I don't get it

Nexus · Jan 9, 2007, 05:39 PM

A lot of the events in the film, such as Biehn going crazy, didn't seem to connect with the primary plot on any kind of thematic level. I know that screenwriters throw in some sub-plots to conflict with the narrative in some way, but not only did they spend way too much time on the sub-plots, but the final message of the film was unclear. Bear in mind that I've only seen the Theatrical Version though. I liked the movie, but I was quite disappointed with the ending because it seemed that they just merely used the aliens as nothing more than a bizarre plot device so the character can return to the surface, as well as a device to make the previous events (which they spent so much time on, I came to the conclusion that they were meant to be important in some way) happen. So is this a 'proper' SF movie, or are the aliens just 'there'?

Ivan · Jan 10, 2007, 12:13 AM

Abyss is a good example of a bad theatrical cut. The alternate AKA special edition includes around 30 minutes more. And it gives a totally new motivation for the aliens and what they are doing.

In a nut shell the alien message in the shorter theatrical cut came out as :"We are saving you because of love" , showing that "I luv you woman" on the wall screen.

It is the same in the alternate version but what precedes that scene clarifies the alien motivation and shows them as much more menacing and threatening.

I don't want to spoil it for you by saying more. Pity you made a mistake and watched the shorter version first. I am sure watching abyss would be a much better experience if you had seen the special edition first.

As for the marine going crazy, I don't think it is out of place because it shows our paranoid human nature, and the fact that we would often destroy the things we don't understand rather then make an effort to reach new realizations. The crew was a miniature symbol of the human society confronted with a new civilisation.

As humans , some will freak out, some will be scared and some will be intrigued.

Camfan · Mar 13, 2009, 09:52 AM

Yeah I'm agreeing with Ivan on this one. Despite coming out in '89 the movie was shot and certainly written during the cold war. I have to say, as much as I like Cameron, this is obvious just look at my name, he's a bit heavy handed with the moral message in this movie. It's still a nice idea though. Personally I found the story with the aliens,

I understand the message, and it's one that Cameron clearly thought worth telling, and dramatically speaking, it always tends to work well with these kinds of 'pressure' movies, where our heroes are in essentially a disaster movie with the fate of the world being decided above them, and upon which they have a direct influence. Just look at Crimson Tide.

I found the personal story of the characters far more interesting to watch unfold in front of me. The mish-mash of cultures, from red-neck to hippy to jar-head to all-american hero, worked incredibly well. Plus some stellar performances from the cast. The so-called 'bigger' issue I have to say ddn't have as much of an impact upon me. I still think the director's cut is the definitive edition, but more for the added time with the characters rather than the pay-off at the end of the movie.

Plus I have to say I think it's one of Michael Biehn's best performances, I know they lobbied very hard to get him a nomination but no such luck. However I found out not so long ago that one of the best pieces of acting I thought I'd ever seen was due to the fact they played the film backwards which made him look so creepy.

I love this film, but was it guilty of self indulgence? Most definitely.

Jan 9, 2007, 05:39 PM	#1
Nexus Psycho Teddy Sausage 3,648 flights since Dec 2001 Location: Seraph's pocket	I don't get it A lot of the events in the film, such as Biehn going crazy, didn't seem to connect with the primary plot on any kind of thematic level. I know that screenwriters throw in some sub-plots to conflict with the narrative in some way, but not only did they spend way too much time on the sub-plots, but the final message of the film was unclear. Bear in mind that I've only seen the Theatrical Version though. I liked the movie, but I was quite disappointed with the ending because it seemed that they just merely used the aliens as nothing more than a bizarre plot device so the character can return to the surface, as well as a device to make the previous events (which they spent so much time on, I came to the conclusion that they were meant to be important in some way) happen. So is this a 'proper' SF movie, or are the aliens just 'there'?

Jan 10, 2007, 12:13 AM	#2
Ivan formerly known as Ivanhoe 1,574 flights since Nov 2000 Location: Europe - Balkans	Re: I don't get it Abyss is a good example of a bad theatrical cut. The alternate AKA special edition includes around 30 minutes more. And it gives a totally new motivation for the aliens and what they are doing. In a nut shell the alien message in the shorter theatrical cut came out as :"We are saving you because of love" , showing that "I luv you woman" on the wall screen. It is the same in the alternate version but what precedes that scene clarifies the alien motivation and shows them as much more menacing and threatening. I don't want to spoil it for you by saying more. Pity you made a mistake and watched the shorter version first. I am sure watching abyss would be a much better experience if you had seen the special edition first. As for the marine going crazy, I don't think it is out of place because it shows our paranoid human nature, and the fact that we would often destroy the things we don't understand rather then make an effort to reach new realizations. The crew was a miniature symbol of the human society confronted with a new civilisation. As humans , some will freak out, some will be scared and some will be intrigued. Last edited by Ivan : Jan 10, 2007 at 12:19 AM.

Mar 13, 2009, 09:52 AM	#3
Camfan Wing Commander 364 flights since Mar 2002 Location: Where the history comes from	Re: I don't get it Yeah I'm agreeing with Ivan on this one. Despite coming out in '89 the movie was shot and certainly written during the cold war. I have to say, as much as I like Cameron, this is obvious just look at my name, he's a bit heavy handed with the moral message in this movie. It's still a nice idea though. Personally I found the story with the aliens, I understand the message, and it's one that Cameron clearly thought worth telling, and dramatically speaking, it always tends to work well with these kinds of 'pressure' movies, where our heroes are in essentially a disaster movie with the fate of the world being decided above them, and upon which they have a direct influence. Just look at Crimson Tide. I found the personal story of the characters far more interesting to watch unfold in front of me. The mish-mash of cultures, from red-neck to hippy to jar-head to all-american hero, worked incredibly well. Plus some stellar performances from the cast. The so-called 'bigger' issue I have to say ddn't have as much of an impact upon me. I still think the director's cut is the definitive edition, but more for the added time with the characters rather than the pay-off at the end of the movie. Plus I have to say I think it's one of Michael Biehn's best performances, I know they lobbied very hard to get him a nomination but no such luck. However I found out not so long ago that one of the best pieces of acting I thought I'd ever seen was due to the fact they played the film backwards which made him look so creepy. I love this film, but was it guilty of self indulgence? Most definitely.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search