You guys have the worst taste in movies ever!

 

Alien: 8.5/10 on IMDb

Aliens: 8.4/10 on IMDb

Alien

Liking Alien 3 is wrong, because it goes against the holy word of IMDb! All hail IMDb the God of movie tastyness! Wooo!

I think Fincher is better director than either Cameron or Scott - though I definetly don't base that view on Alien 3. Cameron's stuff ain't always that good and Ridley Scott is most uneven director ever. Blade Runner is in my Top 3 films of all time and Alien is masterpiece. Director's Cut version of Kingdom of Heaven was ok but... Legend, what was he thinking?

 

Fincher on the other hand directed Se7en and Fight Club...

 

After becoming Hideaki Anno fan I've been total sucker for beautiful cinematography and especially and above all for marvelous camerawork - honestly, nowadays when I go to see movie some sort of stunning and/or original camera placement and/or some marvelous camera drives are nearly must. And awesome cutting be them Godardian jump cuts or whatever

 

Alien 3 definetly delivers on this front and it certainly isn't bad movie. I remember seeing quite many of positive reviews of it lately (they showed it in tv some time ago so that's the reason for reviews).

 

It's not near the same league of Alien and Aliens but it is still fine movie. That is beautifully shot, which gives at least half star extra from me.

 

edit: And to continue film geekery: Many old classics such as Kurosawa films which naturally weren't even capable to deliver such camera movement/placing (for example wasn't steadycam invented in the seventies?) but from visual side most of the materpieces of the time feature interesting image compositions. Just take a look at fights in Seven Samurais for example.

 

Then there's legendary Yasujiro Ozu who didn't move the camera at all still creating some of the greatest cinematic pieces of art through powerful overall directing, extraordinary usage of pillow shots (which I started to really appreciate as storytelling and pacing method after Anno's works) and delibirate image compositions

 

Most movies seriously lack in this department. I'm no sucker for "omg spacial affcts" or "eye candy" at all but visualy enthralling storytelling is something I cherish

Edited April 8, 200817 yr by Xard

The only good movie Fincher has directed is Zodiac.

Nah, I think Se7en was a real masterpiece. Zodiac was very good, and Fight Club is OK.

 

From the various Alien directors films, Fincher is my favourite. All of them have done good stuff though. Scott and Cameron are very uneven for me. Jean-Pierre make *very* nice looking films, and I really dig his visual style. But I'm not a fan of stories themselves, despite the fact that I usually like the weirder stuff.

I always think it's funny that during discussions involving Fincher nobody every brings up The Game.

 

Anyway, Fincher is a good director. There are a lot of flaws in Alien3, but I don't think the direction is one of them. The editing and the script were the biggest problems in that movie. That and the tagline, which was a blatant lie.

 

As long as we're giving our opinions away like kittens, here's my two cents: Alien didn't even scare me when I was five. The movie is very, very dated. Most of the positive opinions about that movie are based on nostalgia, the fact it was the original, and the genuinely scary ideas it presented. But to a "whippersnapper" like myself, the film itself just isn't even a very enjoyable watch.

 

Aliens, however, is right up there with Raiders of the Lost Ark and Die Hard for greatest action flicks ever.

Well, IMHO the Alien movies have become progressively worse since the original. Not that they are bad, but I still think the older movies are better. Scott's original movie still ranks among his best movies (but not THE best, which is still Blade Runner IMHO). The original is scary with its hostile atmosphere and exceedingly high level of acting even before they set down on LV-426. Cameron deserves credit for a decent sequel, but it's still more action than sci-fi horror and lacks much of the tension and atmosphere of the original.

 

The third movie by David Fincher has a glaring problem compared to the earlier movies, however. It's not scary. At all. Even Cameron's Aliens scared me, when I first saw it (on video), and not once did I even blink when I saw Alien 3 in the cinema. The movie is depressing rather than scary. It does that well, however, which can probably be taken as foreshadowing for Fincher's later masterpiece, Seven, though he hasn't done particularly well since then (with Fight Club as the only exception). Yes, Alien 3 has a brutal beginning, but that's one of the things that works for it - it tries to reach for the tense atmosphere of the original movie in the sense that there is one deadly alien, which could be anywhere, and which therefore adds dimensions of claustrophobia ("It's here, and we can't get away!") mingled with paranoia. Since the movie is not scary, it doesn't quite manage it, which I why I consider it not as good as its predecessors.

 

I think it's better than Alien Resurrection, though, which completely misses it's mark. I hated the human/alien hybrid! It was just too lame and not scary. Ripley 8 was sort of a little cool, but I'll never forgive Jeunet for surgically removing the horror of the Aliens from them! Not sure what happened there, because the movie is totally unlike Jeunet's other movies. I haven't seen them all his movies, but those I've seen are much better than Alien Resurrection. I cannot forgive him for committing the cardinal sin of making Giger's nightmarish Alien look weak and uncool.

Actually, while I won't defend the newborns design and especially not how they handled the creature, I have to admit that the creature itself had an impact on me. It was disgusting, unsettling and disturbing. It's likeness to a human and it's show of emotions made me feel very uncomfortable. So, in a way, I guess it fulfilled it's purpose.

I always think it's funny that during discussions involving Fincher nobody every brings up The Game.

 

This is true, I consider The Game a really good flick and even I forgot about it in my previous post!

 

As for Alien, it really seems opinions differ on it. I can't remember the age I was when I first saw it, but it was really terrifying to me. If you've watched the DVD extras, there's a lot of talk about how new and fresh it was when it first was released. Even though I saw quite a long time after its intitial release, that still held true for me. When I rewatched a lot of years later, I did not think it would be scary at all. It obviously didn't scare me as bad as the first time, but I remember that I was quite surprised at how incredibly tense and unpleasant it was.

 

It is however a very slow film, and I suspect not everyone is equally susceptible to that (though of course, I'm sure there are other reasons why people might not find it scary).

 

Personally, I find the build-up to help immensely in the case of Alien. By the time John Hurt (can't remember his characters name atm) gets facehugged, I'm completely into the film. I think Ridley Scott really hit a nerve with the film.

 

To its credit, Aliens does also have a great build-up despite it being more actiony which, again, makes the film more terrifying. While I still wish that it had a more traditional horror approach, I give Cameron a lot of credit for still keeping a lot of the scaryness despite it being quite action heavy.

My only problem with 3 was that I'd read enough of the comics that the plot and themes were already stale.

I liked 3, but in general I'm not too sensitive to bad movies. What I did like about 3 was how brave it was to just kill people off. I know that Cameron supposedly got upset they killed off Newt and Hicks, but making it so nobody survived an encounter with these things but Ripley was nice and made them seem even more threatening. It's a nice break from horror monsters who constantly get beaten up by teenagers.

Edited April 12, 200817 yr by Tale

I always think it's funny that during discussions involving Fincher nobody every brings up The Game.

 

I was going to bring that up. Fincher is one of my favorite directors, and The Game is one of the reasons. I'd put Fincher above Cameron and on par with Scott.

 

Anyway, I enjoyed Alien 3, but thats probably because I've never seen the theatrical cut, only the extended cut from the Alien Quadrilogy.

I think it's better than Alien Resurrection, though, which completely misses it's mark. I hated the human/alien hybrid! It was just too lame and not scary. Ripley 8 was sort of a little cool, but I'll never forgive Jeunet for surgically removing the horror of the Aliens from them! Not sure what happened there, because the movie is totally unlike Jeunet's other movies. I haven't seen them all his movies, but those I've seen are much better than Alien Resurrection. I cannot forgive him for committing the cardinal sin of making Giger's nightmarish Alien look weak and uncool.

 

I seem to remember that there was a big fight over the human/alien hybrid and what it'd look like and how, effects wise, it'd be done.

 

What we got looks so much like a dude in a suit though, it isn't funny.

 

That said I've always had a soft spot for Alien Resurrection and prefer it to Alien3 which has such a jumbled narrative that I find it hard to get into at all. At least A:R is entertaining in its goofiness.

 

I will confess that I saw Alien Resurrection on a double bill at the theater with MORTAL KOMBAT: ANNIHLATION and frankly any film would look good after that...

ok, so I just watched the 'special Edition' again .... and YES, I still hate it.

 

I've learned from this post, however that I can compliment anything I want, but in the future I will refrain from griping about something in a negative manner on game forums. Because the world is huge, and at the end of the day, everything has its fans.

 

I may have been too hasty when I added this line:

"I mean, you can't stick a film done by David Fincher in the same catagory as one done by Scott or Cameron, so I didn't really expect an epic,"

 

What makes Alien 3 sh*t for me was not necessarily the direction of the film, but the film as a whole. I'd like to think of the director as the man in charge of everything: scripts, locations, casting, special effects, etc. , however I know that this is not always the case. It is unfair for me to place all the blame on David Fincher, when it could have just have easily been Ezra Swerdlow (executive producer) or even Sigourney Weaver (co-producer).

 

Anyway, good to know there are more people that like Alien 3, than do not (at leaste that voted on this poll), and I'm totally looking forward to the game. It's gonna be SO bad*ss!!!

I've learned from this post, however that I can compliment anything I want, but in the future I will refrain from griping about something in a negative manner on game forums. Because the world is huge, and at the end of the day, everything has its fans.

 

I may have been too hasty when I added this line:

"I mean, you can't stick a film done by David Fincher in the same catagory as one done by Scott or Cameron, so I didn't really expect an epic,"

Awwwww, don't feel too bad, you did manage to pull your head back out of the sling with this: ;-)

 

But can we at least, MAYBE agree that Scott and Cameron had better Alien movies than he did? Maybe I should have done a "which Alien movie was the absolute worst?" poll instead. tongue.gif

I mean, I don't think you'll find anyone who'll disagree with you on that.

