Opa Opa wrote:
Oh I just loved this disappointingly predictable part:
The guy says something really close to "Shh shh, it's okay baby". I think a year from now when you guys watch this at home and see it for a second time, in the back of your mind you'll think "Shit. Luke was on the money with this".
I think I'll be watching the Director's Cut which will fix many of the problems (almost all of which are typical of Scot's theatrical cuts - see Kingdom of Heaven, for a recent example). I'll be thinking "Yeah, Luke really didn't get what the film was trying to do."
I still think that the article linked a few pages back was an excellent and illuminating read. I think just dismissing it as a dumb action flick with campy dialogue is doing it a great disservice and is pretty ignorant of Scott's directing style...
Will say I'm not ignorant of Scott's directing style though. The director's cut of Alien is shorter than the theatrical release, and the director's cut of Aliens added 20 minutes of scenery. So, um yeah, no.
Will say I'm not ignorant of Scott's directing style though. The director's cut of Alien is shorter than the theatrical release, and the director's cut of Aliens added 20 minutes of scenery. So, um yeah, no.
Yes the DC of Alien is shorter, but it has many worthwhile additions. Either cut is pretty perfect.
Scott has longer Director's cuts/Extended cuts of:
Blade Runner
Kingdom of Heaven
Legend
Robin Hood
Gladiator
dsheinem wrote:
Scott had nothing to do with Aliens.
Nothing?
The director's cut of Aliens opens with an introduction from Cameron mentioning that he worked with Scott to "keep his vision alive", or something close to that. But anyway, watch Prometheus again and tell me when anyone besides the heroine does anything that anyone with a brain would do.
Well, I hope we all agree on the TOTAL RECALL movie when it is released. That, and we can discuss Prometheus's sequel:
dsheinem wrote:
Scott had nothing to do with Aliens.
Nothing?
The director's cut of Aliens opens with an introduction from Cameron mentioning that he worked with Scott to "keep his vision alive", or something close to that.
Scott has no credits related to the film. That him and Cameron had lunch or some such doesn't usually qualify as it being a film that Scott contributed to.
dsheinem wrote:
Scott has no credits related to the film. That him and Cameron had lunch or some such doesn't usually qualify as it being a film that Scott contributed to.
Fair enough. I think through Ridley Scott's ALIEN, he contributed a lot to Aliens, but if you are talking about strictly speaking about a directorial stand point, there is no debate Scott didn't do any directing.
Watched about half of Buckets of Blood. It actually was pretty good, what I watched, but my Dad changed the TV. I made an immediate connection to the sculptor from Bioshock. (Between Bioshock and Half Life 2, I've had some bg dissapointments this year with first person shooters.)
-David is acting under orders from Weyland. This is directly discussed at several points in the film. When he contaminates Holloway, he is trying to decipher the purpose of the canisters - his inquisitive nature is also illustrated in depth.
-Vickers wants to succeed her father as the head of Weyland Industries. Finding the Engineers and saving her father would protract that goal, which explains her cynicism about the nature of the mission.
-The movie was directly stated not to be an Alien prequel on many occasions.
-We can assume that the "zombie" was the final stages the black goop's effect on the human physiology. Holloway likely would have suffered the same fate had he not sacrificed himself.
I agree with everything else. The movie was poorly written, and especially poorly paced in the closing act.
Last edited by sabrage on Mon Jun 11, 2012 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
