Latest News

Katherine Waterston Channels Her Inner Ripley in New Alien: Covenant Still

A brand new Alien: Covenant still shows an armed Daniels. Entertainment Weekly has just posted a new still of Katherine Waterston as Daniels! The new still shows an armed Waterston channeling her inner Ripley in this Aliens looking costume. Alongside the brand new image are several comments by Waterston and Ridley Scott:

“If 2012’s kinda-sorta Alien prequel Prometheus was confusing, Scott says this film will provide some answers. ­“Covenant is really going to show you who did it and why.”

 Katherine Waterston Channels Her Inner Ripley in New Alien: Covenant Still

New Alien: Covenant still shows an armed Daniels

There’s nothing new really said in the other comments but you can check out the full article for the additional comments.

Waterson recently spoke about similarities between Daniels and Ripley, saying that: ““We [Ridley Scott] never really talked about it,” Waterston replied. “I mean, I — obviously I love her, and I love what she did,” Waterson explained, adding that there were “obvious parallels” to be found between the two characters. Waterston made sure to add, “But we never — we never talked about that.”

Keep a close eye on Alien vs. Predator Galaxy for the latest on Alien: Covenant! You can follow us on FacebookTwitter and Instagram to get the latest on your social media walls. You can also join in with fellow Alien fans on our forums!



Post Comment
Comments: 104
« Newer Comments 123 Older Comments »
  1. Molecules
    All things being equal, Waterston could really shine in this. She's proven her range (see recent psychodrama Queen of Earth) and is undoubtedly beautiful, but has a kind of dorky charm that I'm really hoping gets utilised in her character's arc to differentiate her from Ripley as far as possible.
    Perhaps Daniels isn't a natural leader or fighter, but through the story manages to mine reserves she didn't know she had.
    Of course you're always gonna have the Ripley archetype that is an inevitable part of the franchise's box-ticking, but I thought they succeeded with Shaw in the last film (despite some abysmal dialogue) in carving out a new niche.
    And if Daniels is paired with Danny McBride as some kind of beta male who has to rise to the occasion (I'm basing this on his affable schlubbiness and overcompensating with that Stetson hat), you could really end up rooting for them... That's assuming they don't get drowned out by an oversized cast and an overextended script...
  2. Astronoë
    http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/elevator.jpg

    I'm sorry guys but the moment I saw that image I thought it was that one dude from Deep Rising, the dude in the middle with the gun... just to be super obvious.

    Holy shit, that's one of my favourite movies ever and no one else has ever heard of it!
    Tons of other people have heard of it, there was like a thread not too long ago where we all agreed it was an awesome movie. :P

    Those guns were insane...

    Loved that movie! :) and that island at the end was like skull island n the water around an extension of that...shame they didn't do a follow-up..
  3. NickisSmart
    No, though that's not why I mentioned it. The point of that film is the contrast between the human guns and the alien guns, and the radically-advanced nature of the alien tech revealed through its juxtaposition with our modern weaponry. In Covenant, however, I expect the alien weaponry to be the xenos, themselves.
  4. NickisSmart
    Your point? Plenty of "modern" weapons have been in use for 50+60 years. What do you want? Ray guns?

    Furthermore, notice the weapons by the rebels being AK-47s and the like. AKs were first mass-produced in 1948. That gun is nearly seven years old.

    The Steyr was produced in 1978, give or take. So in 70 years past that date, it'd still be in use in 2048.

    In 2103, Covenant begins. That's another 53 years. I'd bet money people like the rebels in District 9 will still be using AKs in another 53 years, from now. It doesn't seem far-fetched for me to see the Steyr being used for another 53, past the initial 70 years, provided it is modified. Hell, if you think about it, the pulse rifle is essentially a modified WW2 Thompson sub-machine gun.

    In other words, people are complaining about superficial details. I can't imagine firearms changing radically in the next 87 years, short of ray guns or something equally hyperbolic.
  5. NickisSmart
    Well, furthermore, those weapons were totally useless against the alien, itself. Yes, they're guns, but all they really give you is a false sense of security. I suspect in Covenant, it will be more akin to Aliens, with the guns being potentially able to at least wound the beasts; but being in outer space, the last thing you'd want to do on board a space ship is start a firefight. Doesn't, at one point
    Spoiler (click to show/hide)
    It makes me thing they'll be using the guns more on the surface of the planet, or as a last, desperate defense.

