MovieChat Forums > Alien (1979) Discussion > I've tried to like Alien, but just can't...

I've tried to like Alien, but just can't get into it.

posted 6 years ago by atd8vii (592)
62 replies | jump to latest

I feel like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't like this movie. I'll give credit where credit is due because it's shot very well and the production design is excellent, but on the whole I've always been disappointed with it.

I'll probably get flak for this but the biggest problem I have with the movie is the inconsistent special effects. The famous chest bursting scene is set up very well and John Hurt sells it perfectly but when it eventually comes out I couldn't help but chuckle a little bit because it looks like what it is, a plastic puppet that is being twisted on a stick by a stage hand. Then when it scurries off, it also looks like what it is, a plastic puppet being pulled along on a track that is hidden in the table. I think the same thing about E.T when he is trying to get to the ship before it takes off, it's pretty poorly done in an otherwise decent movie.

I might be coming down a little hard on the movie because I'm well aware that Scott was being rushed for time and resources when shooting a lot of these effects sequences, but essentially it's an A movie that settled for second. The scene where Ash has his head knocked off and his wooden arms are flailing around everywhere is pretty laughable and the god awful jump cut scene following it is basically unforgivable, there was another way to shoot that scene without resorting to an obvious jump cut.

Which brings be to my next point about the Alien, which for the most part is shot well, keeping it in the shadows and showing only certain sections of its figure was a good move on Scott's behalf. However there are shots that really show that it's just a man in a suit and when it gets blasted out of the air lock it gave it away. All of these things broke my sense of danger and suspense when watching it and I've had conversations with people online who chastise me for judging a movie on its special effects, but I think its warranted. The Alien is the draw card of the film and if you can't sell it with the special effects then there's a problem.

Obviously I'm in the minority here as people have loved this movie for nearly 40 years but I've re-watched this film several times since I first saw it in 1998 and still feel the same way. As they say, first impressions last and those dodgy special effects really stick out like a sore thumb to me and prevent me from feeling the same suspense and terror that the characters are.

[–] Renovatio (2990) 6 years ago

it's ok... You don't have to like it...

as an aside, have you been to see a play in the theatre or been to the opera? do you find it difficult suspending disbeleif there as well?

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

I've actually only seen one play/musical in my life and that was Jesus Christ Superstar and I wasn't a fan. Musicals aren't really my cup of tea but perhaps if the right play came along I'd invest myself in it. I've never really given them a chance because I've never really been interested, but at this stage of my life I'm willing to give one a chance. Who knows what I've been missing out on all these years haha.

[–] Renovatio (2990) 6 years ago

I like watching plays in theatre, not so much the musicals... Worth checking out if you have them in your area...

In the good ones, it's amazing that a few people talking on stage can generate that kind of atsmophere...

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

as an aside, have you been to see a play in the theatre or been to the opera? do you find it difficult suspending disbeleif there as well?

I don't like how the musical scores break the tension and ruin the pace for a story driven audience goer like my self.

The opera isn't even in english so I'm just sitting there trying to guess the story. People may have a claim that plays and operas are high art but movies are better story telling and more entertaining. I doubt that I'm wrong as even world markets seem to agree.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 6 years ago

"People may have a claim that plays and operas are high art but movies are better story telling and more entertaining."

I don't know... Without theatres, movies wouldn't exist. And I don't think that this could be applied like an universal rule. I've seen some stage plays which were quite effective to tells theirs story, even better than in movies in some cases.

But yeah in a way movies are more a source of entertainment for way more people than stage plays. (Me included).

[–] Renovatio (2990) 6 years ago

I like the non-musical plays... Some of them can be quite compelling and entertaining...

I've seen a few that have been made into movies as well... it's a different experience, but some things stay the same... it's more actor focused than movies, as the performances are more at the centre, whereas in the better films it's as much about mood and atmosphere, even performance driven movies...

I've seen Cat On A Hot Tin Roof both as a play and as a film... Both great experiences and there is not much in it comparing those two in terms of entertainment value... the thing is, you can watch the movie aroudn the globe in a thousand cities, but you can't put on a high enough calibre show in more than a handful of cities at the same time if you tried... Movies are more scalable and are the 20th century's key artform and entertainment in my opinion...

I wonder whether or not people who are nitpicky about things in movies feel the same way about theatre... Theatre is clearly more "pretend" in a way as you see the actors on stage, but at the same time they are real people... it's difficult not to connect with another human being standing in front of you...

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

Im sure in a few hundred years people will call those old 2d movies high art but will prefer fictional experience replay from their neural implants.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 6 years ago

I've never liked it. This is really nothing more than that standard of horror movies: people trapped in a house with a monster. I don't think of it as science fiction at all. In the great horror tradition, the trapped people do stupid stuff. I find nothing innovative in Alien.

However, I fucking love Aliens. Cameron took a sow's ear and made it into a silk purse. He made Ripley into RIPLEY!

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

Agreed, I love Aliens, not just because it's more action orientated but I just think it's a better made film overall. It's consistent with it's effects (which is something I look out for) and there's no real sequence that stands as jarring or misplaced.

You could make the same argument with Jaws, people have stated countless times that it doesn't even look like a real shark, which for the most part is true but it's consistent with it's fake sharkness. There's no 70's style blue screen in it or obvious tank shots, because they shot it in the actual ocean and that sells the shark and makes the movie work even after all these years.

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

I don't think of it as science fiction at all.

I think thats the problem. People are scope limiting science ficion to drama's about technology and its effects on humanity. Alien is a horror film first and utmost.

Star Wars was nothing more then the tale of a knight rescuing a princess from a black knights castle. The white knight sneaks into the tower and frees her and later comes back with a peasant army to storm the castle and free the peasants..

We know star wars isn't sci-fi (We call it space opera) but it was still fun even if formulaic.

Do you think of Aliens as science fiction?

[–] R_Kane (15828) 6 years ago

No, I think of Aliens as action/adventure. I think of Forbidden Planet, The (original) Day The Earth Stood Still and 2001 as science fiction.

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

I saw aliens when I was in the 3rd grade in the theatre so for me it still feels like a horror just on child hood memories alone.

[–] robocat893 (13413) 6 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

But Forbidden Planet , is just a remake of Shakespeare's The Tempest ... so i heard
so , er , ergo it cant be sci fi.

[–] R_Kane (15828) 3 years ago

It is BASED ON the narrative of Shakespeare’s Tempist. You have to be a dimwit to call it “a remake.” The play is about magic. I know: you did not actually see or read the play; you “heard” about it. There is a wonderful line in the film, Creator: “I think that, when Science finally gets to the top of the mountain [of knowledge], it will find God sitting there, waiting for it.” Not for nothing, the word “id” did not exist in Elizabethan times. It was waiting for Sigmund Freud to create i. So, pal, Science fucking Fiction.

[–] Frogarama (12942) 6 years ago

He made Ripley into RIPLEY!

Agreed. Hell, Ridley Scott wanted Sigourney to be nude in her final scene, not just underwear.

[–] brux (14666) 6 years ago

I get that. I liked the movie, but for the mood, the characters, the feel, the effects, but all in all it was mostly a horror "haunted house" movie with an extremely simple plot, but like nothing that ever was made before it.

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

Yeah I dig that, and actually the mood is another brownie point I'll give to the film.

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

This is literally the definition of nitpicking. It's like the people who complain about Tippi Hedren's nailpolish and seams making it to the end of The Birds. Way to miss the point.

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

Yep, that's what it is, but these nit picky things affected the movie experience for me. Everybody does it, I'm sure you aren't any different.

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

I am different because the key here is, wisdom to know the difference. Many movies have mistakes but it takes WISDOM to know what is an irrelevant mistake, and what to get hung up on. Everything you complained about in Alien is irrelevant, whereas the jarring dove flying away shot in the original Blade Runner is not, that's a true movie mistake. One does not get wisdom by watching Christopher Nolan, Fincher or Tarantino I can assure you that.

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

Thank you for that piece of tripe Sir Snob-A-Lot.

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

whatever Nolanite.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 6 years ago

"One does not get wisdom by watching Christopher Nolan, Fincher or Tarantino I can assure you that."

Okay then Mr. Hater.

How the fuck exactly does Ridley Scott give you more wisdom than those three?

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

I didn't praise Ridley Scott, I think he's a charlatan and Alien and Blade Runner were flukes.

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

I think he's saying it was a decent movie but can't see how it became a legendary horror movie.

[–] LetThemEatCake (2717) 6 years ago

It's pretty obvious why Alien became legendary. It's mostly thanks to H.R. Giger and not Ridley Scott but it's still kinda obvious.

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

Yea the creature design and ridleys attention to detail back in those days.

[–] Heisenberg (6315) 6 years ago

Actually, Alien is legendary thanks to Giger and equally important the awesome sequel by Cameron. If Aliens was as bad as any of the other sequels, there would be no series.

Kinda like terminator, it's an even better movie than Alien, but without T2 we wouldn't have a series.

[–] atd8vii (592) 5 years ago

Wow, looking back on this thread I'm cringing at how passive aggressive I was being....ick! I'm just gonna go crawl under a rock now, lol.

[–] [email protected] (5497) 6 years ago

atd8vii- I would not give you any flak for not liking this movie even though I love it. I was initially afraud to watch it many years ago. But I grew to love it after several viewings. Now I watch it at least a few times a year. I just love this movie for many reasons.
But if you don't hey, no big deal. I could probably name any number of movies which are very popular and well loved which I don't like.

I really love the cast in this film. I think they were perfect in their roles as "bored truckers in space", just doing a routine job until they were faced with a horror that they never imagined possible.

True the FX were not the greatest, but when I first saw this movie I was too busy being scared spitless to notice the quality of the special effects. LOL

For me the opening title sequence is so spooky and creepy, it scared the heck out of me before anything even happened. It set a tone for what was to come.

The scene where Ash had his head knocked off by Parker really was a shock to me. Maybe I am just easily scared. But when it first happened and all that white stuff gushed out, I thought Ash had also been impregnated by the alien and this was just another form jumping out. It was a shocking scene to me.

But as I said, there are other films in this genre which I have never liked. So it's just a matter of personal preference. Your dislike of this film does not diminish my enjoyment of it.

[–] robocat893 (13413) 6 years ago

True the FX were not the greatest, but when I first saw this movie I was too busy being scared spitless to notice the quality of the special effects. LOL

Exactly!

[–] Owlwise (1490) 4 years ago

Also, I try to judge the FX of any film according to when it was made. If they're doing their best with what was available to them, then I have absolutely no complaints. If anything, I appreciate all the effort they put into their work.

[–] crc32 (2584) 6 years ago

The film was shot on a 7 million dollar budget and in 1979 but had it been done today it would have gotten flak for using CGI to make the alien more realistic. I can already see all the pretentious trolls coming out gushing about how animitronics and practicle effects wewre so much better back in the day. :/

Look at how the Thing 1981 is loved vs how Thing 2011 was trashed because of its CGI. (well some of the CGI was pretty bad I'll admit) but it was still better then the expanding bladder exploding flaming head we saw in 1981 or the sliding spider with bouncing leg upside down head scuttling across the floor. I loved both films by the way.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

So don't watch it again. Problem solved, and you're welcome.

😎

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

Sound advice, and a retroactive thank you to you sir lol.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 6 years ago

Okay then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EX9UQ0SJG8

😎

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 6 years ago

"As they say, first impressions last"

Actually, it depends. There are movies I didn't like with the first watch, but then after the second I got more into it (The Departed and No Country for Old Men are examples).

Of course in some cases, the first impression stays no matter how many times I would watch a movie or whatever people tell me to convince me otherwise (Interstellar is a example).

[–] atd8vii (592) 6 years ago

That's kind of the reason why I've given it a few chances over the past 20 years. There have been several films over the years that I have new found appreciation for after not thinking much of them originally. Seven, Blade Runner, Halloween to name a few. However with Alien it just hasn't clicked.