Makes me hate AvP movie even more!!!!

[Lt. Drebin]

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/686/686746p1.html

I hated this movie from the moment I saw it, but this is enfuriating. Way to go Fox. Way to alienate, pun intended, the two best directors in the entire series....WAY TO GO. :frown: :frown: :frown: :frown: :frown: :frown: :frown: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

F*** YOU PAUL W. S. ANDERSON, and F*** YOU FOX.

And now the sequel is coming....directed by the Straus Bros. OK.

 

[Asknoone]

Fox suck. Paul Anderson sucks.

 

[Cormeh]

I didn't hate AvP, I thought it was OK, if totally stupid.

'We've got this really good script for Alien vs Predator,' and I got pretty upset. I said, 'You do that you're going to kill the validity of the franchise in my mind,' because to me, that was Frankenstein Meets Werewolf. It was Universal just taking their assets and starting to play them off against each other.

Cameron pretty much nailed it there. I enjoy both series of films, but at the time of seeing AvP I had no idea Cameron was even considering A5 long before.

Seeing the film made me believe they had completely run out of good ideas.

 

[Double_Blade]

I hate Paul Anderson but at least he is smart enough to make AVP movie great, I love the AVP movie but I hate the Resident evil movies.

Alice? WHAT TEH HELL??? Paul Anderson screw off!

 

[Zephos]

I hate Paul Anderson but at least he is smart enough to make AVP movie great

Exaggeration of the century.

 

[Asknoone]

I hate Paul Anderson but at least he is smart enough to make AVP movie great

Leave.

 

[ríomhaire]

I hate Paul Anderson but at least he is smart enough to make AVP movie great

:rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling::rolling:

 

[Lt. Drebin]

Leave.

Well put.

 

[Harryz]

I hate Paul Anderson but at least he is smart enough to make AVP movie great.

That comment alone should be worthy of a ban.

Also, thats the first sentence I've ever seen with "smart" and "Paul Anderson" in together.

 

[nutcrackr]

cameron thought avp was good? What on earth is going on in the world? It was the worst of all the alien/predator movies.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

cameron thought avp was good? What on earth is going on in the world? It was the worst of all the alien/predator movies.

I think he was just being polite. Kinda like when a coworker smells really bad, but you just don't have the heart to tell him....kinda like that.

 

[nutcrackr]

I think he was just being polite. Kinda like when a coworker smells really bad, but you just don't have the heart to tell him....kinda like that.

yeah but this coworker is soooo stinky that if you don't tell him you are likely to kill hundreds of innocent civilians.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

yeah but this coworker is soooo stinky that if you don't tell him you are likely to kill hundreds of innocent civilians.

LOL

 

[Gray Fox]

Paul Anderson could make it good if he wanted to, the first RE movie was better then any alien movie and on par with the first predator.

 

[Harryz]

Paul Anderson could make it good if he wanted to, the first RE movie was better then any alien movie and on par with the first predator.

*cries*

 

[Laivasse]

Paul Anderson could make it good if he wanted to, the first RE movie was better then any alien movie and on par with the first predator.

WHAT?? I saw it the other night, it was utter PANTS. You just BLASPHOME.

Edit: I just realised you also rated Predator as better than any of the Alien movies...your statement is like an Escher painting done in sputum upon my very face.

 

[Remus]

the first RE movie was better then any alien movie and on par with the first predator.

What?!?!:flame: How can you say RE was better then any Alien movie, are you :rolling: ?

Best Alien movie 1&2
Best predator movie, the first one, I wish the second didn't exist as well as AVP:x

 

[esplin]

I sense the rotten stench of 21st Century Hollywood corrupting our youth.

 

[Gray Fox]

Alian movies where never that good at all. There was absolutely nothing good about them exept the Alien design. The plot is driven completly by stupidity of the characters as are the scares which really takes away. It's like doom 3, after 10 minuts it gets predictable and not much fun at all.

Simply put if riply comes to a T section, and the left one is fully lit by bright light and every corner of the room is visible, and the right on the other hand is dark, upredictable, and has and eerie sound. She will choose to go with her back to the right in to the right room, because as we all know full lit rooms are the most dangerouse, and the camera will slowly zoom over her shoulder and you love Alien for it. For the rest the acting is bad, the story isn't really worth mentioning sincet here is nothing exiting, new or original about it.
And the second one is a predictable B movie shooting fest, a smear on cameron's otherwise brilliant career.

Now RE on the other hand may have had cheese chars as wel as lines, but for the most part it had a truly unpredictable and fairly complex story, atleast compared to other horror movies. It's plot was not driven by shear and utter stupidity and it managed not to fall in to the same pit traps that most horrormovies do, it wasn't very scary but atleast the scares did not come at the expense of everything else like in most movies.

No it wasn't a bad movie by any means, the biggest problem it has was the name Resident Evil, and the moment people found out it didn't take place in an Old mansion and wasn't to be a lettor to letter translation from game to movie it was doomed. Because most of you make up your mind long before you see the movie, and then when you see it instead of actually sitting there and let the movie do it's magic, you make up rediculus standards which you hold the movie to, so you can outdue each other when you try to diss it later with your friends. Completly oblivious to the fact that those standards could even bring down The Gotfather, or Fight Club.

 

[Remus]

oblivious to the fact that those standards could even bring down The Godfather, or Fight Club.

I don't like the Godfather trilogy or Fight Club even if they are considered "classics".
My point is it's a matter of personal preference you like some movies others like other movies, so that's that.

 

[Lt. Drebin]

The first RE movie was better then any alien movie and on par with the first predator.

Oh for God's sake.

:frown:

Alien was a groundbreaking film. That's not a minority opinion.

 

[esplin]

Okay Gray Fox it seems I have to give you a history lesson.

You remember Star Trek, that show about Vulcans flying around making nice-nice, and Star Wars, a show about Jedi fighting the evil empire and going to a pary held by muppets, that was Science Fiction for 90% of the world before Alien.
Alien not only brought you the stereotypical "giant bug" that has persisted for the last 30 years, it was the first alien that was truly scary. Alien was advertised as a "haunted house in space" giving science fiction a menace that had not been present in movies before then.
Aliens was the evolution of the franchise into a full-fledged action film. The characters were much more realistic and Ripley became a much more dynamic character with the introduction of Newt. The special effects were also top-notch for the time, and I dare you to find a scene from a 1980's film more visceral than the Marine's Last Stand in the living quarters.

Basically any science fiction movie thats not about big ships fighting bigger ships or spreading love throughout the galaxy you can trace back to Alien.

 

[DeusExMachina]

This entire thread makes me want to kill myself.

 

[satch919]

Holy smokes, I didn't know about that! I want another Alien movie. I liked the first Resident Evil too but as far as it being better than Aliens, that's just insane. I was a huge Alien/Predator fan when I was younger. I had action figures and tons of comics. I was happy to see that they were finally going to make an AVP film. However, once I saw it, I felt let down. It was far below what it should have been.

Damn, if Ridley Scott and James Cameron collaborated for a 5th Alien movie, that would be some kind of uber-movie! Keep pushing Fox guys!

 

[nutcrackr]

*head explodes after reading Gray Fox's "opinions"*

 

[Gray Fox]

Okay Gray Fox it seems I have to give you a history lesson.

You remember Star Trek, that show about Vulcans flying around making nice-nice, and Star Wars, a show about Jedi fighting the evil empire and going to a pary held by muppets, that was Science Fiction for 90% of the world before Alien.
Alien not only brought you the stereotypical "giant bug" that has persisted for the last 30 years, it was the first alien that was truly scary. Alien was advertised as a "haunted house in space" giving science fiction a menace that had not been present in movies before then.
Aliens was the evolution of the franchise into a full-fledged action film. The characters were much more realistic and Ripley became a much more dynamic character with the introduction of Newt. The special effects were also top-notch for the time, and I dare you to find a scene from a 1980's film more visceral than the Marine's Last Stand in the living quarters.

Basically any movie thats not about big ships fighting bigger ships or spreading love throughout the galaxy you can trace back to Alien.

Giant scary bug's from outer space who kill humans were very commen in pop culture even before WWII. Alien brought nothing exept a combination of Puppet master
and HP Lovecraft. And whatever it did brought is overshadowd, by it's abysimal, script, story and predictability. Even Hitchcock who was one of the first to use that kind of camera angles for scares was smart enough not to over do it. And used it very subtly, and only to enhance an allready good plot and narrative. In other words aliens was not original, nor a very good movie. it has it's cult status pretty much all to thank to Gigers brilliant design, that in itself is enough to cause you nightmares.
And you comments on the second movie haven't changed my opinion any more, since I found the last scene to be as predictable as boring as the rest of the movie. The last stand was beeing worked to in a completly predictable fasion of simply letting the commander make blatently stupid desisions. It had nothing more going for it then the name aliens in it to destinguish it from the rest of crop of 80's B action movies.
I do agree with you comments on Riply's character.

 

[esplin]

Sorry Gray Fox, I love you man, but all opinions are not equal, and if you honestly believe that Resident Evil is better than Aliens then I simply have no hope for you.

 

[Gray Fox]

;(
I'm So Ronery
I'm so ronery
So ronery
So ronery and sadry arone

There's no one
Just me onry
Sitting on my rittle throne
I work very hard and make up great prans
But nobody ristens, no one understands
Seems that no one takes me serirousry

And so I'm ronery
A little ronery
Poor rittre me

There's nobody
I can rerate to
Feer rike a bird in a cage
It's kinda sihry
But not rearry
Because it's fihring my body with rage

I work rearry hard and I'm physicarry fit
But nobody here seems to rearize that
When I rure the world maybe they'rr notice me
But untir then I'rr just be ronery
Rittre ronery, poor rittre me
I'm so ronery
I'm so ronery

 

[esplin]

:cheese:

 

[Asknoone]

Gray Fox, please do not talk to me again. Your opinion is not valid.

 

[Gray Fox]

Gray Fox, please do not talk to me again. Your opinion is not valid.

And your's is, your idea of an argument is to try degrade the person who you are arguing with, or subtly try to arouse them in to flaming, which only someone like Lemon King would fall for. I may have generally an unpopular opinion on this board but at least I can stand on my own, you can only exist in a forum where people have the same opinion like you since you're arguments have no real substance or show any real understanding of the points you try to make. Your comments are meerly a comedic relief for your ego.
None in this thread has of yet managed to counter my points with any real arguments, you have all simply resorted to childish insults.

 

[Asknoone]

I was not being serious.

 

[Gray Fox]

I won't pretend I was joking, because iwasn't. Simply put straight out I meant everything I said.
**** it, it had to come out sometime.

 

[Direwolf]

I think the reason that no one's tried to counter your argument is that all we can manage is a bit of stunned silence.

To create a proper debate on a subject you first have to find a point on which all parties agree, and then argue from there. But your basic precepts about the RE and Alien movies are so opposite from the norm for nerd and movie culture that theres no place we can argue from.

How does one argue against a person who Jovovich's Alice over Weaver's Ripley? Its flabbergasting.

 

[Gray Fox]

I think the reason that no one's tried to counter your argument is that all we can manage is a bit of stunned silence.

To create a proper debate on a subject you first have to find a point on which all parties agree, and then argue from there. But your basic precepts about the RE and Alien movies are so opposite from the norm for nerd and movie culture that theres no place we can argue from.

How does one argue against a person who Jovovich's Alice over Weaver's Ripley? Its flabbergasting.

Camera angles, story, plot, hook, strange attractor. Are those all unfamiliar terms that you can't argue with. Or is it simply that when it came to actually justifying wat made Aliens so great and RE so bad you can't actually come u with a good reason.

If Alien is so great, then someone could surely some up with a reason of what make it stand out from the crowed. Apart from Gigers design I can't find anything, did it have a good plot, did it have an unusual hook, good script, was it intelligent, did it comment on human nature somehow. As far as I see it was just a bunch of poor clishe's warpped in a Nightmarish package, Riply a woman beeing the main hero's seems to the only really interesting bit that set's it apart, but is that enough to make it a classic, does that make that much of a better movie, is shaft truly better for the fact that it had a black dude as it's main lead. Disproving someone on a forum where everybody disagrees with him should be the easiest thing in the world.

Besides your last comment makes no sense to, the best I can make out is that you mean that I somehow like Alice more then Riply, even though I clearly said it had cheesy scharacters, even though Alice Bunnyhopped the whole movie in RE2.

Fine so I Googled Alien on the net and read a couple of review to finally find out what was so good about it, one struck me in particular, and for one's it seems that Erbert hasn't proofed to be a total wast of Oxygen:

Alien (1979)

Roger Ebert / October 26, 2003



Printer-friendly »
E-mail this to a friend »

At its most fundamental level, "Alien" is a movie about things that can jump out of the dark and kill you. It shares a kinship with the shark in "Jaws," Michael Myers in "Halloween," and assorted spiders, snakes, tarantulas and stalkers. Its most obvious influence is Howard Hawks' "The Thing" (1951), which was also about a team in an isolated outpost who discover a long-dormant alien, bring it inside, and are picked off one by one as it haunts the corridors. Look at that movie, and you see "Alien" in embryo.

In another way, Ridley Scott's 1979 movie is a great original. It builds on the seminal opening shot of "Star Wars" (1977), with its vast ship in lonely interstellar space, and sidesteps Lucas' space opera to tell a story in the genre of traditional "hard" science fiction; with its tough-talking crew members and their mercenary motives, the story would have found a home in John W. Campbell's Astounding Science Fiction during its nuts-and-bolts period in the 1940s. Campbell loved stories in which engineers and scientists, not space jockeys and ray-gun blasters, dealt with outer space in logical ways.

Certainly the character of Ripley, played by Sigourney Weaver, would have appealed to readers in the Golden Age of Science Fiction. She has little interest in the romance of finding the alien, and still less in her employer's orders that it be brought back home as a potential weapon. After she sees what it can do, her response to "Special Order 24" ("Return alien lifeform, all other priorities rescinded") is succinct: "How do we kill it?" Her implacable hatred for the alien is the common thread running through all three "Alien" sequels, which have gradually descended in quality but retained their motivating obsession.

One of the great strengths of "Alien" is its pacing. It takes its time. It waits. It allows silences (the majestic opening shots are underscored by Jerry Goldsmith with scarcely audible, far-off metallic chatterings). It suggests the enormity of the crew's discovery by building up to it with small steps: The interception of a signal (is it a warning or an SOS?). The descent to the extraterrestrial surface. The bitching by Brett and Parker, who are concerned only about collecting their shares. The masterstroke of the surface murk through which the crew members move, their helmet lights hardly penetrating the soup. The shadowy outline of the alien ship. The sight of the alien pilot, frozen in his command chair. The enormity of the discovery inside the ship ("It's full of ... leathery eggs ...").

A recent version of this story would have hurtled toward the part where the alien jumps on the crew members. Today's slasher movies, in the sci-fi genre and elsewhere, are all pay-off and no buildup. Consider the wretched remake of the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," which cheats its audience out of an explanation, an introduction of the chain-saw family, and even a proper ending. It isn't the slashing that we enjoy. It's the waiting for the slashing.

Hitchcock knew this, with his famous example of a bomb under a table. (It goes off -- that's action. It doesn't go off -- that's suspense.) M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" knew that, and hardly bothered with its aliens at all. And the best scenes in Hawks' "The Thing" involve the empty corridors of the Antarctic station where the Thing might be lurking.

"Alien" uses a tricky device to keep the alien fresh throughout the movie: It evolves the nature and appearance of the creature, so we never know quite what it looks like or what it can do. We assume at first the eggs will produce a humanoid, because that's the form of the petrified pilot on the long-lost alien ship. But of course we don't even know if the pilot is of the same race as his cargo of leathery eggs. Maybe he also considers them as a weapon. The first time we get a good look at the alien, as it bursts from the chest of poor Kane (John Hurt). It is unmistakably phallic in shape, and the critic Tim Dirks mentions its "open, dripping vaginal mouth."

Yes, but later, as we glimpse it during a series of attacks, it no longer assumes this shape at all, but looks octopod, reptilian or arachnoid. And then it uncorks another secret; the fluid dripping from its body is a "universal solvent," and there is a sequence both frightening and delightful as it eats its way through one deck of the ship after another. As the sequels ("Aliens," "Alien 3," "Alien Resurrection") will make all too abundantly clear, the alien is capable of being just about any monster the story requires. Because it doesn't play by any rules of appearance or behavior, it becomes an amorphous menace, haunting the ship with the specter of shape-shifting evil. Ash (Ian Holm), the science officer, calls it a "perfect organism. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility," and admits: "I admire its purity, its sense of survival; unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality."

Sigourney Weaver, whose career would be linked for years to this strange creature, is of course the only survivor of this original crew, except for the ... cat. The producers must have hoped for a sequel, and by killing everyone except a woman, they cast their lot with a female lead for their series.

Variety noted a few years later that Weaver remained the only actress who could "open" an action movie, and it was a tribute to her versatility that she could play the hard, competent, ruthless Ripley and then double back for so many other kinds of roles. One of the reasons she works so well in the role is that she comes across as smart; the 1979 "Alien" is a much more cerebral movie than its sequels, with the characters (and the audience) genuinely engaged in curiosity about this weirdest of lifeforms.

A peculiarity of the rest of the actors is that none of them were particularly young. Tom Skerritt, the captain, was 46, Hurt was 39 but looked older, Holm was 48, Harry Dean Stanton was 53, Yaphet Kotto was 42, and only Veronica Cartwright at 29 and Weaver at 30 were in the age range of the usual thriller cast. Many recent action pictures have improbably young actors cast as key roles or sidekicks, but by skewing older, "Alien" achieves a certain texture without even making a point of it: These are not adventurers but workers, hired by a company to return 20 million tons of ore to Earth (the vast size of the ship is indicated in a deleted scene, included on the DVD, which takes nearly a minute just to show it passing).

The screenplay by Dan O'Bannon, based on a story he wrote with Ronald Shusett, allows these characters to speak in distinctive voices. Brett and Parker (Kotto and Stanton), who work in the engine room, complain about delays and worry about their cut of the profits. But listen to Ash: "I'm still collating it, actually, but I have confirmed that he's got an outer layer of protein polysaccharides. He has a funny habit of shedding his cells and replacing them with polarized silicon which gives him a prolonged resistance to adverse environmental conditions." And then there is Ripley's direct way of cutting to the bottom line.

The result is a film that absorbs us in a mission before it involves us in an adventure, and that consistently engages the alien with curiosity and logic, instead of simply firing at it. Contrast this movie with a latter-day space opera like "Armageddon," with its average shot a few seconds long and its dialogue reduced to terse statements telegraphing the plot. Much of the credit for "Alien" must go to director Ridley Scott, who had made only one major film before this, the cerebral, elegant "The Duelists" (1977). His next film would be another intelligent, visionary sci-fi epic, "Blade Runner" (1982).

Though his career has included some inexplicable clinkers ("Someone to Watch Over Me"), it has also included "Thelma & Louise," "G.I. Jane," "Gladiator" (unloved by me, but not by audiences), "Black Hawk Down" and "Matchstick Men." These are simultaneously commercial and intelligent projects, made by a director who wants to attract a large audience but doesn't care to insult it.

"Alien" has been called the most influential of modern action pictures, and so it is, although "Halloween" also belongs on the list. Unfortunately, the films it influenced studied its thrills but not its thinking. We have now descended into a bog of Gotcha! movies in which various horrible beings spring on a series of victims, usually teenagers. The ultimate extension of the genre is the Geek Movie, illustrated by the remake of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," which essentially sets the audience the same test as an old-time carnival geek show: Now that you've paid your money, can you keep your eyes open while we disgust you? A few more ambitious and serious sci-fi films have also followed in the footsteps of "Alien," notably the well-made "Aliens" (1986) and "Dark City" (1998). But the original still vibrates with a dark and frightening intensity.

I cannot lie, nor find the movie any better just because of this, and I still like RE. I do however retract my statement, that it completly and utterly sucks. And I cannot, but admit that it deserves all the praise it has gotten.

 

[StardogChampion]

One of the great strengths of "Alien" is its pacing. It takes its time. It waits.

That's the problem with movies nowadays. They're just action movies with one set-piece after another. The first Matrix is an example of doing this well, but movies like AvP are just piss poor.

Movies need to slow stuff down and get a decent story first of all. Blade Runner is essentially a guy murdering 4 or so andriods (I forget how many), but it doesn't resort to turning itself into an out-and-out action movie.

 

[Direwolf]

Not that action movies don't have their place. But put action where action belongs, and not everywhere else.

Camera angles, story, plot, hook, strange attractor. Are those all unfamiliar terms that you can't argue with. Or is it simply that when it came to actually justifying wat made Aliens so great and RE so bad you can't actually come u with a good reason.

My point is that we all do think that Aliens is superior in cinematography, directing, acting, and writing. But the only way to justify these views to someone who doesn't recognize them by viewing the film itself is to create a lengthy analysis and/or diatribe that amounts to a huge amount of work for something trivial.

 

[SimonomiS]

Why did they have to tell us this?

Ignorance is bliss! D:

 

[Bull Goose Loony]

ok. not only were Alien and Aliens vastly superior in terms of acting, script, soundtrack and cinematography, the concept was original enough to merit an oscar for the creature design. RE on the other hand had average actors, an average plot "omg, zombies" and stupid unorginal crap like the main character matrix kicking a dog.

 

[Laivasse]

The soundtrack was enough of a crime for RE to deserve being strapped to a rocket and fired into the sun.