|
I'm actually not sure if I've seen the Assembly Cut. I've seen two cuts of Alien 3; the theatrical version and some sort of director's cut that changed some things. The one detail in the latter that I remember was that the android Weyland at the end turned out to be human instead. Was that in more than just the Assembly cut? I remember liking the cut I saw better than the theatrical one, but liking the original ending sequence better - Weyland just being another Bishop and Ripley holding in the chestburster felt like a fitting moment to cap off the trilogy.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 13:47 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The basic problem of a such a thread is that no-one has a concept of what made Alien or Aliens 'good'. So, we get a series of non-coherent two minute hates directed at such varied topics as the plot, the plot, the plot, and the shape of the computer screens. There's very little debate about what makes Alien good, it is probably the best executed slow burn horror/thriller film in history. Halloween in Space. I'm sure you are well aware but "plot" as nebulous a term as that is, has little to do with the success of the franchise. Alien 3 might have the best dialogue (hell, Resurrection could have it beat, haven't seen either for quite some time) the plots are all relatively straightforward, but the real success of the first movie is the atmosphere and tension it creates. Aliens doesn't even work if you haven't seen the first, and it isn't because the incredibly simple plot is hard to understand, it's that we need to be as afraid of the Alien as Ripley, without that the whole first third of the movie falls flat. It relies on us already having that tension built so it can create an exciting 80's action horror movie and not make it three hours long. I've always found Alien 3 to be a bit disjointed, although I had no idea it had so much studio interference. It is a shame Fincher wasn't allowed to make the movie as he saw fit. The entire catacombs sequence is amazing, and Weaver's performance is so far beyond what we saw in Aliens. I've always felt 3 was a bit too maligned, and Aliens was a bit overrated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:
This isn't true because I've seen and enjoyed Aliens but not seen Alien.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 07:20
|
|
|
computer parts posted:This isn't true because I've seen and enjoyed Aliens but not seen Alien. I think you seriously misinterpreted what I wrote if what you took away from it was "Aliens is bad unless you saw Alien first".
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:I think you seriously misinterpreted what I wrote if what you took away from it was "Aliens is bad unless you saw Alien first". What you wrote is that the first act of the film falls flat if you haven't seen the original film. It doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
computer parts posted:This isn't true because I've seen and enjoyed Aliens but not seen Alien. What the gently caress? You need to fix this ASAP. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:There's very little debate about what makes Alien good, it is probably the best executed slow burn horror/thriller film in history. Halloween in Space. Right, so Alien 'has atmosphere and tension', while Aliens 'is an exciting action movie'. This is what I'm talking about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
I missed the shot of the queen bursting from Ripley and her grabbing it as she falls into the furnace, in the longer cut. I feel that's pretty iconic of the ending, and I don't really get why they took it out. I know at least in this cut, "Bishop" at the end has a bleeding head and a hosed up ear from getting smacked in the head, does the theatrical cut make it more ambiguous what he is?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:15
|
|
|
davidspackage posted:I missed the shot of the queen bursting from Ripley and her grabbing it as she falls into the furnace, in the longer cut. I feel that's pretty iconic of the ending, and I don't really get why they took it out. Because Ripley has her arms out in a cross at the end (Actually, I have no idea). I could have sworn that the whole Bishop is human thing is in both cuts. blackguy32 fucked around with this message at 10:01 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Right, so Alien 'has atmosphere and tension', while Aliens 'is an exciting action movie'. You definitely weren't talking about either of those things, you were blathering on about how the thread doesn't work because people don't understand or can't articulate why the films are "good". The only thing you are dead on about is that Blomkamp's politics are right at home with the anti-corporate/military industrial message. I assume the "outrage" for him as a director is the fact that his films are far more interested in and focused on those elements than the Alien franchise has been in the past.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
SMG if you want to copypaste a whole bunch of Zizek talking about capitalist penis envy or whatever just go ahead and do it, but understand that this is not in the slightest more intelligent, interesting, or coherent a commentary on the movies than the guy who's mad that Prometheus looks like it was shot in 2012 even though it's canonically a prequel to a movie shot in the late 70s. Passive-aggressive snitting that people who aren't you are talking about the movies is even worse than either of these, though. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 11:36
|
|
|
centaurtainment posted:Blomkomp's Alien movie is going to be sooooo lovely. I'm predicting 35% fan service winks to the camera/references to the first two movies, 45% thinly veiled social commentary about governments weaponizing xenomorphs as a metaphor for drone programs or some poo poo, and 20% Sharlto Copley spouting incomprehensible dialogue while walking around in a mech suit like the one from the end of Aliens except it will have guns on it. People go to see Blomkomp's movies for reasons besides Sharlto Copley chewing up scenery while acting like a crazy person?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
