#1  
Old 09-02-2004, 02:17 PM
Alien






Alien is quite possibly the horror classic to end all horror classics. Everyone knows about it, everyone reveres it, and everyone agrees that not only did it slam this beloved genre of ours into the faces of the ďmainstreamĒ audience, but gained horror respect.
Too bad the movie hasnít aged well--itís one acid-doused rung above mediocre.

The stage for Alien is set when a standard grab-bag of personalities piloting the ship Nostromo takes a quick detour because of a distress call from a nearby planet. Since it could be alien life, they have a look-see. When an arachnid-like organism attaches itself to the face of one of the crew, the member is shuttled back into the Nostromo. This crew has unknowingly pitted themselves against a fierce, rapidly-evolving alien life form.

Tom Skerritt, who plays the main man Dallas, does his Kurt Russell thing well. Weaver, who of course gets tough-as-nails as Ripley, doesnít stand out here. No one does. Thatís why I wonít mention the rest of the cast because the critique would be the same: theyíre good. But no one is spectacular.

Ridley Scott directs Alien, and, of course, builds up intense scenes with a wave of his hand. He fails to make the ship as claustrophobic as it should be, but the design of everything just adds so much weight that shooting it, no matter at what angle, creates dread.

Alien has a standard sci-fi soundtrack. Iíve already forgotten it.

As with most classics, Alien started a trend. It was the first, it was the original, and, according to popular belief, itís still the best. Because what movie could match the thrill of bumbling morons closing in on the motions of a fearsome alien only to find that, ahah!--itís just a cat (that all the crew members mysteriously forgot they had on board), and oh, then the cat runs off and someone goes to fetch it, alone (I mean, there is a vicious creature onboard that could be anywhere, but whatever, right?), so this intrepid sap follows the cat and of course runs into our extra terrestrial guest.
Right--pretty much all of them.
But then, nobody is going to watch Alien in this day and age to bask in the one-dimensional characters, or to fall into one of the many logic holes, but to see this groundbreaking creature. The alienís design is very unique, even if itís obviously some man in the suit. Due to that limitation a few ďtricksĒ donít jive with reality. For instance, the alien pops open itís mouth and shoots some mini-mouth into your head. But it takes so long to do that that the victim has to literally stand still for about a minute (preferably looking really scared while doing so). God forbid anyone duck.
Thatís all beside the point. Because the suit is great, and even though the big alien looks too wooden in numerous scenes, itís predecessor, the face-hugger, always astounds. This guy looks way cool and move very fluidly. Props for that little fellow.

Iíve kind of been skidding over the pros and cons of Alien. Thatís because itís almost impossible to mention something good without a flaw popping up, and likewise something bad without a good. How about the impressive acting? Too bad it fails to elevate these guys to two-dimensional. Sure you didnít know which was going to die, but when theyíre this standard nobody really cares. ďOh wow, that dude with the bandana/kurt-russel-hair/that chick got hurt. Huh. Oh look, the catís back.Ē Whatís more, the final confrontation lacks any backing whatsoever, meaning the audience doesnít care who wins (in fact, theyíll root for the alien since it looks so darned cool).
How about how subtly the alien is blended into his environment? Pretty cool shot with that. But wait . . Why is the alien laying down in a mess of pipes? Oh right, because it looks cool.

Normally this kind of good-bad would eventually peel a film down to an average score of 5/10. But lucky thereís one sole aspect of the movie that has a pro without a con: visuals. Seems an odd thing to praise. But how the ship looks, how the interior appears/moves about, set the standard for sci-fi. The alien ship itself is a masterpiece of design. And even looking at it nowadays, it still exceeds most recent movies in terms of creativity. Visually, Alien is a total blast.

