User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Neill Blomkamp Talks The (De) Evolution of Alien 3...  (Read 9093 times)

Perfect-Organism
Jul 12, 2017, 06:44:27 PM
Reply #120 on: Jul 12, 2017, 06:44:27 PM
Q
Which David? The original David or a clone of him made 200 years after his death for the sole purpose of recovering crucial information pertaining to the bonus situation?

LOL!  It's an android.  Or artificial person, what have you.  He gets to live forever.  It's literally the opposite of Bladerunner.  So he could show up at the  end of Blomkamp's film looking effectively like he did in Covenant.

The key with David showing up at the end of the film is that nothing David's story would be inconsequential for most of the film, which means that Ridley's Covenant sequel would not be spoiled.  But wouldn't it be amazing if at the end of Blomkamp's film a 10-foot tall David shows up looking like the engineer in Prometheus?  We wouldn't know the story of how he got that way until the Covenant sequel comes out.  That would also work nicely with the massive David statue from Covenant...


Huggs
Jul 12, 2017, 08:06:16 PM
Reply #121 on: Jul 12, 2017, 08:06:16 PM
Q
"But the ALIEN franchise is dying at the box office"

I agree with this position. I personally think it's because the prequels do not really play as alien films. They set off to do their own thing, which was admirable, but they did so with less-than-stellar writing. The idea of a city full of dead bodies sounds menacing, but a lush environment with mountains and rivers and a beautiful city doesn't really scream Alien. Taking the scariest creature ever to grace the dark and confined spaces on film, and drop them in wide-open territory, in plain view, and even in the daylight? It felt like the location for a Christopher Nolan film rather than Alien.

Not to Segway too far, but interestingly enough, I believe it was John Campbell, the author of "who goes there" (the short story that would later become "The Thing") who wrote another short story involving a team of scientists that land on a planet and discover a city full of dead humanoid beings who's bodies lay peaceful and intact. It is revealed that they committed mass suicide either due to, or to avoid death by infection from what was called "intelligent Microbes". These microbes would later infect the scientists, and are unknowingly carried back onto the ship, resulting in more casualties. I thought of this story often when watching covenant, and sometimes it did feel alittle too similar.

But yes, it's not looking good. I'm afraid the future of the franchise is pointing towards hibernation. I'm not ready to say the beast is on it's way to extinction, but if awakening is just more of the same, I do believe we're looking at 10+ years without a film. The question then becomes, what will bring it back? Perhaps a standalone film? Something like resurrection but without the character of ripley. Or the most unlikely option, a straight-up, no joke remake of the original film, with different actors, but the same characters, environment, and events. Blasphemy, I know.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 12, 2017, 09:39:29 PM
Reply #122 on: Jul 12, 2017, 09:39:29 PM
Q
"But the ALIEN franchise is dying at the box office"

I agree with this position. I personally think it's because the prequels do not really play as alien films. They set off to do their own thing, which was admirable, but they did so with less-than-stellar writing. The idea of a city full of dead bodies sounds menacing, but a lush environment with mountains and rivers and a beautiful city doesn't really scream Alien. Taking the scariest creature ever to grace the dark and confined spaces on film, and drop them in wide-open territory, in plain view, and even in the daylight? It felt like the location for a Christopher Nolan film rather than Alien.

Not to Segway too far, but interestingly enough, I believe it was John Campbell, the author of "who goes there" (the short story that would later become "The Thing") who wrote another short story involving a team of scientists that land on a planet and discover a city full of dead humanoid beings who's bodies lay peaceful and intact. It is revealed that they committed mass suicide either due to, or to avoid death by infection from what was called "intelligent Microbes". These microbes would later infect the scientists, and are unknowingly carried back onto the ship, resulting in more casualties. I thought of this story often when watching covenant, and sometimes it did feel alittle too similar.

But yes, it's not looking good. I'm afraid the future of the franchise is pointing towards hibernation. I'm not ready to say the beast is on it's way to extinction, but if awakening is just more of the same, I do believe we're looking at 10+ years without a film. The question then becomes, what will bring it back? Perhaps a standalone film? Something like resurrection but without the character of ripley. Or the most unlikely option, a straight-up, no joke remake of the original film, with different actors, but the same characters, environment, and events. Blasphemy, I know.

I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats...


tleilaxu
Jul 12, 2017, 10:21:46 PM
Reply #123 on: Jul 12, 2017, 10:21:46 PM
Q
I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats...
What the f**king f**k did I just read? That f**king triggered my PTSD mate. Prometheus and AC established a much wider scope for this franchise than Ripley and Co. shooting up bugs, why the f**k would you want to regress into nostalgia-pandering garbage? If we're talking about seats then why not just do a Batman vs Alien cross-over? Super-heroes are a guaranteed hit with nowadays youth.


Huggs
Jul 12, 2017, 10:36:04 PM
Reply #124 on: Jul 12, 2017, 10:36:04 PM
Q
"I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats..."

No doubt. That is why I enjoy Gibson's script so much. It carried the story in what felt like (at least to me) the natural direction the franchise was heading. The main problem standing in the way is the age of the original actors. But I personally would be fine with casting younger (quality) actors such as Tom Hardy to play hicks, etc. Just don't let Jai Courtney within 1,000 light years of the darn thing. But it is an interesting thought, what could we be looking at once the prequels are over? I never thought we'd get prequels in the first place. Maybe something parallel to the original timeline but still unrelated to the Aliens per-se. Or will the spinoffs begin again? Alien Vs Terminator? AVPVT?

"That f**king triggered my PTSD mate. Prometheus and AC established a much wider scope for this franchise",

Okay, Well, this is just my opinion, but the idea that a single android with a God complex is responsible for the creation of the Alien is not something I'd call universe expanding. It's something a certain amount of people saw coming even before the movie was released, and it's been divisive to say the least. And the space Jockey's existence was already known, so changing them to flawed humanoids only reduced the impact of their existence, not improved it. Again, that's merely my opinion, and no insult is implied.

"why the f**k would you want to regress into nostalgia-pandering garbage?"

Well, like they say, one mans trash is another mans treasure. Some people like the second movie a lot, and for them, the idea of making films more in that particular style sounds fun and exciting. It's just personal preference.

"why not just do a Batman vs Alien cross-over?"

I believe that's already been done. Just not on film. Regardless, I would see that movie. Bruce Wayne with and m4, clearing the halls of the GCPD to rescue Jim from the Hive. The tumbler tearing through the "Gigerfied" parking garage of Gotham General. Yes, I would see that movie, and I am not ashamed. :)

« Last Edit: Jul 12, 2017, 11:00:27 PM by Huggs »

tleilaxu
Jul 12, 2017, 11:10:36 PM
Reply #125 on: Jul 12, 2017, 11:10:36 PM
Q
Okay, Well, this is just my opinion, but the idea that a single android with a God complex is responsible for the creation of the Alien is not something I'd call universe expanding. It's something a certain amount of people saw coming even before the movie was released, and it's been divisive to say the least. And the space Jockey's existence was already known, so changing them to flawed humanoids only reduced the impact of their existence, not improved it. Again, that's merely my opinion, and no insult is implied.
It's one link of a chain in a creation story. I get the thing about the Space Jockey, but some of Giger's art actually kind of already hinted a little bit in that direction https://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/avp/images/7/70/Giger016.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150109041555

Quote
I believe that's already been done. Just not on film. Regardless, I would see that movie. Bruce Wayne with and m4, clearing the halls of the GCPD to rescue Jim from the Hive. The tumbler tearing through the "Gigerfied" parking garage of Gotham General. Yes, I would see that movie, and I am not ashamed. :)

Quote
Well, like they say, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
That's for sure...


Huggs
Jul 12, 2017, 11:28:01 PM
Reply #126 on: Jul 12, 2017, 11:28:01 PM
Q

Quote

Well, like they say, one mans trash is another mans treasure.


"That's for sure..."



HAHA! But hey, it still wouldn't be as bad as the transformers movies. Gracious, you could get Jai Courtney to play batman and have Lady gaga play his mother who returned from the grave as a zombie to help him hunt the xenomorphs, and it still wouldn't be as bad as transformers, or D.O.J......gads! But that's what makes movies like music, paintings, or any other form of art, there's alittle something there for everybody to like.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 12, 2017, 11:30:30 PM
Reply #127 on: Jul 12, 2017, 11:30:30 PM
Q
I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats...
What the f**king f**k did I just read? That f**king triggered my PTSD mate. Prometheus and AC established a much wider scope for this franchise than Ripley and Co. shooting up bugs, why the f**k would you want to regress into nostalgia-pandering garbage? If we're talking about seats then why not just do a Batman vs Alien cross-over? Super-heroes are a guaranteed hit with nowadays youth.

Chill out bud.

No universe has been expanded with engineers.  If anything, it's compressed.  Nothing is alien anymore.


Xenomorphine
Jul 13, 2017, 01:29:16 AM
Reply #128 on: Jul 13, 2017, 01:29:16 AM
Q
I suspect what Ridley Scott really meant when he said there wasn't a script, was that there wasn't a script <he liked>. Keeping in mind the Robin Hood script fiasco, that wasn't necessarily a bad thing.

He actually said quite the opposite, not too long ago. Claimed that he'd read through the first draft and quite liked it.

Blomkamp was only interested in a copy of Aliens: Weaver & Michael Biehn, pulse rilfes, "retro" technology (which was not a stylistic choice back when the first two movies were made but a reflection of that era's design language and technological limitations), colonial marines fighting the alien queen.

It's a stale vision. Fanboyism.

Except that his favourite of the series is 'Alien', 'Alien Isolation' directly influenced the presentation style he would have used and he's been the only one, in interviews, to repeatedly give emphasis to the need for the series to return to themes of psychosexuality and Giger's biomechanical aesthetics (both of which were relatively absent from Scott's two recent offerings, to their unfortunate detriment). We also know he's been open about listening to the criticism of 'Elysium' and aims to specifically avoid the flaws in that production's creation (contrasted against Scott, who mentioned in a recent interview that he actively avoids paying attention to criticism, which means he's unable to learn from it).

All the indications we've had, thus far, were that it would have very much been the opposite of the kind of Michael Bay-alike explode-athon many uninformed detractors have been stereotyping it as. There would have undoubtedly been some spectacular visuals and some action sequences, but it's wrong to assume it wouldn't have carried its own share of cerebral weight.

Good film? Bad film? None of us can predict what it could have been, but by the same token, let's not falsely characterise it.

« Last Edit: Jul 13, 2017, 01:31:33 AM by Xenomorphine »

SM
Jul 13, 2017, 01:37:55 AM
Reply #129 on: Jul 13, 2017, 01:37:55 AM
Q
Quote
contrasted against Scott, who mentioned in a recent interview that he actively avoids paying attention to criticism, which means he's unable to learn from it

 :laugh:

When a guy, who is 79, has made a couple of dozen movies, that have earned a few billion dollars, two of which are genre defining classics that are still influential decades later - I think he's earned the right to back himself.

« Last Edit: Jul 13, 2017, 01:57:03 AM by SM »

windebieste
Jul 13, 2017, 01:54:52 AM
Reply #130 on: Jul 13, 2017, 01:54:52 AM
Q
...and then when he did breach his own ideals and listened to fans, what did we get?  We got that final act in 'ALIEN: Covenant' that heavily relied on the appearance of the Alien and it was the weakest part of the movie.

Let Scott make his movies the way he wants to.  I'm all for seeing what his unadulterated vision of the 'ALIEN' universe is like.  His was first, after all.

-Windebieste.


Alionic
Jul 13, 2017, 03:21:52 AM
Reply #131 on: Jul 13, 2017, 03:21:52 AM
Q
I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats...

lol

Just flat out ignoring Alien 3 is such a monumentally stupid idea, which raises unfortunate implications. Beginning a trend in Hollywood of ignoring plot lines of sequels that a fanboy director didn't like sets a dangerous precedent.

FFS what is so hard about making an Alien film without Ripley, Hicks, and Newt?


Scorpio
Jul 13, 2017, 04:50:52 AM
Reply #132 on: Jul 13, 2017, 04:50:52 AM
Q
I would say that too, but it's too risky for the studio to a sequel to Alien 4.  The only option after the prequels are done is retcon.


SM
Jul 13, 2017, 05:00:52 AM
Reply #133 on: Jul 13, 2017, 05:00:52 AM
Q
Odd that Fox seemingly has so many 'only options'.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 13, 2017, 05:34:13 AM
Reply #134 on: Jul 13, 2017, 05:34:13 AM
Q
I stand by that the best option is to bring back Ripley, Hicks, Newt, and continue on a different tangent from where Aliens left off.  30 years later, I bet people would still love to see this story.  Whether it would live up to its expectations is another thing, but it would fill seats...

lol

Just flat out ignoring Alien 3 is such a monumentally stupid idea, which raises unfortunate implications. Beginning a trend in Hollywood of ignoring plot lines of sequels that a fanboy director didn't like sets a dangerous precedent.

FFS what is so hard about making an Alien film without Ripley, Hicks, and Newt?

Ask Ridley Scott.


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed