Scott: We are going to make another Alien movie

[genocyber]

The core of Alien was always about symbolizing the unknown mystery of space, and the lurking horrors that lie within it. That their is hostile life that exists that is far more dangerous and sophisticated than humanities darkest nightmares could conceive. The prequels neutered their existence as mad science experiments that we helped create ruined the entire mystique of them. Their origin did not need to be tied to humanity, nor did having another evil A.I. obsess over them. It's a retread of the first Alien film with the character of Ash, but more gratuitous. The character of Bishop was far more interesting than anything we've seen of David by far.

Ok, so in other words you want this:

http://horrornews.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/It-The-Terror-from-Beyond-Space-1958-Movie-6.jpg

That's the creature from It!  The Terror From Beyond Space (1958)

"unknown mystery" -check
"hostile life" -check
"dangerous and sophisticated" -check
"origin not tied to humanity" -check
"nothing to do with A.I." -check

Sounds like a winner to me. Yes.

[Highland]

Lots of handbags flying about in here eh!

[SM]

[Denton Smalls]

The good news is there's only 2-3 people on here that seem to take personal offense to any criticism, constructive or otherwise, to Scott's prequels. The bad news is they flood the comment sections relentlessly so there might as well be 100 of them.

The prequels are fine in their own way, just like the original films are fine in theirs. I'm sure when those came out pre-internet, there was similar backlash, it just wasn't as apparent. I'm reserving judgment until the final film gets released, because the way that's handled can have a retroactive effect on the previous two.

Just to play devil's advocate, why is it that any detractors of the prequels are automatically proponents of Neill Blomkamp?

Also, why do certain people act like they know exactly what Blomkamp's sequel was going to be about in relation to the continuous referencing of queens, pulse rifles, power loaders, etc? I wasn't aware that there was a script floating around the internet, and judging from Ridley's comments, neither was he.

All I saw was some preliminary concept art that was created before the guy was even officially commissioned to work. Between pulse rifle accusations, check out the very well-stocked concept art gallery for A:C on this site and compare the art to how much we actually saw in the finished movie.

[Highland]

What it really should have had, was a Power Loader with  - pulse rifles attached to the arms. Instant classic.

[Maron]

I wish Ridley Scott would at least weaken the androids.
The fight between David vs. Walter was similar to T-800 vs. T-1000
Do you remember Parker almost decapitating Ash with an extinguisher?  Ash should take much more damage, considering him being a newer android than Walter, not even talking about David.

Nothing makes sense what Riddles does lately. Best director of our time?

[Anthony]

Lots of handbags flying about in here eh!

That's been the Covenant threads since its release. I can't recall one news article related to Covenant that didn't devolve into a playground fight over whether it's good or not.

[DorkiDori]

Lots of handbags flying about in here eh!

That's been the Covenant threads since its release. I can't recall one news article related to Covenant that didn't devolve into a playground fight over whether it's good or not.

Therein lies the problem with Covenant. Too many folks arguing over if it was good or not. There are so few discussions regarding symbolism and theory. Prometheus had a bit of arguing over certain aspects of the film, however, the bulk of conversations had about the film were usually about some sort of detail deconstruction... Be it the engineer murals in the urn room, the bas relief of the Deacon in the urn room, what exactly the accelerant (black too) was, were the engineers on LV226 a different faction versus the ones we saw at the beginning, etc etc... See where I'm going? Covenant has only really lead to conversations about it being "good" or bad and really just making comparisons to previous films to justify personal feelings about the film as a whole. Prometheus was questioned for the better part of 5 years after until the release of Covenant.

There was a very big difference between these two films and their outcome of output for years after from fans.

[SM]

Covenant has only been out 7 months.

[Biomechanoid]

Therein lies the problem with Covenant. Too many folks arguing over if it was good or not. There are so few discussions regarding symbolism and theory.

What do you think of the symbolism and the theories for Alien Covenant?

[Alionic]

The good news is there's only 2-3 people on here that seem to take personal offense to any criticism, constructive or otherwise, to Scott's prequels. The bad news is they flood the comment sections relentlessly so there might as well be 100 of them.

This is a joke, right? Vocally, these forums are overwhelmingly against Scott's prequels. Look at the polls, though; most people here like Prometheus and Covenant.

[SM]

Not sure where 'overwhelming' comes from. I see that most people like them but aren't blind to the faults. Which is reflected in the polls. Of course some relentlessly shit can it and someone defend it no matter the criticism. While often prolific, they're at the extremes and in the minority.

[DorkiDori]

Therein lies the problem with Covenant. Too many folks arguing over if it was good or not. There are so few discussions regarding symbolism and theory.

What do you think of the symbolism and the theories for Alien Covenant?

Honestly to me there wasn't much really. It was all pretty straight forward outside of Davids Lab and what transpired between Shaw and David during their trip aaaaand what exactly happened to Shaw. I do realize "The Crossing" and "Advent" existed to explain some of what went on. But honestly, that entire 10 years deserves its own film (or book... Like we SHOULDVE gotten). Its a story all unto itself that could've been very creepy and very disturbing (much like an actual Alien film).

The first movie had a lot of open ended questions which made it fun. Covenant was pretty much cleaned up with the short film "Advent". Outside of the Shaw/David arc, the film didn't really create as many questions or conversations that Prometheus did.

[Denton Smalls]

The good news is there's only 2-3 people on here that seem to take personal offense to any criticism, constructive or otherwise, to Scott's prequels. The bad news is they flood the comment sections relentlessly so there might as well be 100 of them.

This is a joke, right? Vocally, these forums are overwhelmingly against Scott's prequels. Look at the polls, though; most people here like Prometheus and Covenant.

It can certainly appear that the forums are overwhelmingly against Scott's prequels, if you approach the topic on the defensive. An objective view would reveal that it's not the case.

I'm glad most people apparently like both prequels. That's how more are made. I'd rather read about and discuss future films for better of worse, rather than not have any Alien films to talk about at all.

[Biomechanoid]

There are so few discussions regarding symbolism and theory.

What do you think of the symbolism and the theories for Alien Covenant?

Honestly to me there wasn't much really.

Only speculating, perhaps then that is why there are so few discussions regarding symbolism and theory for Alien Covenant? Others possibly feel the same way you do. Mystery solved? Maybe, maybe not.