I'd agree with some of the ones already mentioned, and also add:
Back To The Future
Die Hard
Lethal Weapon
Meet The Parents
Ocean's Eleven
The Karate Kid
The Mummy
Shrek
Ice Age
However, although I enjoy the Rocky films, I do like Rocky III and IV.
Also, even though I hadn't seen Monsters Inc., I went to see Monsters University this summer and really enjoyed it. I then watched M. Inc and didn't enjoy it half as much.
It could be largely due to a good performance by Sigourney Weaver, refreshing to see a female action hero rather than yelling and wailing,
Eh?
Your answer is as if I'd said I can't understand why people think Alien is better than AlienS.
In Aliens all I could hear was yelling and wailing. She was the hero in Alien, she put in a great performance without all the running around.
To me the difference between Alien and Aliens is that in Alien there was more talking in an adult way of how to deal with it. They all seemed very believable characters. No one had an annoying attitude problem. They were just seven fairly normal people who spoke, behaved and used language in the way that WE would. We could relate to them which is probably why we cared about them more. They didn't seem like the stereotypical action heros which is why they were trying to work their way out of this situation they were put in rather than just running around shooting anything and swearing for a majority of the film.
Aliens was just a load of people running around shooting anything that moved. They all spoke in that way as if they all thought they were all hard as hell. I just thought it was rubbish.
I've tried to explain in a bit of detail why I thought Alien was better but if you ask anyone who thinks AlienS is better most of them just say "er.....well,,,,there was more action in it".
Eh? In Aliens all I could hear was yelling and wailing.She was the hero in Alien, she put in a great performance without all the running around.
That was Bill Paxton.
You may have gone into detail in explaining your point of view, but it doesn't seem like you've put much effort into considering what the other person was meaning. I imagine that by "yelling and wailing" the poster means the traditional damsel in distress role, waiting to be saved by the male hero, the likes of Kate Capshaw in Temple of Doom for example. Ripley was nothing like that. In Aliens Ripely may have been loud at times, and showed fear at times, but she was mostly a strong heroic character, within the more action oriented context of the movie.
You may have gone into detail in explaining your point of view, but it doesn't seem like you've put much effort into considering what the other person was meaning. I imagine that by "yelling and wailing" the poster means the traditional damsel in distress role, waiting to be saved by the male hero, the likes of Kate Capshaw in Temple of Doom for example. Ripley was nothing like that.
Exactly.
My original question was "I've never understood why Aliens is so popular". She replied saying "It could be largely due to a good performance by Sigourney Weaver, refreshing to see a female action hero rather than yelling and wailing, tagging onto the back of the male lead".
She was nothing like that in the ORIGINAL Alien. She wasn't yelling and wailing in the original waiting to be saved by some male hero. She always came across to me as their equal so that can't be the reason why some people prefer Aliens.
Let's be honest. The reason people who prefer Aliens to Alien prefer it is because there's more action in it. They haven't got to sit there listening to dialogue because they haven't got the patience to sit there listening.
If you take away all the action in Aliens you've got nothing. Very little story at all. If you take away all the action in Alien you've still got a very good story with believable characters. That is why Alien is and will always be a much better film.
My original question was "I've never understood why Aliens is so popular". She replied saying "It could be largely due to a good performance by Sigourney Weaver, refreshing to see a female action hero rather than yelling and wailing, tagging onto the back of the male lead".
She was nothing like that in the ORIGINAL Alien. She wasn't yelling and wailing in the original waiting to be saved by some male hero. She always came across to me as their equal so that can't be the reason why some people prefer Aliens.
Because in that context she went beyond just being an equal, in Aliens she became the Alpha. A reasonable step given her experiences in the previous movie.
Let's be honest. The reason people who prefer Aliens to Alien prefer it is because there's more action in it. They haven't got to sit there listening to dialogue because they haven't got the patience to sit there listening.
If you take away all the action in Aliens you've got nothing. Very little story at all. If you take away all the action in Alien you've still got a very good story with believable characters. That is why Alien is and will always be a much better film.
You keep comparing the two films by equal standards, they are totally different beasts. If you want a suspenseful space horror you watch Alien, if you're more in the mood for fast paced all guns blazing action in space you watch Aliens. Of course people prefer Aliens to Alien for the action and fast pace. Just like they prefer Alien to Aliens for the horror and suspense. It doesn't matter how awesome Alien is, if you're in the mood for fast paced action that day then Alien is not gonna cut the mustard, and vice versa.
My original question was "I've never understood why Aliens is so popular". She replied saying "It could be largely due to a good performance by Sigourney Weaver, refreshing to see a female action hero rather than yelling and wailing, tagging onto the back of the male lead".
She was nothing like that in the ORIGINAL Alien. She wasn't yelling and wailing in the original waiting to be saved by some male hero. She always came across to me as their equal so that can't be the reason why some people prefer Aliens.
Let's be honest. The reason people who prefer Aliens to Alien prefer it is because there's more action in it. They haven't got to sit there listening to dialogue because they haven't got the patience to sit there listening.
If you take away all the action in Aliens you've got nothing. Very little story at all. If you take away all the action in Alien you've still got a very good story with believable characters. That is why Alien is and will always be a much better film.
BIB I completely disagree with. I like both Alien and Aliens. I do prefer Aliens but that' because I do like the fast pace of it and the more extreme characters. However I am not a dialogue snob. I liked Alien because it was slow and claustrophobic and the talky bit really developed the internal workings of the cast. (I like my drama as well as my action films)
I think both films are great because they are in the same universe cohesively yet take a vastly different approach. At there core is a strong realistic woman fighting for survival and sanity. Plus cool xenomorphic aliens.
Like comparing a Melon to a Lemon. Both fruits yet have different tastes and qualities.
Pirates of the Caribbean - Curse of the Black Pearl. Its on BBC3 right now.
It was a great movie, fab cast, nice timing, witty one liners. Everything that was completely lost in the rest of the films - they were just terrible. I really wish the sequels had never been made.
Right now I'm off to go a bit swoony at Commodore Norrington
If you take away all the action in Aliens you've got nothing. Very little story at all. If you take away all the action in Alien you've still got a very good story with believable characters. That is why Alien is and will always be a much better film.
Really? The story, for a sci-fi actioner, is pretty darn good in Aliens, with a few themes going on. There is the maternal development of Ripley as a character, the idea of a low-tech species managing to overcome and rout a group of well-equipped, high tech marines (Vietnam?) It's everything a sequel should be, in that it honours the source material, but expands on it, takes it in a new direction etc
Really? The story, for a sci-fi actioner, is pretty darn good in Aliens, with a few themes going on. There is the maternal development of Ripley as a character, the idea of a low-tech species managing to overcome and rout a group of well-equipped, high tech marines (Vietnam?) It's everything a sequel should be, in that it honours the source material, but expands on it, takes it in a new direction etc
Well we'll have to agree to disagree.
I think Alien is far superior to Aliens in every single way. I've always thought Aliens is not a patch on the original but each to their own.
I love the way Aliens is always labelled as having no suspense, when an hour passes before you even see an Alien. Seriously, take a look at the timer next time you watch it.
I love the way Aliens is always labelled as having no suspense, when an hour passes before you even see an Alien. Seriously, take a look at the timer next time you watch it.
An hour of build up that gains suspense by way of knowing what's coming - a sense of foreboding, if you like. What Aliens does lack is the original's mystique, it's air of the supernatural, which makes the suspense all the more potent.
Of course, it would've been very tricky to repeat that in what is obviously a very different beast. Aliens certainly does its own thing (that bizarre paternity battle ending for one), but it's a film of the eighties, whereas Alien was really a product of the seventies. You can tell the film world had shifted gears a lot between them, in line with changing public tastes perhaps. I always thought they were two different films for two different audiences.
Die Hard, I can't honestly say I didn't like the sequels but none of them capture the brilliance of the original movie. The first movie had some over the top stunts but still somehow remained believable. The sequels (while fun) just amped the action up to super hero levels of silly.
An hour of build up that gains suspense by way of knowing what's coming - a sense of foreboding, if you like. What Aliens does lack is the original's mystique, it's air of the supernatural, which makes the suspense all the more potent.
Aliens certainly does its own thing (that bizarre paternity battle ending for one), but it's a film of the eighties, whereas Alien was really a product of the seventies. You can tell the film world had shifted gears a lot between them, in line with changing public tastes perhaps. I always thought they were two different films for two different audiences.
For starters the fact that Aliens came out in the 80s has got absolutely NOTHING to do with it and the fact that Alien came out in 1979 hasn't got anything to do with it.
There were plenty of films that came out in the 70s with loads of action and loads in the 80s without that much action.
I keep hearing people say they were different "beasts". Well if that's the case why make a sequel in the first place. If you're going to make a sequel then obviously you don't want to make a straight remake which some directors have done but what's important is that you DO make it in a similar vain or style to the original. That's my problem with Aliens. It simply does away with the claustrophobic feel of the original which creates the suspense, and replaces it with meaningless action and stupid dialogue between the characters.
For starters the fact that Aliens came out in the 80s has got absolutely NOTHING to do with it and the fact that Alien came out in 1979 hasn't got anything to do with it.
I'd have to strongly disagree with this.
They're fundamentally different in politics, subtext, audience awareness and genre awareness to name but four. And these factors all relate to the periods (late seventies/mid-eighties) from which both films sprang. This is often how cinema works.
Comments
Back To The Future
Die Hard
Lethal Weapon
Meet The Parents
Ocean's Eleven
The Karate Kid
The Mummy
Shrek
Ice Age
However, although I enjoy the Rocky films, I do like Rocky III and IV.
Also, even though I hadn't seen Monsters Inc., I went to see Monsters University this summer and really enjoyed it. I then watched M. Inc and didn't enjoy it half as much.
Your answer is as if I'd said I can't understand why people think Alien is better than AlienS.
In Aliens all I could hear was yelling and wailing. She was the hero in Alien, she put in a great performance without all the running around.
To me the difference between Alien and Aliens is that in Alien there was more talking in an adult way of how to deal with it. They all seemed very believable characters. No one had an annoying attitude problem. They were just seven fairly normal people who spoke, behaved and used language in the way that WE would. We could relate to them which is probably why we cared about them more. They didn't seem like the stereotypical action heros which is why they were trying to work their way out of this situation they were put in rather than just running around shooting anything and swearing for a majority of the film.
Aliens was just a load of people running around shooting anything that moved. They all spoke in that way as if they all thought they were all hard as hell. I just thought it was rubbish.
I've tried to explain in a bit of detail why I thought Alien was better but if you ask anyone who thinks AlienS is better most of them just say "er.....well,,,,there was more action in it".
That was Bill Paxton.
You may have gone into detail in explaining your point of view, but it doesn't seem like you've put much effort into considering what the other person was meaning. I imagine that by "yelling and wailing" the poster means the traditional damsel in distress role, waiting to be saved by the male hero, the likes of Kate Capshaw in Temple of Doom for example. Ripley was nothing like that. In Aliens Ripely may have been loud at times, and showed fear at times, but she was mostly a strong heroic character, within the more action oriented context of the movie.
My original question was "I've never understood why Aliens is so popular". She replied saying "It could be largely due to a good performance by Sigourney Weaver, refreshing to see a female action hero rather than yelling and wailing, tagging onto the back of the male lead".
She was nothing like that in the ORIGINAL Alien. She wasn't yelling and wailing in the original waiting to be saved by some male hero. She always came across to me as their equal so that can't be the reason why some people prefer Aliens.
Let's be honest. The reason people who prefer Aliens to Alien prefer it is because there's more action in it. They haven't got to sit there listening to dialogue because they haven't got the patience to sit there listening.
If you take away all the action in Aliens you've got nothing. Very little story at all. If you take away all the action in Alien you've still got a very good story with believable characters. That is why Alien is and will always be a much better film.
Because in that context she went beyond just being an equal, in Aliens she became the Alpha. A reasonable step given her experiences in the previous movie.
You keep comparing the two films by equal standards, they are totally different beasts. If you want a suspenseful space horror you watch Alien, if you're more in the mood for fast paced all guns blazing action in space you watch Aliens. Of course people prefer Aliens to Alien for the action and fast pace. Just like they prefer Alien to Aliens for the horror and suspense. It doesn't matter how awesome Alien is, if you're in the mood for fast paced action that day then Alien is not gonna cut the mustard, and vice versa.
BIB I completely disagree with. I like both Alien and Aliens. I do prefer Aliens but that' because I do like the fast pace of it and the more extreme characters. However I am not a dialogue snob. I liked Alien because it was slow and claustrophobic and the talky bit really developed the internal workings of the cast. (I like my drama as well as my action films)
I think both films are great because they are in the same universe cohesively yet take a vastly different approach. At there core is a strong realistic woman fighting for survival and sanity. Plus cool xenomorphic aliens.
Like comparing a Melon to a Lemon. Both fruits yet have different tastes and qualities.
The Ring
Underworld
Mean Girls
It was a great movie, fab cast, nice timing, witty one liners. Everything that was completely lost in the rest of the films - they were just terrible. I really wish the sequels had never been made.
Right now I'm off to go a bit swoony at Commodore Norrington
Urban Legend
Salem's Lot
The Great Escape
that one is the only one i watch, others are meh..the second one wasn't too bad though
Really? The story, for a sci-fi actioner, is pretty darn good in Aliens, with a few themes going on. There is the maternal development of Ripley as a character, the idea of a low-tech species managing to overcome and rout a group of well-equipped, high tech marines (Vietnam?) It's everything a sequel should be, in that it honours the source material, but expands on it, takes it in a new direction etc
I think Alien is far superior to Aliens in every single way. I've always thought Aliens is not a patch on the original but each to their own.
Of course, it would've been very tricky to repeat that in what is obviously a very different beast. Aliens certainly does its own thing (that bizarre paternity battle ending for one), but it's a film of the eighties, whereas Alien was really a product of the seventies. You can tell the film world had shifted gears a lot between them, in line with changing public tastes perhaps. I always thought they were two different films for two different audiences.
Out of the Final Destination series, I like FD2 a lot but not the rest. Off topic of course but vaguely relevant.
loved this one , the first, but i am looking forward to seeing the last one lol
enjoyed the first one, second was boring and the third i am not even attempting to waste my time watching that!
There were plenty of films that came out in the 70s with loads of action and loads in the 80s without that much action.
I keep hearing people say they were different "beasts". Well if that's the case why make a sequel in the first place. If you're going to make a sequel then obviously you don't want to make a straight remake which some directors have done but what's important is that you DO make it in a similar vain or style to the original. That's my problem with Aliens. It simply does away with the claustrophobic feel of the original which creates the suspense, and replaces it with meaningless action and stupid dialogue between the characters.
They're fundamentally different in politics, subtext, audience awareness and genre awareness to name but four. And these factors all relate to the periods (late seventies/mid-eighties) from which both films sprang. This is often how cinema works.
It's a self-contained movie. Sequels were unnecessary.