So, first off to preface, I did rather enjoy the movie. It was not awesome, but it was fun and it had a neat overall story with some cool ideas and great special FX. The female lead and the robot were both very well played in particular - and the captain gets some points in my book as well.
That being said, hoo-boy was there some implausible BS
(
Read more... )
Comments 5
The small crowd of 4 with whom I went to see the movie today debated Shaw's intentions on finally meeting her makers. Ian and I are squarely convinced that she planned to ask them about their intentions -- and then unleash the cargo of black slime on them regardless of their answers. One other in our crowd disagreed, and thought her intentions were merely about curiosity and non-violent.
You also have to take into account the problem with prequels, especially those made many years after the original. Movie tech and FX are worlds improved now from the 1981 movie this precedes. If they used awesome video screens and communication capacity, how would that explain the worse tech displayed in "Alien"? Of course my argument loses water at the amazing Weyland hologram -- why include that, then? I have no clue ( ... )
Reply
Now I feel better.
I can't believe they got decent reviews on rotten tomatoes.
Reply
That, of course, would be pretty unrealistic in and of itself. It's more likely that they'd be like us - factionalized, varying in culture and attitude, and somewhat less unitary in action than say, The Borg - which seems to be the assumed default social setting in many sci-fi franchises. :P ( ... )
Reply
We're not even sure if the creator alien in the beginning knew what he was doing.
Reply
Signs suggest that our lead archeologist is barking after answers that have already torn apart her creator's society - which of course is a direct reflection of David's position - though he has that advantage of being able to see his creators close up, so he is stripped of any illusions regarding their failings.
Reply
Leave a comment