Joined: Sep. 2009
|Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 10 2011,13:20)|
|Good thoughts. Aliens certainly comes in second for me, but a somewhat distant second. |
Aliens did contain, it its set design, a continuity error (from film to film) that I still find hard to swallow. Specifically, upon locating and entering their hive, the marines witness bizarre secreted structures that resemble black ribs and bones, a motif in the first film as well. However, in the first film that bizarre motif characterized the construction of the space jockey's craft, not anything the alien had produced. That always went "clunk" for me.
I'm with you on the feeling, though again this was a change that Cameron intended, so I'm not sure it's actually a continuity error. Still, it's jarring Fridge Logic. Cameron didn't think most audiences got the idea that the Space Jockey folk built organic/mechanical items and were actually a part of them (hence the Space Jockey actually being a part of his chair in the ship). O'bannon and Scott did that whole bit to give clues about the organic/mechanical nature of the creatures, part of which was inspired by Giger's lithographs to begin with.
|Although not as much as the "clunk" I experienced watching Alien in the theater for the first time - otherwise one of the most intense cinema experiences of my life (as my GF was wretching into her popcorn container due simply to the intensity) - when Ripley finally blasts the alien away, which we see is a man in a rubber suit with big feet. |
Gotta say, this part didn't go clunk for me; I never got the impression that was a man in a suit. I can watch it today even knowing it is and it still creeps me out.
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed. Bilbo
The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis