I'll give you a cookie if you can guess it. Could be discussed somewhere already, but I'm sure it will be a sinch to answer
For everyone who is familiar with the Alien movies, there is a major continuity error in Alien 3. So bad, the whole story of the movie should not have happened.
well the original "theory" on the aliens is that they inject their young into a host, then inside, it grows and feeds on the insides of the host, then breaks out when it's big enough ( like spiders ) this growth and feeding might leave residual matter of the young, but the young dont "symbiote" with the host, therefore no mix of dna, and re-using some of ripley's old dna to re-create her should never have yielded the alien young.
the length of time the alien took to go from egg to full grown (i can't remember the word for this and it's really annoying) seemed rediculously fast........ that it?
I'm going to kick this over to the MDF for general discussion, as it's not really a "trivia question" per se, and it could evolve into a decent discussion thread.
The gestation period is effected by it's host. In alien 3 the host was a dog. Dog's grow faster than humans. It also fed alot, this effects an aliens growth period aswell.
I think the biggest continuity problem of alien 3 is that it was the exact same premise as alien. The only thing this film had going for it was the atmosphere..
__________________ "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything" -Twain
(sig by Scythe)
Well here is the answer, anyone if they know better please correct me if I am wrong, but a lot of people agree with me on this.
The biggest error is: It has come to my attention that it is believed that when a face hugger attaches it self to a being and gestates, it will come off and then die after it was done doing its thing only once.
Well in the case of alien 3, the face hugger attached itself to ripley, did its thing, and then attached itself to the dog. It gestated twice.
no it didn't, there was more than one in the ship, the "company" arranged for multiple aliens to infect rip, newt and hicks...... or wsa it hudson.....?
i never said there were two or three eggs visible in the film, just that there were enough facegrabbers on board for each human that had survived the 2nd film
Actually this is NOT a mistake, the confusion resulting in bad production on 20th Century Foxs' part, who constant intererence with Fincher caused a whole manner of problems, especially the script, which was constantly changing even during filming.
What they ended up with was things:
1) The movie, which shows a single hugger infecting one of the crew, (probably Ripley) then tries to infect Newt but gets injured, and bleeds acid which starts the fire on Sulaco. This Alien eventually gets down to the planet and infects the dog. Ever since the theatrical version of Alien 3 people have suggested a creature called a Super Face-Hugger, capable of laying two embyo's, might have been responsible.
2) Then there's the novel by Alan Dean Foster, which clearly suggests there was at least 2 huggers aboard the Sulaco. The one which attacks Newt is apparently killed, starting the fire on board the Sulaco, while the second gets down to the planet. This book came out before the movie and has caused a lot of debate, even though it holds no water when compared to the film.
The final script, by Walter Hill/David Giler and still available online, doesn't give much away either. There's no mention of any Supper Face-Hugger, yet we know from photos already published on the net, that such a creature WAS made for the film. What the script does give us, is most of what we knew was filmed and never released by FOX...that is...until the Alien Quadrilogy came along.
Getting back on topic, I would have to say, if your looking for ERRORS, possiby one the biggest Alien 3 goofer surrounds the Ox, which was the original beast infected by the Hugger Fincher (wisely) replaced it with the Dog.
NOUN: Parasite, parusIt
An animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another animal or plant); the parasite obtains nourishment from the host without benefiting or killing the host.
Thing is, I always believed the Alien could not infect a dead animal, it is a parasite and therefore would feed off and/or use the host until it was ready. But in the Alien 3 Special Edition this animal was already DEAD before the chestburster sequence, suggesting perhaps the Hugger may have killed it, but thats not really the point. Ripley carries the Queen inside her, but believes if she dies the creature will too, yet if you cast your mind back to the Ox this appears to be not the case, which os probably why it never made to the theatrical version in the first place.
Getting back on topic...I think its safe to say there are a few[I]An animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another animal or plant); the parasite obtains nourishment from the host without benefiting or killing the host.
Last edited by RoaryUK on Oct 24th, 2005 at 09:59 PM
KMC Community Forums
Jan 17th, 2005 08:49 PM
