|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The purpose of editing is not to add or remove scenes, but to construct scenes.  IM_DA_DECIDER posted:You don't need to be smart or capable to get into grad school in the first place. If your undergrad grades are not abysmal and you're willing to travel, you can always find a prof somewhere at the University of Bumfuck who is willing to take you in as cheap labour. That's why many people who can't find a job after college go to grad school, cause it's easy. Once you're in grad school, it is very hard to actually get kicked out. You can concievably sit on your rear end for 5+ years until your prof is sick of you and gives you your drat PhD. Since you learned nothing, you won't be able to hold a job in industry and might be doing endless, fruitless post-doc work with no chance of a tenure track position. IM_DA_DECIDER posted:Now some Weyland-Yutani HR person posts a job offer for a PhD holder in the natural sciences for a multi-year expedition to some god-forsaken planet. Who is going to apply for that? Not someone with a lucrative industry job who is finally able to settle down and have a family. Not a tenure-track scientist who needs to stay at the cutting edge of research in order to actually make it. It's the perfect job for those who slipped through the cracks of the academic system, another unfireable, multi-year position with no pressure to succeed. Charlize Theron might not be qualified or even interested in judging the merits of those people. Hell, they have a PhD, there's minimum standards that come with that! There's not, in many cases. So I guess the "problem" is less about it actually being realistic, but more about the audience's suspension of disbelief. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Sep 27, 2015 |
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
rejutka posted:I reckon it could do with around ten more minutes here and there established various characters, including the space, and it would be untouchable. There's probably a reading of the movie that looks at the development of individual identity, comparing the interchangeable myriad Alien drones of 'Aliens' who exist to die to the similarly unnamed, interchangeable prisoners from Alien3. Both movies "weed out" characters until only those with identity are left - the Alien Queen in 'Aliens', arguably the only "individual" Alien in the movie, and the prisoner Morse in 'Alien3', the one prisoner who doesn't buy into Dillon's collectivist, nihilistic religion, and the one prisoner who largely acts more for himself than for the others (and the one time he strays from that, it almost kills him). Funnily enough the nameless prisoners were less of a complaint among UK audiences, mostly because the throwaway prisoners are played by UK actors that they were familiar with.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Prometheus was awesome, I particularly liked the part where Ridley Scott took the treasured nerd memories and said "God doesn't care" and just hosed 'em all up Also none of the movies "filled out a checklist of nerd criteria" except for *maybe* Resurrection to a small degree (written by Joss Whedon, after all  )Unless you meant the AvP movies in which case yeah they're pretty guilty of that
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 10:19
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:That implication is a pretty big change. It implies that the creature that everyone's so obsessed with isn't actually the ultimate lifeform, it was just an R&D accident. A fun way to read this is that Ridley Scott had a neat idea 35 years ago and obsessive nerds (mostly) missed the point. The black goo could actually make way scarier poo poo if it was deployed by itself. We also know the Alien predates the black goo because the dead-by-chestburster Space Jockey in 'Alien' was "fossilized", while the black goo accident that wrecked the Engineer facility was only a couple thousand years ago. Ridley Scott has even clarified this in interviews after Prometheus came out, so if you think he was trying to give a hilarious "gently caress you" to nerd fanboys, he's pretty much outright said that isn't the case. If anything he doesn't give a poo poo about what "nerds" think, I'm pretty sure he's more interested in making the movies he wants to make. I don't disagree that the black goo can make crazy, scary poo poo, but reading Prometheus as giving a big middle finger to the amorphous other that is "nerds" seems bizarrely petty. Not to mention that from what I've seen on Alien fan sites and whatnot, a large majority of Aliens "nerds" liked Prometheus quite a bit except for some reservations, and those tended to have more to do with the filmmaking and execution rather than any treatment of their beloved "Alien universe". So if people are getting off to the schadenfreude of nerds gnashing their teeth in anguish over their beloved Alien being "ruined"... it largely didn't happen. 
Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Sep 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 15:50
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:Well, I'll be damned, I totally missed that. But the engineer drank it in the beginning when they were creating earth though, didn't he? Full Battle Rattle posted:EDIT: Actually, without the petty 'gently caress you' to nerd kind I actually think I don't like this move as much as I did. Change my opinion to 'It's okay I guess.'  I think there's a lot to like in it, especially when taken on its own merits and not as part of the Larger Alien Multimedia Franchise © 20th Century Fox Film Corporation. The visuals are great, David is great, the creatures are weird as gently caress (although the Trilobite's literal penis is a tad on-the-nose, especially in the wake of the more subtle phallic imagery of 'Alien'). I saw it in the theatre in 3D, and when that sandstorm went down, it looked insane in 3D. It was a big moment when I said to myself, "okay, 3D doesn't need to just be a gimmick, this is really compelling use of the technology". It really felt like you were in the sandstorm. For anyone who likes the visuals from 'Prometheus' and wants to see more of them and their development process, the Prometheus concept art book is awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Yeah, that blog is apparently reiterating what I'd said (and no it's not my blog, I don't have a blog), and the "black goo created the Aliens" theory was so prevalent that Ridley Scott responded to it eventually and said "nope, but think of the Deacon as a genetic cousin". Like yeah the theory seems obvious because the movie is a prequel and it shows a not-Alien get created at the end. But plenty of movies have seemingly-obvious (and often fun, interesting) theories that unfortunately don't add up when you look at the details. CelticPredator posted:I will always give credit to Prometheus credit for that. It's one of the main reasons why I do dig the flick even despite the problems I have with it. I'd rather have a decent but not fully formed film about God, and Humans, and Spirituality, than have a guy go "LETS ROCK!!!" and shoot aliens in the face. So loving tired of goddamn references.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Full Battle Rattle posted:He's reiterating it, but in much less definite terms than you are. Do you have a link to the interview where he explicitly shoots down that theory? I can't find anything other than internet speculation from three years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2015 03:57
|
|
|
Immortan posted:I thought it was rather implied that it was because we started making up our own religions instead of worshipping them (the Engineers)? No, seriously. The subsequent implication was that the Engineers on LV-233 (the planet in Prometheus) were loading up their bio weapons to come and gently caress us up, and then one of them goofed and they accidentally unleashed the Black Goo on themselves, derailing their plan for genocide. It also gives some more motivation as to why when the last surviving Engineer was awakened, the first thing he does is go apeshit and try to make a beeline to Earth.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
IMB posted:I know it's stupid but I also don't mind and loving love it, in fact
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
A slight tangent from something you brought up in your post, but I didn't think the Thing in the 2011 prequel was stupid or incompetent, and in fact on a re-watch you can pick up on how it has several contingencies in place from very early in the movie. It takes something of a "shotgun" approach with regard to assimilating the humans, but it's also never encountered humans before - they're just as unpredictable to it as it is to them. It acts "smarter" in the Carpenter movie because it now has experience taking out a dozen people, so it has an idea of what it's dealing with. If anything, I think having it act differently in the prequel is a subtle, logical detail.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:If this is so malleable, why don't people simply adjust their expectations? Why hold yourself hostage to your preconceptions? Okay that's a loaded question, but the point is still the same. If people have a personal expectation of how characters should behave based on a myriad of subjective factors, asking them to just change their expectations to allow for (subjectively) "bad" elements in a movie might not be reasonable.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Yes, of course. The point of 'turning your brain off' is that you're no longer required to engage with the work. Your point reminds me of when Grindhouse came out, where people were hand waving criticism of Death Proof by saying saying "of COURSE Death Proof is bad, it's an authentic Grindhouse movie and Grindhouse movies are bad, therefore that makes it good because it's authentic! You need to change your expectations!" That always struck me as a really bizarre leap of logic that I couldn't agree with. Besides, what should someone change their expectations to? Should they expect the characters to act (subjectively) unbelievably, and all of a sudden, they'll enjoy the movie? Like I kinda get your point on a wider scale - every piece of advertising for Inglourious Basterds made the movie look like a non-stop action fest with Brad Pitt killing Nazis the entire time. The movie wasn't that at all, and I ended up being incredibly disappointed because the advertising had been so misleading (and especially after getting burned by the misleading advertising for Death Proof). All of that was due to my expectations. Expectations are really hard to change, especially after-the-fact. It's subjective and it isn't "fair", but I don't think it's quite as easy as you're making it out to be. Edit-- MonsieurChoc posted:In fact, I'd kind of say they're the opposite. Adjusting your expectations attempting to udnerstand what the work was trying to say. Turning your brain off is not caring about it. I *understand* what Death Proof was trying to do, from the standpoint of an authentic Grindhouse movie. But I still thought the movie sucked. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
No one is saying to have the same expectations for every movie, and by definition, having subjective expectations means that you don't. When I watch a Farrelly Brothers comedy I have a different set of expectations for the characters than from a Spielberg historical docu-drama. And again, understanding is not the same as liking, and changing your expectations to accommodate one is easier than for the other, especially on a repeat watch of a movie someone may not have enjoyed the first time around. I'm not saying it can't be done - people's opinions of Alien3 have softened over time, and a lot of those initial negative opinions were due to expectations. But I don't think it's something you can just force people to do, or expect them to do like switching a light switch.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:On one hand, people's life experiences will paint the way that they see the world, including media. But on the other hand, I don't think it is impossible for people to see things from a different perspective. One movie that trips me up is the Director's Cut of Blade Runner. I know the film is supposed to ambiguous about Deckard, but the addition of the unicorn scene makes it all but certain to me to the point where I kind of get annoyed that it was added to the movie. Is it right? No, it's subjective.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
The_Rob posted:If it's not right though why not try your best to engage in it with a different way your not used to. The_Rob posted:Also Death Proof is way better than planet terror. Lt. Danger posted:Okay, but you can't force me to consider those opinions to be worthwhile or valuable. It seemed like your response to people doing all of that was to toss a vague, ambiguous "change your expectations!" into the mix, without explaining what they should change their expectations to, how exactly they should go about doing that, or why they should need to do it. And if you don't think other people's opinions are worthwhile or valuable, that's okay. I think the people who shared them will be okay if someone on the internet doesn't agree with their opinion on a movie.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 13:00
|
|
|
I agree, and it's why I tried to steer the discussion back towards Alien3. Darko made a point about subjective biases and suspension of disbelief, and now we're back here. You might notice that my last several posts haven't even mentioned my specific views on Prometheus at all. That's no accident, I've been trying to keep from retreading the same ground while still talking about why I think "change your expectations" isn't as easy or effective as Lt. Danger seems think it is.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 16:40
|
|
|
Talking about what a film is not is pretty important, because it lets us recognize what makes films good/bad, or what they lack or don't lack. That's still an entirely valid, useful way of looking at films, and doesn't require being held hostage by the film itself. You're saying that people aren't "putting forth an effort", and you're implying that people aren't knowing things about the movie, and therefore their opinion is worthless. It seems to me like you're not understanding what people are actually saying about the movie, or that they're engaging in a different sort of film analysis than you are. If your response to people saying what they liked or didn't like is "change your expectations, put in some REAL work", then I get the impression you don't understand what people are saying, why they're saying it, or why it's important. Remember: understanding something is not the same as agreeing with/liking it. Maybe you should change your expectations regarding film criticism? TLDR Edit: there's more than one way to discuss movies, pooh-poohing one form as "no effort" stifles discussion, let's agree to disagree and talk about cool things like movies (or you can PM me if you want to keep talking about this I guess) 
Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Sep 30, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:I don't know why you guys bother conversing with a grown man who considers playtime with his Kenner Aliens action figures as continuity in a franchise that actively tries to distance itself from it. So far the only person who has even mentioned stuff like that in this thread is you.  Re: Blomkamp's "Alien's 2", I think it's a dumb, fan service-ey move that does a huge dis-service to Alien3. Having said that, some of the speculative concept art he posted online prior to his project being officially greenlit was awesome, especially the one of the Derelict in a research facility. lizardman posted:You guys are WAY overexplaining to Xenomrph. I don't know if you noticed in your need to write an essay about things everyone already knew, but I haven't posted about my opinions re Prometheus in a good while now, and had even steered the thread to a completely different movie until someone brought it back. Also I did enjoy the movie, the characters was just a criticism of it. So if you want to drop the issue, can we please drop it? Edit-- also re your Matrix example, I'd sincerely find that kind of stuff interesting and absolutely wouldn't mind if other people posted more things like it, and I'm confident other people would respond to it too. It's why I posted my opinions in the first place, and amidst all the shouting, there were actually people responding to it. I see people talk about things that don't interest me all the time, but instead of stifling their discussion, I just... let them post about it. It seems like a pretty civil way to have discussions; I'd like to think we can have more than one discussion going at a time. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Sep 30, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
david_a posted:A:R gave me a lasting, irrational dislike for Joss Whedon. Partly for writing the awful script to begin with, but also for complaining about all the rad stuff in his script they rewrote/threw away even though all his ideas were worse than what was in the movie. He wanted a ridiculous jeep chase scene through a crop field(!) inside the giant ship that read like some kind of horrible Jurassic Park crossover fanfic. Whedon has a bad tendency to not take responsibility for his own failings. Having said that, Resurrection isn't entirely his fault. It's a bad pairing between a decent script and a (good) director ill-suited to direct it. Jennet' stuff is great, but I don't think he really "got" Whedon's script. A lot of stuff meant to be played straight in the script is done for laughs, and vice versa. I think a good movie could have been done from Whedon's script, but I think it was sort of doomed from the start.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
lizardman posted:Didn't mean to dogpile, my apologies. I was just motivated to make sure it got through to you because I can just see this kind of thing happening all over again in some other thread about another movie. I'll drop it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Ant Man gave me hope that they could pull off something like that, what with how perfect "young Michael Douglas" looked. I wouldn't be opposed to a movie with digitally de-aged Ripley. On the topic of scary Alien, yes I know it's a part of ~*~the expanded universe~*~ but the Alien Isolation video game is loving fantastic and scary as heck. The art design is fantastic (if a little overwrought in some regards), it doesn't just play out like an "Alien greatest hits" and tries to be its own thing while still understanding what made the movie scary and compelling, and it's all around gorgeous and a lot of fun if you like the first movie. The voice actress for Amanda Ripley is a little shaky, and it's a long game (and starts to outstay it's welcome by the last chapter or so), but it's still a great ride. And  SCARY GAMES MONTH starts tomorrow, too. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
I found the Alien's inconsistency to be part of what made it scarier, but I can see how it could stray too far into "unfair frustrating bullshit" territory. The Alien also learned from your actions, so your deterrents would become less useful over time.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Nobody got upset when AVP was remade - and, therefore, retconned out of existence. (Or that Predator 2's 'non canon' because it takes place in a comic-book dystopia.) Likewise, Predator2's setting doesn't have anything to do with anything, seeing as how it's fiction. lizardman posted:Alien Isolation does look pretty rad and spooky. I don't even need the Alien movies to be as overtly horror as that, either, I'm perfectly willing to have an Aliens-style "relentlessly intense action" type of scary. Pop culture often focuses on the Marines blasting the Aliens and treating the Aliens like cannon fodder monsters, but in the actual movie, they're a constant real threat that out-think the Marines at almost every turn. It's really unfortunate that so many things missed the point.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Clipperton posted:The bit right after they've landed and are creeping through the colony is one of the most unbearably tense scenes I've ever seen, it's up there with the 'silent room' in Cube.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 11:55
|
|
|
Yeah it's extra funny when Ridley Scott got all pissed at Damon Lindelof for even speaking of AvP in his presence, given that Prometheus is basically AvP Redux (and in some cases, with better characters. There I said it  )
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Oh Prometheus is a much better looking movie by far. Also AvP doesn't have David. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What do you mean by "the" here? That isn't to say AvP doesn't bring some interesting things to the table. It was the first Alien movie to have a unique "regular" Alien, the shifting pyramid was an impressive practical effect, and Lance Henriksen is seriously the coolest dude and he can do no wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
The Predator rules in AvPR. His performance, the visual design, everything is top notch. Fun fact: Ian Whyte, who played the Predators in the AvP movies, ask played the main Engineer in Prometheus.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
Immortan posted:Don't get me wrong; for I think it's great that it received the nomination. I just figured that the infamous shots of the sock puppet looked unanimously bad even for audiences in 92'; and that the only reason they made it into the theatrical cut was due to its notoriously hosed production. Despite this, I do appreciate how the Alien's head in this one returned to the smooth, translucent dome of the original instead of that ghastly ridged mess that was so ubiquitous in Aliens.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
That and it helped them blend into the hive walls really, really well. When Dietrich gets grabbed it's a pretty big HOLY gently caress moment.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Aside from the mini-comics that came with the toys, the actual licensed comics showed a ton of restraint with regard to wacky Alien hybrids. It took them years to even capitalize on the obvious PredAlien concept (and when they did, it was great and still arguably one of the better PredAlien designs to date), and that has been the only PredAlien in the comics so far. You'd kind of expect the AvP concept to run that poo poo into the ground, but.... nope. Beyond that there was one Alien borne from some sort of aquatic creature that shows up for one page and is never seen again, and one borne from a Space Jockey (and it looks cool), and a Queen born from a spacefaring humanoid in one comic, and that's really the entirety of wacky Alien hybrids in the comics, surprisingly. The rest are pretty much all based on the designs seen in Alien, Aliens, Resurrection, or AvP (and the AvP design is identical to the Resurrection design, without the satyr-legs). I can post up a cool set of comparison pics someone on an AvP forum put together a few years back that goes into the evolution of the movie designs, it's pretty cool and I know I've posted it in prior Alien/Prometheus/AvP threads.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
Oh that's an Alien born from an alligator and I didn't count it in my "wacky hybrids" count because it's from an inter-company crossover. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 11:06
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Why am I not reading about and viewing pictures of various types of aliens right now???       And just for chuckles: 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 11:35
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Are any of the alien comics or books any good? I remember reading a couple avp comics years ago that were extremely hit and miss. Almost all of the Aliens/Predator/AvP comics have been collected in discounted "omnibus" collections, which is pretty cool. I'll copy-paste a breakdown of what's in them and what's worthwhile, in my opinion: quote:Here's a list of all the Aliens, Predator, and AvP omnibuses (omnibi?) and what's contained in them. I've put a * next to each thing in each omnibus that's worth reading, with more * meaning it's one of my favorites. Basically *** = really great, very worth reading; either has great art, great and memorable characters, does really interesting things with the themes and ideas of the movies, or likely a combination of all three ** = very above average * = worth a read, and you'll probably get more enjoyment out of it if you're a "fan" of the series. 0 stars = skip it If I had to pick one Aliens comic that's absolutely worth reading, it's Aliens: Labyrinth. It takes the "mad scientist captures Aliens, poo poo goes wrong" formula and turns it on its head in interesting ways, and it's a really great pairing of the crazy body-horror and alien other-ness of 'Alien' with a moderate dose of the action of 'Aliens'. And I won't spoil it, but some of the poo poo that goes down in the third act is hosed up. It also has really, really great artwork and it's arguably my favorite depiction of the Aliens in comics to date. They're unnaturally tall and skinny, skinnier than even a human in a suit could be, but still inhumanly strong. So when you see one literally pull a man's head off one-handed, it has that much more visual impact. A close second is Aliens: Apocalypse, and it's basically a proto-Prometheus but with heavier focus on the Aliens, although the Space Jockeys get a lot of (indirect) attention, too. The art is great, and it covers a lot of similar "meeting our makers", "hubris of man", "the folly of scientific discovery" themes that Prometheus does, but from a somewhat different angle. There's a new series that wrapped up last year called "Fire and Stone" that as well received, but I haven't read it yet because I've been waiting on a collected edition (due out later this month, if my Amazon pre-order is accurate). It was interesting because they did it as 4 semi-interconnected story arcs, one for Aliens, Predator, AvP, and Prometheus. The Prometheus one had a rescue crew landing on the planet from the movie and coming across the aftermath of the Prometheus expedition. The Aliens one was actually a side story set during the fall of the Hadley's Hope colony in 'Aliens'. I'm not sure how the 4 stories were really connected, but I know at some point in the AvP arc, a Predator gets exposed to the "black goo" and poo poo gets crazy. Speaking of Black Goo, the Fire and Stone series comes up with a clever "official" name for the stuff: "accelerant". And no, apparently the comics don't "explain" the black goo or try to codify its effects or whatever, like a lot of spin-off materials like to do. As for the books, the bulk of the older 90s books were straight up novelizations of the comics. For the most part they're improvements on the comics because they don't have page limit restrictions and are published with the benefit of hindsight, so the author can do things like develop characters, restructure plots, resolve plot holes, etc. That said they're still novelizations of movie tie-in comic books from the 90s, so it's not like they're fine literature. In the mid-2000s and continuing into the present they started doing standalone Aliens and Predator novels, of varying quality. There's a trilogy of books that came out last year that I haven't gotten around to reading all of yet, one is a Ripley story set between 'Alien' and 'Aliens' where she gets woken up mid-hypersleep, has an adventure, and gets put back into hypersleep and her memory gets erased. No, seriously. It actually works better than it sounds, and the author does a good job of salvaging what's otherwise a bad fanfiction premise. I haven't read the second and third books yet, but the second one is set post-Alien Resurrection (but doesn't feature any movie characters), and the third one tells the story of how Hadley's Hope fell (and references some things from the Fire and Stone comic mentioned above).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:Xenoborg Alien: As a Marine, they can one shot you and take insane punishment, unless you sprint up on it and shoot its blinking head sensor at point blank while its "idle" (and hope it doesn't spool up and murder you before you kill it). As a Predator, you can one-shot it at range with the smart disc, or you can gently caress with it with the spear gun because you can snipe off components. Pick off its guns and it just stares at you all angry, pick off its laser sight and it fires blindly in all directions.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
SirDrone posted:You also forgot the AVPR Ridged design which honestly I thought had one ridiculously badass long and spearheaded tail but suffers from making the overall design look goofy as gently caress. The way it's shot and lit in the movie itself makes it look goofier than it actually is, which is kind of unfortunate because it's a pretty neat design and it was a cool change to see them bring the ridged head design back out of retirement.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Speaking of how Aliens are shot in AvPR, someone posted a comparison showing that on the home releases of the movie the lighting is totally different? Was that real? Any pics?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Whoa, that Walt Simonson art looks loving awesome. I'm going to have to hunt that book down. Alien: The Illustrated Story is all around great, and it's got a couple early script draft elements that were never filmed and aren't even in the novelization, like "the Box Alien". The other "movie adaptation" comics are skippable, generally due to bad art or being extremely heavily abridged. The Aliens one is noteworthy because it's told from Newt's perspective and only the second half is the events from the movie. The first half is the fall of Hadley's Hope leading up to the movie. Interestingly enough, the recent Hadley's Hope novel that came out last year specifically references details from it, despite it being a fairly obscure comic. The Alien3 adaptation is bad, but the covers were done by Arthur Sudyam if I remember right, so they're pretty great. The Resurrection adaptation is just plain bad.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:As iconic as the chest burster scene from the original is, the special effects are actually kinda bad. Those close-ups of the puppet looking around are very clearly a static prop being slowly spun around by some intern. So it's neat to see it drawn so dynamic. Movie magic! 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
Party Boat posted:Ridley Scott is a glorious fucker. One of the changes Ridley Scott made for his "director's cut" was he changed the audio of the Derelict ship's distress/warning signal. In the original deleted scene it's all weird and distorted, and sounds unsettlingly like an elephant being strangled underwater or something. It's weird as gently caress and super unnerving. The redone audio is much more tame, and the scene is worse off for it. He's never explained why he changed the audio, either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2015 23:48
|
|