Basically, though, my point was that at some point you have to realize that you’re sitting around watching something that has ray guns and people in shiny suits jumping around and shooting Zorgs (or whatever). And that was the extent of it. Quality is one thing–I like science fiction and I hate hacked-together stinkers like Battlefield Earth or Star Trek: Voyager as much as anyone, but there’s a point at which treating it seriously becomes an exercise in absurdity (well, I like this movie because the characterization of the main hero is slightly less flat and stilted than that other one).
Hm. Y’know I have no idea where I’m going with this. I should know better than trying to hold an argument on a Monday…
And I agree with Gary Kumquat. This film didn’t have any problems that Aliens didn’t have. I think both are really lightweight entertainment. (Now the original Alien is another matter. That was a masterpiece.
I have a question though: Was Pitch Black based on a short story? I have a vague recollection of a short story with very similar creatures. In the short story, the members of a colony or expedition on an alien planet are being attacked by creatures which appear only in darkness. Most of the story involves a long nighttime walk, if my memory serves me. I believe the story ends with the protagonist’s light going out and the creature(s) closing in. Does this ring a bell with anyone?
Am I a movie snob who only sees the latest releases from Hungary and only if they’re subtitled? No.
however, I have stopped seeing a lot of movies. I’ve realized that nothing bad will happen if I don’t go see whatever the hit movie is this weekend.
When I talk about people getting used to substandard movies, I’m not trying to be snobbish. I really do have friends who say things like, “I went and saw foo and I was expecting it to be a full ton of shit but it turned out to only be 1800 pounds of shit, so I was pleasantly surprised.” If that isn’t being trained to enjoy bad movies, what is? Like I said, I don’t think “turn your brain off at the door” is a good review. I don’t think it’s a positive review if you’re saying “Foo isn’t good until you compare it to all the other crap coming out this summer.”
All I’m saying is, to me, movies are too expensive in terms of time and money to waste time on stupid things. That’s valuable time I COULD be goofing off on the computer.
I’ll have to agree with those that say Aliens seemed to have less problems that Pitch Black. At least, I didn’t notice them at the time.
The worst part is, all the stupid stuff in Pitch Black is easily avoided.
Make the eclipse every couple months, so it’s not so unlikely to have landed right before one. Have there be an ecosystem above ground that goes into hiding when the baddies come out (which result in some cool scenes anyway, like of amazing alien camouflage techniques).
Out of curiosity, how old were you when Aliens came out? Might that have something to do with it?
Some of the comments in this thread are funny to me, because I remember having many of the same thoughts about Aliens when it came out:
“Man they’re really dumbing-down science fiction these days.”
“How can people overlook so many plot holes?”
“What is with all the goofy dialogue?”
I was really disappointed in Aliens when it came out because they took what had been a very creepy and suspenseful film (Alien) and turned it into just another loud, explosion-filled SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER!!! It’s amazing to think that it is now viewed as some sort of “classic” against which other films in the genre are judged.
Both Aliens and Pitch Black are lightweight but entertaining action films disguised as science fiction.
You have to admit though, it’s hard to create a sci-fi movie without a few plot holes. Have you ever read a sci-fi book? There would way too much going on to make a GOOD sci-fi movie.
As far as movies go, I never expect too much, it’s extreamly hard to make a GOOD movie these days. If you want a thick plot with no holes in it, read a book.
Well, I was a teenager in 1986 when it came out, so that would be a factor. But I was a fairly critical teenager, I thought at the time.
But now that I think about it, I never really did understand how the Queen got onto the ship. But, I could see it learning to press the elevator button by watching Ripley do it.
I do remember noticing the horrible effects error at the end, when the actor playing Bishop, cut in half, comes WAY out of the “hidden” hole he is in to catch the little girl.
Okay, okay, maybe the queen alien can figure out the elevator controls. She’s obviously intelligent. And maybe, just maybe she can cram her huge, rigid-bodied
self into that teeny little elevator. That stretches my suspension of disbelief thin, but doesn’t break it.
What does break it is that somehow that huge Queen Alien manages to get into a teeny little space in amongst the retracted landing gear of the dropship. Uh-uh. No flippin’ way. A puny human being would have trouble doing that and not getting squashed. No way in hell could the Queen Alien do it. And I seriously doubt she could have simply held onto the outside of the dropship, either. If the sheer airspeed didn’t tear her off, the nuclear blast from the exploding atmosphere processor would have. And even barring THAT, the dropship presumably spent several minutes in hard vacuum above the planet while returning to the orbiting ship. Several minutes of hard vacuum couldn’t kill her? Then there wasn’t much point in blowing her out the airlock, was there?
Don’t get me wrong, I love Aliens. It’s the best sci-fi/action movie I’ve ever seen. But you won’t ever catch me claiming it’s realistic! Same with Pitch Black.
-Ben
According to other sources in the Aliens universe (rpg, books, “graphic novels”, et cetera), several minutes of hard vacuum won’t even faze them. Blowing her out the airlock got her off the ship, which is priority number one. Given that the Sulaco was in orbit, oriented so the ‘bottom’ of the ship was facing the planet (note the initial dropship launch), one could also surmise that the alien queen would go through an unshielded re-entry … and -that- they can’t survive.
I feel like such a geek. I prefer the Aliens setting to Star Wars or Star Trek or Babylon 5 or whathaveyou, too.
I do not know if Pitch Black was based on it, but the story you mean is Arthur Clarke’s “A Walk in the Dark.” About a man taking a lonely walk on a dark night on an alien planet. I will not spoil the story further.
Everybody always mentions that. I say, don’t you people get it? Didn’t you notice that when going down, Ripley gets out of the elevator and it automatically returns to the top? Haven’t you ever seen a elevator that stays in the lobby until someone pushes the button? The queen didn’t have to figure out anything except for the squeezing in part. I figured this out after a couple watchings, but still, nobody else notices…
Admittedly, taking the drop ship up was questionable. Personally I found the airlock scene more questionable. How long does it take for the air to evacuate from the ship into space, anyway?
Doesn’t matter… both of them are movies. And they rock.
Ex-cuuuse me? Weren’t you paying attention? I let you watch my pretty DVD’s and all you remember is how hunky Vin Diesel is? Sheesh. I suppose all you remember from the other movies that weekend was Will Smith in Enemy of the State and Mark Wahlberg in Three Kings…
It was fun. I liked it. If I see it on special on DVD, I’ll probably pick it up.
If I asked for seamless plotting and deep characterization in all my movies, I would see precious few. There’s a lot more to enjoy about movies than just these factors; they’re a visual medium, and I can enjoy camera angles and lighting and cinematography and special effects and Vin Diesel’s rippling muscles…
Oh. But, my point is, a I see movies as a whole; if I walk out of the movie amused, entertained, and impressed, I count that as just as successful a movie experience as I do if I walk out intrigued, thoughtful, and puzzled. They both have their place.
i went to see it in the cinema with my ex boyfriend, who is a multimedia student.
he chose the film (i’d made him see “what lies beneath” the week before) and went for the lighting effects and the “stylistic content”, i was unimpressed by this reasoning.
the upshot being that i, ahem, distracted, him for the entire film. so the most i can say is, Vin Diesel was nice and it had some big pterodactyl- thingies in it.
sorry guys, but there you go, i’ll chose real action over a movie any day of the week.
I thought this movie was great, highly entertaining and slightly thought provoking, at least with character development. I don’t really see any big plot holes except the eyes. The coincidence that they landed days before the eclipse is because a bunch of people have crashed on this planet but why tell a story about a simple rescue, instead tell the story about the odd case when people had to deal with the dark and the creatures that come with it (I think my explanation is as good as the next). In case anyone is wondering you can buy some of the props from the movie at a store near burbank, they sell movie clothes, it’s on cuhenga(sp?) between moorpark and victory but I can’t remember the name. I just went there and they had Riddicks bindings and some other cool stuff for sale, it’s slightly out of my price range though.
I hate to do this to you, really I do. But if we go for your “the lift always returns to the top” theory, how did the Queen call the lift?
And I’m really not trying to single Aliens out here, I loved it as a popcorn flick - just a nice piece of entertainment. You can find just as many plot holes in most films - mainly down to TheRob’s point that an hour and forty minutes doesn’t give you all the time in the world to go into full detail on every twist, turn, decision and event.