    On the planet, I think the beasts will be different than the xenos of the past that we've seen, so I'm not sure how effective the weapons will be. Obviously they can't be very effective or there'd be no threat--unless Ridley pulls an Aliens:

    In Aliens, Cameron's approach was to make the guns lethal to the aliens, but even then, they were ineffective against the hive, as a whole (ergo, Ripley's suggestion to take off and nuke the site from orbit); furthermore, Cameron even made the weapons' leathality a disadvantage to the marines, with the potential damaging of the cooling system of the atmospheric processor potentially resulting in a thermonuclear explosion. Adios, muchachos. He essentially said, in an old interview, that Zulu Dawn can be just as exciting as a slasher film with one guy running around the house, chasing someone with a knife. For all intents and purposes, his approach worked. Yes, those guns were effective against the aliens, individually, but even then, it wasn't safe to kill them--just ask Drake or Hicks. The weapons, even with their lethal effectiveness, still reaffirmed Parker's statement in Alien: "It's got a wonderful defense mechanism; you don't dare kill it." On top of that, in Aliens, even if you did kill a few of the beasts (or even most of them) the surviving members of the hive would do you in, assuming you didn't die from injuries sustained in the battle (acid, or, in Frost's case,  friendly fire--pun intended).



  6. Necronomicon II
    More grounded, stock weapons on a Colony ship is the right decision logically, and it follows from the more tactile, grounded instruments that will feature in the ship as well (granted, there is a compromise between the design in Prometheus and the grungy, utilitarian design seen on the Nostromo), this is not a "state of the badass art" military ship. As Nick said, the weapons in Isolation were not stylised in any way; the weapons being understated makes the fear and vulnerability more palpable.
  7. NickisSmart

    I never said it was going to be a bad movie because of this, I never said I hate the movie because of this. I said it seems lazy and it makes me worry other aspects of production are being treated the same way.


    Why? Maybe they simply aren't interested in reinventing the wheel for the guns. Furthermore, you say "the behind the scenes stills we've seen of creatures look great, that kind of care should be put into every part of the film." So clearly you have nothing to worry about as far as the creatures go (or the sets, for that matter, which all look fine, as we've been shown thus far: ). In fact, based on what we've seen thus far, the guns seem to be the only thing to gripe about, if being lackluster in the sense that they aren't disguised as "futuristic" guns is something to lament.

    However, I will say District 9 was a lot of fun with the alien weaponry and so on, but there were plenty of normal, conventional, modern, human firearms, too, in that film. So, just because you see one Steyr in a production pic doesn't for a second mean that's all we're going to get. Also, the production stills for movies, including Alien, show actors holding props that they don't actually use in the film, so perhaps we'll see something else in the arms of our new heroine?

    Also, the comment of the pulse rifles in Alien 3 doesn't compute, for me. Covenant predates Aliens; how do you know when those weapons came into service? Scott isn't obligated to put them into the film (though I'd be perfectly happy if he did). There can be plenty of explanations for the visual differences in the different films (such as the sleek, futuristic look of the Prometheus versus the Nostromo, despite the latter existing after the Prometheus). For me, it'd seem strange if every person with a gun used all the same kind of gun. That's not how it works, on Earth, now, even. Cohesiveness or lack thereof doesn't necessarily translate to laziness if that lack can be explained.

    Furthermore, this is Ridley Scott. Are you really worried about his visual style being lazy? If anything, the script or story is to be worried about, but how would you get that from them using a Steyr in a production still?
  8. HuDaFuK
    This was even floating around when Prometheus was the big Aliens topic, so at some point in Ridley's prequels we were supposed to see predecessors to the pulse rifle.
    http://i345.photobucket.com/albums/p390/Akuze-Casualty/494b6ad1-392e-4c17-bf0b-680e6a5be77d_zpsrfskfgcc.png

    That thing was just a stupid kitbash knocked up for the marketing. It looks crap and its supposed functionality is ridiculously far-fetched.

    It much rather see something more grounded, especially as this isn't a military ship.
  9. JokersWarPig

    It's not that I'm hard to please, it's that it comes off as lazy and I'm afraid that means the whole production will seem "lazy" when I finally do see it.


    I don't think it "means" much of anything at this point, except that you might be jumping the gun, so to speak. So if you think the guns are "lazy" then everything will be? That's like saying that you don't like Aragorn's sword, ergo you think every other production aspect of LOTR will be just as "bad." That's a tad extreme, especially since guns might not be the focus of the film, even if some people want them to be.

    Have you seen any of the other stills thus far? They don't exactly scream lazy to me, even if what's-her-face looks like Ripley and is holding a modified Steyr. I'm not willing to discount everything good that I've seen thus far on account that the firearm isn't decorated enough. To be honest, I'd rather have it look like a real gun than a silly toy. It looks like a gun that shoots bullets. Beats whatever the hell guns they had in Alien: Resurrection. Hell, just play Alien: Isolation. The shotgun in that game is based off a real gun. God forbid. Does that make the production "lazy" as a whole? Of course not.

    It's not an extreme view at all. The behind the scenes stills we've seen of creatures look great, that kind of care should be put into every part of the film. This still and the security force still show us that the same amount of attention to detail isn't being put into everything, other wise we'd see these weapons dressed up.


    Hell, in Alien 3 Fincher repainted the Pulse Rifles in order to keep things cohesive (and that production wasn't the best to begin with).
    This was even floating around when Prometheus was the big Aliens topic, so at some point in Ridley's prequels we were supposed to see predecessors to the pulse rifle.
    http://i345.photobucket.com/albums/p390/Akuze-Casualty/494b6ad1-392e-4c17-bf0b-680e6a5be77d_zpsrfskfgcc.png

    I never said it was going to be a bad movie because of this, I never said I hate the movie because of this. I said it seems lazy and it makes me worry other aspects of production are being treated the same way.

  10. whiterabbit
    http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/elevator.jpg

    I'm sorry guys but the moment I saw that image I thought it was that one dude from Deep Rising, the dude in the middle with the gun... just to be super obvious.

    Holy shit, that's one of my favourite movies ever and no one else has ever heard of it!
    Tons of other people have heard of it, there was like a thread not too long ago where we all agreed it was an awesome movie. :P
  11. Scorpio
    Quote
    Actually the only real Ripley clones are in Alien Resurrection.

     ;D

    Woman with a gun is hardly a 'Ripley clone' anyway, just 'cos the actual Ripley used one for 20 minutes in one film.  She didn't strut around the place posing with guns in the films - she used them when necessary.  Even in Resurrection, she hands over her gun to Hillard, then throws the flamethrower away after torching the failed clones.

    That's true, outside of Aliens, she only fires one shot in Alien Resurrection.  Classic Ripley uses a flamethrower and is dressed in jumpsuit (with cat, not little girl).  Aliens Ripley takes more after Rambo.
  12. SM
    Quote
    Actually the only real Ripley clones are in Alien Resurrection.

     ;D

    Woman with a gun is hardly a 'Ripley clone' anyway, just 'cos the actual Ripley used one for 20 minutes in one film.  She didn't strut around the place posing with guns in the films - she used them when necessary.  Even in Resurrection, she hands over her gun to Hillard, then throws the flamethrower away after torching the failed clones.
  13. Scorpio
    The closest to a Ripley clone was in AVPR.  Driving an APC and with a little girl, yes, but other than that she was quite different. 

    Shaw and Lex weren't Ripley clones at all.

    Actually the only real Ripley clones are in Alien Resurrection.  :P

    I don't see 'Ripley clone' here except girl with a gun.  Ripley didn't even have short hair in Aliens and she wasn't wearing a tank top.  If she yells "Get away from her you bitch!" though I'm walking out of the theatre.  :P
  14. DorkiDori
    AvP:R was an epic merc fest! I had such a blast watching that film (Im being serious)... Literally every 2 minutes someone dies in a rather horrible way or another!

    Outside of the merc fest... it was shit lol But at least it was FUN shit ;)

    But I REALLY doubt A:C is going to be a turd. For the most part these days, people are TOO harsh on films and expect WAY too much from them anymore. Instead of viewing them as a form of entertainment created by HUMAN BEINGS (to err is human) that is there for the sole purpose of viewing for 2-3 hours worth of enjoyment, weve all gotten to the point of such high expectations of EVERY piece of cinema we go see (at least it seems like it).

    Oh sweet raptor Jesus, Katherine Waterson may resemble Ripley in being the heroine of the film (much like Shaw was in Prometheus)... BIG DEAL. She may have to put on her big girl pants and suck up the sense of fear to save her own butt (and possibly others) and look out, she might be toting around a machine gun and shotgun to shoot Aliens with... Make her an Ellen Ripley clone this does not. It just shows a female being bad ass and owning her shit!

    I guess Im just super happy we finally get answers to the first film. We get to see characters we care about further evolve... and we get to see a creature weve all loved for the past (almost) 40 years get some kind of explanation as to what it might actually be. I choose to go into this film ignoring little details everyone here is nit picking and arguing about. Why not lose yourself in what the movie might be instead of your preconceived notions about whats wrong with it based on silly little details. Ridley Scott is finally giving us, what looks like, and amazing film that is the first of 3 before we go straight back into Alien again.

    But then again... I tend to look at life in a little more positive way than most for the things I love and take interest in (never mind I write loud, evil and angry industrial music lol)
  15. NickisSmart

    It's not that I'm hard to please, it's that it comes off as lazy and I'm afraid that means the whole production will seem "lazy" when I finally do see it.


    I don't think it "means" much of anything at this point, except that you might be jumping the gun, so to speak. So if you think the guns are "lazy" then everything will be? That's like saying that you don't like Aragorn's sword, ergo you think every other production aspect of LOTR will be just as "bad." That's a tad extreme, especially since guns might not be the focus of the film, even if some people want them to be.

    Have you seen any of the other stills thus far? They don't exactly scream lazy to me, even if what's-her-face looks like Ripley and is holding a modified Steyr. I'm not willing to discount everything good that I've seen thus far on account that the firearm isn't decorated enough. To be honest, I'd rather have it look like a real gun than a silly toy. It looks like a gun that shoots bullets. Beats whatever the hell guns they had in Alien: Resurrection. Hell, just play Alien: Isolation. The shotgun in that game is based off a real gun. God forbid. Does that make the production "lazy" as a whole? Of course not.
  16. JokersWarPig
    Because Ridley's failed me once before and now he's already failing me again  ::)

    You seem hard to please.

    It's not that I'm hard to please, it's that it comes off as lazy and I'm afraid that means the whole production will seem "lazy" when I finally do see it.

    Aliens gave us iconic and original weaponry. To want more originality isn't an issue. I'm a little disappointed myself that we're not even seeing any attempt at redressing these guns to look different.


    Quote
    Yeah, it's a little disappointing for those interested in the hardware but it's not going to kill the film.

    What Hick's said here sums up how I feel.



  17. NickisSmart
    Why is that an issue? The Magnificent Seven was practically a note-for-note rehash of Seven Samurai, but it didn't stop it from being a good film, in it's own right. The Bear by William Faulkner was a "white indian" adventure story (at least concerning its aesthetics) but that didn't stop it from being a famous, complex piece of literature.

    AvP2 didn't suck because it had a Ripley clone in it, anymore than the second movie did for borrowing very generously from the first film in terms of tropes, texture and plot. AvP2 sucked because it was a bad film, period. Covenant could have a "Ripley clone" in it, or, you could look at it like "the strongest most resilient character surviving." To me, this just makes sense, and the gender and look is purely cosmetic. To fret about those matters is to fret about window dressing. What matters is the craft of the filmmakers.
  18. Infected
    Ever heard of an M1911? And how long that is in service? And how reliable it is.
    What if the Covenant took off at around 2050 thats like 30 years from now,
    you dont think if a spaceship took off from 2050 would have our modern guns?
    Although it would be cool to see some modified guns like what they did with the pulse rifle,

    Even if it is 2050, they should update guns and optics at least a bit. Cryo tubes, spaceships + modern not-futuristic weaponry looks dump.
    But movie probably take place after Prometheus, somewhere around 2100, so AUG is bullshit.

    Hope it will be adequate explanation for AUG and ACOG, but I suspect Ridley just doesn't give a shit.
    The m16 is from 1960 thats 56 years ago, still to this day it hasnt change much has it?
    So if the Covenant left at 2050, it would have taken guns but no gun factory nor would it take a development team that would create guns while they are traveling through space.
    ah whatever just deal with it. :)
  19. Corporal Hicks
    It's not an unreasonable complaint to have. Aliens gave us iconic and original weaponry. To want more originality isn't an issue. I'm a little disappointed myself that we're not even seeing any attempt at redressing these guns to look different.

    That said, it's not going to kill the film. This isn't Aliens. We're not going to have a focus on the hardware and how impressive it is. There's going to be no "I'd like to introduce you to a personal friend of mine" kind of thing. That's just not what this film is going to entail.

    Yeah, it's a little disappointing for those interested in the hardware but it's not going to kill the film.
  20. BonesawT101
    This thread is getting out of hand. You guys have no problem suspending disbelief when it comes to outer space colonists travelling much farther into the cosmos than we have done or will do in the next 200 years, to colonize a planet that appears to have been at some point the home of God-like humanoid creatures who may have had a hand in terraforming earth among other planets, seeding them with life and contributing to human evolution, AND on top of that, there are foreign alien entities unlike anything ever recorded- but yet you can't fathom guns that already exist and work in real life, being used by these fictional characters?? ???
  21. JokersWarPig
    Well the VP70 isn't a pistol that's widely recognized, I'd imagine that's one reason he chose it. It looked (for the time) different enough to be a futuristic service pistol. I'm assuming it's USCM issued since Goreman is the only person we see with one.

    Hick's shotgun was a personal weapon, that's something (based on dialogue) we can figure was personally owned by him. It wasn't a USCM issued weapon. I'd imagine the USCM issued shotgun would look more in line with the pulse rifle.
    Vaz's pistol you can argue is also a personally owned weapon given the fact it's different from Goremans and can be easily identified.
    Since these weapons are their personally owned weapons that means they were purchased via civilian means.

    In keeping with the Vietnam logic though, it wasn't uncommon for soldiers to get weapons through unofficial channels or by family members sending them through the mail. I've read this was most often knives and smaller things, but in rare instances I've read WW2 weaponry could be acquired. Large weapons being sent to troops though was a common among snipers more so since the US Military didn't have an official sniper rifle during the beginning of the war. Personally owned or purchased hunting rifles were very common in the beginning of the war.

    I know it's Ridley's movie, and I know he doesn't really have to follow anything after Alien, but keeping things a little bit in what was already established would be nice, or at least disguising the weapons a bit so they don't look like something you'd see a US or Australian military member with. It comes off as lazy to me.
  22. FUBAR1945
    I was skeptical when i saw the soldier dudes with M4, but now....... AUG + ACOG? really?

    So we can have super high tech crytubes but can't have the Pulse Rifle or anything else more futuristic?
    And it seens like someone forgot about the Storm Rifle at Weyland Security time-line.

    Ridley is getting nuts on Alien universe since Prometheus, now its for sure. Someone retire this guy.

  23. 426Buddy
    Why does it need an "adequate explanation"? They dressed up something they could get there hands on. I don't see what the big deal is.

    Cameron gave the Marines in Aliens VP70s, a gun that's been out of production for 27 years already, without bothering to even put any dressing on it. Likewise Hicks had an ancient (by the time) pump-action and Vasquez had a Smith & Wesson that was over 200 years old.

    Suspend disbelief for a minute.

    You're making too much sense here lol
  24. HuDaFuK
    Why does it need an "adequate explanation"? They dressed up something they could get there hands on. I don't see what the big deal is.

    Cameron gave the Marines in Aliens VP70s, a gun that's been out of production for 27 years already, without bothering to even put any dressing on it. Likewise Hicks had an ancient (by the time) pump-action and Vasquez had a Smith & Wesson that was over 200 years old.

    Suspend disbelief for a minute.
« Newer Comments 123 Older Comments »
Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed