The Alien Franchise Discussion

[Wor-Gar]

For Ripley to have any involvement in a follow-up to Alien I believe Cameron did exactly the right thing, the thing that made the most sense - guns. Marines. There's no way she would have gone back otherwise. And if you're gonna introduce those elements then of course you have to have multiple Aliens because guns tend to kill things pretty easily. Enter the complaint about how the film turned the Alien into a disposable bug. Enter my retort that the Alien Queen now assumed the mantle previously held by ''Kane's son'' as the invincible and malevolent beast. Less stealthy due to her size but she sure had character. The warriors meanwhile still managed to decimate the troops so they weren't exactly ineffectual themselves.

I would argue that the devolving of the amazingly interesting alien down to a generic ant colony was one of the things that made Aliens lowbrow, despite how "neat" the Queen monster was.

Aliens is a dumbed down version for a broader audience, something Cameron spent his life achieving. He's a genius at making lowbrow into quality.

I wish they'd made the aliens in Aliens something more unique and fitting with their ability to shapeshift themselves into their host. The idea of many aliens never bothered me -- the idea of screaming ants did. Once you degrade them like that, of course you need a Big Bad at the end. Oh, a Queen! Yikes.

Surely there could have been something far more horrific -- and frighteningly alien -- to confront as a challenge.


This is not to say that I don't enjoy the simplicity of Cowboys and Aliens... its just that the first Alien promised so much more.

 

[JAWS]

I would argue that the devolving of the amazingly interesting alien down to a generic ant colony was one of the things that made Aliens lowbrow, despite how "neat" the Queen monster was.

I dont mind that they had an insect like life. It was interesting to see the world of the ALIEN. And they still remained an intelligent species. I mean they still knew how to cut the power man

Aliens is a dumbed down version for a broader audience, something Cameron spent his life achieving. He's a genius at making lowbrow into quality.

I think that is a bit unfair.. I mean I love ALIEN.. But it was the director and the look of the ALIEN that makes it high brow.. The story itself is a creature feature with a great monster with a super cool life cycle.

I wish they'd made the aliens in Aliens something more unique and fitting with their ability to shapeshift themselves into their host.

Shapeshifting into a host wasn't a thing until ALIEN 3 and the Hasbro toys

The idea of many aliens never bothered me -- the idea of screaming ants did. Once you degrade them like that, of course you need a Big Bad at the end. Oh, a Queen! Yikes.

If they tried doing too much more I think it would have ruined what the ALIEN was.. A perfect predator.

ALIEN is great because the creature is simplistic. Its a Great White Shark in space. If you make it too much more.. IDK you run the risk of actually ruining a great monster. I guess I prefer the more simplistic killing machine. It is what made the first movie scary.

I dont think they were degraded they just came up against superior fire power. Which is what made the film so neat as a sequel.

Surely there could have been something far more horrific -- and frighteningly alien -- to confront as a challenge.

This is not to say that I don't enjoy the simplicity of Cowboys and Aliens... its just that the first Alien promised so much more

.

As far as doing more with the ALIEN.. I don't know.. What more did the ALIEN promise in ALIEN?? I mean if the crew of the Nostromo had the military weapons from ALIENS and were located on a planet where the acid would not be an issue.. well then the original would not stand a chance either.

I thought Cameron did a good job of making them seem a bit more dangerous by giving them speed and greater numbers and to show us that there was something laying those eggs.

I mean to make it an action film you had to making them somewhat disposable and I thought he did it in a way that was true to the original.

Making it an action film is what makes it a cool sequel..

Its a fun popcorn flick and is not the artistic masterpiece that ALIEN is.. That is for sure. But if they started screwing around with the ALIEN and making it something more.. I don't know.. They made the Space Jockey something more in the Prequels and that idea sucks




I do understand where you are coming from.. There was a mystery surrounding the ALIEN in the first film and ALIENS made them nothing more then ANTS. But that is the issues with sequels.. They are always trying to give you more answers... And thats not always a good thing.

 

[Wor-Gar]

Shapeshifting into a host wasn't a thing until ALIEN 3 and the Hasbro toys

I couldn't get through your post because this slammed the breaks for me...

