😳
I think the groundbreaking part was Dan O’Bannon’s note in the Alien script that gave us more amazing characters in Aliens.
“At the start of Dan O’Bannon’s script for Alien, there’s a note that few other screenplays contain: “The crew is unisex and all parts are interchangeable for men or women.” It’s a line that fundamentally altered the nature of the film, affecting everything from the presentation of its characters to the way Ridley Scott and his team approached casting, and it was certainly for the best.”
Haha I read that originally as “they be robots and have removable arms and legs that fit erybody else.”
That’s fascinating though. I must say I like Aliens much better. I rarely revisit Alien but I might do in the near future.
Imho, they are different genres altogether.
Alien is a real horror-movie, while Aliens leans more towards the action-movie genre, of course retaining horror elements, but it doesn’t quite play on the body-horror and fear of the unknown as much as the first part does.
Alien is art. Aliens is a schlocky action movie (nothing wrong with schlocky action movies, but it’s just a completely different thing)
I’ve watched Alien in the background dozens of times, had forgotten how it really went. My wife had never seen it, no clue.
She sat like this, edge of the couch, glued to the screen the whole time. And I came away with my view of the movie totally refreshed. A work of art indeed!
So you’re saying that one’s a bug-hunt, and the other’s a stand-up fight?
I knew I made this for a reason
I see from the comments that apparently it was makeup. I wonder to what extent this is makeup, since after all, ALL actors on set wear make up. I have a similar skin complexion and if I sunbathe for a week I’ll look like Vasquez too.
If an actor loses weight or works out to be more muscular, that’s commitment to their craft.
If they lay out in the sun, that’s cheating!
[jk]
Im pretty sure thats just a tan, but its interesting that her imdb page says “Jenette Goldstein is a true chameleon”
Brown face? That’s just a tan
The american obsession with melanin levels is insane. Why cant they be normal and be racist to people who live over the next hill, like us enlightened europeans.
That’s offensive. Those over the hill have bushier eyebrows. They are totally different and meant to be hated.
Brown nose? That’s just business.
I wrote an article about how Jim Carrey used greenface (very offensively too) during the filming of “The Mask”, but hardly anyone cared.
He’s not even an amphibian!
Was it makeup? Lighting can do a lot too…
It was, even though apparently one of her parents is of Brazilian and Moroccan descent.
This is mildly racist in two different directions. There was clearly an assumption of what a “private Vasquez” should look like they were shooting for. She was allegedly cast partially because she was in the right shape for the character already. These days they would have gotten an actor in shape that looked like the ethnic stereotype they had in mind, probably.
Which is still kinda more messed up than just having cast her, kept the character and just not spray tan her. Didn’t even have to change her name. I don’t speak for American latinos, but from where I stand the visual design of the character seems like a much bigger issue than the casting.
A lot of ppl were saying if you need a disabled role, hire a disabled person, if you need this and that hire someone with that exact trait. That’s not the point of acting. The point of a good actor is that they can change for every role.
IMO, it’s all good if their pick isn’t just who ever is the hot item that year, and if the pick actually does a good job.
okay but another point of acting is authentically bringing the experience of the character portrayed so that the audience can empathize with that character, so stuffing someone without that lived experience into the role deceives the audience into thinking that they’re empathizing with people like that character when they’re actually just getting what the actor thinks it’s like instead
You just described acting.
ah, so hiring a white actor to play a Black person in blackface would be okay, then
I mean, Kirk Lazarus was a great character that used blackface in the 2000s… So, I’d say yes, depending on the purpose of the character.
If black people can play a white person, then absolutely. White Chicks, best white face ever. Tropical Thunder, best black face ever. I’ll see my way out.
In both of those examples, the actors played characters of their own race, pretending to be another race as the plot of the respective movies.
It might not seem like it now but Vasquez was a groundbreaking character at the time.
Expand on that
Badass female grunt soldier treated by her fellow soldiers as a soldier first and foremost.
She has the most iconic line from my youth.
Some soldier, saying to Vasquez who’s doing pull-ups: hey Vasquez, you ever been mistaken for a man To which she replies: no, have you?
Also the way
she
dies is bad ass.
I mean next to Ripley, the android and the little girl, she’s the most memorable character in that movie.
Seriously? Spoiler tags?
The movie is just shy of 40 years old. lol
So? Just because it’s old doesn’t mean that everyone has seen it, nor that people don’t deserve to experience the movie the way we did.
Anyone reading a movie trivia thread regarding a 40-yo movie should expect spoilers. C’mon.
Badass strong female character with more depth than what was normally portrayed in Hollywood. Ripley being another.
Ripley and Vasquez are antithetical. Vasquez’s strength comes from enbracing masculinity. She’s in a traditionally male profession, she’s stereotypically, “butch,” (short hair, muscular, etc.), she’s aggressive, and she belittles Ripley with her male peers. The film even calls attention to this early on (“Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?”…“No. Have you?”). Meanwhile, Ripley is similarly a strong woman, but she doesn’t need to reject femininity to show strength. She weeps when she learns that her daughter died and later develops a maternal connection with Newt, but she’s more than capable of picking up a gun and giving orders when needed. She’s also in a traditionally male profession (which she demonstrates when she uses the power loader), but she doesn’t let that define her. She never seeks the approval of the male characters or behaves like them to achieve her goals.
I’ve heard it argued that Vasquez is a sort of queer coded sheild for Ripley, allowing audiences to enjoy Ripley as a strong female character without worrying about her sexuality (“No, Ripley’s not a lesbian; that’s a lesbian.”), but I don’t think that’s fair to either character. Vasquez is a heroic character in her own right, not wanting abandon teammates and ultimately sacrificing herself so that others can escape. But the film is about motherhood, and Vasquez, just like all the other marines, isn’t capable of maternal behavior. I think in the end, Vasquez’s character is meant to demonstrate that Ripley is a bad-ass because of her femininity, not in spite of it.
Putting aside the conversation about sexuality, I think viewing Vasquez as emphasis for Ripley’s femininity downplays the importance they both have. You’re totally right that Ripley shows a strong woman that embraces feminine traits, but there’s a lot to say about a character that breaks gender norms. I think the line you brought up shows that Vasquez doesn’t reject femininity outright, she just chooses to present that differently.
