Comments (Page 597)

I know that, I just said that's what I hear lol

TheXenoneoprotomorph

Its Percocets, Molly, Percocets 

Hes talking about Drugs... 

I just like the song for the flutes

RED0GUY - Those are very valid questions, my friend. Indeed; Ripley was an excellent character whom, in my opinion, should not have had the rather strange twists and turns which took place over her story. It is the human aspects of the first Alien film which drew me to like it so greatly. It is very easy to see some of the elements which occured to Ripley as a mockery - even dreadful. It is easy and understandable to be angry at such things. Furthermore, it is good to have healthy anger over such things - provided it is used contructively.  When I feel anger over a film's plot, I write down what I would have liked to see - it makes me feel much better. :)

Something Real

To make it perfectly clearly, I could live with some stupid explanation for a creature I don't care about but what infuriates is killed off a character you made me care about, that I find interesting in spite of not being a believer myself. You made her being experimented upon (in the novelization while being alive and that is what I understood while watching the movie) and finally the xeno is the ultimate survival because of her dna? Why such a mockery? And why should I care anymore?   

hox I respectfully disagree about the chestburster scene. With Alien, the character became symptomatic and started going nuts. In AC, Oram was just lying there speaking normally and then his chest burst- that seemed pretty fake imo. 

I do agree that CGI in capable hands is perfectly fine. T2 is a great example and that was basically the infancy of CGI.

The chestburster in Covenant is a trillion times better than the one in Alien. I'm not knocking the scene in Alien, which was utterly brilliant, but the practical effects make people laugh these days, especially when the legless Alien scuttles through the breakfast debris. And as for the poor edit between Ash speaking and his head getting torched... don't even get me started on that.

CGI done well is amazing. And in some instances, there would be no other way. Consider the T1000 Terminator in T2, for example.

DK - That would likely be a programming nightmare! :)

It would be an ambitious project. I would imagine it done on an indie level first. There would also be the challenges of having it be stream-able with almost no latency. 

JOYLITT - Well spoken, my friend. :)

It depends whom you hire for the cgi. I have seen the Alien Covenant documentary where they show for instance the neomorph's double jaw, which looked fantastic. But the cgi artists totally botched the scene where it bites Rosenthal. And what was the need of using a puppet for the chestburster when you are going to put on top tons of cgi blood... same with the xeno's "saliva": it screams fake. Bad choices where made. Great looking movies use the best of both worlds.

RED0GUY - I wholeheartedly understand and respect your viewpoint, my friend. I, personally, am not pleased with the direction in which Sir Scott has taken the Alien series. With that being said, I respect a creative mind's desires. The Thing was an absolutely terrifying and wonderful film! It kept me awake quite a lot when I first watched it! :)

Something Real

in 79, I guess the whole thing was effective as it was, but you can't make a sequel to a Lovecraftian story. Once you Imagined and provided some explanation for the inconceivable you diminish the effectiveness of the fear. That's why a more absurd creature as the Thing is more effective on the long run. Carpenter for me is much more intelligent to nothing or do some unrelated stuff then some rehashed sequel/prequel (Of course Escape from LA was shit for this reason and thank God that there is no escape from Earth). RS if he keeps on coming back he will bring only rehashed stuff and a robot can never be that terrifying no matter how evil he is.

DK - Quite so! However, your notion is not without its merits! It is quite compelling. :)

Good point. I think it works well for games but for movies, it might dilute the writers' vision.....unless they specifically write for that purpose.

DK - In the first Jurassic Park, when the Tyrannosaurus rex broke loose from her enclosure, that was movie magic. :)

CGI offers great things if done right. I still think story and acting are key. TZ has proven that time and again- and they packed it into half hour shows with commercials. 

DK - As much as I would like that, I would also be displeased by it. We must have lines upon which we see our films - so that we are inspired to write and create what we want in future presentations. :)

RED0GUY - As long as you keep that awe and wonder in your heart and pass it to others through stories and conversation, it will never be gone. The cynicism within the world is born from too many voices shouting and railing within the public square. However, if you stand away from that square and remain in the fields to speak with those whom choose to do so as well, you can hear one-another much more clearly. :)

I got it, you like Alien but you hate The Alien.

Something Real

As people become more cynical, I think that exploration and the awe which comes from it will die unfortunately. Of course the monster will remain as the message will be "you wanted to explore and not to have a trite corporate life, well a space monster will tear you apart".

RED0GUY - If you had been in charge of creating Alien, how would you have presented the Alien itself? I would have kept it slightly more mysterious than it was. :)

daliens

Look, I said that i liked the atmosphere of the movie until the xeno appears. I liked the same loneliness in space feeling before the marines wake up in Aliens.

daliens

Do you realize that in 2000 that were more christianities (as in dogma evolved and many "heresy" arose)? I think that the cross is a stand in for faith in general, as in the believe that there is a higher power thus an objective meaning to the universe, view inherited from her father. So the ask those questions from a "alien" (in this case ancient humans) about how they see themselves in the vastness of space, living there for millennia is pretty reasonable. If they create were they also created? if they go for a hierarchy of flawed creation and time itself has a start then who was the first creator? The JC connection is pure bogus.

Of course there is also the problem of engineer's sacrifice. Why do they do it? The whole business indicates that have some sort or morality and the simple answer that they create life because they can is simple a cop out.

So yeah, it think Shaw could have found out some "stuff" and could have been a more interesting juxtaposition to David's pure logic.

And before Covenant, you must realize David was just a simple unit of the David 8 series (see the Prometheus novelization thread) coming online in 2089, not the first android built by Weyland ever. That was ret-conned in Covenant, as was Weyland's search for his creators, original his was just a megalomaniac who saw himself as a god because he creates AI and gods don't die. And the Satan stuff also happened.

Sorry for me this remains all crass lack of creativity and cynicism taken to extreme from which no good will emerge.

DK - Indeed! The story is what is most important! As long as you can make your audience believe through good acting and storytelling, it does not matter how you effects appear! "There's...something on the wing!" ;)

Something Real That is classic! I also like the one where he sat in a dive restaraunt feeding coins into a so called fortune telling devil contraption and became obsessed! Those were the days when effects didn't matter much- it was all about story and actors selling the story. I still watch TZ!

DK - I watched the original "Gremlin" episode of the Twilight Zone with William Shatner last week! :)

I love those old black and white shows- Twilight Zone and Outer Limits. They used what they could for that day. They probably would have loved CGI back then but it was simply a pipe dream at best back then.

DALIENS - Hahaha! Quite so, my friend. Quite so. Fortune favors the bold! :)

The trick, Something Real, is not minding that it hurts :)

The big chap before he got blasted out into space in Alien! :-) poor fella 

DALIENS - I am almost willing to wager I could wear one of those and make it look fashionable. :)

I thought Ridley Scott is doing the old scool practical effects like nobody else is doing nowadays. 

And practical effects can be a lot more expensive for a movie of that scale. Unless we go for something like this:

Old scool David and Walter

RED0GUY - Science Fiction - aliens, monsters and exploration amongst the stars - will never die. :)

Homage. 

red0guy@gmail.com the Alien is a love it or hate it thing, there no way in between. It's like the Greshka thing from the short "A song for Lya" by George R.R  Martin. It grows on you.

Only look at the passionate debates on this forum.

C.JAM - Quite so! Practical special effects are much more enjoyable! :)

I can agree with the sentiment, but how back to basics should we get? We could go to black and white to get really hard core. I think CGI has its place in the right hands. I love old school but do not think we need to go back to this:

IRAPTUS - Oh, gosh! I would certainly hug the Newborn and tell him it is going to be alright - provided he was not interested in tearing me to little bits. :)

red0guy@gmail.com Shaw, as Peter Weyland believed the engineers created us. If she was a Christian  (I presume because of the cross she carried with her) she was a messed up Christian. Did she believe Jesus Christ was an engineer?  That's even more messed up faith. Did she ask that last surviving engineer why did they want to destroy Earth? Really? Did you really expect an answer? Did Weyland expect to find immortality? 

What would you like to see of Shaw? What more could she have done? Trying to talk with another kind engineer? I doubt she could find one.

The ancient aliens theories are funny and entertaining (talking about the tv shows and von Daniken) but they have not proved anything yet. Just theories about other wordly beings. A new high tech religion.

Wren- There are gaps. And there's some degree of cognitive dissonance.