|
|
Post by StarFuryG7 on Apr 2, 2013 15:16:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Apr 3, 2013 0:38:54 GMT -5
From the article: ... the part of Ripley came down to Sigourney Weaver, a little-known Broadway actress, and Meryl Streep, who was about to become one of Hollywood’s most sought-after actresses ...
OMFG - I cannot stand Meryl Streep. I cannot imagine her as my beloved Ripley. If she had played Ripley, I would have rooted for the Alien!
From the article: After shooting the better part of the film, Ridley Scott asked Fox for a bit more money to shoot what he called "a new fourth act" to end his movie with. Multiple finales (including killing Ripley) were conceived between scriptwriting, storyboarding and actually filming ...
I adore Alien. I love it's sequel, Aliens, even more. Almost three decades later, it's still my favorite movie of all time, of any genre.
But I do so admire a director like Clint Eastwood who envisions the entire movie, from start to finish, edits it, and completes it, long before filming begins. Eastwood brings his movies in under budget and under deadline. IMO, *that* is what director should do.
Writing multiple scenes and filming them multiple ways, and extending the filming dates for months, and even years, like Kubrick for instance, is, IMO, an utter waste. IMO, is shows a *lack* of direction, and IMO, that lack takes away from the sizable brilliance that such directors are credited with, again, like Kubrick.
How do the rest of you feel about such waste?
|
|
