Blu-ray Review HTF BLU-RAY REVIEW: Alien Anthology (1 Viewer)

[SamT]

Originally Posted by TravisR



I think it's much creepier to have no idea what's behind the door when the marines get there. That way, the viewer and the marines both have no clue what they're about to walk into. When you've already seen the colony, you lose that. The intro of Newt in the theatrical cut is much more interesting than seeing her 'origin' (it being her family that happens to be the group to go out to the derelict ship is also incredibly convenient) and not knowing how the colony got infested is better than seeing its beginnings. While the scene is interesting to see on its own, it isn't neccessary to the story and all the characters except Newt are essentially pointless since they never appear again.

I agree.

 

[SamT]

I have a love/hate affair with Cameron's director's cuts. Most of the added scenes are great on their own, but somehow mostly manage to destroy the pacing (which i think is more important with these movies). Others are simply unnecessary. The DC of The Abyss is the one I do like, but that's probably because it's the only version of the movie I've seen.

Kind of agree. They are of course not considered Director's Cut but the Special Editon. James Cameron always got the cut he wanted. He wasn't forced into anything.


My feelings with James Cameron's Special Editons are simpler. It's just a hate/hate affair. You will be shocked but I believe Cameron has never improved any of his movies with his Special Editions, they are actually inferior.


My main problem is that with his Special Editions the cheese factor goes real high. The actings get worse and things get too over the top. You know Cameron as not being a very subtle guy, so adding over it doesnt help very much. One of the greatest offenders in this regard for me is the Abyss Special Edition. ... man I hate that SE with a passion!

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by SamT


_Man_

 

[SamT]

Ok I just finished Alien "DC" and Aliens TC.


Aliens Original Version?

I was very shocked to see that they have digitally altered the infamous shot where half Bishop grabs Newt. Originally you could see his lower body and the practical effect.


What makes me angry is that you can NOT digitally touch and remove a part of a shot and call it the original version. You want to correct it? Ok, do it in the Special Edition.


Anybody bothered by this? What is on the BD set is not the original version. I guess I will keep my DVD set.


Alien "DC":

I watched the Alien "DC" for the first time and didn't like it and find it inferior to the original cut.


The scene where Ripley and Parker run after the Alien that has grabbed Brett is unnecessary. It actually hurts the scene. They shouldn't run to the Alien, It's just like they are chasing a wild dog. The situation is so extraordinary and frightening that they should run in the opposite direction.


Also the cocoon scene didn't work for me because Ripley comes out as a cold blooded murderer! Dallas looked pretty ok (like Newt in Aliens). She should have tried to rescue him instead of murdering him! That was pretty bad.

 

[Ted Van Duyn]

Originally Posted by SamT The scene where Ripley and Parker run after the Alien that has grabbed Brett is unnecessary.

They weren't actually running after the Alien but running to aid Brett who they heard screaming from the other room. This is the one alternate scene I thought played out better in the DC because the transition to Parker saying "Whatever it was...it was big." has a lot more weight to it. I would have been happy with this cut if this was the only scene that was changed, but sadly it wasn't so I'm with the theatrical cut still.

 

[SamT]

Originally Posted by Ted Van Duyn




They weren't actually running after the Alien but running to aid Brett who they heard screaming from the other room. This is the one alternate scene I thought played out better in the DC because the transition to Parker saying "Whatever it was...it was big." has a lot more weight to it. I would have been happy with this cut if this was the only scene that was changed, but sadly it wasn't so I'm with the theatrical cut still.

Yes, but still the Alien is there and overall it "cheapens" the Alien's first attack. Remember that it's the first time we see the grown Alien attack anyone. Better for it to be in a more private manner with no one else involved!


In the original version the line "Whatever it was...it was big." works because a full grown Brett has disappeared with no trace.

 

[Brett_M]

Nice review. I have watched both Alien and Aliens already and both looked and sounded incredible. Aliens was a nice surprise, too. The sequence on the Sulaco where the camera pans from a matte to the squad getting ready for their briefing blew me away. The matte line was really visible in the previous DVD incarnations but the transition on the B-R was seamless.

I played around with MU-TH-UR but I didn't want it to be a distraction during my first B-R viewings of these titles. I can see using it in the near future. Love the packaging, too. BD of the year, imho.

 

[robbbb1138]

Originally Posted by SamT

Yes, definitely. I didn't want to say that before because it's throwing stones in a glass house when you consider that his work has a level of cheesiness to begin with. Avatar is the most striking example of this in his work, so I cringe to think of how the added scenes will play when that longer cut comes out in a few weeks.

 

[Johnny Angell]

Originally Posted by SamT

Yes, but still the Alien is there and overall it "cheapens" the Alien's first attack. Remember that it's the first time we see the grown Alien attack anyone. Better for it to be in a more private manner with no one else involved!


In the original version the line "Whatever it was...it was big." works because a full grown Brett has disappeared with no trace.

It has always bothered me when the theatrical version cut from Brett being taken to Parker saying "it was big" as if he had seen it. That transition always played out, to me at least, like no one has seen the Alien. It didn't make sense for Parker to comment on it's size.


As for Ripley being a cold-blooded murder, I don't react to the cocoon scene like that at all. First of all, Dallas is begging her to kill him. Dallas, IMHO, looks to be in bad shape and much worse off than Newt. In the case of Newt, Ripley can quickly see that she hasn't been impregnated yet since a hugger is about to do the deed. I find myself urging Ripley to put Dallas out of his misery as an act of compassion.


If there's a spot where Ripley comes off as callous, look at the deleted Burke cocoon scene. When she encounters Burke, she gives him one brief look, hands him a grenade, and leaves. She doesn't give him a second thought and I can't blame her.

 

[Jason Charlton]

Originally Posted by SamT
Anybody bothered by this? What is on the BD set is not the original version. I guess I will keep my DVD set.

Really? You feel there will be a time when you'll have a craving to watch "Aliens" but the thought of seeing a split-second digital manipulation of a shot will be enough to make you decide to watch the DVD instead of the Blu-Ray?


Now, I know the "original" vs. "altered" debate is like the Home Theater Forum version of the Kobayashi Maru - and let me be clear - I'm not trying to stir up any debate over the merits of the change, but I find it surprising that such a seemingly innocuous change would be enough to outweigh the multitude of other benefits the Blu-Ray has over the DVD.

 

[SamT]

I'm not trying to stir up any debate over the merits of the change

Well, its not a debate about the merits of the change or if they should change anything or not. It's quite simple, they sell the original version, they label it as the original version, but it's not.


I keep the DVD for historical and archival reasons and to have a copy of the original movie. I'm of course not going to watch it.

 

[Doug Otte]

Originally Posted by TravisR



I think it's much creepier to have no idea what's behind the door when the marines get there. That way, the viewer and the marines both have no clue what they're about to walk into. When you've already seen the colony, you lose that. The intro of Newt in the theatrical cut is much more interesting than seeing her 'origin' (it being her family that happens to be the group to go out to the derelict ship is also incredibly convenient) and not knowing how the colony got infested is better than seeing its beginnings. While the scene is interesting to see on its own, it isn't neccessary to the story and all the characters except Newt are essentially pointless since they never appear again.

I can see your point if it's the first time viewing the movie. My experience was that I had seen the original cut of Aliens many times. When I first saw the extended version, I thought the pacing dragged with the additional scenes. However, on subsequent viewings, I've grown to prefer the extended cut because the additional scenes strengthen the theme of Motherhood that is prevalent throughout the movie.


Doug

 

[Nelson Au]

I didn't know there was digital manipulation done when Bishop grabs Newt. Where was it done?


When I watched the BD, I replayed that sequence with Cameron's commentary on and he talked about how there was a slight mistake there and you sort of see Lance's torso under the rubber bits. When I watched the BD, I could see the rubber torso bits lift off the floor a bit. Are you saying they erased anything visible under the torso as it lifts off the floor? I never noticed that before! As Cameron said in the commentary, your eyes are focused on the main parts, so he himself didn't notice that mistake before.

 

[Jason Charlton]

Images of the scene in question before and after the manipulation can be found on this post in another thread:


http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/282839/alien-trilogy-coming-to-blu-ray/270#post_3735761


I had never noticed it before, either.

 

[Johnny Angell]

I hadn't noticed this problem until I was listening to the commentary on my DVD (way in the past) and than it was obvious. I just re listened to the commentary on the blu-ray and I thought "that's not as noticeable as I remember." Now I know why. And I'm glad they did it. It doesn't hurt the movie, it removes an error that would take me out of the movie.


In the commentary Cameron mentions he had watched the movie about 5 times before he saw it. He pointed out he did what audiences do, he looked where he the film wanted him to look, which was Bishop grabbing Newt.

 

[WillG]

As for Ripley being a cold-blooded murder, I don't react to the cocoon scene like that at all. First of all, Dallas is begging her to kill him.

As I had indicated, I think it's was impractical to burn him alive with a flamethrower when the ship was minutes away from self destruct anyway. She could have just said that and told him it would all be over in a matter of minutes.

If there's a spot where Ripley comes off as callous, look at the deleted Burke cocoon scene. When she encounters Burke, she gives him one brief look, hands him a grenade, and leaves. She doesn't give him a second thought and I can't blame her.

Actually she'd pretty compassionate here. There's nothing she could do for him as he had already been impregnated. If she truly was callous, she would have just let the alien burst out of him instead of giving him a quick way out.

 

[Nelson Au]

Thanks for the link Jason. I wasn't following that thread, or my subscription to it was disabled!


That's a huge goof. I don't see a problem fixing it. Sort of like the reflection of Indiana Jones in the glass and the snakes or removing wires. Or in Star Trek 2 when Khan's son dies, his eyes are open, but he closes then when Ricardo Montaban leans over to hug his body. That always got a chuckle in the theater. But I understand the feelings about leaving it if it was in the original.


That's a huge topic for discussion for another thread about what is the final product of anything, A movie, a painting, a car design, etc. As an artist or sorts myself, I always see things in the work I do I want to go back and fix. Other times I get lucky and it works out.


But never the less, I now have something to look for in the older DVD's!

 

[SamT]

Are you saying they erased anything visible under the torso as it lifts off the floor?

Yes, that is what I am saying. Jason Charlton's link shows the difference.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/305336/htf-blu-ray-review-alien-anthology/60#post_3747030

Now I know why. And I'm glad they did it. It doesn't hurt the movie, it removes an error that would take me out of the movie.

The problem is not that they did it. The problem is that it's in the original version.

 

[robbbb1138]

Looking at the image from the original release, I never would have known this was even a flub. It just looks like his back to me and that his innards were ripped apart a bit unevenly.

 

[joshEH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillG

The opening of Alien 3. It was just a plain and simple cheat. Maybe the queen could have somehow left an egg, but the "Aliens" Ripley most certainly would have done a sweep of the Sulaco before going into stasis.

It could've been within a cramped compartment near the rear of the dropship itself, where the Queen could've easily pinched one out during the course of the film's final 10 minutes. Ripley could easily have missed it during a sweep.


At least, that's how I've been rationalizing it to myself for about 18 years, now -- me being a huge fan of Alien³, otherwise. It's upside-down and at a slight angle in a tight corner on the ceiling, going by the footage.


By the way, whatever happened to the Rule of Biehn™?

Smooth-shaven = goodie, facial hair = baddie. Did I just dream this rule? Was he not evil in Jade? Doesn't he have a 'stache in Dragon Squad?

It used to be so simple -- Biehn and Paxton working as a team, the rest of the universe sleeping easy...

Originally Posted by SamT The problem is not that they did it. The problem is that it's in the original version.

Issues with the seamless branching might have been the factor -- having a digital alteration in one version, but not the other, could have raised complications during the authoring process.