 

 

Personally, I saw the theatrical cut of Alien 3 first and while it is a very difficult movie to really like (what with its central themes, the bleak atmosphere, the killing off of most of the previous movies' main characters, etc.) I didn't hate it as such. The reason for this is mainly that you can see imo that the movie has massive potential*; I don't know, it's not necessarily anything tangible as such, but whilst sitting through it I was constantly thinking "Yeah, I see what you're trying to do here, but somehow you're just not pulling it off completely. Now if oooonly you'd tweak this thing here - whatever it may be; story strand, set design, camera shot, etc. - a liiiiittle bit, this'd be soooo awesome!". So, essentially, almost there, but not quite. Thankfully, the new cut managed to rectify a lot of these things, i.e. a lot more of the potential of the movie is realised - although, unfortunately, still not all of it. For that, the movie's still too patchy. But at least that version I can now sit through without being overly disappointed at the wasted potential of it all.

 

* Something, I believe, Alien: Ressurrection shares with Alien 3 - though only to a much lesser extent, and only for the first half of the movie. Apart from some overly silly scenes like the ricocheting bullets by the dual-wielding space pirate near the basketball court the movie does quite well in building up tension and moving the story forward, and the scene with Ripley coming across her previous aborted clones is quite a good wtf-moment. Towards the end, however, the silliness just takes over and the movie descends into utter, utter dross. So far that it's impossible to see how the movie could have been saved without MAJOR re-editing. And that's the reason why I do hate Ressurrection, but not Alien 3.

 

 

Oh, and The Game

I seem to remember that there was a big fight over the human/alien hybrid and what it'd look like and how, effects wise, it'd be done.

 

"Something emerges from the wound. An alien, to be sure, but nothing we've seen so far, its forelegs arch out of its back like spiders legs, its back legs set on enormous haunches, thick and powerful. Its head is long, eyeless, like the others, but along its white expanse red veins, coming out of the skin and running like thick black hairs to the back. It has retracted pincers at the side of head that come out when its tongue does. Its much bigger the the others, nearly the size of the queen herself. And it's bone white."

 

Joss Whedon's original description.

"Something emerges from the wound. An alien, to be sure, but nothing we've seen so far, its forelegs arch out of its back like spiders legs, its back legs set on enormous haunches, thick and powerful. Its head is long, eyeless, like the others, but along its white expanse red veins, coming out of the skin and running like thick black hairs to the back. It has retracted pincers at the side of head that come out when its tongue does. Its much bigger the the others, nearly the size of the queen herself. And it's bone white."

 

Joss Whedon's original description.

 

 

Now, if only they'd sculpted it (I like puppets ) instead of using all that horrible CGI in this film.

 

 

Also, re: Alien 3 - I love how the psycho convict kept calling the Xenomorph a dragon. That's what I'll be calling it from now on. But the entire movie was just so damn bleak...

Actually, while some of the Xenomorph sequences were CGI in Alien Ressurection, but all the newborns sequences were animatronic due to budgetary reasons. Although the original animatronic had oversized genitals which were digitally removed.

Maybe thats why the movie felt like the muppets in space. It was a ****ing travesty, and by one of my all time favorite directors, which only makes it sting worse.

Edited April 12, 200817 yr by Gorgon

I'm not defending the absolute tripe that is Alien Ressurection, but I have to say that that's unfair considering Alien and Aliens were all puppets and animatronics to begin with. In fact, the downward spiral started with Alien

For the record, I actually like Alien 3 better than I like Aliens (but not as much as Alien).

 

I've never met anyone who agrees with me on this, though.

I'm not defending the absolute tripe that is Alien Ressurection, but I have to say that that's unfair considering Alien and Aliens were all puppets and animatronics to begin with. In fact, the downward spiral started with Alien

See that to me in no way looks like what Whedon described (beyond being white).

 

Its just a bad design and really takes the movie down a peg or two, IMO.

 

Actually, looking at that still and thinking about it, it actually looks a little bit like the naked old blind woman seer from the opening of ICEWIND DALE: HEART OF WINTER...

Edited April 13, 200817 yr by Amentep

I'm not defending the absolute tripe that is Alien Ressurection, but I have to say that that's unfair considering Alien and Aliens were all puppets and animatronics to begin with. In fact, the downward spiral started with Alien

Alien 3 was an alright movie. It had some great actors and one liners, and it was pleasing to look at. It definitely cannot compare to the first two, though. Definitely not great, but it's not the trash that most people claim it is. Alien: Resurrection on the other hand...terrible.

 

"For the record, I actually like Alien 3 better than I like Aliens (but not as much as Alien).

 

I've never met anyone who agrees with me on this, though."

 

Yeah. You're definitely the only person on this planet who likes Alien 3 more than Aliens.

 

Directors...ah I like some of Finchers work. Fight Club is one of the greatest (and manliest) films of all time. Seven was fantastic, The Game was pretty good.

 

As for Ridley Scott, I agree that he's a very uneven director. He's made some really awesome movies though.

 

James Cameron...well, let's see. Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2, True Lies, Titanic. Those are the movies he's directed (that he's publicly known for, for the most part - killer fish aside). Personally I enjoyed every single one of them, especially Terminator 2. God that movie owns.

 

Hasta la vista, baby.

Edited April 13, 200817 yr by TravisPennington