Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Alien stands up very well. But it certainly doesn't feel timeless (or, more accurately, contemporary). The sets, costumes, and score of Alien are all touchstone late 70s. Even the commercial premise (art horror) is a hallmark of its era. Another example - which might be more clear to younger posters - would be Jurassic Park, looks great in 2017 but it is clearly a 90s movie. Neither film suffers for obviously being products of their times.
Overread wrote: Alien 3 steps up in quality if you watch the directors cut version which adds in a lot of material that was originally cut out.
The 4th honestly would have done better without Riply and if they'd cast Sigorny as another character in her family encountering the Aliens.
Also I got into comics and the comic series that came after Alien is a great read. Loads of material and stories set around them which honestly feel more faithful to the lore than films 4 and beyond. Certainly they could have done loads with the Alien franchise and even taken it to a full on war story.
Also Kilkrazy why for art thou banned from watching Alien??
Clearly you aren't married.
The wife wanted to watch Money For Nothing on BBC iPlayer.
Frazzled wrote: Interesting side note: If you work in the energy industry, the early scene in BR with the flares is just another day at the office (flaring was normal practice until the price of nat gas rose enough to make it wasteful economically). You haven't lived until you've been right below one going off. Its incredibly loud and HOT!
In case anyone reading this is from the north-east of England ... that scene was apparently inspired by Sir Ridley Scott having driven up the A1 at night, past the steelworks in Teesside.
Overread wrote: Alien 3 steps up in quality if you watch the directors cut version which adds in a lot of material that was originally cut out.
The 4th honestly would have done better without Riply and if they'd cast Sigorny as another character in her family encountering the Aliens.
Also I got into comics and the comic series that came after Alien is a great read. Loads of material and stories set around them which honestly feel more faithful to the lore than films 4 and beyond. Certainly they could have done loads with the Alien franchise and even taken it to a full on war story.
Also Kilkrazy why for art thou banned from watching Alien??
Clearly you aren't married.
The wife wanted to watch Money For Nothing on BBC iPlayer.
Ah, so still horror at least!
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
El Torro wrote: The first 3 Alien films are my favourite trilogy of all time. I just think they tell the story of Ripley perfectly, from start to finish. Alien 3 is of course a step down in quality but I still think it's a solid film.
I have a soft spot for Alien Resurrection. It's flawed, quite badly, but it was trying to do something new with the source material and did new things with the original's theme of transgressive cross-species sexuality and breeding.
As a sci fi action film I thought Resurrection was entertaining enough. It was a terrible Alien film though, it just wasn't able to grasp the mood and atmosphere of the first 3 films. It's like the filmmakers were shown how cool the xenomorph is and made the film based on that, not really taking anything else into account. Aliens was an example of drastically changing the tone of its predecessor while still making a worthy and relevant sequel, something that Resurrection just wasn't able to do.
Resurrection is easily the worst Alien film in my mind, not that Prometheus and Covenant were that much better though.
Frazzled wrote: If you work in the energy industry, the early scene in BR with the flares is just another day at the office (flaring was normal practice until the price of nat gas rose enough to make it wasteful economically).
They still use those flares when necessary though. We've been enjoying the sight of Mordor for several weeks now what with the local refinery (20 klicks out) doing a rather large maintenance project without shutting everything down. They have to vent more stuff when some process or other isn't working at 100%, but there's still almost normal output and almost normal income. One could easily imagine that the corps in Blade Runner prefer to continue making money while doing maintenance, so they pick bigger flares with some lost profit over no flares and many weeks with no profit.
Literally the only special effect I always thought was crap in Alien is the last explosion of the Nostromo and it's crazy rainbow waves.
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should."
AegisGrimm wrote: Literally the only special effect I always thought was crap in Alien is the last explosion of the Nostromo and it's crazy rainbow waves.
It looks like a neon hamburger at one point. I don't know if it's so much a bad effect as perhaps a creative decision that should have been reined in a little.