Alien is an overrated sci-fi yarn thatís a parlor trick of a movie. Itís a candidate for the ďlook what we can do!Ē awards. The design of everything, from the alien to the ship, is just fantastic. Everything else is throwaway. Itís almost like the creative team figured ďHey, thisíd be a wicked alien, wouldnít it? Cool, now letís make a movie.Ē

Totally original creatures and designs are thrown into a mishmash of ďbeen there, done thatĒ. Alien isnít bad, but not great either.


6/10--a sci-fi gimmick



REVIEW DATABASE

MOVIES:

28 Days Later : 7/10
8mm: 9/10
Alien : 6/10
Audition : 7/10
August Underground : 5/10
Battle Royale : 8/10
Cannibal Holocaust : 9/10
Dawn of the Dead : 5/10
Day of the Dead: 8/10
The Dead Zone : 7/10
Donnie Darko : 10/10
The Eye : 7/10
Elephant : 6/10
Freaky Friday: 8/10
Ginger Snaps : 7/10
Hardcore : 6/10
Hellboy : 6/10
House of 1000 Corpses : 4/10
House of Sand and Fog : 9/10
Hulk : 10/10
Irreversible : 8/10
Kill Bill Volume 1 : 8/10
Kung Pow! Enter the Fist : 7/10
Last House on the Left: 3/10
May : 10/10
Memento : 8/10
Mulholland Drive : 7/10
Near Dark : 6/10
One Hour Photo : 9/10
Perfect Blue: 9/10
Requiem For a Dream : 8/10
Se7en : 9/10
Terminator 2: Judgment Day : 10/10
Thesis : 6/10
Underworld : 7/10
Willard : 8/10


TELEVISION
Buffy the Vampire Slayer (season 5) : A
Neon Genesis Evangelion - Perfect Collection : B-
End of Evangelion : A-


BOOKS
Stephen King's IT : 5/5 stars

Last edited by C-Desecration-; 09-20-2004 at 04:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-02-2004, 03:40 PM
I pretty much agree. Alien had some cool parts, but overall it wasn't anything special. I was actually quite bored for most of the runtime.

5/10
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-02-2004, 04:57 PM
you people are insane! This movie is a masterpiece!!! (10/10)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-02-2004, 09:16 PM
Trivia Question:

Is Alien an original Film? Actually...NO!



Anyone Remember?



It! The Terror from Beyond Space (1958)
The lone survivor of a derelict spaceship is picked up and placed into custody. The astronauts on board thier "Space Ship" sort things out. Meanwhile, a nasty looking alien manages to get on board. It likes to hide in the air shafts and picks off the crew one by one....Ring a BELL?

Dan O'Bannon's admitted that "IT" The Terror From Beyond Space, was the true inspiration for the first "Alien".

I have never considered this one of the greatest horror films, a bit overrated in my book! But H.R. Giger's Designs are magnificent to behold...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-02-2004, 10:47 PM
Having seen the extended version in theaters this year, I still think the movie hasn't lost anything. If I recall correctly, it's probable Alien is the first movie to have really scared me... and one of the few even now.
I love the beginning of the movie and how we slowly become part of the crew aboard the Nostromo, the diner scene, the colorful yet not cliched characters... In terms of horror and tension, one of the greatest achievement in horror movies.

And I have to react about something part of C-Desecration's review :

Quote:
For instance, the alien pops open itís mouth and shoots some mini-mouth into your head. But it takes so long to do that that the victim has to literally stand still for about a minute (preferably looking really scared while doing so). God forbid anyone duck.
Looking scared ?
Huh, don't you think in such a situation you would be really scared shitless and, say, completely paralyzed by fear ?

And when you say Dallas does his Kurt Russel thing, you're thinking about Elvis or the parts Russel had after Alien ?

I think it's a shame to reduce Alien to a visual achievement, for instance I didn't think the characters were one-dimensional at all but found good and bad in all of them, but hey.

10/10.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-03-2004, 11:33 AM
Alien is a great film but at times it does get a bit too slow. Also I would've love to have seen more of the alien. So many people think less is more well I'm not really one of those people. 3/4 It's a great movie but I wouldn't rank it as high as other people do.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-03-2004, 12:27 PM
i really like Alien, its a great film, the only problem i ever find with it is some of the performances, one of the actress always irritates me, i cant remember her name though. i thought the alien was excellent and to have shown it anymore would hurt the film IMO

9/10
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-04-2004, 01:44 PM
Quote:
Looking scared ?
Huh, don't you think in such a situation you would be really scared shitless and, say, completely paralyzed by fear ?

Actually, people don't usually become paralyzed with fear, just as getting really scared doesn't turn your hair white. But the fact that it happened twice was just ridiculous. I mean, alien drops in, dude widens his eyes, and that mouth-thing plays SLOWLY, long enough for the schlub to not only gather himself but MAYBE sidestep or something.
Again, that was just limitations of their technology, which was why it isn't necessarily a flaw, just an annoyance.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-04-2004, 02:15 PM
Yeah I guess your right Cronos.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-04-2004, 02:33 PM
I'm quite stunned by C-Des's review. One thing Ridley Scotts film has done is age well. Judged against todays CGI snooze-fests Alien remains one of the best sci-fi horror flicks ever made.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-04-2004, 05:24 PM
I'm with Khain. The characters didn't strike me as thin. I hope we haven't gotten to the point where if someone isn't a caricature, then they're one-dimensional. I can't comment on whether or not I'd duck if a xenomorph were to approach me. Isn't it toplofty to scrutinize a person's actions in such a situation? Do you mean to tell me that you would think clearly if a big fucking alien was gearing up to deflate your brain? I've been paralyzed by fear before, and I wasn't even dealing with a being from another planet. And I don't get the Kurt Russell comparisons either.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-05-2004, 12:32 PM
Honestly, I think the characters are well rounded and act human. Sure, they don't have an oozing persona that would stick with you through Hell and high water, but they at least seem real to me. A classic for a good reason.

However, IT! THE TERROR FROM BEYOND SPACE is considered a direct ancestor of ALIEN. Certainly, I see the comparison, but I think that they way they were filmed and the way the material was handled leaves far more credit due from other sources (PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES for instance).

As for being paralyzed by fear, never happened to me, but it does happen. All that really happens is that your brain becomes overloaded with information and blocks your brains communications in the turmoil. I can see it happening, my little borther (really little) always had this problem, though not with fear. Instead it would happen whenever there was too much stimulus around him.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-06-2004, 10:59 AM
Okay, first off, that kurt russell thing. The main guy not only looked like MacReady, but just continuously reminded him of the guy (macready was kurt russell's character in The Thing). So that's why I made that comment.

And come on, these characters are beyond one-dimensional. At least stereotypes have a personality. They were believable sure, but we knew nothing about any them (and this is the original cut, remember, I didn't review the director's). Sure it was nice that we didn't know who would die, but that's just because they didn''t bother developing ANYONE. That angle only works in those "day in the life of" films, which this certainly wasn't.
As for the paralyzed comment, remember the second mini-mouth death? The black dude (now that's rich characterization!)? He yelled to someone "get out of here!", which of course would mean he wasn't paralyzed by fear. Yet still he shrank back and just stood there while the alien did it's long, drawn-out mini-mouth reveal. Again, that was the technology limits, not the movie's fault.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-06-2004, 11:12 AM
Actually, it was Lambert who was "paralyzed", and Parker wanted her to move so he could roast Mr. Alien. Since she didn't, he tried to jump at it and attack it directly. But of course it threw him into the wall, picked him up and held him in place before impaling him.

Parker wasn't paralyzed. In fact, Parker had the biggest set of balls of any of the crew, save for maybe Dallas.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-06-2004, 01:15 PM
. . .
. . . dammit.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-06-2004, 09:05 PM
Damn C, giving Near Dark and Alien, two of the most original films in there genre mediocore reviews!!!

You dissopoint me.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-07-2004, 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by C-Desecration-
Okay, first off, that kurt russell thing. The main guy not only looked like MacReady, but just continuously reminded him of the guy (macready was kurt russell's character in The Thing). So that's why I made that comment.
But is that a criticism? In your review, you state that Tom Skerritt does his Kurt Russell thing. How can he do his Kurt Russell thing when Kurt Russell was a nobody in 1979? By your logic, Kurt Russell does his Tom Skerritt thing in The Thing.

Things.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-07-2004, 07:49 PM
Actors can be developed in more ways than one. Some of my favorite characters are so because they defied logic and were outright zany and memorable. In Alien, the characters are not distinguished, but as for being believeable, there are people just like that. As a matter of fact, the idea of having multi-dimensional characters really depends on how much activity you have had with people and the types of people. You see that they are one-dimensional, but I have dealt with several people who are practically copies of these characters.

Calling them one-dimensional to my understanding means that they play on one note and continue to hit it. Some actors make their bread doing this (Christopher Lamber, Christopher Lee (it's how he makes his bread I said), Arnold Swartzenwhatever) and are some of the most decorated and revered actors.

The characters in Alien have expressed more diversity in one film that Lamber has in his entire body of work.

One of the reasons I love this movie is because the characters give off an aura that seems down to Earth, if not necessarily real. Believable is one way to put it.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-07-2004, 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by countchocula
But is that a criticism? In your review, you state that Tom Skerritt does his Kurt Russell thing. How can he do his Kurt Russell thing when Kurt Russell was a nobody in 1979? By your logic, Kurt Russell does his Tom Skerritt thing in The Thing.
Yeah, that's what I meant too, and why I was asking if C-Desecration was referring to Elvis. But maybe he just wanted to say the characters were quite similar, nothing more.

Concerning the one-dimensional characters, I agree with Gluttony of the definition of the term. And I think referring to a character as "the black dude" is where you make it one-dimensional. If it's all you remember about the guy, fine. As far as I'm concerned, I remember his attitude quite brave, his very down to earth thoughts and his lucidity. He could have been the typical black cool guy, he isn't.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-07-2004, 10:01 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Gluttony
One of the reasons I love this movie is because the characters give off an aura that seems down to Earth
Which is kind of ironic, since they never actually get back down to earth.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-07-2004, 10:26 PM
Paralyzed in assumption

There is something to be said about people who claim ďI would do this that or the other thingĒ if that happened to ME!! Yeah, right! When one views a genre film they always claim what they would do, or like to do. The truth is we really donít know, we only like to vocalize what we believe we would do. Whoís to say what any of us would really do until we are confronted with any situation until we are really in it C-!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-07-2004, 10:31 PM
Quote:
But is that a criticism?

Nope.


Quote:
And I think referring to a character as "the black dude" is where you make it one-dimensional. If it's all you remember about the guy, fine. As far as I'm concerned, I remember his attitude quite brave, his very down to earth thoughts and his lucidity.

Hmm.
The characters are real, like I 'think' I said. Not sure. Anyways, the thing is that personality is what makes us as an audience feel for these guys, right? Once you understand someone you 'like' them, in a weird way. But these guys had nothing to understand. I went into the movie figuring I'd like each of them, and I did, at first. But when I realized they weren't going any further, they lost their sparks. For me, I just need some meat. Alien was played like those "day in the life of movies" (anyone see Elephant?), but that didn't at all jive with the tone of the movie. If I'm remembering right Aliens got development right. Alien didn't (in my opnion). Aliens, for instance, showed a motherly aspect of ripley. Simple, right? But made all the difference. I heard that there's a love scene between weaver and kurt russle ( ) in the director's cut, and that probably would've made some difference too.

