-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
$
- Thread starter Lonestar
- Start date
I would argue that they are completely different kinds of movie thus not well suited for a side by side comparison. The first one was more of a psychological thriller and he second was more of your standard formulaic action type movie. I like both of them though. Ever read Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness?" Apocalypse Now isn't the only film which was inspired by that book.
Brett
Good and valid points, I agree. Both are great movies and seperate genres. I think Aliens was a perfect compliment to Alien. I think Aliens also defined the sci-fi action movie, just like Die Hard was really the start of the formulaic action film.
Never read the book "Heart of Darkness". Is it worth it?
NavyLonghorn
Registered User
It's a relatively short, quick read that has been the influence for some of the gretest films ever made. Think "Apocalypse Now" in 19th century colonial Africa. "The Company" sends a guy (on a ship named "Nostromo") to get "Kurtz" who has gone haywire among the natives. Kind of focuses on the distinction between the civilized and uncivilized worlds and what can happen when they mix.
Brett
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
Die Hard is a great exception. The third one may have been the best. The again, Samuel L. Jackson was in it, so that goes without saying.
Other exceptions are the James Bond movies, which are more or less unrelated, as well as Indiana Jones movies.
As a rule, I like sequels better when they have new names, rather than just Whatever 2, 3, 4......
On that note, First Blood was first, then Rambo (First Blood part 2), then Rambo 3. WTF?
NavyLonghorn
Registered User
I too GREATLY enjoyed Die Hard 3. I thought it was very well done, especially for a third in series. I thought Die Hard 2 was weak. Die Hard is still one of my favorite "Christmas" movies and one of the best action movies ever made (the original if you will).
Personally, I like Indiana Jones more than James Bond. Why? Indiana Jones is the tough American... sophisticated... yet rough at the same time.
If you're going to continue typing things like that, maybe you should trade avatars with Steve.
I'll admit it. I'm a HUGE geek when it comes to Alien/Aliens (hated Alien 3 and ALien Resurrection was ... eh ok). The fact that the ship is named "Nostromo" makes me want to read that book...
Don't hate Squeeze, don't hate.
Very disappointing, especially for Bruce Willis. Let's review... the military is all bad, anti-communists are all bad, and the neutron bomb is bad. Got it.
About the only thing that movie didn't get wrong is that pilots aren't too bright (love the ILS straight into the ground)
Very disappointing, especially for Bruce Willis. Let's review... the military is all bad, anti-communists are all bad, and the neutron bomb is bad. Got it.
About the only thing that movie got wrong is that pilots aren't too bright (love the ILS straight into the ground)
Which is very strange for Bruce Willis, he's one of the few Hollywood Conservatives.
Yeah, the ILS into the ground was amusing, oh and how long the grenades wait until detonation when he ejected...
Harrier Dude
Living the dream
The third MAY have been better than the first. Both great movies and light years ahead of the second, which blew.
Samuel L. Jackson was great in the 3rd. On average more funny lines in 3 than 1. Great action in both. The first set the standard.
Now go back and hit your hash pipe, t-sip.
