New Alien Movie to be direct sequel to Aliens

[zinfamous]

This doesn't need to turn into some pointless argument, just look it up, there are dozens of articles online explaining how it's not CGI. I even linked you to the production video where they explain how they used a puppet. Was only mentioning it to begin with because I find it very interesting since it's so misunderstood.

but there was also CGI.

I'm not sure why you refuse to understand that. The alien puppet was given a CGI treatment.

from KT's linked article:

Finally, dodgy matte-work of the creature itself, the first time the xenomorph was digitally rendered - a less than perfect combination of puppeteering and CGI - seemed to add further insult to injury. In all fairness, however, the 20th Century Fox logo was still quite analog at the time.

Read more: http://twitchfilm.com/2012/06/ripleys-inferno-deep-down-you-love-alien3.html#ixzz3T9zgeclY

 

[Ichinisan]

As I said, the Alien in Alien 3 was a puppet, not CGI.

:Edit: http://youtu.be/Qi7aQ8f7oyw?t=1m38s

Reminds me of another big complaint about that shit movie: The Xenomorph eats people.

It's like they completely ignored the previous 2 films.

 

[motsm]

but there was also CGI.

I'm not sure why you refuse to understand that. The alien puppet was given a CGI treatment.

from KT's linked article:

Are you talking about the aliens shadow? That was CGI from what I understand, but I hardly consider that a CGI alien. As for the article, he seems to be incorrectly referencing the matting process as being CGI, and hes just a fan anyway, so it's not like he has inside info that overrides the production piece from the DVD. Either way, I'm done arguing the point, believe whatever you want.

 

[mikeymikec]

nvm

 

[MongGrel]

Good thing this was edited out of the original, or even the original Alien wouldn't be what it was.

Alien deleted scene: Alien attacks Lambert - good quality


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR5jYeIMBKk

 

[ImpulsE69]

There is a bunch of background info on the making of 3 on the BR. They had a difficult time getting the puppet and lighting right in some of the scenes. Back when it came out, it wasn't nearly as apparent as it is today, but they managed to somewhat fix it in the BR version.

Honestly when I first saw 3, I didn't like it, but it was more than just the film and (spoiler alert) killing off Ripley. I didn't get to see the last 10 minutes of the film because the projector broke in the theater. It was another year before I got to see it again. Most people hated 3 simply because of the Hicks/Newt kill off as a sequel to Aliens. As a standalone film it isn't so bad. There are many tells and comparisons to be made to basically a resignation of the world sucks to be made with the movie.

 

[KlokWyze]

Can't wait for this, but I'm worried about the director messing this up. I have faith.

 

[manimal]

Can't wait for this, but I'm worried about the director messing this up. I have faith.

its always the producers that screw shit up and in A3 it was ripley Going all diva


I dont want any guns in the next movie.


Ok were also gonna make a sequel to deep throat and were not gonna have any dick in it.

 

[ImpulsE69]

its always the producers that screw shit up and in A3 it was ripley Going all diva


I dont want any guns in the next movie.


Ok were also gonna make a sequel to deep throat and were not gonna have any dick in it.

There weren't any guns in Alien and it worked out fine. While one can argue about her anti gun views, it was the least of the issues with the making of Alien3.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I liked World War Z quite a bit. Was definitely messy, but very enjoyable.

KT

Ugh, did you fry your movie "taste buds"? WWZ is generic modern schlock big budget zombie apocalypse schlock.

But Snowpiercer was terrible!

lol at Ichnisian's sig, though. That is hilarious.

This.

 

[halik]

Fascinating. I will continue to develop opinions about the taste of individuals based on their opinions.

Hah, ouch. Your retort is as clever as it is snarky.

I agree with the sentiment of this thread though; anyone that actually appreciates good scifi cinema should be appalled by Prometheus. They took a classic and turned it into Independence Day.

 

[Ruptga]

Hah, ouch. Your retort is as clever as it is smirky.

I agree with the sentiment of this thread though; anyone that actually appreciates good scifi cinema should be appalled by Prometheus. They took a classic and turned it into Independence Day.

That's just unfair to Independence Day, it never pretended to be deep or amazing cinema. Prometheus might have been ok(ish) if it had been a new IP that didn't come with a multimillion dollar hype train.

Then again, that could just be my nostalgia talking. :hmm:

 

[darkswordsman17]

That's just unfair to Independence Day, it never pretended to be deep or amazing cinema. Prometheus might have been ok(ish) if it had been a new IP that didn't come with a multimillion dollar hype train.

Then again, that could just be my nostalgia talking. :hmm:

This. I love Independence Day for what it is, ridiculous schlock. Not only that, but at that time, big budget sci-fi action stuff was rare. These days there's a new one like every other week.

That too. It was hyped as being a pseudo origin story for the Alien universe. And that's my problem is, this movie had so much promise, and everything but the characters and story are up to snuff to make it a good movie.

With this and the sequel to Blade Runner, it just feels like we're getting pointless extrapolations of these franchises because Ridley Scott apparently needs money? Which would be fine if we were getting the full treatment, instead we're getting writers who should be writing for crap cable channels reality shows.

These movies are the types of movies that years down the line Abrams (Into Darkness is another film ruined by shithead writers) and Scott will be saying "yeah, it sucked, and we screwed up, and blah blah blah".

 

[blankslate]

This. I love Independence Day for what it is, ridiculous schlock. Not only that, but at that time, big budget sci-fi action stuff was rare. These days there's a new one like every other week.

When I watched ID4 for the first and pretty much only time I thought it was stupid because it was. The Mac notebook being used to program a virus for an entirely alien computer system was only the least of it's issues...

Other than the state of the art special effects of the time it was pretty much and still is a mediocre movie and worse if you think about how the stereotypes (not characters, stereotypes) are treated.



.....

 

[CZroe]

When I watched ID4 for the first and pretty much only time I thought it was stupid because it was. The Mac notebook being used to program a virus for an entirely alien computer system was only the least of it's issues...

Other than the state of the art special effects of the time it was pretty much and still is a mediocre movie and worse if you think about how the stereotypes (not characters, stereotypes) are treated.



.....

The virus being made/distributed on a Mac was not the stupid part. They had spent decades reverse engineering their systems and learning to interface. Remember?

It was stupid because the capability to produce the virus was assumed as if it only required the idea. If you knew that their systems were vulnerable and you knew how to write a virus for their system, then the "idea" of writing something malicious is not what is holding you up. Also, the "idea" came from a protagonist who was clueless about it all a day earlier rather than someone familiar with their own capabilities.

 

[CZroe]

That's just unfair to Independence Day, it never pretended to be deep or amazing cinema. Prometheus might have been ok(ish) if it had been a new IP that didn't come with a multimillion dollar hype train.

Then again, that could just be my nostalgia talking. :hmm:

Not true. We gave you a list of unforgivable flaws that are no more excusable in an unrelated movie. Prometheus was bad for the same reason LOST ended up infuriating the fans. No, I don't mean "writing that leaves more questions than answers," because it's clear that a lot of these were not deliberate (just stupid). Conclusion? Lindelof is a stupid hack.

A better character could have been lost who didn't already express fear, wasn't responsible for mapping, and didn't leave earlier. Being trapped in a trench or having a sanctuary in that direction would have been a good reason to run straight instead of turning. Having a malfunction would have been a good reason to take the helmet off.

 

[KeithTalent]

When I watched ID4 for the first and pretty much only time I thought it was stupid because it was. The Mac notebook being used to program a virus for an entirely alien computer system was only the least of it's issues...

Other than the state of the art special effects of the time it was pretty much and still is a mediocre movie and worse if you think about how the stereotypes (not characters, stereotypes) are treated.



.....

Yeah, Independence Day is boring. Not a fan. Way too fucking long.

KT

 

[manimal]

Yeah, Independence Day is boring. Not a fan. Way too fucking long.

KT

is this sarcasm?


U NO LIKE IT?



WHYYYYYYYY


its good popcorn fluff have you rewatched it? Maybe you were having a sandy vagina night when you saw it?

 

[KeithTalent]

is this sarcasm?


U NO LIKE IT?



WHYYYYYYYY


its good popcorn fluff have you rewatched it? Maybe you were having a sandy vagina night when you saw it?

Watched it for the first time, or at least all the way through for the first time, in 2013. Popcorn fluff, for me, needs to be under 2 hours long, not 2.5 fucking hours long. Painful; I almost turned it off half way through.

KT

 

[mikeymikec]

How is the BR quality for Alien and Aliens?

Out of curiosity, I had another look just now, viewing on a 32" wide screen, comparing only the scene where John Hurt's character is waking up.

The DVD copy shows the occasional bit of crap on the film that immediately disappears, and looking at the detail on the walls, one can tell that it looks a little blurry.

The BR copy gets rid of the crap, alters the colour balance a little, and the blurryness disappears almost completely (though on the backdrop of the chamber containing the hypersleep beds it is still visible), however lots of white surfaces show 'pixellyness'. Overall, it's an improvement, but not a level of improvement where I think "OMG I can't watch the DVD version any more".

 

[ImpulsE69]

Out of curiosity, I had another look just now, viewing on a 32" wide screen, comparing only the scene where John Hurt's character is waking up.

The DVD copy shows the occasional bit of crap on the film that immediately disappears, and looking at the detail on the walls, one can tell that it looks a little blurry.

The BR copy gets rid of the crap, alters the colour balance a little, and the blurryness disappears almost completely (though on the backdrop of the chamber containing the hypersleep beds it is still visible), however lots of white surfaces show 'pixellyness'. Overall, it's an improvement, but not a level of improvement where I think "OMG I can't watch the DVD version any more".

Are there multiple BR versions of Alien? The quadrilogy version I have is definitely OMG better. I mean, absolutely no comparison. (acutally though, maybe I don't have the best DVD version to compare it to either? )

 

[mikeymikec]

Are there multiple BR versions of Alien? The quadrilogy version I have is definitely OMG better. I mean, absolutely no comparison. (acutally though, maybe I don't have the best DVD version to compare it to either? )

Not that I'm aware of. The DVD copy I have of Alien is nothing special either AFAIK.

 

[motsm]

The BR copy gets rid of the crap, alters the colour balance a little, and the blurryness disappears almost completely (though on the backdrop of the chamber containing the hypersleep beds it is still visible), however lots of white surfaces show 'pixellyness'.

I assume you mean film grain? If so, that is the intended look since it was shot on 35mm.

 

[mikeymikec]

I assume you mean film grain? If so, that is the intended look since it was shot on 35mm.

Nope, looks like pixels, the sort of patterns I'd expect when downgrading the colour depth.

PS - not that this bothers me particularly, just that someone was interested so I thought I would try to describe the differences I could see as well as possible.