This feels like the original capeshit with its overly long run-time, monotonous and mindless action, stronk independent woman protagonist, and stupid one-liners.
Cameron is a hack.
Aliens
bump
No, it's okay, let it die.
But it's unironically
>contrarian poster displaying their terrible taste in movies
Bet you though Aliens 1 was great, eh Ridley?
>t. coping capeshit cuck
Sorry that Endgame won't top Avatar in returns, maybe at the end of the next 15-year-long series.
You fishing for a whale with bait this big?
compared to the first it does seem like that I guess
>avatar getting a re-release just as avatar 2 is coming out for a double feature
Suck shit comicucks
Right? This isn't even fucking bait, just a empirical observation.
Is Alien 1 not great? lmfao but naw I don't even have to be "full contrarian" by disliking both Alien and Aliens just disliking one of them nets me the "contrarian" badge
ALIENS is based and you are gay
I agree. I never could understand how anyone sane can like 2nd movie. It's so bad compared to the 1st one.
Feels like some kind of a American army propaganda.
Marines ruined the movie. Even alien 3 and 4 are better.
Hello, woman. Will you attack Predator or Terminator next or The Thing?
Nah you're wrong. Very wrong.
>image name
A more provocative thread title and topic would be why does Yea Forums so vigorously defend Alien 3 as it stands? Listen, I'm no expert on Alien 3 and I am sure that there are a hell of a lot more people on this board that have read the scripts and the screenplays (there were a lot of them) that were written for Alien 3 by an inordinate amount of writers. Recently I listened to an audio drama of William Gibson's second screenplay for Alien 3 and wow did we get shortchanged--GIbson hit all the right notes. The optioned Alien 3 was written by three people who are the equivalent of wgaf, wgas, and the who's who of who are you. Listen I am not trying to shit talk David Fincher at all, and arguably Hollywood meddling is to blame for Fincher's vision not being fully realized. By my own admission, I have only seen the theatrical cut. I did not, as one user put it to me, 'watch the assembly cut, the theatrical cut, read the original screenplay, watch Fincher interviews and watch deleted scenes' in order to fully appreciate the film. At what point, is it 'the work and the work alone?' In other words, if I need all these accessories to appreciate the film/text/piece, what does that say about the original piece? I don't mean an accessory like prior knowledge or a dictionary to appreciate something, but rather that I need to incorporate multiple works orbiting an original piece in order to get the full picture of the one work. I can fully parse this thought more if you like, but I figure I'll stop here.
Go to bed, Jay
> I have only seen the theatrical cut.
Fix that. Then explain to me what you think the flaws of Alien 3 are.
I've never understood the worship of this movie. It's not even in view of the same playing field as the first movie. I don't hate it but it's a mediocre action movie (at best, I don't even consider it above average against it's contemporaries) compared to one of the best sci-fi movies ever made.
The CGI alien ruins the entire movie for me but I'm autistic about real special effects
Formulate a compelling case for why I should and perhaps I will, instead of a glib non-response like you've posted
Where did the eggs come from?
One for Ripley and one for the dog\cow.
The alien in Ripley takes days to gestate and the dog burster pops out after five minutes