Can you buy a normal Aliens DVD WITHOUT the special edition stuff?

Wouldn't it be great if Cameron could remake his own version of Alien 3 and continue from where Aliens left off...I for one would love to see Michael Biehn/ Hicks back in action...."Yeeeah....Yeeah...Thass Raaight!"
 
i don't think we can complain about the director of Alien 3

Fincher is class.

However, it was his first film and as such he wasn't allowed to make the film he wanted due to the money orientated scum dictating the films progress

We had pure action in aliens going for it again in Alien 3 would have been a mistake
 
We had pure action in aliens going for it again in Alien 3 would have been a mistake

Well obviously not since the current non action Alien 3 tanked and has many more people hating than loving it. Besides if they didn't want to do a action Alien flick they should have just got hold of Crow again, what the hell was he doing in the early 90's that was more important than this?

Wouldn't it be great if Cameron could remake his own version of Alien 3 and continue from where Aliens left off...I for one would love to see Michael Biehn/ Hicks back in action...."Yeeeah....Yeeah...Thass Raaight!"

Wait a sec mate, isn't that exactly what I've suggested? Well needless to say I whole heartily agree with that idea. Personally I've always had a soft spot for the character of Bishop, one of my only reasons to revisit the horror that is Alien 3 is because of his brief return.

Come on Cameron you haven't done anything since Titanic, and you are not even directing T3 which pretty much guarantees that it will suck. Are you really going to let that pathetic excuse for a sequel forever tarnish the name of your masterpiece? Rectify the wrongs, make a new Alien 3. Or should I call it Aliens 2?
 
Hi,

Just to add my three Euro's worth...

I loved "Aliens", but I do think the Special Edition is far superior - plot-wise. Although for sheer balls, the original is a masterpiece of gritty sci-fi adventure!

"Blade Runner" is great, with the voice-over. And there are also many positive things about the "Director's Cut". However, when watching the DC version, I miss hearing Harrison Ford's dulcid tones.

As for the worst Alien film, Numero Quatre is by far and away, the absolute bottom of the barrel! Winona Ryder was shockingly bad in it, and having Ripley being reborn, but as an android - what a load of pooey! At least "Alien 3" was innovative, in its origin, if not overly well written/directed.

Pooch
 
I disagree about the idea of a sequel to Aliens continuing Ripley's story - as I said before I feel that her story came to a natural end anyway. It just shows a lack of imagination to my mind to keep going back to Ripley - there are plenty of stories about the Aliens to be told without Ripley, I mean it is a big bloody universe out there!!


As for Blade Runner, I find that I cannot even watch the original version after seeing the 'Director's Cut'. It just doesn't have the same mood and pace - you cannot enjoy Vangellis' score with Ford talking all over it; and the tagged on happy ending is just horrible!
 
kamikaze wrote: "Besides if they didn't want to do a action Alien flick they should have just got hold of Crow again, what the hell was he doing in the early 90's that was more important than this?"

Who the hell is "Crow"? Alien was directed by a little known director named Ridley Scott if I remember!

But on the subject of sequels that basically ignore the previous movies and indeed contradict them, has anyone seen "Sum of all Fears"? A young, unmarried (and crap) Jack Ryan, but set very firmly in 2002!
But then again, Blofeld completely failed to recognise Bond between YOLT and OHMSS (maybe because both were played by completely different actors!)

As far as Alien films go, AvP is definitely the way to go, the comics and PC games were great and would not need a continuation of the Ripley character.
 
i thought he meant cameron crowe instead of james cameron

Alien Vs Predator i fear would be awful a final cash in on the franchise

i would like an intelligent, tense and genuinely scary conclusion to the franchise it would be a shame to end it with the poor conclusion to alien 4. I doesn't have to and perhaps shouldn't feature Ripley.
 
Who the hell is "Crow"? Alien was directed by a little known director named Ridley Scott if I remember!

Whoopsy doodle! My bad I meant of coarse Scott! I mixed his name up with Russel Crow from Gladiator which Scott directed, talk about a mixeup.

As far as Alien films go, AvP is definitely the way to go, the comics and PC games were great and would not need a continuation of the Ripley character.

The games might have been cool but then again they where not written and directed by Paul Anderson... Be afraid, be very afraid.

But I guess we shouldn't write it off yet maybe it will turn out ok? But one thing is for sure, I'm going to the cinema with the bar firmly set very low like the last time I saw a Anderson movie. I guess there aren't that many directors that specialise in making sci-fi action movies which is exactly what the alien vs predator movie will be. Or maybe the so called high profile directors where either busy with other project or refuse to make this type of movies. So more often than not we get stuck with directors like Anderson. Sigh....
 
So more often than not we get stuck with directors like Anderson.

The studios certainly don't see it that way - they like directors like Paul Anderson. There is more that goes into choosing a Director for a film than whether or not s/he has critical appeal.
Studios like Paul Anderson because he is good to work with - he works within the budget, always produces on time, and is tollerant of studio interference. Studios would always prefer to hire somebody like him than a more 'talented' director who stands up for his artistic integrity.
 
One reason to want Aliens Non-S.E. on dvd is that the master that's available for the S.E is horrible: grainy, dark and nasty. it was that way from the beginning when it was assembled on DV for the CAV laserdisc release, which was possibly one the of grainiest pictures I have ever seen.

They cleaned it up a bit for the dvd, but not by much. The next time that Aliens (non S.E) is on digital tv, watch it and see the difference. It's so much nicer picture-quality wise it's untrue!

regards,
Anephric
 
I watched Alien 3 the other nite...


Actually think its a damn good film! It certainly doesnt have a very good script, but I think the ending is superb! Doesnt have the usual hollywood happy ending... well, in a way.

I'm still not sure wether I prefer Alien or Aliens. I think Alien probably has more suspense... no weapons etc. but Aliens has to win for action :)


On the Cameron thing, he came up with the whole ideas for Terminator/T2, how can he not have any involvement with T3? Criminal.
 
The really startling thing about "Alien: Resurrection" is that script was written by Joss Whedon, who has since created the (in my not particularly humble opinion) rather excellent "Buffy" and "Angel" TV series. If you've ever watched "Delicatessen" then you'll know that the director was also capable of vastly better things. Don't know what went wrong, really.

The original "Alien" movie (like many horror films) is full of sexual imagery, because this taps into people's subconscious but very basic fears and creates dread, fear or revulsion without you quite being able to say why (unless you really stop and analyse it). The alien's mouth, as I've said before, is a vagina dentata - a vagina with teeth, which is a very potent psychological symbol, playing into the male castration complex. There are three rapes in the film - the lascivious way the alien kills Lambert, and the oral rapes of John Hurt's character by the facehugger, and of Sigourney Weaver by Ian Holm's rolled-up magazine. The alien tearing its way out of John Hurt plays into pregnancy fears (and with him being a man into paternal pregnancy hang-ups too). And of course the juvenile form of the alien when you first see it is a blood-stained phallus - another sort of rape image.

It's a matter of public record that Harrison Ford hated the voice-over on "Blade Runner" so much that he deliberately did it as badly as he possibly could in the hope that this would change the minds of the studio people about using it. It was added after the initial cut of the film by those who thought that the audience would be too stupid to understand the film without having it all spelled out for them.

I didn't much care for the added-on bits of Terminator 2 either. I think it weakens Sarah if she needs to be prompted by a dream-version of Reese, and it makes no sense for terminators to have the capacity to learn but to have that capacity switched off. It also holds up the action too much.
 
Originally posted by godzilla
But then again, Blofeld completely failed to recognise Bond between YOLT and OHMSS (maybe because both were played by completely different actors!)

and did you notice the Blofield from Diamonds Are Forever plays the good guy Henderson in YOLT?
 
...compared to Maud Adams playing a fairly major character in TMWTGG and Octopussy and that American guy playing Brad Whitaker in TLD and a CIA agent in Goldeneye and TND.

Another Yank, who does the voice of Scott Tracy in Thunderbirds, plays various military types in TSWLM and others.

Burt Kwouk also appears as different characters in Goldfinger and DAF.

Is there really such a small pool of actors willing to appear in Bond movies or is it a blatant case of favouritism by the producers?
 
Originally posted by NicolasB
It's a matter of public record that Harrison Ford hated the voice-over on "Blade Runner" so much that he deliberately did it as badly as he possibly could in the hope that this would change the minds of the studio people about using it.

I think this is a bit of an urban myth - in an interview I saw Ridley Scott played this down a little, he said that he didn't think Harrisson did it very well, but he didn't think that it had been deliberate.
 
I'm just wondering whether people would hold Alien 3 in a bit of a higher regard if the two classic hadn't come before it.

How do you think it would be recieved if the two films before it hadn't existed?

Considering the huge amount of expectation for the film to live up to its predecessors.
 
I think Alien 3 is underated. I belive it was a deliberate attempt to try and get back to the suspense of the first film which still stands head and shoulders above the others.
Aliens is a totally diferent kind of film and whilst I agree it is excellent it does reduce the aliens to meer canon fodder.

Alien 3 had a number of probelems to deal with:

Principal photography began before the script was even finished.
Numerous writers,
To much power given to the actors, a feature that was repeated with Alien resurection. Sigorney Weaver should never have been given an executive producers role and been allowed to influence the film.
I thought David Fincher did an excellent job with the material available, How much more of a better film could he have made? The ending was tacked on at the end and had to be shot after principal shooting had finished.

The comparison was always going to be made with Aliens and as such is a more downbeat and depressing film.
In my opinion however it is the better film
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom