[Mr Pye]

A little off topic now, but I think the same thing is mentioned about the people playing marines in Aliens. That they were together for some time beeing trained (not sure how hard) by british army people. And that American servicemen could tell because some behaviour was different from how American army would have done it. Again here one suspects some exhaggerations for promotional purposes.

[Just your average movie goer]

Yeah, I'd be suspicious of that too. In neither Aliens nor Predator do the actors do anything during the movie that requires special training. Actually, no - I take that back. Acting generally requires training... but a lot of the people in both movies seemed to skip over that.

Actually, I know it's off topic but does anyone think it's a little odd in Aliens having Sigourney Weaver (one of the greatest actresses working in movies today) playing opposite the likes of Paul Reiser and Bill Paxton? I've always found that one of the biggest notable differences between Alien and Aliens is that in the original, Sigourney is surrounded by other great actors and they all work together as an ensemble - while in Aliens, Sigourney seems all alone in that department. It's as though Ripley, the character, comes along to tell the other characters more about the aliens - while Sigourney, the actress, comes along to ground the performances of the other members of the cast.

This is also another one of the reasons why there should never have been a crossover between Alien and Predator - because the first movie starred Sigourney Weaver and the second starred Arnold Schwarzenegger. This speaks volumes about the kind of movies that they are.

[Mr Pye]

I was going to say didn't Arnie and Weaver star together in True Lies, but then I looked it up and it was Jamie Lee Curtis.

Yeah Weaver gets to carry a lot of Aliens on her shoulders. Besides Paul Reiser hers is almost the only character that's not a roughneck marine. And Michael Biehn plays Michael Biehn.

You have a good point about the problem with AvP and one of the things that I dislike most about that movie is the woman in the lead. I keep forgettning her name, (ok I just don't wanna learn it ) but I find her as unconvincing as I find Weaver convincing.

[Just your average movie goer]

I've never seen the thing myself but from the previews and what-have-you, I rather get the impression that the actress in question got the lead because she's got a pretty face. Now, Sigourney Weaver is in my view a stunning woman. However, her beauty is by no means conventional and she definitely didn't get the part in Alien because of it.

These days, it seems that a lot of movie stars are in the position they are simply because they're physically attractive. Now, I won't say that this is a recent problem. It's been a problem before as well. A lot of the black and white movies from the golden age of Hollywood have the same problem - handsome leading men and beautiful leading women and none of them able to really act. There's a reason why the voices and intonation styles of so many of these people sound interchangeable; they were.

However, somewhere along the line, the 'movie star' went into decline and actors started taking over. Take Gene Hackman for instance. He would never have landed a leading role in the golden age of Hollywood - a supporting role maybe, but not a lead. Yet, he is a brilliant actor and he steals every scene he's in.

Unfortunately though, while the 'movie star' went into decline, the concept has never really gone away and some people in the business still hold onto this notion that the people in movies must be glamorous and unnaturally good looking with flawless features.

I really don't care about whether the actors in movies are good looking or not - but unfortunately, many people do. Although I'm not the biggest fan of The Dark Knight for instance, I disagreed entirely with those armchair critics who complained that Bruce Wayne would never fall in love with someone who looked like Maggie Gylenhaal (however you spell it) because she isn't hot enough or some rubbish like that. After all, while these critics are emotionally stunted, that doesn't mean Bruce Wayne should be. Anyway, casting people simply because they look good isn't the right way to go about it. Movie studios are not modelling agencies.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 31 May 2011 - 09:22 PM

[Mr Pye]

Quote

I've never seen the thing myself but from the previews and what-have-you, I rather get the impression that the actress in question got the lead because she's got a pretty face

She is good looking, though I didn't get the impression this was the only reason she got the part. She doesn't look like a kid, and she seem reasonably fit, if I'd just saw a photo of her I might think, yeah, she could pull it off. But there seems to be a difference between beeing tough and acting tough and this woman can't act in a convincing way. It's not all her fault to be fair. The script gives her a number of hopeless lines. The whole thing degenerates to farce in a moment where she uses Arnolds line from Predator 'You're one uugly mother fucker'. I didn't think it was possible to say that line in a wrong way. It was.


