welcome. I can't guarantee I'll always side with it, but I'll always be open to the argument. I've spent a lot of time on this, and while it's basically made to fit my own idealized version of the film (as much as that's possible), I really want the fan community to enjoy it as well. My reasons for cutting the Dillon line were short-sighted and superficial, and you guys made compelling arguments that convinced me. Since I've changed it back I haven't had any second thoughts.

Also yes, the Queen chest-burster is in this version, and the effects have been reworked in those shots too. If you want a sneak peek, there are stills on the 'Help Needed' section of the website.

FYI the 'Sound' section of the website just went live, and the site is now complete, for anyone who's curious. There are a couple of other changes detailed in there.

[BigDaddyJohn]

I really like the light effects in Alien vision.

[TC]

BTW, learning that OP's solution is to cut out frames and resync sound breaks my heart. Even a single frame lost makes a difference. Terry Rawlings will be spinning in his grave.

TC

Hundreds, shortening the film by seconds.

But the rest of the film is getting cut anyway, so not a great difference.

Yeah, I'm probably being a bit precious about it. Afterall, the project is an underground pirate exercise. In this context, complaining about the artistic integrity of the filmmakers being flouted (in this case, the film editor) is a bit silly.

So putting that aside, I just feel that the solution to the problem makes things worse, not better.

It's not the cumulative effect of all the frame deletions that bother me, it's that film editors place their cuts for every single shot with great precision. To say that trimming frames off (even single frames) makes no difference is just plain wrong.

TC

[SiL]

As an editor, if I realised the last frame of every other shot had an odd issue I wouldn't be precious about them getting cut.

Outside of the tedium of actually doing it, at least.

[TC]

As an editor, if I realised the last frame of every other shot had an odd issue I wouldn't be precious about them getting cut.

Outside of the tedium of actually doing it, at least.

I gave up editing a long time ago.

In fact, there was a time pre-90s when editing tape-based composite PAL, that the technology wouldn't guarantee single-frame precision for every cut because of the dreaded odd/even PAL-sequence requirement.

Basically, you had a 1-in-4 chance of your out-point and in-point being completely PAL compliant. If you were willing to allow a 180 degree-phase error (which meant a very slight picture jump horizontally) then you had a 1-in-2 chance of achieving the in- and out-points as desired. It was a nightmare for anyone like me who came from a film background and was used to cutting to exact frames.

Obviously, digital non-linear editing in the 90s and 2000s turned that around completely.

However, it's true that frame precision is not really an issue if the material is of a certain type: e.g. lots of wide shots cut together montage-style (maybe the film is a tourism promo featuring mainly picturesque landscapes - there was a time when I worked on lots of those).

But for up-tempo action and close-up dialogue scenes you really are trying to squeeze those cuts in at exact frames: either between or on camera/actor movements, and in close-up dialogue scenes you really have to watch out for eye-blinks and lip movements. Do you not find this the case?

TC

[SiL]

For dialogue I'm going more by feel, so it's rarely a matter of frame-by-frame precision. Yes, I'm trying to avoid blinking and facial twitches and lip movements that could draw attention to the cut, but that doesn't always require a great deal of precision.

My approach to editing is that there are many ways to work the material, and while I bring my creativity and sensibilities to the table and do what I feel works best, I don't often watch something back and think "This  is the only way this could've been cut and anyone who disagrees is wrong".

Unless it's a scene where the material was junk and it's only by the grace of my editing that it's comprehensible at all, but mercifully those situations are rare.

[BlueMarsalis79]

@Project A34K

Confused on how both of said philosophies intersect:

"The EEV hurls toward prison colony Fiorina 161 and breaks atmosphere, crashing into the ocean, causing catastrophic damage. A hole is torn in the side of the shuttle and it is flooded instantly. Hicks and Newt's cryotubes are damaged with the impact. Newt's floods in seconds and Hicks is crushed in the impact. Neither wake up or suffer for a moment."

Which I absolutely agree with given what Clemens tells Ripley, I prefer to think he tells the truth.

"The reveal shot of Hick's body is from the Assembly Cut, while the shots of Bishop and Newt are from the Theatrical Cut, although the information card that appears on screen for these shots has been removed. The audio has been reworked to fit the new cut and the sequence still ends with the shot of the oxen and the prisoners on the beach to suggest that's how they got the shuttle out of the water."



So... ?

[SM]

Newt definitely suffered.

[BlueMarsalis79]

*In the theatrical cut.

[razeak]

I can't completely root for Dillon based on his rehabilitation. That label doesn't absolve one of such a barbaric crime. Using violence and forcibly entering another human is such a horrific act.

The victim can never escape such a violation.

[BlueMarsalis79]

You do not "escape" such violation, you just overcome it.

But awful people can do good, I can root for awful people doing good, whilst not seeing them as absolved.

[SM]

I can't completely root for Dillon based on his rehabilitation. That label doesn't absolve one of such a barbaric crime. Using violence and forcibly entering another human is such a horrific act.

The victim can never escape such a violation.

Crimes plural.

But part of justice involves rehabilitation.

[Kradan]

I like Dillon. Of course there's no "but" about what he's done. He's very frank and upfront about it - he doesn't hide it and neither does he take any pride in it - I can respect that. He also protects Ripley from being gang-raped and stands up for her on several occasions which also contributes to me liking him

Also

Spoiler

We're all gonna die, the only question is when. This is as good a place as any to take your first steps to heaven. The only question is how you check out. Do you wanna go on your feet? Or on your f**king knees, begging? I ain't much for begging! Nobody ever gave me nothin! So I say f**k that thing! Let's fight it!

[close]

[SM]

I like Dillon. Of course there's no "but" about what he's done. He's very frank and upfront about it - he doesn't hide it and neither does he take any pride in it - I can respect that. He also protects Ripley from being gang-raped and stands up for her on several occasions which also contributes to me liking him

Also

Spoiler

We're all gonna die, the only question is when. This is as good a place as any to take your first steps to heaven. The only question is how you check out. Do you wanna go on your feet? Or on your f**king knees, begging? I ain't much for begging! Nobody ever gave me nothin! So I say f**k that thing! Let's fight it!

[close]

Spoiler

The only question is why there are two only questions.

[close]