Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!steph
From: steph@graffiti.UUCP (stephanie da silva)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: Alien I
Message-ID: <412@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 5-Nov-85 20:25:37 EST
Article-I.D.: graffiti.412
Posted: Tue Nov  5 20:25:37 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 8-Nov-85 07:38:41 EST
References: <11900004@hpfclp.UUCP> <7013@ucla-cs.ARPA> <85149@cpsc53.UUCP> <987@mit-vax.UUCP> <85156@cpsc53.UUCP> <3224@think.ARPA>
Organization: Information Brokerage Network, Houston, TX
Lines: 23

> 
> Three problems with this.  First, it doesn't particularly mind vacuum.
> Second, it is resistant to fire.  Remember that the alien didn't seem to
> be so much killed by the exhaust of the escape ship as shaken loose by
> the blast.  Third (this is most important) the alien has corrosive
> blood.  If they killed it or shot it full of holes or whatever, its
> blood eats through the hull.  As it happens the hull ended up with a
> few holes in it anyway,  so they might well have been better off blowing
> it away and taking their chances, but they goofed.
> 
Another factor in the alien's favor is that is was an intelligent life form.
I remember someone commenting to me how stupid the movie was because the
people kept going where the alien was. I told her it was the exact opposite--
the alien went where the *people* were.

Also, one thing that the ship's science officer brought up was that the
creature was essentially nothing more than a survival machine--which
more or less swung things in it's favor.

I honestly can't see how anyone would think this was a terrible movie. It had
beautiful sets, excellent script, plot & screenplay, excellent editing,
it was well cast and the acting was top-notch (with special lauds going to
Sigourney Weaver).