Aliens

Aliens (1986)

90 corrected entries

(21 votes)

Corrected entry: The marines are not allowed to fire in the reactor (which later explodes from damage caused by the APC with a 30 megaton blast), however it is described as a FUSION reactor. Fusion reactors do not cause nuclear explosions if they overheat. They can't. They just turn off.

Correction: Fusion reactors can be cooled by liquid hydrogen. If the coolant pipes are hit the highly flammable and explosive hydrogen will be released, along with radioactive tritium (no explosive value but contamination). Remember, these things are huge so we are talking about large amounts.

lionhead

Corrected entry: The guns fire 10mm caseless. Each magazine holds 95 rounds (according to the poorly placed counter). A springloaded magazine can only push bullets in one direction, so at most you can have two rounds alternated vertically in a compressed zig-zag pattern. You can't have five rounds side by side in a magazine, as there would be no way of moving them horizontally into the chamber as well as vertically through the length of the magazine. This means that a 100 round magazine would either have to be a drum or cylinder shape like that on a Thompson submachinengun or it would be at least sixty centimetres long.

Correction: Nowhere in the movie it is established springloaded magazines are used, and as it takes place in the future, who knows what they came up with.

Corrected entry: The crew finds half a dozen face huggers in the med lab, and two of them are still alive. One tries to attach to Burke when he gets too close to the glass case. If a face hugger was able to break the much tougher glass of Kane's space suit's helmet in the first film and attach to him, why wouldn't it be able to break through this less durable glass in this film to get on Burke?

Correction: The creature doesn't break the glass to Kane's helmet, it melts its way in with acid. Presumably the liquid in the container neutralizes the acid somehow. Also, we have no idea what either the helmet glass or the container are actually made of. The container is made of a material strong enough to withstand the strength of the facehugger.

BaconIsMyBFF

A laboratory jar that is made of material stronger than that of the faceplate of a space helmet that is designed to withstand a pressure differential like that between atmospheric pressure and a vacuum. Yes, that's going to happen.

This is both a futuristic movie and there is a 57 year gap between movies. And it isn't a "laboratory jar", it's some sort of made up stasis device. It is completely plausible that a stasis device would be more durable than a helmet made nearly 60 years prior. But the point is moot because the alien in the first film never breaks the helmet, it melts it.

BaconIsMyBFF

Even the strongest acid cannot corrode a glass beaker, but it could easily corrode other transparent materials. It isn't a matter of how "strong" it is, it's a matter of chemistry. We don't know what the faceplates of the space suits are made of, but current day ones are made of polycarbonate plastics.

Correction: Probably because the facehugger doesn't have anything to hold on to and break the glass.

lionhead

Corrected entry: In the part of the film where Ripley and Gorman are inside the APC, and Ripley is trying to get the marines to get out of the bowls of the atmosphere processor before anymore get killed, she has the headset on, then in the next shot of her she doesn't, then she does, and then it gets ripped off by Gorman.

Correction: She never actually has the headset 'on' per se. She holds the ear pieces up to her one ear and speaks into the microphone. When Gorman appears to rip it off, you can see that it comes out of her one hand that she was holding it in.

There is a very clear moment where Ripley has the earpiece completely on her head. This mistake is correct; it is indeed a continuity error.

BaconIsMyBFF

Corrected entry: Whilst the phrase 'Fire in the hole' may have changed in the future, it is unlikely it would have two separate meanings. For example, the first is when the APC catches fire, (as in fire in the APC) and the second is when Vasquez throws the cannister in front of the sentry guns (the more traditional meaning-i.e. throwing a grenade). Both these phrases have nothing to do with each other, but are still used in exactly the same way.

Correction: The simple act of shouting "FIRE" will get people's attention, while the knowledge of fire is one of danger. Adding the phrase "IN THE HOLE" is a message that immediately tells our brain "A place is involved". Thus "Fire in the hole" is a easy verbal short hand for "There is a dangerous situation that you need to be away so look at the direction I am pointing in, running from or looking at" which would be a bit difficult to should out quickly.

Correction: Hudson didn't say 'Fire in the hole' he said 'Fire in the hull' as in the hull of the APC.

Sam Montgomery

Corrected entry: When the crew are in the drop ship going down to the planet, Hicks is asleep in one shot, but when Hudson is ranting at Ripley about the weapons that are available, Hicks can be seen behind him, wide awake. Hicks is then both awake and asleep in the following shots, and Apone even tells someone to wake Hicks up, when we can see he is already awake and laughing with the others.

Zoe666

Correction: This is all meant to demonstrate how seasoned a soldier Hicks is that he can "sleep" through the drop. At no point is he ever actually asleep, he's just very relaxed. He opens and closes his eyes as the conversation interests or disinterests him. Apone is making a joke about this.

Phixius

Corrected entry: During the inquest of what happened to the Nostromo and its crew, Van Leuwen refers to Ripley's company ID number as NOC14472 while the data screen in the background displays NOC14672.

Correction: Either the display or Van Leuwen are wrong, but either way, the error is possible within the context of the film, with him being a human and the display being created by information supplied by then entered by a human. Not really an 'error'.

johnrosa

Corrected entry: This isn't a mistake, but a funny little thing: When you look closely to Drake's an Vasquez' Auto-cannons, you can clearly see, that these are modified German machine guns, produced by Heckler & Koch. In some shots, when firing, you can also see the ammo-belts hanging out of the guns (e.g. when Drake is firing his last rounds, just before he drops the gun). These machineguns are also carried by some Stormtroopers in "Star Wars" - almost unmodified.

Correction: The auto-cannons are actually German World War II era MG-42s, according to the special edition DVD.

Correction: The Stormtrooper E-11 Blaster was in reality the Sterling smg, manufactured in the UK.

The original poster was referring to the Star Wars rifle "DLT-19", which is in reality the older brother of the MG-42, an MG-34. Other blaster rifles in the films are based on the MG-42 as well (Dengar's, for example).

kayelbe

Corrected entry: In the scene where Ripley drives the APC into the hive to save the marines a flamethrower accidentally ignites the APC. When this happens Hudson yells "Fire in the hole" to tell everyone that the vehicle is on fire. Any marine would know that this phrase means that an explosive charge has been placed by the speaker and has nothing to do with anything being on fire.

Correction: In 200-300 years this phrase could have changed. Also he may actually be saying "fire in the hull", as in the hull of the APC, not necessarily "fire in the hole".

Corrected entry: When Ripley goes to rescue Newt, she only uses the tracker bracelet to try and find her. Why didn't she also take along a motion sensor? It could have not only helped her find Newt quicker, but would have given her warning if there were any aliens closing in.

Correction: They only had two motion sensors on the planet. At the beginning of the final battle, Hudson has one, which was presumably lost with him, and Ripley has the other. She carries this for some time, but seems to drop it in the lift (she has it when they enter, she's lost it by the time they leave) either to help the injured Hicks, or possibly it's been damaged by acid from the alien who attacked them there. If there were no spares on the second dropship, and there's no indication that there were, then she simply doesn't have a motion sensor available to take with her.

Tailkinker

Corrected entry: Near the start, Burke gives his phone card to Ripley in her cabin, and his name is spelled "Bourke." But in the credits, his name is spelled "Burke."

Correction: On the card, it reads "Carter J. Burke." It's a bit hard to read because of the design of the card, but it does say Burke.

Corrected entry: When Michael Biehn's character reaches for Newt for the first time while she's cowering in the recess of the hallway, he cries out just before she bites him. (00:45:55)

Correction: We see Newt bite Hicks and it's not until the camera changes from Newt to Hicks do we hear him cry out. But by then, he's already bitten.

Bishop73

Corrected entry: When the marines are in the dropship and ready to go to the planet below, the couplers release and the ship literally drops from the Sulaco which is in a gentle orbit. The dropship should have continued to move with the Sulaco in orbit.

Correction: Assuming that the planet has the same gravity pull as our Earth, all that would be required for the dropship to appear to "drop down" would be for the Sulaco to give the it "a push" and/or the dropship to push back.

XIII

I think it's the dropship's own propulsion system which sends it plummeting at high speed towards the planet.

Corrected entry: Bishop's programming about "he is not allowed to harm, or by omission of action allowed to harm, a human being (paraphrased) is the same prime directive of the androids in Isaac Asimov's "Robot's of Dawn" series.

Correction: The rule is invented by Asimov, however it is a widely used rule by other writers/ filmmakers for robots in general, not for androids specific.

