Alien Franchise (1979-?)

[Zot!]

I think the idea is that the directors cut has a new transfer that he messed with (being a director's cut, that seems fair enough), while the theatrical cut has also gotten a new transfer, but hasn't been digitally altered. Or at least that's what I'm hoping. I don't believe this is just a DNR filter applied to an existing transfer. It sounds like they did pretty extensive "restoration" from the original elements. I'm pretty sure the latest Blade Runner had something similar done, no? As long as Cameron leaves the theatrical as-is, he can muck about for all I care with his director's cut.

[oldsheperd]

He added some blue people, an Austrian accented Cyborg, and sinking ship to Aliens. All in 3D!

[Brian C]

You know, I was trying to formulate some sort of "let's just wait and see" perspective about this whole Cameron thing, but then I realized, this is the guy who thought a non-anamorphic DVD of Titanic was the way to go back in 1999*. So it's not just possible but likely that he's way behind the curve on DNR.

* - and I don't believe he ever got around to anarmorphic releases for either The Abyss or True Lies.

[flyonthewall2983]

From thedigitalbits, something to possibly calm the fears about the new transfer

As you might expect, all that talk of de-noising and de-graining has some fans freaked out that the release is going to suffer the same excessively DNR-ed fate as Fox's recent Predator: Ultimate Hunter Blu-ray. Here's the deal: Everyone we trust who was involved, and/or has actually SEEN the new Aliens HD master for Blu-ray, reports to us that the film looks terrific. To the degree that DNR was used, it was applied carefully and with a light hand, with an eye toward striking the proper balance between maintaining the detail and integrity of the image and the desire to reduce grain and address the deficiencies of the stock used at the time. There is apparently STILL grain left in the image, it's just no longer excessive or distracting. Plus, Cameron is no slouch when it comes to the presentation quality of his films on disc, and he approved this transfer and master. Look, there's a VERY big difference in digital mastering when the filmmakers are directly involved in the process, as opposed to when they're not. So we're told the disc looks great, we trust that it looks great and I'll personally work to directly confirm that. My own feeling is that Predator was probably an aberration. Fox has generally been doing very good mastering work for Blu-ray in the last year or so, and I suspect this is going to be a non-issue when we all get our hands on the Aliens disc.

[Brian C]

Plus, Cameron is no slouch when it comes to the presentation quality of his films on disc, and he approved this transfer and master.

I believe Bill here that early reaction is over-the-top, except this point just seems wrong. Cameron films have had a very spotty history on disc.

[flyonthewall2983]

* - and I don't believe he ever got around to anarmorphic releases for either The Abyss or True Lies.

You're right about The Abyss, but I was channel surfing and saw True Lies on A&E HD and it was anamorphic, though it was full-frame. I don't know if it's been released at all since the old DVD, but at least on TV it's in a more updated form.

[Cosmic Bus]

Comparison shots from the new Alien and Aliens transfers towards the bottom of the page.

They've done a pretty nice job retaining some of the grain without sacrificing detail, but I'm not a fan of the new color timing.

[aox]

I wish there were BD/DVD comparisons for Alien, as there are for Aliens. However, with what we have, Aliens seems to maintain grain and be faithful to the source.

Interesting

[Roger Ryan]

Yeah, actually it looks like very little of the grain was removed! Okay, nothing to be too worried about.

[aox]

I don't understand now what Cameron (a huge tech geek) meant when he hinted that he removed all the grain from the second film. Did everyone read that incorrectly, or was his statement taken out of context?

[andyli]

I don't understand now what Cameron (a huge tech geek) meant when he hinted that he removed all the grain from the second film. Did everyone read that incorrectly, or was his statement taken out of context?

Perhaps he did the de-grain part. And then the technicians added the grains back after he went out of the door.

[Finch]

Very pleased with the caps of Alien - hopefully I won't have to wait too long for the individual release.

[oldsheperd]

Does anyone have any links for reviews of the boxset yet. I've read reviews for the UK Blu set and they're all generally positive. I'm debating whether or not to get this or the Ernie Fosselius 4 pack at Apprehensive Films. It's a weird either/or I know.

[Finch]

Beaver on the first film

Home Cinema Choice on the set

The Digital Bits

[aox]

blu-ray.com

not surprisingly, it seems the first (and second) film has been given the most attention.

[mfunk9786]

I want this set so bad. Fox really overpriced the hell out of it though, so I guess I just need to hang in there for a gold box deal.

[Alphonse Doinel]

The Region Free UK version is £37.49 on Amazon.

FAR better deal.

[stereo]

How do you know it's region free? Just checking.

[mfunk9786]

Any word on the packaging on the UK edition? I will still hold out, it seems like every UK boxset ends up at £17 within a couple of months regardless of the SRP.

[Alphonse Doinel]

Some people on the blu-ray.com forums confirmed it. The features apparently play fine too.

UK Packaging is similar to the dvd version, where everything folds out. The US version is sort of a book design, and the discs go in cardboard sleeves.

I'm also waiting for a drop. It's pretty inevitable. Canadian retailers already have it for $79, and some people are getting it for $59.

[oldsheperd]

Pretty stoked. I should be getting mine in the mail tomorrow.

[oldsheperd]

I haven't watched the films yet but the packaging is top notch. It's a sturdy box and the dvds are housed in a book with foamcore mounting pages. Overall pretty nice aesthetically.

[colinr0380]

I've just received my Blu-Ray set and am enjoying going through all the films again. It was also interesting to read this post on Aliens from Michael Mackenzie's blog, who raised the idea of Aliens being a bigger scale remake of Alien. I was inspired to post my thoughts in response to his post there, but thought I would put them here too, since I haven't written much on Aliens here. This should also be considered as the better version of my post, since I've spent a little more time tidying it up and trying to express myself a little more clearly than in the comment attached to the blog!:

I would slightly agree on the way you start to root for the aliens eating everyone - except Ripley of course. I would argue that the perspective of the film towards the soldiers is tied to Ripley's perspective of being 'outside of the group', something that gets even more prominent in the following films (The difference being that here she in making an attempt to try and assimilate back into society again, while for the later films that is simply not a possibility any more)

In Alien, Ripley could be seen as being a true, full member of a crew until she became individualised in a way by the crew being decimated. In the first film she also came across as one of the more officious and not particularly fun loving members of the crew - in the scene where she makes the, proven to be correct, decision to keep Kane in the airlock which gets overridden by her captain for example.

She then comes to the foreground and gets individualised through having the 'family' of the crew ripped from her. I think Cameron's Aliens, in its re-purposing of many of the set pieces of the first film on a bigger, louder scale also takes this theme up too. We meet all of the stereotypical (although this was really the film that defined many of the stereotypes!) soldier types who don't really seem particularly interesting or individualised, or at least are just painted in a rather broad manner - even the eventual 'hero', Hicks. After the first encounter with the aliens, when most of the soldiers are whittled down to the core cast, we then start seeing the remaining characters becoming individualised in their deaths/martydoms or their heroics - I particularly liked the moment of the odd couple of Gorman and Vasquez coming to terms with each other before they die together after being cornered.

These characters taking up that strand of the film (with Hicks eventually reaching the point of character development that Ripley did in the first film) frees Ripley up in this film to fully explore the motherly aspect of her relationship with Newt, who is basically placed, in terms of the plot mechanics, as a more sophisticated version of the cat in the first film.

I suppose that this is why the 'new version' of Ripley in Hicks, and the 'cat figure' in Newt have to be removed from Alien3 to give Ripley some new territory to explore, even if it is done in the most brutal manner possible.

Even though I agree with you about the film basically being a remake of many set pieces of Alien, I think this is one of the few examples of a remake done intelligently, knowing which aspects of the material can be most profitably expanded upon to express a more 'James Cameron' kind of vision!

[Jeff]

Individual Blu-ray releases come out May 10 and are up for pre-order on Amazon

[Roger Ryan]

I just finished watching the new Blu-ray version of "The Making of ALIEN 3" which increases the running time to nearly three-and-a-half hours (including the "Enhancement Pods" outtake selection). This fascinating documentary extra is probably better than either version of the film itself and is perhaps the most contentious bonus feature yet created. Participants can barely contain their contempt for each other (although the Brits handle this better than the Yanks) as they recount every misstep and disappointment, along with a wealth of technical info on set and creature design and visual effects. Nobody seems particularly happy with any aspect of the project; even the effects guys complain about how the matte paintings were photographed or the Alien was composited into the image. Just watching this feature, you would think the film is a lot worse than it actually is.

By the way, I noticed when watching the longer "work print" version of the film (which I find to be a big improvement over the theatrical cut) that the additional footage is of a better image quality than the footage common to both versions. There's not a huge difference, but the shots that are unique to the "work print" edition are sharper and contain a bit more detail.