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).