That, and he does effects and gore really well. That's the only reason I bother with them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 12:52
|
|
|
What was the exact point where goons started rounding on Blonkamp because I feel like yall unanimously loved him around the District 9 days when you thought he'd be dull and hectoring and had your hearts broke when he turned out to be fun instead
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
I enjoy his movies well enough, even Elysium, and I don't really have much against him making an Alien movie either. If it does retcon Alien 3 out then that's dumb as hell but oh well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
Elysium was not as good as D9, and the ending was extremely stupid, but I liked the rest of that movie a lot. Chappie, though, just looked bad from the get go, and although I haven't seen it, I also have no interest in doing so. That said I still think he's a good pick for a new Alien movie; if nothing else, he'll make something that's very distinctive - I always liked the idea that Alien, perhaps by chance, ended up becoming a sort of anthology series where each movie had a different director with their own wildly creative spin on the concept that was completely different from the last one. Which even Jeunet had, and despite that movie not being great, I would rather take another bizarre Resurrection-style film over the series becoming yet another homogenized "cinematic universe" or whatever. I would honestly prefer it if Ripley did not return, however. Hakkesshu fucked around with this message at 13:36 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
If they have to keep Ripley, they may as well just start from where Resurrection left off and run with the alien DNA angle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
david_a posted:Whoever came up with this should have gotten a bonus, though. Yeah this was loving fantastic and set the mood for what was about to follow perfectly...
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 13:53
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:Elysium was not as good as D9, and the ending was extremely stupid, but I liked the rest of that movie a lot. Chappie, though, just looked bad from the get go, and although I haven't seen it, I also have no interest in doing so. That said I still think he's a good pick for a new Alien movie; if nothing else, he'll make something that's very distinctive - I always liked the idea that Alien, perhaps by chance, ended up becoming a sort of anthology series where each movie had a different director with their own wildly creative spin on the concept that was completely different from the last one. Which even Jeunet had, and despite that movie not being great, I would rather take another bizarre Resurrection-style film over the series becoming yet another homogenized "cinematic universe" or whatever. Elysium was not as good as District 9 but Chappie was incredibly excellent. Your mileage may vary based on how much you want to see Die Antwoord teach a robot to be gangsta I guess; anyway it succeeded on all crucial wierd rap robot fronts I agree that variations on the theme are better than a unified Star Wars style style guide/universe, he's one of the more tonally bizarre picks they coulda made but that's what makes the project seem interesting. We've already got the deathly serious horror movie Alien, and rad commando space-Vietnam Aliens, and both did their jobs so well that trying to redo them would be ill-advised; I doubt anyone's going to try to do people trying to be solemn at glowing green Repo Man alien better than Alien 3 did; hell I liked Resurrection okay (better than 3 anyway) but it definitely drove the final nail in the coffin of the whole 'Alien as bioweapon/hey there's a new kind of Alien and it's deadlier and freakier lookin' thing. Prometheus tried to go back to the original's cosmic horror but was sort of doomed from the outset trying to set itself against that standard, and wound up being a second-rate At The Mountains of Madness filmification made under the impression that the shoggoths were the good part. A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 14:41
|
|
|
Is the assembly cut streaming anywhere or is it only on DVD or whatever?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
The only thing I'm worried about re: Blomkamp is if he tries to pander too hard to the Aliens fandom. I've always thought people losing their poo poo over Hicks/Newt dying was unbelievably infantile, but hey I can understand not liking the overall direction that 3 went in. But if they put Hicks and Newt in this new film let's just loving end this miserable world once and for all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:The only thing I'm worried about re: Blomkamp is if he tries to pander too hard to the Aliens fandom. I've always thought people losing their poo poo over Hicks/Newt dying was unbelievably infantile, but hey I can understand not liking the overall direction that 3 went in. Yeah. I'm not thrilled about the direction that Alien 3 went in, but I wouldn't want the deaths of Newt/Hicks to be magically reversed, now that it's out there. I just mostly wish they would dare to do an Alien movie without Ripley in it, but that is evidently not gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Elysium was not as good as District 9 but Chappie was incredibly excellent. Your mileage may vary based on how much you want to see Die Antwoord teach a robot to be gangsta I guess; anyway it succeeded on all crucial wierd rap robot fronts There were parts of it that were genuinely superb, the whole notion of