Latest News

Alien Covenant Officially Released in UK!

After years of waiting and following its production closely right from Prometheus 2 to Alien: Paradise Lost, Alien Covenant is finally upon us! Ridley Scott’s Alien Covenant is released nationwide today in the UK. Starring Michael Fassbender and Katherine Waterston, the film revolves around the crew of a spaceship called the Covenant landing on an uncharted planet. While there, they meet David, a synthetic android from the Prometheus expedition and soon the crew have to fight for survival from alien life-forms.

The reviews from critics, particularly from the UK press, have been generally quite positive praising the tension, location, cast and visual style and the film is currently sitting on 74% on Rotten Tomatoes which is slightly higher than Prometheus’ 72%.

 Alien Covenant Officially Released in UK!

Will you guys be seeing Alien Covenant tonight? For those that have seen it, feel free to post what you thought below or in the Fan Reviews thread in the forum. Alien Covenant will be released next week in the United States and Canada.



Post Comment
Comments: 1090
« Newer Comments 12345678910111213141516171819202122 Older Comments »
  1. Engineer
    What the hell happened to this place

    Right.... can we all get back on topic now? This is supposed to be a fan review board for covenant, whether good or bad. Not a review of some boy's blog entry about the movie.

    Call's arc is in her changing attitude to Ripley.

    Ash and Bishop- yep, no arc. We learn more about them, but they don't change over the course of the story.
    Never mind! I retract my previous statement!

    SM, Jonesy1974, you are correct. Ash and bishop did not have character arcs. I was not thinking about the term character arc correctly, and I stand corrected now. My bad! :-)

    Hey SM! Quick question... I didn't stick around long enough to watch all the credits for covenant, but I was just thinking about it and got curious... did you have any sort of involvement in this film??

    I did stay for all the credits and didn't see nothing.
    (That's a 'no'.  :) )

    Lol.
    So you actually liked covenant, huh? I'm honestly surprised by that! I thought for sure you'd dislike it! What about the movie did you like?

    One thing I've seen a lot of, which is weird to me, are people saying the hated the film, then after a second viewing they loved it. I sort of did the opposite. I walked out thinking it was good, but not great. In the poll, I was one of the many who rated this film as a 3. But after a few days of thinking about it more and more, I find myself disliking it more and more. If I could re-vote in this poll now I'd give it a 2 or a 1.

    Have you read the novel yet? If so, did you like that more, less or about the same?
  2. SM
    Call's arc is in her changing attitude to Ripley.

    Ash and Bishop- yep, no arc. We learn more about them, but they don't change over the course of the story.
    Never mind! I retract my previous statement!

    SM, Jonesy1974, you are correct. Ash and bishop did not have character arcs. I was not thinking about the term character arc correctly, and I stand corrected now. My bad! :-)

    Hey SM! Quick question... I didn't stick around long enough to watch all the credits for covenant, but I was just thinking about it and got curious... did you have any sort of involvement in this film??

    I did stay for all the credits and didn't see nothing.
    (That's a 'no'.  :) )
  3. Predaker
    Why do we have to cite you like a term paper to 'prove' we read your online blog and disagreed with it? Would you like it in MLA format? Is there a dropbox we can submit our annotated posts to?

    Here we go.  ;D

    Quote
    Point in fact, I ... find myself standing within a curious minority as Covenant is encircled and set upon by just about everyone. This includes so-called fans of the series, who should know better but clearly don't. According to them, it's neither scary nor original enough to merit any sort of praise.
    Quote
    Permit me the opportunity to say ... Let me be clear:
    Quote
    the comparison between it and Alien ... pointless.
    Quote
    In regards to that so-called “same universe,” critics of Alien: Covenant need to realize
    Quote
    I sense purists presume
    Quote
    Prometheus ... superior ... As if.
    Quote
    I am confident that people will come to realize
    Quote
    One needs only to watch ... any slasher film ... All the more ironic it sounds, as well, when fans ... clamor for more of the same, as purists who insist
    Quote
    I, for one, can celebrate the classic monsters
    Quote
    When fans attack
    Quote
    How perplexing this is to me
    Quote
    So people fussing about David being the so-called “father of the xenomorph” can chill out.
    Quote
    Before people laps into apoplectic fits, maybe they should realize
    Quote
    Purists cry foul
    Quote
    Furthermore, it's not about
    Quote
    With Covenant, I've noticed its detractors declaring
    Quote
    these people ... fussing
    Quote
    They actually want it to be hidden, or mysterious
    Quote
    But people need to remember
    Quote
    This is because Covenant is ... not a horror film.
    Quote
    It is not that kind of film
    Quote
    if only people ... could change ... they might see it for what it is, rather than condemn it
    Quote
    In regards to Covenant and the misplaced ire being directed at it from all sides, I feel as though it is being delivered by critics who have “closed [themselves] up.”
    Quote
    bonding with certain human characters ... is simply not the point ... why penalize the film for it?
    Quote
    To hold Covenant accountable for failing to use death to make us care about the human cast would be to miss its true aim
    Quote
    There's much to be gleaned if we let the scales fall from our eyes and stop trying to classify Covenant as a horror film ... and celebrate it for what it actually is.
    Quote
    admit it: how many of you actually knew David was wrong when he quoted Ozymandias and said Byron wrote it? Furthermore, how many of you even knew he was quoting a poem at all? ... for those of you who say these things don't belong in an Alien film, you clearly weren't paying attention when you watched Alien or Aliens.
  4. Engineer
    Call's arc is in her changing attitude to Ripley.

    Ash and Bishop- yep, no arc. We learn more about them, but they don't change over the course of the story.
    Never mind! I retract my previous statement!

    SM, Jonesy1974, you are correct. Ash and bishop did not have character arcs. I was not thinking about the term character arc correctly, and I stand corrected now. My bad! :-)

    Hey SM! Quick question... I didn't stick around long enough to watch all the credits for covenant, but I was just thinking about it and got curious... did you have any sort of involvement in this film??
  5. SpeedyMaxx
    Why do we have to cite you like a term paper to 'prove' we read your online blog and disagreed with it? Would you like it in MLA format? Is there a dropbox we can submit our annotated posts to?
  6. Protozoid
    Quote
    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    I'm curious as to what your definition of 'deep' is. Merely serving up a more complex (convoluted) plot doesn't make something deep. The fact that Alien is a monster movie at it's core hasn't prevented academics from writing hundreds if not thousands of pages of critical, theoretical analysis on the film. I can scarcely think of a movie so straightforward on the surface that is so densely packed with subtext. I highly doubt we'll see as much intellectual engagement with Covenant in 40 years outside of Youtube videos.
    Yes, deep is definitely relative. I meant that Covenant strived for complexity and has a penchant for quoting lofty high art. It's more pretentious, but not necessarily as profound as it wants to be. Besides, by having the characters spoon feed us the ideas and their answers, it gives us less to talk about than Alien, Blade Runner, or Prometheus. O'Bannon called Alien a surrealist mystery. I think Covenant is a surrealist adventure movie with very little mystery left once it ends. At a glance, Alien has less obviousness depth, but for all of its chattiness and references to classical art, Covenant's isn't much deeper than Alien, if at all. Scholars will write about Covenant, too, but I doubt they will reappraise it as a lost masterpiece. At best, it will have a small following like Ridley's Legend and Fincher's Alien3. All of them are pop profound to varying degrees.
  7. SM
    Quote
    And yet, despite not being in a position to judge because you haven't read it, you are judging me all the same.

    No, I judged the part I read and decided I didn't want to read anymore - I'm not judging you personally.

    There's really no need to continually misrepresent what I'm saying.
  8. NickisSmart
    On top of that, I specifically said I'm not in a position to judge because I hadn't read the whole thing.

    And yet, despite not being in a position to judge because you haven't read it, you are judging me all the same. Or is "pretentious condescension" something other than judgement rendered, where you come from? You not having read my piece doesn't wash your hands of being judgmental, it just invalidates anything you say, in regards to my arguments, and ironically makes what you say in and of itself pretentious.

    As for you "not wanting to be treated with pretentious condescension for any longer than [you] have to," the act of judging a book by its cover (or in my case, my article by its introduction) makes for a lazy reader.

    I did, i read the first, like, 10 paragraphs

    Could've fooled me, in that you fail to actually give any examples from the article.

    i am not gonna put the 10 paragraphs here, is pointless

    An example from the paper is not the same thing as the entire paper, itself. The fact that you think otherwise suggests that you don't know how to cite quotes. You don't provide a single example of anything that I actually wrote in my paper, except the title. Why should I think that you actually read what I wrote if you can't actually specify the contents of my writing?

    Maybe rant is not the exact word, english is not my first language

    Maybe not.



    We need to get Nickissmart to interview Ridley
    and shirtless too, like in his 40minute youtube vids.
    and with Goodbye Horses blaring in the background.

    A census-taker once tried to test me...
  9. Jonesy1974
    I've seen many films with amazingly deep, complex characters but Alien and Aliens are definatley not amongst them. Alien is my fave film of all time but it's just a genre flick whose characters can be summed up in a sentence.

    Lambert, Parker, Dallas etc are no less meat for the grinder than Farris or Karine.

    For me, Oram is one of the most complex characters in the entire series. Alien 3 and Covenant are the strongest entries character wise IMO.
  10. D88M
    That kind of dismissiveness is why I didn't venture much further into reading it.

    "I'm too lazy to read." OK, got it.

    I glossed over the first 8, 9 or 10 paragraphs and is more of the same, is more like a rant against the fans that did not liked Covenant than a review

    And you sound like someone who didn't read a single word of what I wrote. "In these paragraphs, he wrote this." Uh, maybe cite some actual quotes from my piece? You're just like SM: "Oh, he takes a stance that I don't agree with. I don't feel like reading it..." The hypocrisy you guys utilize is rather thick. If you can't read the review or use anything from it in a counterargument, you're not actually talking about it.

    I'm not going to just say what makes people happy and slap a random number score onto it; that's what constitutes reviews, nowadays. If you want call what I wrote a rant, that's your prerogative, but I fail to see how what I wrote constitutes anything remotely close to one.

    I did, i read the first, like, 10 paragraphs, maybe is you who didnt read what i wrote lol, i am not gonna put the 10 paragraphs here, is pointless, i got bored of reading it because in the title said "Covenant review" and was more like a rant against people who did liked the movie

    what hipocrisy? what are you even talking about?

    You can say whatever you want bro, i dont care, and i know a lot about not saying something just to make everyone happy, i liked Covenant, is a good movie, but is not great, not by a long shot, though it does have some GREAT moments

    Reviews are about objectively talking about a movie, about its virtues and flaws, and how good or bad is overall

    Maybe rant is not the exact word, english is not my first language so excuse me everybody for any typos, but is just like: This is what i think of the people that dont liked Covenant, for 10 paragraphs at least, and also, it might be just me, but you sound a little agressive and superior in your tone, we can have a civilized debate without accusing anybody of anything about stuff we like or dont like

    Also, lets be honest, Covenant is good with some great moments, no doubt about it, but it could, and it should have been so much better, it lacks connection to Prometheus, the characters but David and Walter are bland and generic, the ending is like a dumbed down, rushed, modern recycled version of the Alien ending, the pacing after the first hour is rushed (it shows that footage is missing), some dialogues are not so good, etcetera, all movies have flaws of course, and except 2001 and Solaris (the Russian version, of course) no movie is perfect, but Covenant is far from being even a great movie
  11. SM
    Call's arc is in her changing attitude to Ripley.

    Ash and Bishop- yep, no arc. We learn more about them, but they don't change over the course of the story.
  12. Jonesy1974
    Evil robot and mad scientist have both been done before in the series.

    Not to mention robots as developed characters along with other characters who also have 'story arcs.'

    Which character are you referring to?
    Probably all of them

    More nonsense then
    Really? How so? Ash, Bishop and Call had 'story arcs'

    I would hardy call them story arcs. These are far from complex characters. Call probably has the most I guess but it's an incredibly contrived one, in a film I can barely bring myself to watch.

    David is the only android so far to have a story arc because he's the centre of the story. Ash and bishop are peripheral and serve Ripleys story arc.
  13. Engineer
    Evil robot and mad scientist have both been done before in the series.

    Not to mention robots as developed characters along with other characters who also have 'story arcs.'

    Which character are you referring to?
    Probably all of them

    More nonsense then
    Really? How so? Ash, Bishop and Call had 'story arcs'
  14. SM
    That kind of dismissiveness is why I didn't venture much further into reading it.

    "I'm too lazy to read." OK, got it.

    I glossed over the first 8, 9 or 10 paragraphs and is more of the same, is more like a rant against the fans that did not liked Covenant than a review

    And you sound like someone who didn't read a single word of what I wrote. "In these paragraphs, he wrote this." Uh, maybe cite some actual quotes from my piece? You're just like SM: "Oh, he takes a stance that I don't agree with. I don't feel like reading it..." The hypocrisy you guys utilize is rather thick. If you can't read the review or use anything from it in a counterargument, you're not actually talking about it.

    I'm not going to just say what makes people happy and slap a random number score onto it; that's what constitutes reviews, nowadays. If you want call what I wrote a rant, that's your prerogative, but I fail to see how what I wrote constitutes anything remotely close to one.

    It's not laziness or hypocrisy - it's not wanting to be treated with with pretentious condescension for any longer than I have to.

    On top of that, I specifically said I'm not in a position to judge because I hadn't read the whole thing.
  15. Jonesy1974
    And yes, Nick is right, Blade Runner flopped extremely hard and was scorned by critics for nearly a decade.

    Yes, sadly it did. At the time the critics response seemed to be, this is the guy that did Alien, so let's bring him down a peg or two and bash it. Vangelis' music was ridiculed for being chosen because it was fashionable in the wake of Chariots of Fire. Critics had by this stage decided that The Duellists was style over substance - Alien also received that accusation but it was with Blade Runner that the detractors felt they had the definitive proof of their negative bias. So again Blade Runner was a film that was considered to be all about visuals with no worthwhile substance. One critic accused Scott of stealing Kubrick's footage from the opening of The Shining for the closing of Blade Runner. Scott was even criticised by an American critic for the way he himself looked. The knives were out for Blade Runner and it only got proper re-evalution after the accidental screening of an early voice-over-less cut years later when the negative clamour surrounding it had faded into insignificance.

    Alien also received mixed reviews. Many critics condemned it as just a haunted house movie in space and said it was all style and no substance. Some of the reviews were actually pretty savage.

    Masterpieces become so over time, not on initial release.
  16. Hudson
    Quote
    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    I'm curious as to what your definition of 'deep' is. Merely serving up a more complex (convoluted) plot doesn't make something deep. The fact that Alien is a monster movie at it's core hasn't prevented academics from writing hundreds if not thousands of pages of critical, theoretical analysis on the film. I can scarcely think of a movie so straightforward on the surface that is so densely packed with subtext. I highly doubt we'll see as much intellectual engagement with Covenant in 40 years outside of Youtube videos.


    Actually, no you could not say that. Covenant is nowhere near the same tier as Blade Runner. It's nowhere near the same tier as Alien.

    I say it is.

    Alien Covenant doesn't break new ground within the Alien series, and sure as hell doesn't within general cinema.

    Sure it does.


    But defending Alien Covenant, which many are saying is the 3rd best film in the series, by putting it on the same plane as some of the best films ever made is absurd [...] You can like Covenant, but give me a break.

    And why not? I love Alien. It's a great film. I like Aliens. Good movie. So why can't I categorize the three of them together? Because you think it's absurd? These are merely films. I love Alien and Blade Runner but give me a break.

