AVP on Amazon, what do they mean with...

[El Mariachi]

... theatrical version only?

CLICK AMAZON

Commentary by director Paul W.S. Anderson, Lance Henriksen, and Sanaa Lathan (theatrical version only)

Commentary by Alec Gillis (alien effects), Tom Woodruff Jr. (alien effects), and visual effects supervisor John Bruno (theatrical version only)


weird, will a director's cut come and be slightly better?

[Blade Runner]

I was under the impression there was already a directors cut

[El Mariachi]

I already know what it was. I didn't read well

it's that stupid "new beginning" stuff which was not in the theatre

this thread can be closed and never again may there be talked about AVP

[spudthedestroyer]

there's loads of people taking the piss out of Anderson on all his imdb entries about his 'Director's Cut', simply because he says its the studios fault the movie sucked everytime

The original script was posted in this thread, and it quite clearly only has about 4 slight scene changes and was always going to be PG13
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0370263/board/flat/13009715

Sorry buddy but there is no directors cut. What we saw in the theaters was what Anderson wanted us to see. If you dont believe me go to www.simplescripts.com and read the script.

Why can't people get that this film was always going to be PG-13? There are only about four deleted scenes and they don't have more blood or gore in them.

I saw in an interview with Anderson that there is definetely going to be a R-rated DVD, because he said the effects for the peoples deaths just weren't done in time or something like that, but that they will finish them and release on the DVD instead of having all the off-screen deaths that are in the movie, but it could end up not happening.

Anderson NEVER said that in an interview. What he did say was that the film we saw was the one he always intended to make. He said the gore level was high to him and if the MPAA wants to rate that PG-13, then so be it. He has never spoken of stuff to be finished and included later... he spoke of the Bouvetoya opening he wished he left in and will include on the DVD. The 3 deleted scenes to be included are all supposedly short and silly and were definitely not edited for the sake of the rating.

I've been trying to tell people for ages that there is no R version and that Paul WS Anderson lied about the fact. He also said that there would be an uncut Resident Evil, which was also BS. Don't believe anything this guy says

ps. then again, imdb people are idiots:

what's wrong with CGI, They look great in cgi, and it is completely cgi in this movie, and just to remind you guys you don't have to see this movie, but it and the comics and games and card games and books and others are part of both series.

[dinky]

I have no idea what the imdb idiot is trying to say about comics and games and books, but you ARE overly harsh about the quality of cgi. Looks wasn't a problem for this <s>film</s> movie; plot, script and direction were.

[spudthedestroyer]

GCI was crap here, just not good enough quality to justify its over use, I don't see whats in the slightest bit harsh about that.

Facehuggers looked awful, I mean did you see the aliens crawling over the walls? and that Alien Queen looked shit too. Okay it was going to look shit anyway, since the scene was shit, but damn, nothing like a plastic <s>dinosaur</s> alien queen to conclude the crowning scene in this gem

Poor direction led to the over use of poor CGI to make up for weak plot. I'm not ragging on CGI artists, I just think there wasn't the budget or the technology to make any of it work, it would have been a notable visual improvement to use older techniques. What's amazing is that the Queen looked better in Aliens, but when it came to real sets and props for AvP they even sprayed it an ass-brown.... its not like they didn't have access to the previous alien props either.

The backgrounds looked okay in many scenes (landscapes are one of the things where CGI works wonders), but I mean they can even get those looking okay in Stargate SG1and pretty much anything these days

[dinky]

I thought the slicked-up cgi effect was more troubling in A4. AvP cgi wasn't so troubling, maybe cuz it's black foreground on (mostly) black background. anyway, the queen walking like a t-rex was pretty impossible not to see that way (having seen JP).

anyway, your point about wasted money and doing less with more is well taken, and the fact that cgi couldn't cover up</i> other shortcomings is the more important issue about cgi to emphasize. after all, there's a shitload of cgi in LotR, and most of that seemed pretty damn good to me (matting with treebeard and the two hobits being a notable exception)

however, I think the main</i> reason the queen looked so much better in Aliens</i> is because you never had to see it fully articulated. yeah, you see it chugging up the elevator shaft, which amounts to a stationary body and two arms/legs left on "spin cycle." but cameron never asked the queen to move in full view of the camera the way anderson did in AvP. there's the scene in the hangar, but even there, it's a confined space, close-up, showing certain sections of the queen (or she's stuck under the exo-suit-thingy) - in any case, you're not requiring her to do much more than stand there and articulate one or two limbs at a time from a very limited pov.

this obviously doesn't take everything into account. you're still going to be annoyed by the slick look of the queen's face in A4 and the all-too-even appearance, even when thawing in AvP (that last one didn't bother me seeing as to how I have NO idea what such a thing would actually look like - in fact, neither one was an issue for me). like any good scary movie, the proper use of the monster is to show as little as possible, and that's what the more recent Alien flicks fail to understand - something that falls squarely on the writer/director's head(s). seeing aliens for any extended time in A1 or A2, it becomes painfully obvious that you're looking at a guy in a topheavy suit - it's not like the make-up/puppet combo is a priori</i> more convincing. cameron, scott, and even fincher were't dumb enough to put their creatures under a spotlight though.