A way to make Blomkamp's Alien work without retconning Alien 3 or Resurrection?

[The Alien Predator]

Exactly HuDa, I couldn't have said it better myself...

[Perfect-Organism]

To be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.

Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?

Their opinions are pretty important if they're the ones making the movie, but that's not the point I was making.

I'm saying it's possible that the majority of fans who support A5 are mature intelligent folks who don't deserve to be dismissed as whiners and trolled with all this obnoxious ranting.

For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb.  If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.

That really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.

And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?

Aliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film.  Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus.  A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor.  It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless. 

So when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's their turn.  We should be the ones asking them how it feels.

And on that point:  What a rigged question!  Naturally, we wouldn't like it; our love for Aliens is why we want the retcon in the first place.  So what?  You've proven nothing, Alien 3 Defense Force.  To answer it though, I'd deal with it. If someone thinks they can make a better movie than one of the best sequels of all time, then I say go for it.  I'm sure I'd find their efforts adorable.

This is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.

Disney Princesses?  Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.

You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence.  Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.

There are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.

And in 30 years all they've come up with is crap.  The retcon is due.

Well said Kelgaard.  I've been of the opinion that a retcon should happen for years now.  I've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here.  There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with.  I bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...

[Corporal Hicks]

I do not advocate the insulting of others and staff will challenge that behaviour. However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with disagreeing with people and discussing those reasons.

[426Buddy]

No matter how you slice it Alien3 doesn't retcon anything about Aliens. You can make a lot of arguments about the quality of the film or the magic egg but it doesn't actually retcon anything shown in Aliens. It's just not what a retcon is and thats a fact.

[The Alien Predator]

To be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.

Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?

Their opinions are pretty important if they're the ones making the movie, but that's not the point I was making.

I'm saying it's possible that the majority of fans who support A5 are mature intelligent folks who don't deserve to be dismissed as whiners and trolled with all this obnoxious ranting.

For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb.  If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.

That really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.

And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?

Aliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film.  Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus.  A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor.  It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless. 

So when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's their turn.  We should be the ones asking them how it feels.

And on that point:  What a rigged question!  Naturally, we wouldn't like it; our love for Aliens is why we want the retcon in the first place.  So what?  You've proven nothing, Alien 3 Defense Force.  To answer it though, I'd deal with it. If someone thinks they can make a better movie than one of the best sequels of all time, then I say go for it.  I'm sure I'd find their efforts adorable.

This is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.

Disney Princesses?  Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.

You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence.  Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.

There are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.

And in 30 years all they've come up with is crap.  The retcon is due.

Well said Kelgaard.  I've been of the opinion that a retcon should happen for years now.  I've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here.  There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with.  I bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...

You are getting "flak" because people have noticed a hole in your proposal and are pointing it out.

That and Ripley is a huge debilitating chain which shackles this franchise. It will never be free until it tries something bold and new like Prometheus and Covenant are at least trying and those I am excited for because they will likely expand the lore.

The only promising thing about Alien 5 is that concept art for the monolith and the derelict plus anything else Engineer related. Also that cool Marine suit that looked more armoured compared to the rest.

But Ripley, Hicks, Newt.... been there, done that, seen it before. We already know these characters pretty well. Ripley 8 still has a lot to be explored about.

[HuDaFuK]

I've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here.  There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with.

No one's belittling you or insulting you, we're just pointing out that trying to develop some ridiculous workaround enabling Hicks and Newt to be alive in Blompkamp's film whilst still keeping the third and fourth films canon is an inherently flawed process. Because the work around will inevitably be clumsy at best, ridiculous at worst.

[Russ]

It'll be a hypersleep dream handwave.

I've said this loads - its the only way they can acknowledge 3 and 4 (which NB has said he would do) but conveniently drop them. I know some of you hate the idea, but having read pages and pages and pages of solutions, I still can't come up with a better one that has now been established as part of the continuity thanks to the sequence in Prometheus.

It's the only way to be sure.

Or - colour me flabbergasted if they didn't do it. It just seems so easy to me. You could do it a few shots - everyone would get it... and then on with the movie.

[426Buddy]

It'll be a hypersleep dream handwave.

I've said this loads - its the only way they can acknowledge 3 and 4 (which NB has said he would do) but conveniently drop them. I know some of you hate the idea, but having read pages and pages and pages of solutions, I still can't come up with a better one that has now been established as part of the continuity thanks to the sequence in Prometheus.

It's the only way to be sure.

Or - colour me flabbergasted if they didn't do it. It just seems so easy to me. You could do it a few shots - everyone would get it... and then on with the movie.

As cheap as the dream idea sounds, if you have to retcon its the easiest and most plausible solution.

[Corporal Hicks]

It fits perfectly within the lore. There is absolutely no denying that. Especially, as pointed out, with Prometheus doing the whole dream perving. It's just such a horrid mechanic. 

[Kel G 426]

They could be Bishop's dreams.  That would explain why they're so cinematicly detailed.  His brain could be running through scenarios.

I bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...

I don't expect anyone to change their opinions; if the movie is good, they'll grudgingly acknowledge it, but maintain their stance on the retcon angle. That's fine. By then, I won't care.  I'll have the sequel I've always wanted, and they can keep theirs.

[Russ]

@Hicks I think it would be if they hadn't set it up. But it really works for me and doesn't insult us as much as the magic egg in 3. That was cheap - we're always searching for reasons for that on here, but out of the insane world of AvP Fandom, I remember sitting in the cinema (having seen Aliens a brazilion times at the movies and on video) thinking "WTF" - there was absolutely no logic to that.

You know, I've attacked 3 for treating the characters poorly - but Hicks and Newt aside - even I accept its a great arc for Ripley. But its undone in the first shot by having something that was not established. There wasn't even a flashback to a reprogrammed Bishop resorting to his primary directive or something like that. Or he didn't even say "Look, about the egg..." when he was part head part milky groundsheet (or if he did, I can't remember... traumatic amnesia or something).

It was just "there must have been an egg on there." NO! There wasn't *lol*.

The dream handwave is small beer compared to that leap of over the chasm of bollocks excuses in my book.

It's not great, but if they're going to acknowledge the others... it works just fine for me. And I think the vast majority of casual fans will get it too?

[Perfect-Organism]

I think it would be hilarious if the film starts with Ripley falling into the vat of molten lead and then it transitions to a Working Joe watching her having this dream and deciding to wake her from her nightmare...

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

The recent trend in big franchise sequels to rely almost exclusively on the nostalgia crowd in favour of actually doing new and interesting things really isn't doing these movies any favours. Films like Jurassic World and The Force Awakens are just incredibly bland and forgettable once you scratch off the flashy franchise veneer.

But they made big money and that's all that maters in Hollywood these days. Fox knows the big selling point for Blomkamp's film will be the return of Hicks, Ripley and Newt. Just like the return of Han, Leia and Luke was a big selling point for TFA.

Prometheus was an attempt at something new and fresh in the Alien universe. But it didn't really excel at the box office, it certainly never came close to TFA and Jurassic World's returns. So it makes sense for Fox to play it safe this time and return to the Alien brand for the very loose Prometheus sequel and to follow Disney's recipe with regards to Blomkamp's new Alien film.

It would make absolutely no sense for Fox to drop Hicks and Ripley just so they can stay in canon to two films which the majority of casual fans dislike.

[426Buddy]

The recent trend in big franchise sequels to rely almost exclusively on the nostalgia crowd in favour of actually doing new and interesting things really isn't doing these movies any favours. Films like Jurassic World and The Force Awakens are just incredibly bland and forgettable once you scratch off the flashy franchise veneer.

But they made big money and that's all that maters in Hollywood these days. Fox knows the big selling point for Blomkamp's film will be the return of Hicks, Ripley and Newt. Just like the return of Han, Leia and Luke was a big selling point for TFA.

Prometheus was an attempt at something new and fresh in the Alien universe. But it didn't really excel at the box office, it certainly never came close to TFA and Jurassic World's returns. So it makes sense for Fox to play it safe this time and return to the Alien brand for the very loose Prometheus sequel and to follow Disney's recipe with regards to Blomkamp's new Alien film.

It would make absolutely no sense for Fox to drop Hicks and Ripley just so they can stay in canon to two films which the majority of casual fans dislike.

Doesn't matter what fox does or doesn't do, this franchise is never going to make TFA level money.

I know movie making is a business, but that type of reasoning isn't going to produce an actual good film regardless of the box office return. As a fan of this franchise I just want a good film, that doesnt destroy whats come before, even if no one at Fox would look at from that POV.

And i'll add that if Fox is actually trying to achieve the success of starwars or JW by copying that formula then I would prefer no new film at all.

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

Doesn't matter what fox does or doesn't do, this franchise is never going to make TFA level money.

It won't. Not if it's R-Rated.

But they would still want to maximize profits by appealing to the very large nostalgia crowd.

I know movie making is a business, but that type of reasoning isn't going to produce an actual good film regardless of the box office return.

And that's why good original films are such a rarity these days.