sentience and AI but then everything surrounding that was pretty terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Yeah. I'm not thrilled about the direction that Alien 3 went in, but I wouldn't want the deaths of Newt/Hicks to be magically reversed, now that it's out there. I just mostly wish they would dare to do an Alien movie without Ripley in it, but that is evidently not gonna happen. I assume they are going to ignore 3 and 4, I don't think hybrid alien Ripley and dead Ripley are how they intend to reboot the franchise, especially since it is confusing as gently caress. This is 20th Century Fox's Star Wars, I wouldn't be surprised or particularly upset to see Weaver, Biehn, Henrikson or even Fassbender. We live in a world where they keep rebooting Spiderman just so the rights don't revert, they can make up whatever scenario they want no one will bat an eye. Sorry but the rules clearly state you need either a Ripley or a Predator. Marketing New Brain fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
If they're gonna reboot they should actually just do a reboot and also ignore 1 and 2, and recast Sigourney while they're at it. After watching Fury Road I recommend Charlize Theron! Just forget that she was in Prometheus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:I'm actually not sure if I've seen the Assembly Cut. I've seen two cuts of Alien 3; the theatrical version and some sort of director's cut that changed some things. The one detail in the latter that I remember was that the android Weyland at the end turned out to be human instead. Was that in more than just the Assembly cut? davidspackage posted:I know at least in this cut, "Bishop" at the end has a bleeding head and a hosed up ear from getting smacked in the head, does the theatrical cut make it more ambiguous what he is? I don't really like him being human either. Lance is credited as "Bishop II" so I feel like the intent was to make it a bit less clear. The part that really bothers me for some reason is that his story seems too convenient- the designer of the Bishop android is the exact same age, happens to also work for the Evil Bio-Tech division (despite constructing a robot with Asimov's Three Laws), and was instantly available to haul rear end out to Fury 161? The marines in the second movie seemed familiar with Bishop so he must have been with them for a while which makes their appearance being identical a bit odd. It feels unsatisfying, and since when has The Company been truthful about anything? I prefer to think that his story is bogus and he's just another Carter Burke-type middle manager (who didn't look like Bishop) with a serious desire to climb the ranks. It does not seem out of the question that they could have performed Future Plastic Surgery(TM) while en route to make him a convincing facsimile of the android. That could explain why his ear hangs off on that weird angle after being clobbered. Crediting him as "Bishop II" is just saying that, human or robot, he was just another expendable tool in service of the almighty Company. exquisite tea posted:I just mostly wish they would dare to do an Alien movie without Ripley in it, but that is evidently not gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
88h88 posted:There were parts of it that were genuinely superb, the whole notion of sentience and AI but then everything surrounding that was pretty terrible. If you didn't crack up at MOMMY.DAT I don't know what to say man Also every scene the mall ninja villain was in but then I guess some folks haven't had to deal with that guy IRL exquisite tea posted:Yeah. I'm not thrilled about the direction that Alien 3 went in, but I wouldn't want the deaths of Newt/Hicks to be magically reversed, now that it's out there. I just mostly wish they would dare to do an Alien movie without Ripley in it, but that is evidently not gonna happen. There's nothing magical about it, it's a movie, they are fictional characters. There is no innate, sensical reason to default to treating a nearly 40 year old series of monster movies like it's some kind of exhaustive future history that must be rigidly consistent across all iterations and media platforms, or force anyone trying to write something interesting about it to first work around every terrible or just plain narratively inconvenient idea some guy had in ye olden dayes, except that that's how Star Wars does it, and Star Wars is terrible for this exact reason. There's nothing especially vital to the basic idea of an Aliens movie in the least remembered movie going "Note: Poochie died on his way back to his home planet".
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind if a reboot went with a completely new visual style and got away from the Giger aesthetic all-together. Come up with a new type of alien that is also terrifying just in a different way than the xeno.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Immortan posted:What the gently caress? You need to fix this ASAP. The worst part is I think I've only seen the extended cut of Aliens. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
I don't want it to become a new Thing that studios do, but I find the idea of doing a different sequel to a franchise movie kind of refreshing (though it's like a different way of constantly remaking things, I suppose). And the Alien franchise is very suitable for such an idea, since each movie is very different from its predecessor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
AnxiousApatosaurus posted:Is the assembly cut streaming anywhere or is it only on DVD or whatever? Yes, just look for the two hour+ version: http://www.amazon.com/Alien-3-Special-Sigourney-Weaver/dp/B00GQ4P55Y/ computer parts posted:The worst part is I think I've only seen the extended cut of Aliens. I liked the intro Cameron gave for that cut, "I got what I wanted in to theaters, but marketing wanted new scenes, so here's some poo poo I cut cause I didn't like it."
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:SMG if you want to copypaste a whole bunch of Zizek talking about capitalist penis envy or whatever just go ahead and do it, but understand that this is not in the slightest more intelligent, interesting, or coherent a commentary on the movies than the guy who's mad that Prometheus looks like it was shot in 2012 even though it's canonically a prequel to a movie shot in the late 70s. Do you see me writing about 'intelligence'? The issue is way more basic. People cannot articulate what makes Alien 'good'. It's treated as self-evident: "it's so obvious I don't even need to explain it." But if/when an explanation is provided, it doesn't make any sense. It happens in nearly every thread about a popular franchise: "Empire Strikes Back is the best movie ever made." Why? There's never an answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:There's nothing magical about it, it's a movie, they are fictional characters. There is no innate, sensical reason to default to treating a nearly 40 year old series of monster movies like it's some kind of exhaustive future history that must be rigidly consistent across all iterations and media platforms, or force anyone trying to write something interesting about it to first work around every terrible or just plain narratively inconvenient idea some guy had in ye olden dayes, except that that's how Star Wars does it, and Star Wars is terrible for this exact reason. There's nothing especially vital to the basic idea of an Aliens movie in the least remembered movie going "Note: Poochie died on his way back to his home planet". I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a movie to have at least some kind of logical narrative connection to previous entries in the series, which have up to this point maintained a consistent and connected narrative. A movie that promotes itself partly on the world that has been created for it should at least attempt to dwell within that same world, or else what's the point really? I don't care that much either way because nothing about the new Alien project particularly excites me. I do think you illustrate the inherent problem of when a franchise tortuously returns to the same characters because they've totally run out of ideas. You see the same thing going on with Terminator and, to a certain extent, the new Jurassic Park.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The basic problem of a such a thread is that no-one has a concept of what made Alien or Aliens 'good'. So, we get a series of non-coherent two minute hates directed at such varied topics as the plot, the plot, the plot, and the shape of the computer screens. It's hard to always accurately identify what makes something really good, but it's pretty easy to pick up on what can ruin a movie. For me all a movie needs is a consistent plot and characters that act like humans (if they're human). The plot doesn't need to be groundbreaking, it can be some space truckers finding more than they bargained for investigating a beacon, what ever. As long as everyone acts believably, that the plot moves forward in a way that seems natural, and the writing and plot serve more than to just segue from one special-effects extravaganza set-piece to the next. I get a strong sense from a lot of lovely over-produced big budget effects-driven movies that the plot and characters are secondary to the effects. In Prometheus it felt like a bunch of disconnected separately conceived effects-shots that they thought would be totally cool or gross or scary strung together by a lovely plot to barely string them together, and the primary motive of each character was "move the plot to the next cool scene". While in Alien 1-3 all the big "setpiece" scenes very much felt like a natural result of the plot , and the plot felt like a natural result of the actions and motives of the characters. I don't care about the intention of the film maker. Maybe Aliens was actually conceived as just a but of cool action and scenes and strung together with a basic plot, but it works. Maybe Prometheus genuinely tried to have a good plot and characters, but it didn't work and is poo poo. Also unlikable uninteresting characters. In Alien, Aliens, Alien 3 I like the characters, I can remember the characters. Riply is great, Paul Riser plays the perfect 80's MBA corporate guy, the crew of the Nostromo feel like real people. The prisoners in Alien 3 are hilarious and nasty. Prometheus has a teen slasher cast, where everyone is suicidally stupid and unlikable so you cheer when they get killed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
I love the Alien franchise, but I don't think I could stomach an even longer cut of 3.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:Prometheus looks like a modern corporate toy (plus holograms), the Nostromo looks like a modern piece of industrial equipment. Cutting-edge machinery that prioritizes being built to last over looking cool looks a lot more 1970s than it does Apple product. I guess if they really wanted to be weird obsessive film nerds they'd go back and carefully composite LCD screens over the Nostromo's CRT monitors so it'd be 100% Hard Sci-Fi. I dunno, it sure feels like there's a lot of more whizz-bang sci-fi poo poo in Prometheus than there was in Alien. It feels weird that the ships would have grown less comfortable over time rather than more, but maybe I am getting hung up on something fairly inconsequential. It just sort of hurt my immersion--I didn't feel like I was really part of the same world that Alien took part in, at least until they get to the installation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
Prometheus' biggest misstep was the link to Alien, really. The rest of the movie is fairly fun, even if the Guy Pearce make-up payoff didn't make it to the final version. It has some nice little body horror moments in it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:People cannot articulate what makes Alien 'good'. It plays on fears of helplessness, claustrophobia, isolation, betrayal, and hopeless death. The alien itself is very much an "other" that we are barely able to understand and that what which we could understand about it, specifically it's grotesque parasitic nature and psycho-sexual overtones in appearance are disturbing. That the audience is left to fill in the blanks made the creature more chilling too. The alien could be made to represent all sorts of fear. The sound and visual style is bleak and dark. The film was also a jarring departure from popular sci-fi of its time. It's also generally technically well made but I don't think you're saying that people need to justify compositional framing decisions in order to articulate why the film is 'good'. If people can't articulate what makes Alien 'good', it's probably that all of the sequels and backstory that came after it have diluted what it is/was at its core and made the film central to the language of modern sci-fi/horror so the best qualities of the film have been absorbed into assumptions about the whole genre rather than specific qualities of the original film itself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:In Prometheus it felt like a bunch of disconnected separately conceived effects-shots that they thought would be totally cool or gross or scary strung together by a lovely plot to barely string them together, and the primary motive of each character was "move the plot to the next cool scene". While in Alien 1-3 all the big "setpiece" scenes very much felt like a natural result of the plot , and the plot felt like a natural result of the actions and motives of the characters. I don't care about the intention of the film maker. Maybe Aliens was actually conceived as just a but of cool action and scenes and strung together with a basic plot, but it works. Maybe Prometheus genuinely tried to have a good plot and characters, but it didn't work and is poo poo. Can you be a little more specific why you think Ripley is great but Shaw is bad? What is it about Shaw that is different from Ripley that makes her a lesser character? Why is it a good thing that Paul Reiser plays the perfect corporate stooge, yet you complain that you cheered when characters in Prometheus are killed? Isn't Burke just as unlikeable as anybody in Prometheus? Didn't you cheer when he finally got his? You really don't think the characters in Prometheus had motivations? David had no motivation to do what he was doing? Shaw? Holloway? Vickers? Come on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 13:47 |
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Because Ripley has her arms out in a cross at the end (Actually, I have no idea). I could have sworn that the whole Bishop is human thing is in both cuts. In the theatrical version it's not confirmed one way or the other, Bishop just says it but no one buys it. In the assembly cut he is definitely human and he has an extra bit where you can see blood and his messed up ear. After holding his head in pain he slams his bloody hand on the fence holding them back and screams "I'M NOT A DROID" In a great mix of both pain, desperation and almost surprise. Lance Henrisken.  Hakkesshu posted:The only thing I'm worried about re: Blomkamp is if he tries to pander too hard to the Aliens fandom. I've always thought people losing their poo poo over Hicks/Newt dying was unbelievably infantile, but hey I can understand not liking the overall direction that 3 went in. If this new Alien movie literally ends with everyone getting definitely obliterated and aliens overrunning earth it would be amazing, but they'll never let anything end without sequel potential. Hell if they reboot I'd want Charlize Theron in it BECAUSE she was in Prometheus. Like how From Beyond and Re-Animator have the same cast. Like just get as many returning cast members as possible in any Alien or Prometheus related movie but in totally different roles every time. duz posted:I liked the intro Cameron gave for that cut, "I got what I wanted in to theaters, but marketing wanted new scenes, so here's some poo poo I cut cause I didn't like it." He's generally right in that Aliens' theatrical release is tighter, but at the same time the special edition was on laser disk, VHS, etc. long before he recorded that clip for the Quadrilogy. I do prefer the special edition though just for the brief bits of the derelict and the colony itself. There was so much great minature and set trickery done to realize the movie it feels like a waste to excise any of it. I do also like the colony scene because it plays well with the later part where Ripley confronts Burke about him sending the colonists out to investigate the derelict. Otherwise you spend most of the movie with the notion that a huge alien outbreak just happened to happen a week after Ripley wakes up until that scene. It makes the characters seem less competent for not questioning that. I notice people are huge fans of the auto-turret sequence, I mean it's cool but that's a scene I can totally understand cutting. It's like how every sci-fi thing has to be made about jerking it to military porn by its fans at some point, despite the point of Aliens being that that's idiotic. In that respect Niell Blomkamp is ahead of the game. Neo Rasa fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Jun 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:40
|
|
