Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Good point though... what was the creature's motivation in the original?
> (ignoring the deleted scenes with two cocooned crewmembers!)

Well, I wasn't ignoring that. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that it's best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

On 6/24/2010 4:46 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> I thought the second was better than the first, but I think the first
>> could be counted as better Sci Fi.
>
> I don't know why people really thought that. There are few movies where
> the sequel is as good as the original, and I'll grant Aliens held its
> own. But I didn't like it as much as Alien. Perhaps it was just because
> I was at the right age for Alien and too cynical by the time Aliens came
> out or something.
>

The comic relief was a point against it.


I felt the (fourth?) movie with Wynona Ryder was low quality the first 
time I saw it. I thought the characters were caricatures straight out of 
comic books. But I watched it again recently and sort of liked it.


-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message

On 6/24/2010 4:48 PM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
> Also, even though they're not movies, I think there's been some very
> good science fiction television shows recently. Firefly and the remake
> of Battlestar Galatica come to mind.

Don't forget Farscape!


-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> On 6/24/2010 4:48 PM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
>> Also, even though they're not movies, I think there's been some very
>> good science fiction television shows recently. Firefly and the remake
>> of Battlestar Galatica come to mind.
> 
> Don't forget Farscape!

I actually have never seen it, although it seems that I should remedy that!

Post a reply to this message

SharkD wrote:
> I felt the (fourth?) movie with Wynona Ryder was low quality the first 
> time I saw it. 

It helps to remember that Weaver always wanted to be a comedian, and that 
the fourth movie was therefore supposed to be funny.

With the most realistic horrible monsters ever invented.

Kind of rough, there...

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that it's best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> writes:

> Neeum Zawan <fee### [at] festercom> wrote:
>> Don't get me wrong - I really liked District 9. Just had some poor SF
>> aspects. A lot of my issues with it could have been resolved without
>> much effort. It just wasn't the director's goal.
>
> I'm sure you mentioned it when the movie was first released, but OOC what were
> your main issues with it?

If they had such awesome weapons, why the heck didn't they use them?

Too many human qualities were given to them. Or rather, other than
appearance, there didn't seem to be a nonhuman character trait. 

And along with that, why judge the human's treatment of the aliens in
the same way we would judge treating other humans? The aliens aren't
humans, and human rights need not apply. It wasn't established till
quite late in the movie that perhaps they should (this may be
intentional, though).

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> "Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> a écrit dans le message de groupe de
> discussion : 4c23b627$1@news.povray.org...
>> I'm trying to think of a (hard-ish) sci-fi movie that was as good an
>> adaption of the book as (say) Harry Potter was.
> 
> A boy and his dog? Harlan Ellison himself was rather pleased with the
> adaptation, and the guy isn't exactly easy to please.
> 
> G.

I don't know what it is about that movie, but I can not stay awake long
enough to see it from start to finish. About 30 minutes is all I can
watch before dozing off.

Post a reply to this message

On 24/06/2010 9:43 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:05:39 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 24/06/2010 8:46 PM, Darren New wrote:
>>>
>>> Alien? (I never really heard any defensible complaints about it.)
>>
>> How about I fell asleep before it finished?
>
> I thought the second was better than the first, but I think the first
> could be counted as better Sci Fi.
>

I really just don’t like the media. There is nothing better for filling 
in the background than your imagination. Bookz Rulz! :-)

> Falling asleep doesn't mean it's bad Sci Fi, though - I fell asleep
> during Amadeus the first time I watched it, but it was still a good
> film. :-)
>

I have this affliction that when the lights go down, my eyes close. Just 
like putting a cover over a bird cage. O_o

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Neeum Zawan <fee### [at] festercom> wrote:
> If they had such awesome weapons, why the heck didn't they use them?

That's a good question, but it's such a biggie that i felt it was a deliberate
attempt to preserve some mystery rather than an actual plot hole. Just like we
never really find out why the aliens are found all cowering in a cargo hold, or
why the ship turned up in the first place. There are obviously good reasons for
these, but the human characters never find out what they are. I like that as a
plot device, it leaves something for your imagination to chew on :)

> Too many human qualities were given to them. Or rather, other than
> appearance, there didn't seem to be a nonhuman character trait.
>
> And along with that, why judge the human's treatment of the aliens in
> the same way we would judge treating other humans?

I read somewhere that they deliberately made the aliens less 'alien' than they
could have, purely to ensure that the audience could empathize with the main
alien character.

Post a reply to this message

On 6/25/2010 8:19 PM, Kevin Wampler wrote:
>> Don't forget Farscape!
>
> I actually have never seen it, although it seems that I should remedy that!

It's a serial, so you have to start at the beginning or a lot won't make 
sense. But it's well worth it!


-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message