Jump to content

Talk:Aliens (film)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NittyG (talk | contribs) at 05:09, 3 November 2020 (→‎Special Edition (aka Director's Cut) should be mentioned in the infobox in this case: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleAliens (film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 18, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
April 8, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Notes

Does Lance Hendriksen play Bishop in Alien 3?

Dear User:Canterbury Tail, my edit was correct, pls read the source.

Regards, Da Vinci Nanjing (talk) 13:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not according to the movie credits, and I don't know if you've seen the movie, but Lance Henriksen does indeed play Bishop which your source even corroborates. I don't know if you've seen the movie but Bishop the android is in it, both at the start of the movie and about a third of the way in when Ripley re-activates him. Also credited as Bishop II officially, not as Weyland. Canterbury Tail talk 14:30, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear User:Canterbury Tail, you are right. When Hendriksen appears at the end of film, either he is Bishop II oder Weyland, he isn't Bishop (I). When Ripley reactivates him, the character despiction is based on an animatronic puppet not Hendrisksen playing him, but Hendriskesn provides the voice for the puppet, so it is a voice only role.

Regards, Da Vinci Nanjing (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I loved the movie.

--Stephenfisher2001 (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Hey, I just want to say is, I've seen the movie back in January 2020, and My favorite part in the movie is "Game Over Man! Game Over!", and I've watched the Special Edition, within 154 minutes long, instead of the original cut! Newt is my favorite character of all time, she's so cute. :)[reply]

Canterburry, Like is said, I saw the 154-minute version, and I loved the extended version, the one you undo it, I'm not mad, I'm just being nice. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenfisher2001 (talk


Explanation of March 6, 2020 Edits

Nothing in the movie states that Bishop is an "executive officer", or that Hicks is "Apone's second in command", or that Hudson is a technician or technical anything. The movie also includes no reference to "smart" guns, and does not name the type of weapon that Vasquez and Drake use. I am removing these extremely questionable claims and replacing them with each character's primary contribution to the plot or what they are most remembered for. Also, Bishop is explicitly identified as a Lieutenant in the mess hall scene ("looks like the new lieutenant's too good to eat with the rest of us grunts").

contribs) 01:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See, I always interpreted that line as referring to Lieutenant Gorman. Do you have a source for your edits? NekoKatsun (nyaa) 01:19, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:BRD and List of characters introduced in Aliens (1986). Your wording needs improvement, in addition to sources. −αΣn=1NDi[n][Σj∈C{i}Fji[n − 1]+Fexti[(n^−1)] 09:49, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I checked everything from Xenopedia to the packaging on the action figures and I'm going to have to retract my claim about Bishop being a lieutenant; it does make more sense that the "new lieutenant" would be Gorman, since the Marines already have some familiarity with Bishop ("do the thing with the knife") and Hicks shouldn't be surprised that androids don't eat. I stand by the rest of my changes, as they replace unverifiable claims with verifiable ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107 (talk) 09:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Read the replies you received above, if you continue to revert to your edits, you will be blocked (also, Xenopedia is not a reliable source). −αΣn=1NDi[n][Σj∈C{i}Fji[n − 1]+Fexti[(n^−1)] 10:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I know Xenopedia isn't a reliable source. That's why I don't cite them for anything. Speaking of which, there are also no reliable sources for the information that I removed, which is why I removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107 (talk) 10:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See this source, written by Caroline Joan S. Picart, which has some descriptions of the characters and critical commentary. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:03, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not in the parts that are viewable by the public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107 (talk) 05:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that the smart guns are identified and clarified somewhat in the novelisation. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the novelization is not the film, and thus anything in there cannot be directly applied to what we see and hear on screen. There are multiple differences between the film and the novelization. Such as Newt is only 6 in the novel, Aliens have stingers in their tails and take down multiple marines, and many others. Therefore the novelization cannot be taken as representative of what is on the screen which is this article. Canterbury Tail talk 11:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Special Edition" and Jay Benedict

Shouldn't there be something about the "Special Edition" version mentioned in Jay Benedict? --Mortense (talk) 21:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what you're talking about. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

can we add horror to aliens

basically, i want to add horror to the genres of aliens — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thephantomseeker (talkcontribs) 13:07, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source stating that Aliens is considered a horror film? NekoKatsun (nyaa) 17:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Special Edition (aka Director's Cut) should be mentioned in the infobox in this case

I made an edit the the infobox to include the runtime of the Director's Cut (154 minutes), and it was immediately reverted by a user using an IP address, hopefully not a bot.

The description read: Only the theatrical run time is included in the infobox

Common guidelines are actually not strictly theatrical releases.

Note the wikipedia guidelines in Template:Infobox film:

"The runtime for the film should be for the primary release; this will usually be the format the film premiered on, so for films that have had a theatrical release insert the runtime of the original theatrical version. Runtimes can vary due to regional censorship, alternative cuts (such as a director's cut or an unrated version) and different technical specifications across release formats, but do not include any additional runtimes without consensus."

While typically the theatrical release is considered the original, in the case of Aliens, the "Special Edition" is actually the original, or very close to it.

Refer to the following sources:

https://thisorthatedition.com/aliens-1986/#:~:text=Both%20the%20theatrical%20and%20the,2003%20Alien%20Quadrilogy%20DVD%20set%3A&text=What%20you're%20about%20to,the%20special%20edition%20of%20Aliens.

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=2558663

"The original version, however, was too long for the producing studio so it demanded several cuts to tighten the plot. Especially the American audience was not trusted to have the ability to sit through a movie of 148 minutes. So Cameron went to the cutting room, again, and lost more than 15 minutes of footage."

--NittyG (talk) 05:09, 3 November 2020 (UTC) [reply]

I would prefer to find better secondary sources, but I think these may suffice. If you feel otherwise, let me know.

If I don't generate a discussion, I'm going to revert the reversion of my edit.