Le Anne Fossmeyer wrote:
> I don't think the end battle was written or portrayed as a cat fight:
> each female feels she must destroy the other to ensure her and her
> species' continued existence.
This is true of Ripley, yes. But the queen? I don't seem to remember the
queen ever stating her (its?) ideas on the subject. My *major* beef with
the second and third installments (neither of which I particularly liked
(though I'd have to go with Fincher's direction over Cameron's camera
mauling any day)) is that there are still no character developments in the
xenomorphs (the aliens) in either film. Nothing. If I wanted that I'd just
continue to watch _Alien_ (which I do, and it still manages to scare me to
death from time to time).
Everything there is to be known about aliens the audience learned in the
first film and with the idea of the queen. For me, that doesn't make a good
story when you have over six hours of film already out and another two
hitting the theatres next week So, you'll have to excuse me, but I don't
buy the idea that the queen was fighting to save her race, becuase there's
nothing pointing to that. _Alien_ was a great horror film, and the other
two attempted to recall that greatness with little or no success. Ripley's
the same character, with no growth (Cameron attempted it with scenes on
Earth and at Gateway, but the studio cut them out and I can't count them as
"canon" as long as 20th Century Fox calls the shots), throughout, the aliens
don't change. Will this change in _Resurrection_? I'd like to think so,
but I'm not holding my breath...
Please, all of you _Alien_ fans out there, please keep in mind that this is
all IMHO...
- Geoffrey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:07:31 PDT