Last edited by C-Desecration-; 09-07-2004 at 10:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-07-2004, 10:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by C-Desecration-
is it a criticism? Nope.
No it is a FACT!!!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-08-2004, 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by C-Desecration-
I heard that there's a love scene between weaver and kurt russle ( ) in the director's cut, and that probably would've made some difference too.
There's no love scene. The differences between the two versions aren't drastic. If you didn't glom onto the theatrical cut, you probably won't get much out of the director's cut.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-17-2004, 05:06 AM
Personally, I think ALIEN is near flawless. The pace was deliberately slow so that you could get into the vibe and dynamics of the characters, so that when the horror began later in the film, it was all the more effective.

But, alas, as one acquaintance of mine pointed out, we are living in the A.D.D. generation, where everything has to happen immediately, or everyone loses interest.
As a result, directors have had to make decisions based on the short-attention spans of modern audiences. Case in point: DEEP BLUE SEA, which was sliced and diced to remove character-oriented scenes in order to "move the story along." Sadly, that's all it is about these days...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-17-2004, 02:45 PM
Quote:
Sadly, that's all it is about these days...

Funny, TCM 03 had just as slow a pace as alien. Plus it built on the dynamic. What alien did was almost as lazy as that ADD pacing you mentioned--it did a forcefully slow beginning, squeezed out every drop of characterization it could (which wasn't much), then just dropped everthing and shrugged off building anyone above "Oh, he's the captain." But although I think these characters (in alien) are as whatever as could be, the earlier scenes did give group dynamics. But then you can write in dynamics while steadily raising the interest level in each character(which alien doesn' do).
Oh, and sixth sense, signs, se7en, unbreakable, may, donnie, tcm 03, the ring, insomnia, hulk, mystic river, village, the cell (in a way), 28 days later, memento, one hour photo, willard, minority report, green mile and just for the hell of it some non-horror like gladiator, cast away, lotr series, seabiscuit, the last samuri, cold mountain, gangs of new york, collateral, manchurian candidate, all of which did good at the box office (or in turn on video), have totally epiletic, ADD pacing, because, I mean, that's all we can handle.
Damn you MTV.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-18-2004, 11:42 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by C-Desecration-
Funny, TCM 03 had just as slow a pace as alien. Plus it built on the dynamic. What alien did was almost as lazy as that ADD pacing you mentioned--it did a forcefully slow beginning, squeezed out every drop of characterization it could (which wasn't much), then just dropped everthing and shrugged off building anyone above "Oh, he's the captain." But although I think these characters (in alien) are as whatever as could be, the earlier scenes did give group dynamics. But then you can write in dynamics while steadily raising the interest level in each character(which alien doesn' do).
Oh, and sixth sense, signs, se7en, unbreakable, may, donnie, tcm 03, the ring, insomnia, hulk, mystic river, village, the cell (in a way), 28 days later, memento, one hour photo, willard, minority report, green mile and just for the hell of it some non-horror like gladiator, cast away, lotr series, seabiscuit, the last samuri, cold mountain, gangs of new york, collateral, manchurian candidate, all of which did good at the box office (or in turn on video), have totally epiletic, ADD pacing, because, I mean, that's all we can handle.
Damn you MTV.
Kid yourself not. With the exception of a few of those films you mentioned, they all move fairly fast compared to ALIEN. Or better yet, go on kidding yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-18-2004, 04:45 PM
Well I do make a habit of kidding myself.
But what qualifies a pace as slow? Is it when literally nothing is happening? Because in all those movies the pace might not be that, because there's a slew of things going down, whether it's a character arc or villain or etc.
And if a slow pace is when nothing much is happening, is that a good thing? Shouldn't there always be something, character developments, little hidden cubbies of personalities opening, etc?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-31-2005, 03:38 PM
Alien is a film that seems to get better and better with each viewing, the effects are one of the things that continue to amaze me since they still look so damn good, the alien looks great, as does the face hugger and all the gooey and ickiness that goes with them. the rest of the films effects are also pretty good with some nice gore and blood flying everywhere. the performances also seem to get better on repeated viewings, characters i once found annoying i dont any more. Scotts direction is also excellent, he manages to give the film a really dark ominous feeling which is claustrophobic at times (such as in the air ducts).

is Alien a classic??? Damn straight it is

10/10
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:33 AM
I just watched Alien again like a week ago, and I was again impressed by it.

The first thing you have to do to understand why Alien moves so slowly is to understand 1970s sci-fi. While Star Wars had come out, by far the more influential film at the time was Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Sci-fi wasn't about whiz-bang fast-zoom! Yes, Alien starts out slowly, but it starts a hell of a lot faster than 2001. Alien is a thinking man's horror film. It is not an action shoot-em up. The long lead-in time lets you bask in the mood. It builds tension because (if you're paying attention) you'll notice conflicts that are already present within the crew.

The characters are NOT one-dimensional. They are not charicatures, either. Mr Cooper in Event Horizon is a charicature. "Hey, I'm the funny black guy!" No, we don't find out everything in the world about these characters' histories. We don't have to. It's not important. These people are colleagues, not best friends. Everyone in this movie has their "work face" on. And the characters are entirely believable. I have never in my life met a Mr Cooper, someone who always had a funny line all the time and always looked cool (I've met people who thought they were a Mr Cooper, but they weren't). The cast in Alien come across as real people, real people who don't always like each other.

The slow moving jaw-strike of the alien wasn't a defect of the special effects technology--it was done on purpose. It's your chance to see the thing up close. Could someone have dodged out of the way? Possibly, but the close up is done entirely for the benefit of the audience (so we can actually see what happens). Plus, I'd make the argument that none of the crew actually expected a little mouth to pop out and stab them. That ain't something you see everyday, you know?

Why did the guy wander off alone to get the cat? Because they were chasing a little 8" tall thingy. I think the problem that some people are having with this movie is that they went into the film knowing what happens in the sequels. At the time, the audience didn't expect a man-sized critter to come down from the ceiling.

The alien was hiding in the pipes because it knew the ship was going to blow up. It needed Ripley to launch the shuttle. There's no point in jumping out and killing her immediately--it has all the time in the world.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-05-2005, 10:57 AM
Good points WolfMan. To tell you schmoes the truth. Alien was one of those movies that grew on me. I thought it was boring and lame the first time I saw it.
the second time I saw it, I was like: Wasnt as bad as I remember, but still not great. Then the third time I saw I was a more mature movie watcher and Alien became one of my favorites along with its BOOM sequel Aliens. I cant figure out witch I love more now. Two totally different films. But definatly a classic in my eyes.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-05-2005, 01:05 PM
Quote:
Alien is a thinking man's horror film.

A gradual build of the plot does not necessarily mean it is anything deep, insightful, or mentally stimulating. The only trick this movie has up its sleeve, apart from the basic intrigue of the plot itself, the idea of alien life, is that the creature here is constantly unpredictabe and ever-changing for the most part. There is no interesting philosophy or thought, again apart from the basic premise. It's a brainless alien movie smartened up by its look and design. I don't think alien is thinking man's anything, and its intelligence bill is uncalled for.
The characters are not deep, and for me not particularly interest, which is always a problem with a creature flick, because eventually the creature is the most interesting part, so nobody gives a flying flipper whether anyone lives or dies. Luckly alien managed to get past this a little because it was so somber you weren't necessarily scared for the characters, but yourself, since there were certainly some good boo-scares.

I think the sequel is better.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-07-2005, 06:45 PM
Im a huge fan of the series, excluding the fourth. I even enjoyed the third. I can't decide whether I enjoy the first or second better, they're too different and stand on their own merits. I dont see the Kurt Russell similarity either, but hey, we all pick up different things in movies.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-09-2005, 01:40 PM
.



i'm just trying to comprehend how C gave "8mm" a 9/10 while "Alien" only got 6/10? <sigh> well, different tastes result in differing opinions regarding art, especially movies.

