Google| Subject | Re: The Lone Alien theory |
| From | Keith Hazelwood |
| Date | 07/15/2001 07:26 (07/15/2001 07:26) |
| Message-ID | <kh92ltkp29p6928jd0j1qf1e2cual1316k@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | alt.cult-movies.alien |
| Follows | Robbie Grant |
| Followups | Robbie Grant (8h & 12m) > Keith Hazelwood |
On Sat, 14 Jul 2001 20:09:59 +1000, Robbie Grant <randrgrant@ozemail.com.au>wrote:
Robbie GrantYeah, so what in the hell is your point? You do this kind of "apples to oranges" comparison a lot and it may strike a cord with the less critical thinkers around here, but not me. You know damn well your analogy is totally vacuous.
After the first film, turning the aliens into hive-dwelling creatures was unnecessary. So was making Ripley and the marines face more than one of them. So was putting the marines in the movie. So was even having Ripley at all. Personally, I think it all made for a damn fine movie, though. What the hell has necessity got to do with anything? Hell, in the grand scheme of things, the entire series is "unnecessary".
As far as the lifecycle of the alien goes, there is no reason why it can't have two separate modes of reproduction.So why not three? Four? A thousand?
Indeed, by your own logic, it's not "necessary" for it to have only one, therefore it is "unnecessary" for it not to have more.Nice strawman argument.
Personally, although Alien3 kind of implied that one lone warrior cannot make an egg,Good point.
I still like the idea, and if a subsequent movie somehow managed to bring this idea in and do it well, I'd be happy.And I'd have no choice but to accept it. However, since no movie thus far has done so, it remains solely within the realm of baseless conjecture.
Keith "Intellectual rigor annoys people because it interferes with the pleasure they derive from allowing their wishes to be the fathers of their thoughts." -George F. Will
07/08/2001-
