>Example: the Alien films. In the first (and, IMHO, best) film, the
>caustic alien blood burns through three or four decks worth of
>floor/ceiling. In the fourth film, it burns a guy's face. Somewhat.
>It's a minor nit, but it's something that shows how horribly those
>rules are applied, and often thrown out the window.

A nit for a nit: The aliens in the fourth film were not 'purebred' but gengineered from a genetic sample of a queen-impregnated Ripley. Just as Ripley was a mix of the genetics, so, in theory, would the newly created aliens be as well. They showed her blood was mildly acidic, and inversely the high acidity of the original alien blood might be diluted by mixing with human genes.

Is this explained explicitly in the film? No, so on the surface it's still a valid point, but the concept I just put up could very well be in someone's backstory that was working on the script.

Personally I like the concepts and style they put forth in the fourth film, but there was too much style and not enough substance which made much less than it could have been. I wish they'd just give up and finally do an Earth War-esque movie...

------------------------
"We are totally fluxed."
------------------------
Chad Collier
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company