About Maggie Gyllenhaal. I have to admit I find her hot. Not a classical beauty but the girl has charisma, and she's a better actress than Katie Holmes. She also played in a number of oddball movies like Donnie Darko, Secretary and Adaptation. All interesting movies in their own way. The only thing that had me puzzled is why they changed actress when they were going to kill of the character anyway. I wish they had gone with her already in Batman Begins.

[Just your average movie goer]

Yeah, I thought she was charismatic too. I haven't seen her in anything else to be honest but it was pretty obvious from the get-go that the woman was capable of acting. I'm with you on the change though - why bring in a new actress if they're just going to kill the character off halfway through? Also, they didn't really give Maggie anything to do with the role before that scene either. I quite liked the idea they were going for with Rachel Dawes - childhood friend, moral compass and all that. However, the script did the character no favours in either film, always making her so sanctimonious and irritating - and I think it's a credit to Maggie that she makes her as likable as she does. Katie Holmes actually did a fair job as well but in that scene where she's crossing the bridge, and she says to the cop "Sir, I'm a Gotham City District Attorney. Let me pass." her delivery is so bitchy, I wished the cop would have just said. "That's nice, kid. Why don't run off home and do your homework?"

Now, the actress in Alien vs Predator. Yeah, she does look fit and capable but this is yet another one of these things with Hollywood that irritate me. Just as I don't need actors and actresses to be particularly attractive, I also consider their physical fitness and skills as being neither here nor there. If they're fit and can do their own stunts and the rest of it, well good for them. However, I honestly don't care. They don't need to be able to do whatever their characters are capable of doing. Sir Ian McKellan probably can't twist metal with the power of his mind or perform deeds of high magic but I don't see it affecting his films in any negative way. Or take people comparing James Bond actors or Batman actors for that instance. I don't care whether Daniel Craig is tougher than Pierce Brosnan or Christian Bale than Michael Keaton. It doesn't make a bit of difference to my enjoyment of the movies all these people are in. Actually, it reminds me of that wonderful story about the filming of Marathon Man. Dustin Hoffman came onto the set looking absolutely exhausted and co-star Laurence Olivier asked him why he looked as though he was dead on his feet. Dustin Hoffman replied that he hadn't slept for a few days so he could convincingly pull off the next scene in which his character was supposed to look somewhat exhausted as well. To this, Laurence Olivier dished out the famous advice "Try acting, my boy. It's much easier."

And... did I read right? They threw Arnie's somewhat overrated line from Predator into this too? That sounds kind of desperate to me. Did they also have a scene where either a human or a predator sees the girl being attacked by an alien so they could say "Get away from her, you bitch!"?

Actually, that reminds me of another point in the business of which are more fearsome, the aliens or the predators. Yeah, Bill Paxton teases the aliens where he's dropping that embarrassing f-bomb cluster but his character's an idiot and he gets killed straight afterwards so we can discount his lines. Everyone else is pretty reverent in the presence of the aliens. Then consider how everyone talks to the predators. In Predator 2, Danny Glover talks to the one he fights as if he's just another punk. Then of course, there's his utterly brilliant line when the other predators appear at the end. "Who's next?" Punks.

Once again, the xenomorphs come out in front.

[Mr Pye]

Quote

And... did I read right? They threw Arnie's somewhat overrated line from Predator into this too? That sounds kind of desperate to me. Did they also have a scene where either a human or a predator sees the girl being attacked by an alien so they could say "Get away from her, you bitch!"?

Yep, they went there. Though iirc it's used about one of the Aliens in AvP which makes even less sense in a way. And the delivery of the line was just awful. I tried to find it on youtube but you're lucky I couldn't find it. I cringed anyway, both because they used the line and because it didn't fit context of the movie just then. It was so obviously thrown in as a reference to Predator. And to make it even worse, and I don't know how to explain that, she just says it all wrong.

I don't think they used the 'get away from her you bitch' line. Though after I heard u.m.f I wouldn't have been surprised of that one popped up as well.

This post has been edited by Mr Pye: 01 June 2011 - 11:52 AM

[Just your average movie goer]

So it's delivered badly and delivered to the wrong creature as well. Now, it makes even less sense because the aliens aren't the ugly ones - quite the opposite in fact. There's an elegance to their appearance that the predators lack. Also, predators are famously ugly. In the Predator films, the human characters always comment on this fact. Also, predators have to hide their faces behind masks all the time.

Oh, I just realised something else about them. Remember in the first movie how the creature has an auto-guiding system for his shoulder cannon? That means when they're practicing their so-called sport, they don't even aim their own weapons. So not only are they cowardly and under-handed, they're lazy as well. I guess in a way though, this works to the advantage of the movies they are in because they're the kind of villains we love to hate - which makes it all the more rewarding when an enterprising human character gives them a good dose of comeuppance.

That said though, I have to wonder why these cowardly, underhanded, lazy, amoral critters are used as heroes in the Alien VS Predator movies. That's kind of weird.

However, I did like something I heard about them - and it was actually about the second movie, oddly enough. Although Alien Vs Predator: Requiem is dreadful, apparently the predator in it is the predator that comes closest to being like a proper warrior. That sounds kind of intriguing to me (although not intriguing enough for me to want to sit through that movie). The fan boys of the creatures themselves always go on about them being honorable warriors and the rest of it - but none of the creatures in either Predator or Predator 2 fit that category. The old predator in Predator 2 might have if he hadn't nearly killed Lieutenant Harrigan by blasting off without giving him enough time to get safely away from the ship. However, if they've got all their high-tech weapons and gadgets, it seems possible that at least some of the species could be actual warriors, rather than rednecks who just like hunting technologically inferior species.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 01 June 2011 - 09:57 PM

[Mr Pye]

It's been a long time since I saw AvP Requiem. I know the lonely predator in that movie managed to deal with several Aliens whereas the three in the first movie didn't do very well. Two of them at least are killed off very quickly by the Aliens. I don't know if this is what they mean when they say beeing a proper warrior? For my part I feel that AvP has bigger problems than the Predators not beeing as strong as people expected them to be. Also the pred in AvP Requiem may have been very effective but from what I remember, the actiuon scenes were both dark and used shaky cam making it difficult to see what happens a lot of the time. Maybe that would be easier if one watcehd on DVD and had the option to go back and see again though.

[Just your average movie goer]

No, I think it was that the predator in question was actually doing an honest day's work for a change - cleaning up a xenomorph infestation - rather than going on an expensive hunting trip for his own cowardly pleasure.

I don't think it'd be worth watching the movie again though (in your case) or at all (in mine) - especially as it's essentially a slasher flick about teenagers in a small American town. This is pretty bad when you think about it because Alien went to great lengths to avoid being a simple slasher flick. However, I mustn't leave out Predator either as the Alien vs Predator movies hurt them both. That said, it's a greater fall for the Alien series as it started higher up.

That's another reason why I'm looking forward to Prometheus. I think Hollywood owes the Alien franchise at least one good movie to make up for all the abuse it's heaped upon it over the years.

And shaky cam... is there any more annoying trend in Hollywood at the moment? Audiences don't pay good money to see hand-held camera work.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 03 June 2011 - 09:25 AM

[Zatoichi]

hmm, 3-D might possibly be a little more annoying. Not that I've been going out and seeing a bunch of it, but .... having movies in 3-D is something that Hollywood goes through a period of doing roughly every thirty years or so. Its often used to replace the things in a movie that actually make it good, and as a justification for jacking up already high prices. I've seen at least a few movies in 3-D, and I'm pretty sure the effect really didn't do much to increase my viewing pleasure.

I could rattle off the wrongness of AVP Req, but its really not worth it. The Pred in it might be the closest to honorable, and possibly an actual hunter, but he's mostly an idiot.
Motivation - Well, he's either taking revenge for his buddies getting killed or attempting to ensure the xenos don't end up with a whole new planet. Not really sure. Once again, it is a big mistake to be making either the Preds or the Xenos the heroes of these films. They're the bad guys. (Actually, I think the movie manages to show Ripley's point about the xenos getting to Earth. Although it was handled very poorly and they were put up against some of the most worthless humans in existence, in the space of about 2 days the xenos have wiped out and entire town that looked closer to being a small city)

Plan of Attack - I don't think he cares that much about humans actually. He kills a bundle of them simply for being nearby. Not even to keep himself secret from them either. In fact, if he didn't start by wasting some random humans while they were near some other humans, no one would have any inkling of an idea that he was around. And if he was trying to stop the xenos from trashing the planet, there was no way he was going to be able to tackle a xeno mini-hive by himself. So, where could you easily find some allies that would totally be willing to help put a stop to the xenos? Oh hey, look at all of these humans that live here. I bet they like staying alive and stuff. Maybe I should present myself in a non-threatening manor and ask for a hand. Naaaaah. I can't reveal myself to them, and I actually feel like killing a bunch for fun. You know, since I'm in this sector of the galaxy anyways, I might as well make the best of it.

I think he's here for revenge at best. Revenge for a group of Preds that failed their trials. If they failed, why are they worth getting revenge for?

[Just your average movie goer]

Good point. Well, basically, I'd been told that he was cleaning up the xenomorph infestation so he was actually a predator on a job for a change. However, as you pointed it, it sounds as though job or no job, he still couldn't help throwing in a bit of redneck hunting as well. Also, he doesn't special forces units or tough trigger happy cops but he hunts the civilians of a small (city-sized) country town? Well... it seems as though the entire predator species are nothing but rednecks.

EDIT: I've never actually seen a 3D movie but one day, I was in a cinema foyer where there was a 3D film demonstration with a TV screen and a guy passing around 3D glasses. I gave it a go for the hell of it and I have to say that if it's any indication of where the technology is at the moment, then that technology has a long way to go before it has any hope of reaching something approaching impressive. Also, it was kind of headache inducing. I don't think I'd like to sit through two hours of it.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 06 June 2011 - 07:34 PM

[Lord Aquaman]

Predator is an awesome, well paced sci-fi/action/horror film, but Arnold Schwarzenegger's love child scandal sucks some of the sympathy out of the climax when the Predator's got him on the ropes.

[Just your average movie goer]

Very true. In fact, it makes the entire movie hard to watch. And it's not just the latest scandal. It's all the other dirt that's been dug up in light of it. The man's a creep of the lowest order and he has been a despicable excuse of a human being for over some time. I encountered an interview he gave after winning his first Mr. Olympia title and he really is appalling. What's worse than all of this is the reason why no-one knew what a creep he was when he became a household name in the eighties: he had a PR team working around the clock to cover his tracks and silence people. Women he sexually harassed on movie productions were threatened with never working in the industry again if they went to the press. It's really awful.

And as to how it affects viewing his movies, I think that's up to the individual. Sometimes, I can separate the actor from the role and sometimes I can't. For me, I can't watch Hot Shots these days because Charlie Sheen is such an aggravating person (and that moronic show Two and a Half Men was saturating the media for a long while too). However, other people who hate him just as much as I do seem to have no problem watching the movie.

With Schwarzenegger, I think it comes down to how much I enjoy the film and whether I should deprive myself of the enjoyment derived from watching it just because he's in it. With most of his work, it's a no-brainer. I think we can all live without Commando or Twins. And although Predator is enjoyable enough, I have discovered that its over-simplicity doesn't lend itself much to repeat viewing. It was a novelty at first seeing this eighties cult hit which I had missed at the time - because, let's face it, there's something very nostalgic about watching eighties movies. However, I think at this point, I can get by without watching Predator again.

I think, for me, the only Schwarzenegger movies I will watch in future are The Terminator and Terminator 2, the latter oddly enough being a movie I recently changed my mind about. Maybe I should mention something about it in the thread for that. Anyway, in these cases, I think the films are good enough that they don't deserve to be relegated to the trash just because Arnie's in them.

[civilian_number_two]

Also Total Recall. And Conan the Barbarian. And True Lies.

Maybe I can separate guys from their scandals better than others.

For Sheen, I didn't really like him in anything except Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Can you imagine how much better Platoon or Wall Street would have been with Emilio?