ALIEN VS. ALIENS!!!FACT!!!

I’ve been reading a lot of hostility towards James Cameron’s Aliens over the years, and criticism towards his development of the aliens lifecycle, so lets look at why, IMHO, Aliens is superior to Ridley Scott’s Alien.

Now, Ridley Scott’s Alien is a masterpiece of atmospheric Sci-fi Horror. But let’s not overestimate its narrative qualities. Dan O’Bannon’s script was a mix of It! The Terror from Beyond Space and Planet of the Vampires with a touch of Lovecraftian cosmic Horror (O’Bannon was a Lovecraft fan and Alien resembles At the Mountains of Madness among other works). It has a simple three act structure. Act One, the crew wakes up, goes to the planet and Kane is attacked. Act Two Kane dies and the crew goes chasing after the alien while being picked off one by one. Act Three is the revelation of Ash being an android, the rest of the crew snuffing it, Ripley escaping and finally shooting the alien into space.

Then there is the fact that Alien has no characterization to speak of. This is the reason why the movie works soo well because Scott has ALWAYS been a Director who focuses more on his visuals rather than characterization, theme and subtext. The only reasons Alien works is because of the people Scott worked with (most of whom at the behest of O’Bannon) who filled in the details of this world with their designs. The other reason is because of the brilliant casting because we learn absolutely NOTHING about any of these characters throughout the course of the movie beyond how they react to things and that’s all there is to it.

Attached: 1420381404328.png (400x300, 204K)

I think a lot of you have this impression that Alien is much deeper than it really is. There are no ideas beyond the set and creature design. Too much thought has been put into the role of the “Space Jockey” who was nothing more than a prop. It was simply a dead alien with a cargo of eggs. I always thought the SP was the equivalent of a space truck driver, probably some moron who couldn’t keep his hands off the merchandise and doomed himself. We think of the ALIEN as some sort of bio-mechanical warrior because of the way it looks which was only because of H.R. Giger’s designs. People think that the Aliens are engineered only on the basis that it has what looks like ribbed tubes and whatnot which didn’t, IMHO, suggest that it was a manufactured creature and instead was a particular artistic choice by Giger who has a fixation with merging flesh and mechanics. For all we know the fucking eggs could have been a delicacy on some unknown planet and they got space salmonella creating the Aliens!?!

As for Aliens, I think the movie is vastly superior in terms of narrative and characterization. Ripley goes to LV-426 to face her fears, confronts and conquers them and in the end she wins the love of Newt who becomes a substitute daughter. She also learns to trust Bishop who comes through and dispels her, not entirely unjustified, prejudice against synthetics. That’s characterization because we actually KNOW Ripley this time, something that Scott’s movie didn’t have. Furthermore, Aliens couldn’t just be a rehash of Alien as the novelty and mystique of the Alien wasn’t there anymore and Cameron made the brilliant decision of turning his sequel as an allegory for Vietnam what with the tooled up grunts getting their asses handed to them by an opposing force with overwhelming numbers that were willing to die to defeat their enemies. This is obvious to anyone with more than two fucking brain cells and is much more subtext than ALIEN ever had.

But I don’t understand this confusion about the Alien’s lifecycle. In Alien, it’s from an egg, the egg opens and a parasite attaches itself to Kane. It’s birthed from Kane and goes round killing. The alien is a lifeform and all life forms have a biological cycle. But people seem to not be too sure of this as Scott’s failure was in not making clear what the Alien was. Why was it killing the crew beyond protecting its territory when provoked. What was its intent apart from nesting? It wasn’t killing the crew to eat them, as this was never implied. This confusion also stems from the deleted scene, where Ripley finds the cocooned Dallas and other crew members, because people have mistakenly taken this as canon even though it was cut from the final film. People think that the alien had the ability to procreate and that it was cocooning the crew to create more aliens. But this doesn’t work anymore than a chicken, which has the ability to lay eggs, attacking another animal to create more of its kind. It doesn’t make sense because Scott didn’t bother to fill in those details. What if the Alien was cocooning the crew because it was a simple drone and thought that a queen alien (I’m theorizing now because the Queen concept hadn’t came into thise series yet but indulge me) was nearby? Wouldn’t that make more sense? There’s also this strange belief that the Aliens are some sort of highly evolved beast when it only demonstrated basic survival instincts. It’s nothing more than an animal.

This is why Cameron was smart to give the Aliens the structure of an insect colony because the original alien never showed any sort of intellectual or technological advancement. If it had been an Alien sitting in the chair instead of the Space Jockey then you could have suggested that this was an advanced race. But the way the eggs were being transported and the Alien’s behavior suggests that they were only cargo for some unknown purpose. To jump to the conclusion that they were some sort of engineered bio-mechanical weapon is a bit presumptuous. They could have been transporting them to a fucking zoo for all we know.

I think that James Cameron’s Aliens is the best type of sequel, one that takes what was great and adds depth to the concepts of the original while also advancing in its own way. So I really don’t understand the recent amount of hate I’ve been reading on various websites towards Aliens lately. Probably because Cameron has the two most successful movies of all time and now a world diving record while they seethe with jealousy. There’s no other explanation as people who criticize his creation of the Alien Queen and the use of the insect lifecycle clearly have their heads up their fucking assholes since they failed to notice the fucking EGGS and birthcycle of the Alien in the original movie. I get the feeling that these dipshits think the Alien was like the creature in John Carpenters The Thing which could infect its hosts and turn them into more of its own kind. Not the same thing I’m afraid.

Fucking Ceiling Cat almighty people fucking are stupid!!!FACT!!!

Get a fucking blog. What do you think of Alien 3?

wrong

>What do you think of Alien 3?

Fucking trash that's nicely Directed!!!FACT!!!

Even the Assembly cut? And hey what's this one line reply shit Creepy? I wanted a fucking essay about Alien 3. Your standards are slipping cunt.

Aliens is better. No question.

Making the Aliens in to a insect hive structure was dumb. What's the point of facehuggers if they can just have a queen lay more eggs? The Alien was inherently parasitic with the face hugger implanting an egg in a human, which then bursts out once it grows a certain size, which then consumes biomass to grow big and then presumably lays/makes the cocoons that contain more facehuggers.