First, the shapeshifting lifecycle was part of the original alien's biology as far back as 1979. It takes on the appearance of its host, that was why it was humanoid. It was a rather brilliant excuse for why it looked like a man in a suit. I do believe you had to read Starlog and other magazines back then to get that background information.

As you say, it was a super cool life cycle... which added to the fact that there was some original thought applied to the alien conceit. They didn't just make it an alien bug.

I'll read the rest now...

OK, well it seems like you did come around to all I was saying by the end of your post. Popcorn vs art and all... I never meant high art by any means.

Incidentally, in terms of 'promise', I meant the promise of 'the alien' being even more unusual and interesting as opposed to a simplistically understood insect, despite how fast they were.

 

[a-dev]

I would argue that the devolving of the amazingly interesting alien down to a generic ant colony was one of the things that made Aliens lowbrow, despite how "neat" the Queen monster was.

Aliens is a dumbed down version for a broader audience, something Cameron spent his life achieving. He's a genius at making lowbrow into quality.

I wish they'd made the aliens in Aliens something more unique and fitting with their ability to shapeshift themselves into their host. The idea of many aliens never bothered me -- the idea of screaming ants did. Once you degrade them like that, of course you need a Big Bad at the end. Oh, a Queen! Yikes.

Surely there could have been something far more horrific -- and frighteningly alien -- to confront as a challenge.


This is not to say that I don't enjoy the simplicity of Cowboys and Aliens... its just that the first Alien promised so much more.

''A genius at making lowbrow into quality''

A backhanded sort of compliment I think it's fair to say. As a big Cameron fan I'm torn about how to respond to that. You (and many others) simultaneously respect and look down upon him as a filmmaker. It never fails to confuse me

But that said I never experienced being a fan of Alien before Aliens came along. And I've since become very familiar with being a fan of something for a long time before it then gets a new sequel - and finding the new film to completely fail to live up to my hopes and expectations. I guess that's what Aliens detractors have always felt.

 

[xipotec]

Wow , really surprised to hear people think that the xenos in Aliens were just ants.

I felt they moved them into intelligent creatures that evolved into killing machines to reproduce the species. At all costs. The hive mind mentality is actually quite terrifying and also plausible for a successful alien species.

Some of my favorite scenes were the Aliens maneuvering the intruder hero?s into position to eliminate them.

Seeing the queen call off the xenos to protect the young was also incredible.

Then the best illustration of the intelligent species aspect was the queens desire for revenge against Ripley. No ant cares about revenge.

I think that was one of my issues with the original. In the end it is pretty much a monster in space horror film. There is nothing special about the Alien besides the life cycle , as previously said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wor-Gar]

''A genius at making lowbrow into quality''

A backhanded sort of compliment I think it's fair to say. As a big Cameron fan I'm torn about how to respond to that. You (and many others) simultaneously respect and look down upon him as a filmmaker. It never fails to confuse me

No question Cameron is a master filmmaker. One of my favorites, always has been. And for such a brilliant guy I always found it amazing how in touch he is with his inner 'grunt'. His specialty is blue-collar grunt. It had become a personal cliche by the time Avatar opened (along with his walkers). Rambo, Aliens, Abyss, etc... all favor a very basic blue-collar type and point of view. Its very American, there's nothing wrong with it, but it does require that the movie around it also simplifies things for that particular audience. But its also one of the reasons his movies do so well. He's got some great ideas but he's Dukes of Hazzard at heart.

I don't see why you guys can not be more critical of things you like. With the exception of Jaws )) every movie can be criticized and broken down to be analyzed, like Aliens, but I can still enjoy it as the movie it is intended to be. The Alien/Aliens argument is nearly mirrored by the Terminator/T2 argument for those fans. I've seen people rip on T2, yet they seem to still enjoy it. At least compared to T3... much like Alien 3... which is brilliant compared to Alien 4... much like T4. Funny that Cameron is responsible for the argument in both camps.