    Covenant will be the exact same movie in 35 years, unlike Blade Runner. Scott has had absolute control over this film, so we have the definitive finished product right now.

    I'd go out on a limb and say that's a bit of a stretch, for a plethora of reasons. Not big on soothsaying. Sorry.

    But let's not trivialize film masterpieces in defense of something that at best is objectively 'decent,' especially in the context of Scott's career.

    I think the planet will keep on turning regardless.

    Care to elaborate on literally any of these responses? They might as well be Tweets.
  17. Salt The Fries
    And yes, Nick is right, Blade Runner flopped extremely hard and was scorned by critics for nearly a decade.

    Yes, sadly it did. At the time the critics response seemed to be, this is the guy that did Alien, so let's bring him down a peg or two and bash it. Vangelis' music was ridiculed for being chosen because it was fashionable in the wake of Chariots of Fire. Critics had by this stage decided that The Duellists was style over substance - Alien also received that accusation but it was with Blade Runner that the detractors felt they had the definitive proof of their negative bias. So again Blade Runner was a film that was considered to be all about visuals with no worthwhile substance. One critic accused Scott of stealing Kubrick's footage from the opening of The Shining for the closing of Blade Runner. Scott was even criticised by an American critic for the way he himself looked. The knives were out for Blade Runner and it only got proper re-evalution after the accidental screening of an early voice-over-less cut years later when the negative clamour surrounding it had faded into insignificance.

    Lol come to think of it. I was meeting, you can sort of call it dating one chick a decade ago. I decided to watch Blade Runner with her. We never got laid, though. Fill the dots yourself.
  18. Salt The Fries
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.

    The positives I take away from Covenant are that finally an Alien film, with Alien in the title, has some epic and breathtaking shots and sequences. Mainly talking about the nitrino burst, the solar panel repair, landing on Paradise, the Engineers' decimation, and the xenomorph entering the cargo bay.

    I took the neutrino burst as a negative. Neutrinos are harmless and pass through all of us every second of every day. A quick google search would have informed the writers of that, so in my opinion it was a lazy and sloppy plot devise. There are plenty of other harmful "bursts" that would have served that purpose well enough.
    Paying attention to the film would also reveal that the neutrino burst was also a concomitant of a solar flare. It is SAID in the film.
    I don't recall that, but then again I only saw the film once. I'll take your word for it...
    I saw it twice and the second time I took a mental note of all the common criticisms and I had a mindset to confront if any of them were actually founded :D Thanks for trusting me, bro :)
  19. Engineer
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.

    The positives I take away from Covenant are that finally an Alien film, with Alien in the title, has some epic and breathtaking shots and sequences. Mainly talking about the nitrino burst, the solar panel repair, landing on Paradise, the Engineers' decimation, and the xenomorph entering the cargo bay.

    I took the neutrino burst as a negative. Neutrinos are harmless and pass through all of us every second of every day. A quick google search would have informed the writers of that, so in my opinion it was a lazy and sloppy plot devise. There are plenty of other harmful "bursts" that would have served that purpose well enough.
    Paying attention to the film would also reveal that the neutrino burst was also a concomitant of a solar flare. It is SAID in the film.
    I don't recall that, but then again I only saw the film once. I'll take your word for it...
  20. Gash
    And yes, Nick is right, Blade Runner flopped extremely hard and was scorned by critics for nearly a decade.

    Yes, sadly it did. At the time the critics response seemed to be, this is the guy that did Alien, so let's bring him down a peg or two and bash it. Vangelis' music was ridiculed for being chosen because it was fashionable in the wake of Chariots of Fire. Critics had by this stage decided that The Duellists was style over substance - Alien also received that accusation but it was with Blade Runner that the detractors felt they had the definitive proof of their negative bias. So again Blade Runner was a film that was considered to be all about visuals with no worthwhile substance. One critic accused Scott of stealing Kubrick's footage from the opening of The Shining for the closing of Blade Runner. Scott was even criticised by an American critic for the way he himself looked. The knives were out for Blade Runner and it only got proper re-evalution after the accidental screening of an early voice-over-less cut years later when the negative clamour surrounding it had faded into insignificance.
  21. Salt The Fries
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.

    The positives I take away from Covenant are that finally an Alien film, with Alien in the title, has some epic and breathtaking shots and sequences. Mainly talking about the nitrino burst, the solar panel repair, landing on Paradise, the Engineers' decimation, and the xenomorph entering the cargo bay.

    I took the neutrino burst as a negative. Neutrinos are harmless and pass through all of us every second of every day. A quick google search would have informed the writers of that, so in my opinion it was a lazy and sloppy plot devise. There are plenty of other harmful "bursts" that would have served that purpose well enough.
    Paying attention to the film would also reveal that the neutrino burst was also a concomitant of a solar flare. It is SAID in the film.
  22. Engineer
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.

    The positives I take away from Covenant are that finally an Alien film, with Alien in the title, has some epic and breathtaking shots and sequences. Mainly talking about the nitrino burst, the solar panel repair, landing on Paradise, the Engineers' decimation, and the xenomorph entering the cargo bay.

    I took the neutrino burst as a negative. Neutrinos are harmless and pass through all of us every second of every day. A quick google search would have informed the writers of that, so in my opinion it was a lazy and sloppy plot devise. There are plenty of other harmful "bursts" that would have served that purpose well enough.
  23. BishopShouldGo
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.

    The positives I take away from Covenant are that finally an Alien film, with Alien in the title, has some epic and breathtaking shots and sequences. Mainly talking about the nitrino burst, the solar panel repair, landing on Paradise, the Engineers' decimation, and the xenomorph entering the cargo bay.
  24. Salt The Fries
    To me Blade Runner is a faux-artsy exercise in style. But then again, deep deep down, the very first Alien is an exercise in style as well. Don't get me wrong, I was raised on those two films. I first saw them when I was 7 and loved them ever since. To me Covenant achieved things Blade Runner only superficially touched upon, though. And it incorporated its artsiness in a lot meaningful way, I'd say.

    And yes, Nick is right, Blade Runner flopped extremely hard and was scorned by critics for nearly a decade.
  25. Protozoid
    Sure it does.

    In what way?
    I adore Blade Runner and Alien, but they do have flaws and limitations.

    Alien is more effective than Covenant, IMO, but isn't as deep.

    Blade Runner is a greater artistic achievement than either Alien film, but it has some glaring plot holes in the early cuts and Harrison Ford's performance is pretty weak. It's his most interesting character, but one of his worst performances, IMO.

    So there's wiggle room to rank Covenant up there with great sci-fi cinema by Ridley, but I would personally rank it much lower for my personal tastes. It is closer to Legend in terms of quality than Blade Runner. The Martian is probably the most effective overall, although maybe not as personal, idiosyncratic, or artistic Blade Runner, Prometheus, or even Covenant.

    Different strokes.
  26. NickisSmart
    Actually, no you could not say that. Covenant is nowhere near the same tier as Blade Runner. It's nowhere near the same tier as Alien.

    I say it is.

    Alien Covenant doesn't break new ground within the Alien series, and sure as hell doesn't within general cinema.

    Sure it does.


    But defending Alien Covenant, which many are saying is the 3rd best film in the series, by putting it on the same plane as some of the best films ever made is absurd [...] You can like Covenant, but give me a break.

    And why not? I love Alien. It's a great film. I like Aliens. Good movie. So why can't I categorize the three of them together? Because you think it's absurd? These are merely films. I love Alien and Blade Runner but give me a break.

    Covenant will be the exact same movie in 35 years, unlike Blade Runner. Scott has had absolute control over this film, so we have the definitive finished product right now.

    I'd go out on a limb and say that's a bit of a stretch, for a plethora of reasons. Not big on soothsaying. Sorry.

    But let's not trivialize film masterpieces in defense of something that at best is objectively 'decent,' especially in the context of Scott's career.

    I think the planet will keep on turning regardless.
  27. Hudson
    Quote
    And you could say the same of Blade Runner when it completely and utterly bombed, and was torn apart by critics.

    Wow.

    Actually, no you could not say that. Covenant is nowhere near the same tier as Blade Runner. It's nowhere near the same tier as Alien. And since so many people here seem to--for some reason--consider Aliens to be an enemy or rival of Alien, instead of a companion, then I'll ruffle all your sensitive little feathers to definitively state that Covenant is also nowhere near the same tier as Aliens either. Alien, Aliens, Blade Runner; those are each individually groundbreaking films outside of the context of Ridley Scott, James Cameron, or the science-fiction genre. Alien Covenant doesn't break new ground within the Alien series, and sure as hell doesn't within general cinema.

    Like I've mentioned before, people liking the film doesn't bother me. Whatever, people like Prometheus and I've had to get over that over the last five years too. But defending Alien Covenant, which many are saying is the 3rd best film in the series, by putting it on the same plane as some of the best films ever made is absurd, and makes one come off as insecure that they won't be surrounded and validated by other proponents of Covenant at all times. You can like Covenant, but give me a break.

    Not to mention, Blade Runner's theatrical situation is not the same as Covenant's at all. The film's production was not a rose garden, hence we didn't see the film originally intended. There's no indication that this is the case with Covenant. We know ~20 minutes were cut for mere running time, not for content. Covenant will be the exact same movie in 35 years, unlike Blade Runner. Scott has had absolute control over this film, so we have the definitive finished product right now. Second, Blade Runner was blown out by ET (like every other genre film in 1982), not the critics. Go ahead and compare that to Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 absolutely destroying Covenant at the box office if you want, but it's also not the same. Guardians of the Galaxy may have been a surprise, but its anticipated sequel was not, and Covenant's reviews weren't all that bad.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm a loyal fan and will purchase the Blu-Ray. But let's not trivialize film masterpieces in defense of something that at best is objectively 'decent,' especially in the context of Scott's career.
  28. NickisSmart
    People not liking the movie is not about a reflection on you or anyone else on this silly board. It's about people not liking the movie. That's it. You need to get out of your own head, ignore this board, and look at those reasons instead of assuming this is all about us or how we relate to you. Because it's not. In the real world nobody gives a shit about any of us. The real world is where this movie died.

    And you could say the same of Blade Runner when it completely and utterly bombed, and was torn apart by critics. As far as I'm concerned the information that "peopled didn't like Covenant" simply isn't useful or interesting to me. For me, it's about  looking beyond the simple facts that "people don't like the movie" and analyzing the movies, themselves. I don't expect to change people's minds if they're dead-set against it. But I do get annoyed if people attack what I write without demonstrating that they've read it, in any shape or form. Yes, this means citing quotes.

    They're free to attack me, if they want, but that doesn't mean I have to care. At the end of the day I don't. Sure, I wish Covenant did better, but the reasons for its poor performance aren't mysterious to me. And in my arguments, I don't simply dismiss people who attack the film. Maybe in the title. But in my arguments, I provide plenty of their own statements through my own lens. I at least can interact with their rhetoric via my own in actual discourse, as opposed to clapping my hands over my ears and going "lalalalalalalalala! I'm not listening to you!"

  29. Engineer
    I'm getting immensely bored of certain people who are unable to accept that other people may not agree with them or think the same of the film and instead of being gents about it, act like dicks. If you can't present yourself in a mature manner, don't respond. It's as simple as that. I have an expectation that the people here are at least teenagers (I can't remember the exact age limit) so let's actually see people acting like it.

    So let's see less dismissive responds, let's see less generalizations and how about we have some adult conversations? If you're incapable then there's really no point in responding at all.

    I've been waiting for this. Thanks Hicks! :-)

    Oh, and well said SpeedyMaxx
« Newer Comments 12345678910111213141516171819202122 Older Comments »
Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed