Best paced action film ever made. Iconic dialogue from start to finish. Brilliant casting. Impeccable acting. Visually amazing. Flawless script. SFX have aged fantastically. Sigourney solidifies Ripley as an all-time cinema icon. Supporting cast given time to develop on screen. All characters have story-driven purpose. Even the child-acting is natural and effortless.
Scary, witty, emotional, thrilling & endlessly re-watchable. Love love LOVE Aliens. A PERFECT film. Just a shame the start of Alien-3 crapped all over it.
Walter Hill "William Gibson's script...This this is too much like Aliens. I personally wanted to puke all over James Cameron work. Fox were building sets on a daily basis for a third story. As I threw every script in at my fireplace I completely remained stubborn thoughout".
David Fincher "I had to fight for this scene. Fox were on my back when I stepped in this muddy marry shores. I got insulted for those Madonna music videos I made. I just copied original Alien film when brought this on VHS so knew what I was making ugh."
Vincent Ward "I was so annoyed by that Newt clearly couldn't understand why I had to continue with her. My Wooden Planet idea took some courage to write as I clearly thought I was writing a epic science fiction tale but ummm never really cared was just writer strike you know?!"
Sigourney Weaver "LOL They put me alongside a Hicks Doll with no face on?!!"
Quotes almost.
You gotta stay in your seats until the Sulaco reaches the terminal!
Agreed. I watched Aliens 3 and Resurrection but other than that kick-ass basketball scene, which the cast and crew say Sigourney actually made, they don't exist for me. Was really hoping for the spoken of sequel that was to override those, but apparently they're putting all their focus on a sequel for the snooze fest known as Prometheus. Though there is one small bit tlof Aliens that slwas flawed. They mentioned how much ammo they had left but I swear Hudson ran through 5 times that amount when he went all gonzo during the breach battle.
It does have some major flaws though. Yes, it's a masterpiece of a movie, but sadly it's weighed down by the child actor that can barely act. Wait... did you just say that the child acting is natural and effortless? Remember when she sees the facehugger wrapped around her dad and she just screams with the blandest facial expression on her face, and she doesn't even look scared. She just looks and sounds annoying, like somebody told her to scream, but she forgot that she was also supposed to act. That bit of drowning she did in Alien 3, she had it coming. Never seen more suitable come upens for useless child actors.
Well yes I agree her acting was not exactly among the greats of child-performances. But is good enough, like it doesn't take away from the rest of the film at all imo, certainly not useless. Her screaming at the start isn't 100% convincing, but on balance she did well. She carried off some pretty iconic lines, they would have been corny AF in the hands of the typical stage-managed brat.
What are the other "major flaws" btw? Not starting an argument, I'm always genuinely curious to hear peoples criticisms for Aliens. Like I said, it is one of the few films I consider truly perfect (especially within it's genre.)
In 1990, I didn't want anybody making a sequel to Aliens. I thought Aliens was perfect the way that it was and that a sequel might damage the Alien legacy. Well, I was right. Alien 3 did damage the Alien legacy and the opening credits of Alien 3 destroyed everything Ripley had fought for at the end of Aliens. But I was wrong at the time for not wanting that lousy sequel to exist.
It was interesting how co-producer Sigourney Weaver killed off Newt in the opening credits after her character had risked her own life to save Newt twice at the end of Aliens. What was more interesting, however, was how Sigourney Weaver responded to the question "Do you have any faith, sister?". And what was most interesting was how Sigourney Weaver stole credit away from Ridley Scott and James Cameron for directing the two finest monster movies ever made and gave the credit to God instead.
It's just a shame I didn't realize that back in 1992 and that I wouldn't first pray until ten years later. It would then be several more years before I would connect the dots between Alien 3 and Star Trek V, along with Poltergeist II and Psycho III. Wow! What a waste of time between 1992 and 2002. Now that's a shame.
Anyway, Alien 3 was not a shame, but was a lousy yet important film that reveals the creator behind all great things.
If Hicks & Newt are brought to life in a new Alien movie, attention will be drawn to the sheer awfulness of the important film Alien 3. It's a win-win situation.
To be fair, I don't think Alien3 is awful, and actually had some interesting aspects. But the first two were impossible to live up to - and the disrespect that was shown to Newt & Hicks was unnecessary. If they had to be killed off, they could have at least been given some progression into the film - Which would have made the death more effective anyway. Just dying before the film even starts simply seemed like the writers couldn't think up any good ideas.
It was interesting how co-producer Sigourney Weaver killed off Newt in the opening credits after her character had risked her own life to save Newt twice at the end of Aliens.
It's also completely untrue. She had NOTHING to do with the script writing, aside from having a clause put in her contract stating that Walter Hill and David Giler must write the final draft. Sigourney was initially gunning for a small role, with Michael Biehn taking the protagonist lead as Hicks. Then later it was intended to focus more on the relationship between Newt and Ripley. Sigourney did not want her killed off at all. So again, you are making things up.
What was more interesting, however, was how Sigourney Weaver responded to the question "Do you have any faith, sister?".
You mean she spoke the line of dialogue she was paid to...?
And what was most interesting was how Sigourney Weaver stole credit away from Ridley Scott and James Cameron for directing the two finest monster movies ever made and gave the credit to God instead.
OMG, like, wowsers, man... An actor has a personal opinion that is oh-so-vaguely connected to something one of their many many characters spoke about.... how groundbreaking...
Funny how you don't even mention Ripley and guns and Sigourney, which is a far more pertinent and direct connection, even brought up by the actress herself in the Special Features... you know, since you're supposed to be all about the compelling trivia and fascinating connections and all... reply share
Sigourney Weaver may have changed her story in the past 24 years, but I do remember her saying something to the nature that she thought that Alien 3 went in the direction she thought it should have gone.
Also, simply as an actress, she didn't have to accept the script as it was. She could have said "no". Jodie Foster said "no" to the sequel to The Silence Of The Lambs. But Sigourney Weaver went along with it. She took the money, she got her hair cut off, and she acted in the movie that killed off Newt in the opening credits of the movie.
Sigourney Weaver may have changed her story in the past 24 years, but I do remember her saying something to the nature that she thought that Alien 3 went in the direction she thought it should have gone.
Referring to the death of her own character, yes... She also stated that she wanted to sleep with an alien at some point, the closest to which she got in A4.
Also, simply as an actress, she didn't have to accept the script as it was.
Actually, she did. It's called contractual obligation and carries a heavy penalty if the actor quits, especially so late into pre-production as this point. This is why she had the above-mentioned clause in her contract.
She could have said "no". Jodie Foster said "no" to the sequel to The Silence Of The Lambs.
Before the project started, yes.
Also, she was the co-producer of the movie.
Yes, she was. So what...? You think that means something? Go read up on the roles and duties of a Producer, before comparing it to both Director and Screenwriter. Then you might understand how little control over this she actually had, as a mere co-producer to the Director, three full Producers and one Executive Producer, not to mention Brandywine and 20th Century Fox who own the whole shabang in the first place. reply share
I'll give ttaskmaster half-credit for his intelligent argument defending Sigourney Weaver from killing off Newt. He made an intelligent case, but so did I. As co-producer of and star of Alien 3, Sigourney Weaver deserves some of the blame for killing off Newt. Jodie Foster chose not to have anything to do with Hannibal. Sigourney Weaver's name, on the other hand, appeared TWICE in the opening credits of Alien 3.
So...we both came across with equally compelling arguments. Neither of us won that argument, but neither of us lost.
And to use a little humor to illustrate my point...
No, you made an arse of yourself... Your trivia was untrue and you demonstrated no appreciation of how the industry works. That's not very intelligent at all.
As co-producer of and star of Alien 3, Sigourney Weaver deserves some of the blame for killing off Newt.
She was subordinate to several other people - You think she carries any blame for the decisions of people that can overrule her on all matters??!! It was their decisions that removed Michael Biehn, repeatedly rewrote the script and put her in the lead in the first place, not hers.
Jodie Foster chose not to have anything to do with Hannibal.
Jodie Foster has said in interviews she was already busy with another movie and thus unavailable. THAT is why she didn't do it. Sigourney, on the other hand, was already legally contracted to Alien3 and couldn't walk away without considerable penalty, which I doubt she could afford. Studios are usually not very kind to people who abandon their committments.
Among all the 92 quotes and responses from ttaskmaster, he's given an ocean of replies, accusations, claims, but nothing to prove anything.
There's a difference between replying to something and proving something.
There's a difference between accusing somebody of something and proving something.
There's a difference between claiming something about somebody and proving something.
Ttaskmaster wants people to trust him over me, but he hasn't proved any of his false accusations against me. May God help the person who believes anything that ttaskmaster says.
Among all the 92 quotes and responses from ttaskmaster, he's given an ocean of replies, accusations, claims, but nothing to prove anything.
Ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist won't make it vanish... If that worked, you'd no longer be here.
There's a difference between replying to something and proving something.
And you have been proven wrong numerous times by numerous people in numerous threads, only one of whom is me.
Ttaskmaster wants people to trust him over me
I don't give a *beep* if they trust me or not... But I have presented the evidence for them to see and make up their own mind. The fact that the evidence proves you wrong is what irks you and why you are still here whining about it.
but he hasn't proved any of his false accusations against me.
Nope, just the true ones.
May God help the person who believes anything that ttaskmaster says.
Yea verily, for The Lord is on the side of the righteous... so of COURSE he'll help them.
As I suspected, I was right.
There's a difference between saying something and proving it, you know... saying it doesn't make it true.
ttaskmaster took Jodie's so-called official response and tried to run with it
For ages, she was up for the role, then officially declined due to filming conflicts. Perfectly valid.
but the evidence is there that I'm right.
She may have underlying reasons, but that is not the official line and inadmissible as evidence.
I did the research.
Not enough. There is an 'Official' line for a reason, which again is to do with the damage caused by actors abandoning their contracts and equally applicable to Sigourney's lack of responsibility for the decisions of others.
Tell me again how you went away and learned how the industry works? Yeah, didn't think so.
So still unable to actually substantiate your claims, you resort to finding words in the dictionary and trying to make tenuous connections there, now... Worse still, you're repeating yourself. Same old tired, butthurt whining because someone disagrees with your opinion and faulted your trivia.
Yeah, I just looked up Hannibal at Wikipedia's site and I found what I was looking for about Jodie Foster not having anything to do with that sequel. As I suspected, I was right. ttaskmaster took Jodie's so-called official response and tried to run with it, but the evidence is there that I'm right.
Yes there are very few films I have rated that I would personally give a perfect 10 to - but Aliens is one of them. Can't really see how it could be improved. James Cameron at his peak.
Saw it twice in the theater on its initial release. Many times on videotape. Then on DVD, and then on Blu-Ray. And it never, ever gets old. There's just no way any real film fan could watch this and have a negative reaction.
For a monster movie or a sci-fi in general, I would say Aliens is perfect. It will never feel cheap or dated... despite how desperately people want to make it out to be. Technically, it is the best alien monster movie money can buy.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.
I like all the first 4 Alien movies and for different reasons. I do need to re-visit the first and I usually feel it is a little ponderous and even unlikeable, however I need to reevaluate it's virtues. Aliens-86' is my favorite of the series and for the reasons you have cited.
Don't eat the whole ones! Those are for the guests. 🍪
It will never feel cheap or dated... despite how desperately people want to make it out to be.
Actually, people aren't as desperate as you to say otherwise. When people say it looks dated (ie, too 80's) they are giving an honest opinion. I agree it is very 80's, but guess what? It was made in the 80's! You can disagree with them and that's fair enough. But to go to the lengths you do to defend the movie is desperation at its' finest. Is it a brilliant sequel? Absolutely. Is it the best of the series? Well, that's a matter of personal opinion, surely?
If those pen pushers up at city hall don't like it,well, they swivel on this middle digit!
reply share
The fact that Cameron took numbers and turned them into an art form, using them so perfectly in his framing puts this movie a notch above every other Alien film... and every other science-fiction film. I'm just sorry that you can't see the extent of Cameron's cinematic brilliance in this film.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.
Cheap, no. Dated, yes... The instant you see the GRiDCase laptops running the Senrty Guns and grainy resolution "Pentax" helmet cameras on the APC monitors, it's dated. The instant you see the same 1970s Racal RA-150 headsets that the Millenium Falcon has, it's dated. The instant you see the Seiko Pulsemeters and Reebok Bugstompers, it's dated. The instant you see friends and acquaintances on screen and they look less than half their current age (with the exception of the immortal Ricco Ross), it's dated!!
The dated 80's aspect of the technology works in it's favor I find. The film is designed gritty, shadowy and even minimalist within it's art direction and set decoration. This gives the film an air of realism and also other-worldliness that many films can tend to lack today due to being overdone. The style is reflective in the substance and makes if all the more foreboding.
Don't eat the whole ones! Those are for the guests. 🍪
It does add substance and atmosphere. If these roughneck military guys had more sleek, advanced, futuristic sh!t, the movie would feel too much like Star Trek and that's the exact opposite effect they were going for.
Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.