 

[abake]

I like Aliens. A lot. It's a great action movie and I really do believe it's a masterpiece of the 80's (Sci-Fi) action genre. The thing is... it is an 80's flick.
For better or worse, Cameron distilled it into the perfect 80's action movie: it's got the clever one-liners, it's got the heavy handed Vietnam allegory (complete with inept officer), it's got the by-the-numbers cast of characters that are all immediately recognisable, it's got the budding love interest story... I mean, Aliens is so good at what it does that everything that came after it became a clich?. The mastery of it is that Cameron just made it so damn good.
I agree with Wor-Gar, Cameron is a genius at making low-brow look great. Or rather, was, IMHO. I haven't really liked anything he's done after T2, and I still like T1 better...

As for the impact on the franchise and the nature of the alien itself... I'm in the "they got dumbed down" camp. And I don't mean it literally, as in "the creatures were dumbed down", because, as was pointed out, they clearly show intelligence. What I mean is that the alien(s) became simple monsters. Yeah, sure, clever beasts, but monsters. In Alien, the creature is almost as much a protagonist as the rest of the crew. It even gets named: "Kane's son". Its elaborate movements, its cat and mouse game with the crew, its knowledge of where and how to hide in the ship (when it showed up in the Narcissus it was clear to me the thing knew what it was doing) are all much more sophisticated an eerie than the hordes of drones and telepathic Queen in Aliens.

Of course, going bigger seems logical, but the ants/hive/queen thing isn't the only way of going bigger. Besides, going bigger isn't the only way... you could go weirder. But it is what it is, and I think we got a better sequel than anybody had the right to expect. I think, however, that Aliens' success was both a blessing and a curse, because it paved the way for a franchise, but it also set up an expectation for what should come next. And we know how that turned out...
People enraged because Hicks and Newt were killed off, because it wasn't a "war" anymore, but a lone creature again, etc... And I think the franchise never quite recovered from that. Just look at all the people clamouring for an Alien 5 that brought back Hicks and Newt.

 

[ironwez20]

Wow , really surprised to hear people think that the xenos in Aliens were just ants.

I felt they moved them into intelligent creatures that evolved into killing machines to reproduce the species. At all costs. The hive mind mentality is actually quite terrifying and also plausible for a successful alien species.

Some of my favorite scenes were the Aliens maneuvering the intruder hero?s into position to eliminate them.

Seeing the queen call off the xenos to protect the young was also incredible.

Then the best illustration of the intelligent species aspect was the queens desire for revenge against Ripley. No ant cares about revenge.

I think that was one of my issues with the original. In the end it is pretty much a monster in space horror film. There is nothing special about the Alien besides the life cycle , as previously said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I always saw them as a evolved spider creature

 

[Wor-Gar]

I like Aliens. A lot. It's a great action movie and I really do believe it's a masterpiece of the 80's (Sci-Fi) action genre. The thing is... it is an 80's flick.
For better or worse, Cameron distilled it into the perfect 80's action movie: it's got the clever one-liners, it's got the heavy handed Vietnam allegory (complete with inept officer), it's got the by-the-numbers cast of characters that are all immediately recognisable, it's got the budding love interest story... I mean, Aliens is so good at what it does that everything that came after it became a clich?. The mastery of it is that Cameron just made it so damn good.
I agree with Wor-Gar, Cameron is a genius at making low-brow look great. Or rather, was, IMHO. I haven't really liked anything he's done after T2, and I still like T1 better...

As for the impact on the franchise and the nature of the alien itself... I'm in the "they got dumbed down" camp. And I don't mean it literally, as in "the creatures were dumbed down", because, as was pointed out, they clearly show intelligence. What I mean is that the alien(s) became simple monsters. Yeah, sure, clever beasts, but monsters. In Alien, the creature is almost as much a protagonist as the rest of the crew. It even gets named: "Kane's son". Its elaborate movements, its cat and mouse game with the crew, its knowledge of where and how to hide in the ship (when it showed up in the Narcissus it was clear to me the thing knew what it was doing) are all much more sophisticated an eerie than the hordes of drones and telepathic Queen in Aliens.