"Alien" is a classic, a claustrophobic sci-fi/horror exercise in atmosphere and dread. Ridley Scott's baby is, and always will be, a brick in the foundation of classic horror cinema.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-09-2005, 02:00 PM
I like the whole Alien series. But I am a film student and now I have become unfairly biased against the first in the series.

Last year, we studied Alien. And do you know what I learnt? Everything is to do with sex and birth. Of course the facehugger and the alien bursting out of the chest are the obvious references to male rape and birth, but we were taught that EVERYTHING is sexual.

Take for instance the opening scene, where the camera travels down corridors into the room where the crew wake up. Those corridors are a big vagina, you know. And the room is a uterus. And the crew are born. Uh huh.

The ship itself is a penis. And a mother. Yeah it's a penis-mother. Remember when they jettison John Hurt's body into space? That's an ejaculation.

What about the alien itself? Well that's a "vagina dentate"; literally, a vagina with teeth. In fact, it's a vagina with teeth that opens up to reveal a penis with teeth; this is supposedly man's worst nightmare. Apparently Dracula is a vagina with teeth too. Uh huh.

For those of you who didn't enrol in film school or film courses, this is part of what you're missing.

I like Alien. A lot. But whenever I watch it now, I can't help but think of all those stupid theories. When we were studying it, I just wanted to show everyone Return Of The Living Dead (another film written by Dan O Bannon) and say "find a biting vagina in this one, whores!"

Yes, I would've called my film class whores for the sake of integrity. Or something.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-11-2005, 05:37 PM

I saw Aliens before Alien, and that spoiled the first film a bit. So when I saw it roughly 15 years ago, I liked it, but didn't love it. I gave it 7/10.

On my second viewing roughly 7 years ago I started to appreciate the film more. I noticed that it's a very beautifully made, sophisticated movie. My grade raised to 8/10.

A month or two ago I watched it again, and now I think it's one of the 5 best horror movies ever made. The films look is simply outstanding, and direction is brilliant. Except for the concept of the alien creature itself, the script isn't particularly witty or original. But the it's the execution which matters: This film is pure poetry in every sense. Now I would give Alien 9/10.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-12-2005, 05:57 PM
I loved the entire Alien series! They were all good in my opinion!
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-19-2007, 05:50 PM
I`ve finally seen this(yes i know) .You know what pissed me off about this flick ,well let me tell you.Ripley said when dallas and the others got back from checking that alien ship.She said"not to open the door,they have to be quarantine.".But oh no that jackass didn`t listern and opened the door hence letting the alien on board ,he was the doctor for crying out loud the so called smart one .

You should always listern to the female as they`re always right.

Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-19-2007, 05:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drugs and hugs View Post
You should always listern to the female as they`re always right.
Hehehehehe.

But then there wouldn't be a film
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-20-2007, 04:04 AM
First off, let me state that I'm not a film student nor a professional filmmaker. And although I may not be able to justify my opinion regarding a certain movie in a professional, methodical manner, my opinion stll counts, because, remember, movies are not only made for film students and film professionals. So here it goes...

I really can't see why this film is all that great. It's far from being bad, but it sure is not the masterpiece it's made out to be. It has definitely aged, too. Those stupid computer platforms with all those flashing lit buttons are certainly irritating in the present day. Similarly, I think the computer screens in the likes of Minority Report will look just as dumb 15 years from now. That's normal. And don't get me started on how retarded the xenomorph looked when it jumped at Ripley near the end of the film with it's arms open like it wanted to hug her. Then it just stood there. It's like how kids try to scare each other, jumping from some dark corner.

The acting was average too.

The truely amazing aspect of the film really is the design of the creature. It is the sole reason I paid for the Quadrilogy boxset.

It's better than the second, but the third is the best Alien film in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump