I never liked ripley scott
Him and cameron have too big Egos
shareI think the director gets too much credit in general, but without a good director, and someone who can manage a movie production a movie will not be good. The movies that Scott takes on are interesting, but he doesn't seem to know how to stick to the point.
shareThe Director
sharethe director of a movie that is, and the actors as well. There are usually huge teams that make movies, and only the pretty faces of the actors get the credit, then the directors, and then the writers. Far too hierarchical in my opinion.
shareActors are front and center for marketing purposes, but I'm not sure that equals credit for a film being good or bad.
A team is responsible for a film, but unless the director or writer(sometimes they're the same person) has a vision
for the film it will not be good. Witness all the arcade action films being released nowdays.
I prefer Alien over Aliens. Sometimes less is more. But they're really different genres within Sci-Fi. Alien is gothic horror and Aliens is action adventure.
shareThat would be an impossible choice for me. While Alien was the first, had the vision, and has the spookiest concepts for the monster, it was a little stupid in the typical way of the haunted house. Everyone walks off alone and gets caught by the monster. But Aliens had a richer more complex plot and more action and the characters were more three dimensional. I could not decide between them.
shareI agree they're different types of Sci-Fi. I liked both in their own way. Aliens was the big, epic production and it had the first sci-fi heroine action star in Sigourney Weaver. The story became based on her being able to add depth to her character, Ripley.
share