Of course, going bigger seems logical, but the ants/hive/queen thing isn't the only way of going bigger. Besides, going bigger isn't the only way... you could go weirder. But it is what it is, and I think we got a better sequel than anybody had the right to expect. I think, however, that Aliens' success was both a blessing and a curse, because it paved the way for a franchise, but it also set up an expectation for what should come next. And we know how that turned out...
People enraged because Hicks and Newt were killed off, because it wasn't a "war" anymore, but a lone creature again, etc... And I think the franchise never quite recovered from that. Just look at all the people clamouring for an Alien 5 that brought back Hicks and Newt.

Well said.

 

[JAWS]

I couldn't get through your post because this slammed the breaks for me...

First, the shapeshifting lifecycle was part of the original alien's biology as far back as 1979. It takes on the appearance of its host, that was why it was humanoid. It was a rather brilliant excuse for why it looked like a man in a suit. I do believe you had to read Starlog and other magazines back then to get that background information.

Starlog is Canon now??

I am just going by the films.. It was not until the third film that the general audience and fan knew about this... BUT if the filmmakers had an idea I can see what you are saying about taking it down that road in ALIENS.

As you say, it was a super cool life cycle... which added to the fact that there was some original thought applied to the alien conceit. They didn't just make it an alien bug.

I'll read the rest now...

OK, well it seems like you did come around to all I was saying by the end of your post. Popcorn vs art and all... I never meant high art by any means.

Incidentally, in terms of 'promise', I meant the promise of 'the alien' being even more unusual and interesting as opposed to a simplistically understood insect, despite how fast they were.

I just remember thinking it was cool that there was more to the ALIEN then just being a monster in space..

In some ways I think the Prequels are trying to make the ALIEN more unusual and interesting and it's failing big time.

''A genius at making lowbrow into quality''

A backhanded sort of compliment I think it's fair to say. As a big Cameron fan I'm torn about how to respond to that. You (and many others) simultaneously respect and look down upon him as a filmmaker. It never fails to confuse me

But that said I never experienced being a fan of Alien before Aliens came along. And I've since become very familiar with being a fan of something for a long time before it then gets a new sequel - and finding the new film to completely fail to live up to my hopes and expectations. I guess that's what Aliens detractors have always felt.

I was a big ALIEN fan when I was a kid and getting an ALIEN sequel for me was a huge surprise. The only way to keep up on this stuff was through Starlog and Fangoria and I was spending my money on comics instead at the time with the occasional purchase of said magazines.

So perhaps that is why I hold it in such high regard as a huge fan of the original. I never gave much thought of there being a sequel. So when it landed it was a nice surprise and when I saw it I was shocked with how different it was from the original (other then ripping off the ending lol)

Wow , really surprised to hear people think that the xenos in Aliens were just ants.

I felt they moved them into intelligent creatures that evolved into killing machines to reproduce the species. At all costs. The hive mind mentality is actually quite terrifying and also plausible for a successful alien species.

Some of my favorite scenes were the Aliens maneuvering the intruder hero?s into position to eliminate them.

Seeing the queen call off the xenos to protect the young was also incredible.

Then the best illustration of the intelligent species aspect was the queens desire for revenge against Ripley. No ant cares about revenge.

Agreed.

I think that was one of my issues with the original. In the end it is pretty much a monster in space horror film. There is nothing special about the Alien besides the life cycle , as previously said.

Yeah.. I mean I love the original ALIEN... I love that it doesn't feel pity or remorse and it absolutely will not stop until you are dead (Does Cameron have an original thought j/k)

But in the end it was just a man in a monster suit. I thought ALIENS did a better job of making them feel more like actual living creatures.

But I also understand the "bug" argument.

I am lucky and love both films and the way both the ALIENs are portrayed

I don't see why you guys can not be more critical of things you like. With the exception of Jaws )) every movie can be criticized and broken down to be analyzed, l

I like Aliens. A lot. It's a great action movie and I really do believe it's a masterpiece of the 80's (Sci-Fi) action genre. The thing is... it is an 80's flick.
For better or worse, Cameron distilled it into the perfect 80's action movie: it's got the clever one-liners, it's got the heavy handed Vietnam allegory (complete with inept officer), it's got the by-the-numbers cast of characters that are all immediately recognisable, it's got the budding love interest story... I mean, Aliens is so good at what it does that everything that came after it became a clich?. The mastery of it is that Cameron just made it so damn good.
I agree with Wor-Gar, Cameron is a genius at making low-brow look great. Or rather, was, IMHO. I haven't really liked anything he's done after T2, and I still like T1 better...

I agree and disagree all at the same time.

I mean DIE HARD is an 80's action movie but its so well made it transcends 80's action.
Same goes for Predator and Lethal Weapon.

At the same time I agree with how ALIENS hits all the beats of 80's war style action films of the time and because of that I can see where maybe it feels a bit dated for some. Unlike ALIEN which is timeless. For me personally I dont get the dated feel but I grew up with the film and in the 80's. This film feels nothing like Commando to me

But that is what makes it so great. It did not try and be ALIEN 2.. It really set itself apart from the first movie.


And yes.. T1 is better then T2

As for the impact on the franchise and the nature of the alien itself... I'm in the "they got dumbed down" camp. And I don't mean it literally, as in "the creatures were dumbed down", because, as was pointed out, they clearly show intelligence. What I mean is that the alien(s) became simple monsters. Yeah, sure, clever beasts, but monsters. In Alien, the creature is almost as much a protagonist as the rest of the crew. It even gets named: "Kane's son". Its elaborate movements, its cat and mouse game with the crew, its knowledge of where and how to hide in the ship (when it showed up in the Narcissus it was clear to me the thing knew what it was doing) are all much more sophisticated an eerie than the hordes of drones and telepathic Queen in Aliens.

The whole movie of ALIEN is literally alien to the viewer.. Nothing about the ALIEN or where it comes from feels familiar to the audience.

What is the planet they are on? What is that weird looking ship?? What the hell is that space jockey ?? Are those eggs?? What the hell is that face Huger? Acid for blood? Chest burster? ***** shaped head? Teeth inside of teeth?? What is this creatures end game?? What did it do to Lambert?? What the hell ?????



Its really a brilliant film in that way.. And in all honesty IMO any explanation would take away from the original film and demystify it. As the Prequel films have show..

Of course, going bigger seems logical, but the ants/hive/queen thing isn't the only way of going bigger. Besides, going bigger isn't the only way... you could go weirder.

If the films got weirder with the ALIEN creature I cant help but feel that it would have hurt the original more then helped.

At least as a Hive colony it still has this "We will destroy anything in order to grow and survive"

But it is what it is, and I think we got a better sequel than anybody had the right to expect. I think, however, that Aliens' success was both a blessing and a curse, because it paved the way for a franchise, but it also set up an expectation for what should come next. And we know how that turned out...People enraged because Hicks and Newt were killed off, because it wasn't a "war" anymore, but a lone creature again, etc... And I think the franchise never quite recovered from that. Just look at all the people clamouring for an Alien 5 that brought back Hicks and Newt.

That is true.. But the trailer for ALIEN 3 didn't help... It made it look like an ALIENS sequel and not more in line with ALIEN.

I was not a fan of killing off Newt and Hicks... And I really was not a fan of killing Ripley. I just felt her character deserved a happy ending.


I have come around to really liking ALIEN 3... But still view it as a bit alternate Universe film

 

[Wor-Gar]

I mean DIE HARD is an 80's action movie but its so well made it transcends 80's action.
Same goes for Predator and Lethal Weapon.

I would definitely put Aliens in the camp of GREAT 80's action movies like the above. Its a great movie.

But since this is a discussion thread I thought we could discuss it... and for me, it pales in many ways to the original. It offers a lot instead, but it just isn't Alien enough for me, that's all. But I do like and respect the fact that Cameron brilliantly took it in a whole other direction as a sequel. A very hard thing to do.

Starlog is Canon now??

And yes, as much as all the nonsense you have to read to understand Star Wars. I know, I see your wink.

But back then, with no internet, those magazines were the only way to get information and filmmakers intent. It was their communication to the fans for backstories and a deeper understanding of the movies. Also those movie books that would come out. The Making of... loved those.

