From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Date: 14 Aug 92 01:00:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <j7wm0jn@lynx.unm.edu>, lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble) writes...
>[There are spoilers.]
>
>mcclaine@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Casey) writes:
> 
>>> Where did the eggs aboard the Sulako [sic] come from? 

>> The only reasonable explanation that I can come up with is that the
>> queen laid probably two eggs on the dropship while it was in transit to
>> the Sulaco. 

>....which still doesn't explain how the egg(s) got to the Hypersleep
>chamber.  In my opinion, there *is* no plausible explanation for the eggs
>aboard the _Sulaco_ in the context of the second movie.  If you rewatch
>_Aliens_ with an eye for how they might have gotten there, it's pretty
>obvious that Cameron intentionally tied off any loose ends that left an
>clear path for a sequel.

     Can I interject something here?  WHO CARES?  I don't mean: "Just
     watch the movie and like it or not like it, you geek!"  Nothing
     like that: but didn't you notice that ALIEN^3 is, more than anything
     else, a direct sequel to AIEN?  Everything in Fincher's movie pays
     homage to Ridley Scott's original -- and nothing in the mood, the
     shooting style, the performances; nothing CONTROLLED by Fincher,
     makes any kind of positive connection to James Cameron's film.
     Even dialogue references to ALIENS are kept at an absolute minimum.

     Fincher's attempt, and I think it's successful (I also think ^3
     is by far the best in the series), is to depict Ridley Scott's
     Alien in Schusset and O'Bannon's HEART OF DARKNESS universe.  In
     that context, the Alien isn't just "an animal," etc - it isn't
     the easy-to-kill-en-masse-with-big-guns Alien of the second movie.
     It's the PERFECT organism - so who cares how the eggs got onto
     the Sulaco?  The point is: THEY DID.  And thank god, because the
     movie was brilliant.

>There was a great quote buried somewhere in the _Cinefantastique_ coverage
>that sums up a lot of the film's problems: one of the money people figured
>that even if they *did* kill off Ripley at the end of _Alien 3_, they
>could still being her back for a fourth movie . . . because, after all,
>"it's science fiction".

     I was annoyed when I read the Cinefantastique coverage.  That magazine
     is fucking pompus.  They take every opportunity to slag whatever they
     have decided is worth slagging - and what with all the production and
     post-production chaos that went on with ALIEN^3, they decided that it
     COULD NOT end up as a good movie.  Now, I'm a screenwriter so I'm not
     about to say that a good script isn't of paramount importance - and
     I'm also not about to say that the script for this movie was anything
     other than absolute shit (I posted it to rasfm last March) -- but when
     everything else -- the cinematographer, the film editor, the film
     scorer, the actors and most importantly, the director -- is absolute
     top of the line, they CAN overcome a bad script.  The stupid bits
     CAN be edited out, or re-shot later -- and for this movie, they were.

     I can't wait to get ALEN^3 on video.  (I've noticed - incidentally -
     that since I've seen ^3, my opinion of Cameron's movie has gone
     WAY down... it just seems like the he dropped the BEST things about
     the first one in favor of action and Rambo-lina type things; and
     it also seems that Fincher picked the ball back up... anyone else
     get this impression?)

     Scott
Xref: sparky rec.arts.sf.movies:6270 rec.arts.sf.tv:2771