Alien or Aliens?

Summary of each sentence, in order: hate, hate, hate, don't like, hate, hate, hate, can't remember, don't remember, like, don't really care, like.

Alien

On the desert Island? I'd be happy with either Christina Hendrikson or Angelina Jolie. Only if Angelina was on the island with me, I'd have to be feeding her grapes...

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

Aliens is the better film (in my opinion) and the one I prefer. I don't hate Aliens. I like Bill Paxton (although his character annoyed me). I love all the marines (they seemed real with real faults). I love war films. I love that it looks like there's only 5 or 6 aliens (the 5 or 6 were very well done). I loved Newt (she was a doll). I love that robo-suit scene at the end (Get away from her, you Bitch!) .....


Sorry HK... I couldn't resist...

__________________

I must chose Alien with a slight edge. I like the scale of the art direction more in the original, as well as the overall tone. Aliens is more exciting, but Newt kind of annoys me sometimes. I do like a whole lot about Aliens, too, so it's just a slight edge.

I still want to read that book Chris mentioned one time about the allegory in Alien...

__________________

A L I E N

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

I was just mentioning that book to planet news in a profile comment yesterday. It's called Monsters From the Id. Most of it's about other classic horror and its relation to sexual guilt; I think Alien features prominently in just one of the chapters, but it definitely changed the way I viewed the film, and some of it seemed pretty obvious after-the-fact.

This.

I bet myself 5 bucks Justin would chose Alien.

Pay up, me!

If you don't have the money, you'll have to give yourself an IOM.

I think the general consensus has always been "I love both films, but prefer "A" over "B", normally because you edge towards horror or action. I have to say, I'm pleasantly surprised how many prefer the original.

The pace and tone are almost identically in both films, but I'l always prefer Ridley Scotts original because of the way the creature was presented. It seems like a fairly small detail, but Aliens changed my whole perspective on the "Xenomorph" negatively, when they turned the creature into a "bug".

I prefer the idea that the creature isn't just a hungry carnivore feeding off of its own instinct and requirements (yes, but something more). I know this was suggested by Ash, but the 'unknown factor' of the aliens origins, it's cunning, physical structure and its lethal still added a dense fear factor that for me was sort of washed away in aliens.

Thanks for the responses

I noticed some people were mentioning books, I don't have time to link them, but search these if your interested in some good alien books . Big thumbs up with Alien Harvest and Genocide.

Alien Harvest
Berserker
Earth Hive
Genocide
Labyrinth
Music of the Spears
Nightmare Asylum
The Female War

You cheeky mother
This plus the next two paragraphs are the summation of how I feel, the unknown always wins, plus the whole stomach birth. Suspense compared to blasting a bunch of bugs with no wonder of what will happen next is also a factor, it's like a more serious Starship Troopers...but ST doesn't have Newt.

I have heard from someone outside here that the books that the movies were based on are very, very good but very rare, how are they?

Indeed, If you watch some of the extras on the 9 disk edition of the alien quadrilodgy. You'll hear Ridley talk a lot about how he presented the Alien. Everyone has the ability to scare themselves when they let their imagination run wild.

No film maker can present anything on screen as terrifying as showing you minute details and letting you construct the rest. The alien became more and more over-exposed as we approached Alien Rez at which point we have the alien standing in well lite rooms on camera. It raped the Alien of its relevance to the franchise and the terrifying characteristics that were defined at the start.

Unfortunately there's no going back, the creature isn't scary any more, its a horror celebrity dining out with Freddy, Jason and Michael Myers . I'm anxious to see what Ridleys going to do with Alien 5/untitled prequel next year.

, you cant beat a bit of stomach birth. The chest-buster scene is the only reason the movie was made. David Giler.

Definitely Aliens. Best movie out of the whole series. When I was 12, this was my favorite movie for awhile.

For some reason, I actually cannot get into the first film, Alien. I think it's slow and quiet and kinda boring. Aliens solved that problem for me. I even think I'd rather watch Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection over the first film.

SC , check out the Assembly Cut of Alien 3 - far superior to the theater release, IMO.

Still flawed, but better.

Well, I saw the first film and as an older adult was grossed out by the little monster popping out of the guy's stomach and was offended by the stupid old cliche of expendable cast members leaving the communal protective area to wander alone down dark corridors in search of a stupid stray cat, knowing that the boogie bear will jump out and kill 'em at any moment. I don't appreciate films that, incapable of building suspense through a logical plot, resort instead to having things jump out of the dark to startle viewers.

On the other hand, the film perked up quite a bit in the scene where Sigorney is clad only in her undies as she fights the giant lizard! But not enough for me to ever watch it again or to see any of the other films in that series.

So does the fact that I sat through Alien make it the better film? Or does the fact that it discouraged me from viewing any of the sequels make it the worse film?

Whaaat? Some people feel guilty about sex? What a strange concept!

In my opinion the third gets unnecessary flack. Sure, the CGI sucked (even at the time), but the film stayed true to the gothic, disgusting repulsive nature of the alien franchise and provided us with a watchable horror/sci-fi. As Sadie mentioned, the DCut was much better than the theatrical.


When you say "knowing that the boogie bear will jump out and kill 'em at any moment" I'm not sure weather you mean the characters did illogical things (wandering from safety, only to be picked off by the creature), which in my opinion can be insanely irritating and ruin any horror film, but in fact did not happen in this film.

Or ..... that your saying you knew that the characters (some "expendable" in your opinion) were going to wander and get picked off. If the latter, your an idiot for not assuming that some of the cast members were going to be killed off in a alien horror flick, with the tagline 'In space no one can hear you scream'. I would have been thoroughly disappointed if nothing had gone down .

None of the cast members were the "expendable", at least not in the traditional sense of the term (Characters with little or no exploration into their past, present or future, present specifically to be killed).

Neither, the fact that you haven't seen Aliens makes your participation in the thread, somewhat .......... pointless.

Now this sort of nudges up against a point that has always bothered me about sci-fi films. We learn from Darwin that all animals and plants have over the centuries adapted to best survive in their environment. So giraffe have long necks to reach leaves in trees, hippos spend a lot of time in water to support their weight, lions have sharp teeth and claws for tearing prey, wolves live in packs and cooperate in running down prey and have longer snouts for reaching into the body cavities of their victims.

Now if that's the way Mother Nature works on Earth, she must pretty much follow the same rules on other worlds, wouldn't you think? So what in hell would justify the body and facial developments of movie creatures like in Alien and Predator? What sort of creature would depend on pods to reproduce as in Invasion fo the Body Snatchers? I mean, who moved the first pods close to their first victims at the start of that life form and why was it only people that the pods replaced? Avatar is about the only film I've ever seen where the special creature features are even explained via all those built-in connectors that allow them to plug into other creatures.

What I'm saying basically is that I'd like to see Hollywood come up with space aliens that look practical as well as scarey. I mean can you really imagine that Alien thing carrying on a day-to-day life in its own world looking like that?

Interesting point. However some speculate that the aliens are synthetic. Biological weapons if you like, created by the creatures from Alien that were transporting them as eggs. These creatures are also know as "space jockeys", (pictured below) by the alien and predator, comic communities. We understand that these 'Space Jockeys are going to be explored in the upcoming Alien Prequel which dates before the events of LV-426.



The alien related books, (which I should mention are not considered cannon) depict the space jockeys as an Alien race who travel from planet to planet in search of natural resources. (sort of like independence day). The eggs they transport are launched to the planet in question......resulting in extinction in just short of a year. (the aliens effectiveness at this job is displayed in aliens)

Anyway, back to your point, the aliens are meant to be deadly killing machines, weapons, (based on that particular theory) there fairly successful in that respect.

----

Aliens take on various forms depending on the characteristics of their hosts. Most of the Aliens seen to date have been human-spawned, but a number of Aliens born from other hosts have also been seen. Dog, Predator etc.

--

To a degree I dont really agree with the point you've made, interesting as it is. I should have asked why the Aliens physical structure is impractical to a potential existence, outside of the films.

Terrible cop out answer but I rate both films equally.

Alien is a marvel of production design (considering when it was made and the genre films that pre-date it), beautifully photographed, and authentically acted by a superb cast (especially Weaver and Holm). It creates a wonderfully bleak sense of impending terror laced with sickly psycho-sexual horror undertones, making the film a complex piece that rewards repeat viewings. The end result is still just a high concept slasher flick though...all be it a great one.

Aliens is also a marvel of production design considering what Cameron put up on screen and the hostile British crew (many of them patriotic veterans of Ridley's original) he had to work with. I find it impossible to imagine a better sequel considering the classic status of the original, and the fresh approach Cameron took (consider how average Jaws 2 is by comparison). It's well photographed and superbly acted by a fantastic cast (especially Weaver and Paxton). The film delivers a roller coaster ride of high tech, high octane action and suspense, laced with both feminist and maternal undertones making a complex piece that rewards repeat viewings. The end result is still just a high concept war movie though...all be it a great one.

__________________
100 Favourites From The Future: REWIRED