 

[xipotec]

I think the conversation diverges between seen in theaters and seen on TV/VHS or GASP dvd/BR/streaming.

We are referencing both of these films within the possible wrong reference in time.

Alien :1979. I am 7 years old. I would have to wait till 1982 to actually see this film. But even then, in horrible VHS and HBO quality it shook you. And as previously said, it was mostly due to the complete foreign nature of the alien. 3 things that stood out, it?s birth, the twist with ash, and it?s dearth at the hands of the seemingly weaker member of the crew. Weaver was NOT expected to be the star of this film. She was absolutely NOT the top billed star at the time for moviegoers. Not to mention a woman, sole survivor? That was groundbreaking.

The sexual undertones of the Alien, along with the legendary designs made what should have been ?just a monster in space? something special. But the overall story is , like the sequel , often said to be formula.

1986: Aliens : 14 years old. seen in glorious widescreen theater presentation, in a single screen theater. NOTHING about this seemed formula at the time. The characters were NOT cookie cutter, even thought they would quickly become that, as many films tried to emulate that character formula. The Aliens, a threat to an unarmed crew, now devours an entire planet settlement, decimated a crack military unit and had to be NUKED to contain them. These undertones scored the perceived threat of invasion from other countries, particularly the USSR. Cameron is able to channel these societal fears into his films., making subtle nods to subconscious fears. But let?s be clear, none of this was obvious on the outset of first viewing. Nothing seems contrived , because at the time it was not.
With special effects that , until recently , held water.....incredible pacing and story......it was an incredible ride.....that?s had deep though involved on how to keep the tension flowing, while keeping the suspense. The newer lifecycle, and the queen reveal was just as impactful as the original chest burster.

I think the main difference is the overall tone. One is a jump out and boo monster film, albeit creative and disturbing. The second a sci-fi action film, albeit, done with laser precision and creative additions to a world and creature that would endure for decades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Wor-Gar]

1986: Aliens : 14 years old. seen in glorious widescreen theater presentation, in a single screen theater. NOTHING about this seemed formula at the time. The characters were NOT cookie cutter, even thought they would quickly become that, as many films tried to emulate that character formula. The Aliens, a threat to an unarmed crew, now devours an entire planet settlement, decimated a crack military unit and had to be NUKED to contain them. These undertones scored the perceived threat of invasion from other countries, particularly the USSR. Cameron is able to channel these societal fears into his films., making subtle nods to subconscious fears. But let?s be clear, none of this was obvious on the outset of first viewing. Nothing seems contrived , because at the time it was not.

Again, a very personal POV, thank you for sharing.

But the conventions and cliches (cookie cutter) were readily apparent to many moviegoers older than 14 or who had a much better and broader understanding of movies. Not sure how at 14 you had not seen The Dirty Dozen or the myriad of movies that copied that "assemble the team for a mission" formula. What may have seemed very original to you wasn't the same experience of the entire film going public in 1986.

 

[JAWS]

I would definitely put Aliens in the camp of GREAT 80's action movies like the above. Its a great movie.

But since this is a discussion thread I thought we could discuss it... and for me, it pales in many ways to the original. It offers a lot instead, but it just isn't Alien enough for me, that's all. But I do like and respect the fact that Cameron brilliantly took it in a whole other direction as a sequel. A very hard thing to do.

Gotcha.. And don't get me wrong.. I think ALIEN is the superior film.. I just think ALIENS took it into the best direction. I am glad Scott did not come back for the sequel.. I always hated his "Bio Weapon" explanation for the ALIEN.

And yes, as much as all the nonsense you have to read to understand Star Wars. I know, I see your wink.

But back then, with no internet, those magazines were the only way to get information and filmmakers intent. It was their communication to the fans for backstories and a deeper understanding of the movies. Also those movie books that would come out. The Making of... loved those.

Without a doubt.. I loved the making of book and quickly looking through Starlog and Fangoria at Waldon Books at the mall.. Do you remember StarBlazer?? It was basically the national enquire of movie mags .. Sybil Danning was going to be the next Terminator

Also The biggest reason I collected soundtracks is so I could relive the film through imagination by listening to its score.. Bigger movies had the Story of albums also.

I think the conversation diverges between seen in theaters and seen on TV/VHS or GASP dvd/BR/streaming.

We are referencing both of these films within the possible wrong reference in time.

Alien :1979. I am 7 years old. I would have to wait till 1982 to actually see this film. But even then, in horrible VHS and HBO quality it shook you. And as previously said, it was mostly due to the complete foreign nature of the alien. 3 things that stood out, it?s birth, the twist with ash, and it?s dearth at the hands of the seemingly weaker member of the crew. Weaver was NOT expected to be the star of this film. She was absolutely NOT the top billed star at the time for moviegoers. Not to mention a woman, sole survivor? That was groundbreaking.

The sexual undertones of the Alien, along with the legendary designs made what should have been ?just a monster in space? something special. But the overall story is , like the sequel , often said to be formula.

1986: Aliens : 14 years old. seen in glorious widescreen theater presentation, in a single screen theater. NOTHING about this seemed formula at the time. The characters were NOT cookie cutter, even thought they would quickly become that, as many films tried to emulate that character formula. The Aliens, a threat to an unarmed crew, now devours an entire planet settlement, decimated a crack military unit and had to be NUKED to contain them. These undertones scored the perceived threat of invasion from other countries, particularly the USSR. Cameron is able to channel these societal fears into his films., making subtle nods to subconscious fears. But let?s be clear, none of this was obvious on the outset of first viewing. Nothing seems contrived , because at the time it was not.
With special effects that , until recently , held water.....incredible pacing and story......it was an incredible ride.....that?s had deep though involved on how to keep the tension flowing, while keeping the suspense. The newer lifecycle, and the queen reveal was just as impactful as the original chest burster.

I think the main difference is the overall tone. One is a jump out and boo monster film, albeit creative and disturbing. The second a sci-fi action film, albeit, done with laser precision and creative additions to a world and creature that would endure for decades.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a great point.. Two films became immensely better when films started getting widescreen presentation on special edition VHS and then DVD (I never owned a laser disc) ALIEN and Halloween. I always liked both films but they instantly became all time favs of mine when they got a widescreen home video release. Remember the scene when Michael's Mask would slowly appear behind Lori? On the old Pan and Scan VHS you could not see that.. You would just hear the music.. Really made the scene just blah..

Alien looked like a painting come to life in widescreen.

Again, a very personal POV, thank you for sharing.

But the conventions and cliches (cookie cutter) were readily apparent to many moviegoers older than 14 or who had a much better and broader understanding of movies. Not sure how at 14 you had not seen The Dirty Dozen or the myriad of movies that copied that "assemble the team for a mission" formula. What may have seemed very original to you wasn't the same experience of the entire film going public in 1986.

I was a fan of the Dirty Dozen back then and films like The Magnificent Seven and the idea of those films never entered my mind.

ALIENS my be "lowbrow" but its still an original movie. Taking the ALIEN and pitting it against the Dirty Dozen was something that had not been done before.

I cant think of too many sequels that completely switched genres the way ALEINS did. I went to it expecting a horror movie and instead got this great action / war movie of Man vs alien hoard.. Pretty original idea IMO.

Hell take Predator. That's a pretty original concept.. It's Commando meets ALIEN and thus a truly original feeling film. Actually I guess you can view it as The Dirty Dozen vs ALIEN and thus not that original, so ever mind

 

[Wor-Gar]

I loved the making of book and quickly looking through Starlog and Fangoria at Waldon Books at the mall.. Do you remember StarBlazer?? It was basically the national enquire of movie mags .. Sybil Danning was going to be the next Terminator

Also The biggest reason I collected soundtracks is so I could relive the film through imagination by listening to its score.. Bigger movies had the Story of albums also.

I don't remember StarBlazer, but there were a couple mags at that time that covered movies and sci-fi and monsters and fantasy, etc. I also spent hours at bookstores reading the mags.... and a HUGE YES on soundtracks. I started collecting at 9... absolutely loved them. In fact, I was a total late bloomer with regular "radio" music -- didn't get into what you would call normal youth music until High School... but maintained my soundtrack interest to this day.