Correction: Incorrect. When the crew for Batman went to Acton Power Station (closed down and used for filming), they found part of the old set from Aliens. They didn't actually use any part of that set, they simply found it.

GalahadFairlight

Corrected entry: When Vasquez goes to weld the piece of pipe back in place part of it has already been welded. Look at the right of the screen. The piece has already been tack welded before she fires up the torch. (01:41:05)

luchador

Correction: It's not tack welding seen at the right, it's slag from the torch cutting.

Corrected entry: In the scene where Bishop "does the thing with the knife," it appears Ripley is sitting at the end of the table with the rest of the marines. She is watching the events with Bishop and Hudson. However when Bishop sits next to Ripley, she's at a different table and her back is to the other marines. Did I see this right?

Correction: Almost. Ripley has spun round 90 degrees to watch what is happening at the other end. Because the camera is low down it looks as if Ripley is at the same table. In some shots you can see her legs however, indicating she has just swivelled round on her stool.

SoylentPurple

Corrected entry: In the final rescue of Newt, Ripley wisely uses flamethrower bursts to make sure the small hallways are clear of aliens. However in all other scenes involving the Incinerators they leave a flaming wash behind that continues to burn for a while (ex. the APC rescue). Obviously the director couldn't have Ripley wait around for the wash to die down so the bursts burn clean.

Correction: Flamethrowers use a pressurized liquid that sprays out and ignites. In every other scene, the flamer was sprayed directly ON something (like Frost or the APC). Ripley fires it straight down the tunnel to flush out any hiding aliens, so it has nothing to cling to.

Grumpy Scot

Corrected entry: When Spunkmeyer is loading a weapon into the ship he lifts it up to the ship with the walking forklift. As it is pulled into the ship we see strings holding up the back end of the weapon to keep it level. These strings were not there as he carried the weapon. (00:36:30)

luchador

Correction: Not so. The cables are being used by the guys in the background that are guiding a large, black object that is suspended from heavy cables, going from left to right in the distance.

johnrosa

Corrected entry: When Vasquez cuts a hole in the pipe for Bishop to up link with the mother ship to get the other landing plane, the plate from the pipe falls in to the hole. When Bishop is in the pipe, Vasquez and Ripley place the cut out piece back on the hole to weld it in place. The cut out piece is smaller than the hole. It was cut out from the pipe and should not fit over the hole without falling through. (01:40:20)

luchador

Correction: They probably just did the very common thing of turning the plate around so the left side was welded to the right side of the hole etc. It wouldn't fall through that way as Vazquez obvioulsy didn't cut a perfectly shaped piece of metal.

Revealing mistake: When Ripley first burns the egg plants inside the nest, the Queen screams and moves her head. The steel rod used to hold the Queen's head to the rest of her body is easily visible.

Jack Vaughan

More mistakes in Aliens

Hudson: Game over man... Game over!

More quotes from Aliens

Trivia: Paul Reiser's character Carter Burke was so immediately hated that during the movie's premiere his sister hit him, and when Burke's death occurred, his mom's response was simply "good."

More trivia for Aliens

Question: I know that the studio chose James Cameron to direct due to the strength of his script, but why wasn't Ridley Scott offered the chance to direct? And was the studio considering a sequel before Cameron joined?

Dra9onBorn117

Answer: It really was all down to James Cameron having already written the script and proving himself capable of directing with 'The Terminator.' It was just a quicker, easier, and almost certainly cheaper decision to let him direct his own script rather than get someone else, even Ridley Scott. While the producers had wanted to make an 'Alien' sequel almost immediately, at the time the head of 20th Century Fox didn't want to pursue it fearing it would be seen as an obvious cash-in and flop. When a new executive at the studio came in a couple years later, the project was put back on track, and I believe Cameron was the first to be approached to write the script.

TonyPH

Chosen answer: The studio was considering a sequel before Cameron was involved, but regarding directing it, Ridley Scott told "The Hollywood" in a 2008 interview, "They didn't ask me! To this day I have no idea why. It hurt my feelings, really, because I thought we did quite a good job on the first one." The studio liked Cameron's script and at that time he had enough clout to be able to insist on directing it.

raywest

More questions & answers from Aliens

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.