I was a fan of the Dirty Dozen back then and films like The Magnificent Seven and the idea of those films never entered my mind.

That doesn't make it fact that no one else picked up on it. Because I did. So there.

Hell take Predator. That's a pretty original concept.. It's Commando meets ALIEN and thus a truly original feeling film. Actually I guess you can view it as The Dirty Dozen vs ALIEN and thus not that original, so ever mind

Actually it was pitched as Rambo meets Alien. I knew Lawrence Gordon back in those days and he told me so. His take was that you basically took two popular/successful films and mashed them together for the pitch. Die Hard was, oddly, Rambo meets Towering Inferno. Rambo was a big motivator in that specific slice of time these things were getting pitched. Given that Cameron wrote Rambo 2, I'm pretty sure his pitch was Rambo meets Alien as well (if he pitched that way).

 

[JAWS]

I don't remember StarBlazer, but there were a couple mags at that time that covered movies and sci-fi and monsters and fantasy, etc. I also spent hours at bookstores reading the mags....

Starblazer was trash But my local 7/11 carried them so I use to get some.. Here is an example



Love the Sybil Danning pin up centerfold $10 value

Plus was going to be the sexy witch to bring him to the dark side.


I knew it was crap back then but it pics from the movies and that was good enough for me

and a HUGE YES on soundtracks. I started collecting at 9... absolutely loved them. In fact, I was a total late bloomer with regular "radio" music -- didn't get into what you would call normal youth music until High School... but maintained my soundtrack interest to this day.

So interesting how much we were alike here.

I also did not get into "regular" music until high school. It was all about film scores until about 1986.

Star Wars, ESB and JAWS were my first few soundtracks.. I had SW on 8 track .. Then I got the Conan the Barbarian soundtrack and my interest in movie music really blew up.. And yep I am still collecting movie scores.. Though it tends to be older scores released by La La Land Records.. I don't find too many modern day scores that I love.

I have some of the Comic book movie film scores and Mad Max: Fury Road and Tron 2.. I also have the ST SW film scores. But not much else..

Back in my cassette buying days I use to buy the score to any film that I liked.

That doesn't make it fact that no one else picked up on it. Because I did. So there.

Oh I was not questioning that.. I was just pointing out that it went right by me

 

[Wor-Gar]

I had SW on 8 track ..

The one and only 8-track I ever had was... wait for it... JAWS!

I think I still have it tucked away somewhere. I've kept everything Jaws I've ever gotten... from The Jaws Log to the recent LIFE Magazine.

 

[xipotec]

Again, a very personal POV, thank you for sharing.

But the conventions and cliches (cookie cutter) were readily apparent to many moviegoers older than 14 or who had a much better and broader understanding of movies. Not sure how at 14 you had not seen The Dirty Dozen or the myriad of movies that copied that "assemble the team for a mission" formula. What may have seemed very original to you wasn't the same experience of the entire film going public in 1986.

I would still say that the team film was not even formulaic still.

TDD was lauded as a great film because it was original and well done. Granted , by the late 90?s many more films were being made with that formula.

It?s a matter of when does that format become formula ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JAWS]

The one and only 8-track I ever had was... wait for it... JAWS!

I think I still have it tucked away somewhere. I've kept everything Jaws I've ever gotten... from The Jaws Log to the recent LIFE Magazine.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

Actually it was pitched as Rambo meets Alien. I knew Lawrence Gordon back in those days and he told me so. His take was that you basically took two popular/successful films and mashed them together for the pitch. Die Hard was, oddly, Rambo meets Towering Inferno. Rambo was a big motivator in that specific slice of time these things were getting pitched. Given that Cameron wrote Rambo 2, I'm pretty sure his pitch was Rambo meets Alien as well (if he pitched that way).

Interesting, since Speed was Die Hard on a bus. I guess Die Hard took Rambo's place in the 90's.

Anyway, Lawrence Gordon also produced The Rocketeer. I wonder if that film hurt his career. It's a good movie tho.