Ask Steve Perry

Started by Corporal Hicks, May 06, 2007, 09:22:14 PM

Author
Ask Steve Perry (Read 188,645 times)

Mr. Domino

Mr. Domino

#750
I think there are two main problems here:

1) There's always lots of talk about how originally, both the Alien and the Predator were completely unknown in their motives/psychology, and what made them great is how alien they were to us, how unknowable, and yet the same people that say that tend to treat the behavior of the specific creatures from those two films as the gospel for all members of that race. Do I think Mr. Perry's aliens were considerably less fearsome than their onscreen counterparts? Definitely. Did I ever have a problem with it while reading his books? No. There's any number of reasons that the aliens of Prey, or even Earth War, could be less smart or otherwise different from the LV-426 Aliens, or Kane's Son, or the Runner. Everyone is obviously welcome to disagree with that approach, but anyone taking anything as ironclad truth on a species whose entire point is to be alien and unknowable is, I think, a bit on the foolish side.

2) Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I have always felt that Mr. Perry is simply not a horror writer. He's a science fiction writer, and while they're not always mutually exclusive, I think he's a lot more likely to win a Hugo than a Stoker. I think that Aliens/Predator shouldn't be shoehorned into strictly horror all the time. After all, Aliens to me was more sci-fi than horror. As formidable as the creatures were in that film, they really just weren't all that scary if you ask me. If you want to be frightened, go watch Alien or Alien 3.

MadassAlex

MadassAlex

#751
Quote from: Mr. Domino on Oct 22, 2009, 01:31:29 AM
1) There's always lots of talk about how originally, both the Alien and the Predator were completely unknown in their motives/psychology, and what made them great is how alien they were to us, how unknowable, and yet the same people that say that tend to treat the behavior of the specific creatures from those two films as the gospel for all members of that race. Do I think Mr. Perry's aliens were considerably less fearsome than their onscreen counterparts? Definitely. Did I ever have a problem with it while reading his books? No. There's any number of reasons that the aliens of Prey, or even Earth War, could be less smart or otherwise different from the LV-426 Aliens, or Kane's Son, or the Runner. Everyone is obviously welcome to disagree with that approach, but anyone taking anything as ironclad truth on a species whose entire point is to be alien and unknowable is, I think, a bit on the foolish side.

Reducing the competence of the Aliens defeats the purpose of their narrative role. Sure, they could be weaker or stupider for certain reasons, by why would anyone do this? Why make your villain less threatening?

Quote from: Mr. Domino on Oct 22, 2009, 01:31:29 AM2) Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I have always felt that Mr. Perry is simply not a horror writer. He's a science fiction writer, and while they're not always mutually exclusive, I think he's a lot more likely to win a Hugo than a Stoker. I think that Aliens/Predator shouldn't be shoehorned into strictly horror all the time. After all, Aliens to me was more sci-fi than horror. As formidable as the creatures were in that film, they really just weren't all that scary if you ask me. If you want to be frightened, go watch Alien or Alien 3.

But they were threatening. That's the bottom line.

SM

SM

#752
Alien - all of them - has always been horror stories in a science fiction setting.

SiL

SiL

#753
Quote from: SM on Oct 21, 2009, 11:28:06 PM
Black Destroyer and Discord in Scarlet are both parts of Van Vogts 'Voyage Of The Space Beagle'.  I've been meaning to read it for a long while, but a quick glance at the plot summaries on Wikipedia reveal the obvious inspiration for both It! and Alien.  From memory they settled with Van Vogt out of court.
I see. But didn't O'Bannon say that he thought the whole thing was a bit of a laugh considering it was one of the places he actually didn't take anything from? I'm referring to his introduction to the script on the Quadrilogy. Been a while on my end.


Mr. Domino

Mr. Domino

#754
Quote from: SM on Oct 22, 2009, 01:39:10 AM
Alien - all of them - has always been horror stories in a science fiction setting.

If you want to call Aliens and Resurrection horror movies, be my guest.

SM

SM

#755
Cameron and JPJ made horror films.  Whether you find them scary or not is neither here nor there.

QuoteI see. But didn't O'Bannon say that he thought the whole thing was a bit of a laugh considering it was one of the places he actually didn't take anything from? I'm referring to his introduction to the script on the Quadrilogy. Been a while on my end.

I recall something similar too.  But based on those wiki descriptions the similarities are blatant for Van Vogt to make a case - whether O'Bannon actually nicked them or not.

steveperry

steveperry

#756
A  couple of points: If a moviemaker admits he swiped something from somebody in particular, he is liable for it. Because he said he didn't steal it from this guy or that doesn't make it so.

Cameron swiped The Terminator from Harlan Ellison. And was foolish enough to admit it to a journalist, which is why Harlan's name got put on the DVDs and he got a nice financial settlement. Van Vogt did, too.

People in Hollywood steal stuff all the time and hope to get away with it. Mostly, they do. Sometimes they don't.

Trying to imbue the xenomorphs with depth came from the comic and novel writers. What they have in the movies is shallow at best, and one-note. All they do is eat and reproduce. I don't see any culture anywhere more complex than an ant hill or a bee hive.

Alien was a haunted house in space movie, and scary more because you mostly saw only glimpses of the monster as it went "Gotcha!"

A2 was science fiction, and Heinlein's bug hunt.

A3 was back to horror and, for my money, a waste of time. It made A2 moot, and I thought A2 was the best of the bunch. That's taste, and how I see it. No point in arguing that.

A monster need not be intelligent to be scary. Nor does it need to be invulnerable. The Alien queen had enough sense to realize that an elevator did what it did.

I don't see the drones as anything but ot-nay oot-tay ight-bray. For all I know, they are telepathic and the queens order them around like pawns. I could make a good case for that, and surely enough hints have been dropped that this is possible, even likely. They don't seem to have any language, though maybe it's ultrasonic or based on pheromones.

It doesn't matter. They don't really exist. They are all spun from imaginary cloth, and as real as Sherlock Holmes and Han Solo. Whatever life they have comes from the puppeteers who make them dance. As one of the puppeteers, I got to pull the strings a few times. I did it like I thought it made sense.

Aliens, who are cross between lobsters and wasps, with acid for blood and big ole teeth and sharp tails, started out as gotcha-monsters in a movie about space truck drivers. All they needed was to look scary and be able to kill people. And that's all they did.

And all they needed to do.

Still is. Making them "intelligent" serves no purpose. If they were very bright, they'd have won more than they lost, and they didn't. Ipso facto.

War Wager

War Wager

#757
QuoteStill is. Making them "intelligent" serves no purpose. If they were very bright, they'd have won more than they lost, and they didn't. Ipso facto.

Their ultimate deaths in the finale's were unavoidable, even if they were brain boxes or air heads.

MadassAlex

MadassAlex

#758
Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PM
Trying to imbue the xenomorphs with depth came from the comic and novel writers. What they have in the movies is shallow at best, and one-note.

I have to disagree with you entirely there. What the comics and novels have done is introduce the fanciful ideas of individual writers that don't really have a narrative role beyond, "hey, this would be cool". I recall one book trying to tell me that the Xenomorphs were creations of mankind, when the first movie had Alien eggs in a vessel that predated human space travel. One comic had a balls-out retarded Alien-Predator-Human hybrid that shat out facehuggers and threw them.

Another comic had an instance of a Predator, human and Alien Queen teaming up. There was an Alien King in one comic, too, although it served no purpose because it basically just died anyway. Not that it had any place within the life-cycle.

The EU works are - for the most part - ridiculously under-considered on the part of the writer. They do not add any depth to the Alien creature at all and tend to ignore what gives the Alien depth (and it is more considerable than you may think) it has. The Alien doesn't need a culture, a language or anything that makes a human being interesting. Its psychosexuality, necromorphic form and frighteningly savvy psychology give it draw. 

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PMAll they do is eat and reproduce. I don't see any culture anywhere more complex than an ant hill or a bee hive.

There doesn't need to be a culture. Aliens are avatars of survivalism - anything that doesn't contribute to death, reproduction or survival is pointless, which is the draw of their villainy. They're unrelenting enemies because they don't suffer from human weaknesses or needs.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PMA monster need not be intelligent to be scary. Nor does it need to be invulnerable. The Alien queen had enough sense to realize that an elevator did what it did.

Sure, but dumb enemies are generally either in video games or are interesting because they don't know what they're doing. Having a creature designed as a consummate icon of predatory evolution act unintelligently is just defeating the purpose before you even put pen to paper (or finger to key). Aliens being invulnerable doesn't matter - if their behaviour in EU works was consistent with the movies, then they wouldn't present themselves as targets even half the time we see them in the comics.

As SiL pointed out, the Alien Queen sat on her bottom when the first Alien at least changed location and went somewhere that wasn't exploding. And there didn't seem to be many other Aliens that wanted to stick around.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PMI don't see the drones as anything but ot-nay oot-tay ight-bray. For all I know, they are telepathic and the queens order them around like pawns. I could make a good case for that, and surely enough hints have been dropped that this is possible, even likely. They don't seem to have any language, though maybe it's ultrasonic or based on pheromones.

On the other hand, the Queen made definite physical movements to ward off the Aliens in the egg chamber. In A:R, the Alien that was chosen to be a sacrifice for the sake of escape didn't seem very willing at all. It seems more likely to me that Aliens are instructed by the Queen in extremely general terms but have enough individual intelligence to solve problems and choose proper targets themselves - as is necessary for a such a survivalist.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PMIt doesn't matter. They don't really exist. They are all spun from imaginary cloth, and as real as Sherlock Holmes and Han Solo. Whatever life they have comes from the puppeteers who make them dance. As one of the puppeteers, I got to pull the strings a few times. I did it like I thought it made sense.

Sure thing. I don't blame you for putting your thoughts to paper because it's what any of us would've done given the opportunity you were given. The disparity between the Alien creatures in the series of the same name and the Alien creatures within AvP media is really throwing, however. It's clear that the Alien has been downgraded to make way for the Predator and that just seems unnecessary.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 09:37:23 PMAliens, who are cross between lobsters and wasps, with acid for blood and big ole teeth and sharp tails, started out as gotcha-monsters in a movie about space truck drivers. All they needed was to look scary and be able to kill people. And that's all they did.

And all they needed to do.

Still is. Making them "intelligent" serves no purpose. If they were very bright, they'd have won more than they lost, and they didn't. Ipso facto.

Making them intelligent makes them more competent foes. Ergo, more of a threat. Ergo, they produce more narrative and dramatic tension. There's a reason why so many EU comics and novels aren't gripping - portraying the Alien as weak, they set up a sort of safety zone where the reader doesn't feel threatened by the capabilities of the Alien.

As for winning more than they lost:

They did.

In the first film, Ripley threw it out into space, but it caused the destruction of the Nostromo and killed every other crew member. In the second film, there were four survivors out of almost twenty characters and Hadley's Hope was levelled. In Alien 3, one survivor. A:R, an entire military vessel's worth of soldiers was evacuated (and many killed) over the release of seven Aliens before the vessel was smashed into Earth.

The killcount doesn't really lie.

steveperry

steveperry

#759
In the first film, Ripley threw it out into space, but it caused the destruction of the Nostromo and killed every other crew member. In the second film, there were four survivors out of almost twenty characters and Hadley's Hope was levelled. In Alien 3, one survivor. A:R, an entire military vessel's worth of soldiers was evacuated (and many killed) over the release of seven Aliens before the vessel was smashed into Earth.

The killcount doesn't really lie.

Actually, yeah, it does lie.

The crew of the Nostromo were typical monster-movie idiots and every place they had a choice, they picked the stupid one. Even so, Ripley survived, the xeno froze in space, so the humans won. Last woman standing.

Twenty characters in A2 versus how many Aliens? Hundreds, at least, maybe thousands. When the cutting was done, the aliens were all dead, and Ripley, Newt, and Hicks weren't. Humans over Aliens.

A3 I didn't care. The movie was lost me when the ship crashed.

A4. Ho hum. Who was left at the credit crawl? Some of the people, yets?

AvP I and II, how many xenos running loose?

Body count doesn't determine who wins. Never has.

Your comments are articulate and well-considered. I just don't agree with them. The Xenos seem like bugs to me, and while you are obviously passionate in your belief, I don't hear anything that changes my mind. Sorry.

MadassAlex

MadassAlex

#760
Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 11:37:42 PM
Actually, yeah, it does lie.

The crew of the Nostromo were typical monster-movie idiots and every place they had a choice, they picked the stupid one. Even so, Ripley survived, the xeno froze in space, so the humans won. Last woman standing.

On the contrary, the crew of the Nostromo were notable for having a plan and enacting it with focus and some modicum of leadership. The plan to shoot it out the airlock was one that was a failure due to the failure of the original motion tracker, and the plan to take their chances and leave would've worked if they weren't apprehended by the Alien.

Each kill the Alien made was not due to the incompetence of the Nostromo crew, but the strength of the Alien.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 11:37:42 PMTwenty characters in A2 versus how many Aliens? Hundreds, at least, maybe thousands. When the cutting was done, the aliens were all dead, and Ripley, Newt, and Hicks weren't. Humans over Aliens.

157. 160+ if you count the Marines that were hauled off in the initial confrontation. This number was drawn from Burke's statement, if I remember correctly, of how many colonists were on LV-426. Obviously, captured Marines made for more hosts.

Most were killed in the blast at the end, with relatively few killed by the Marines themselves. Since it's all off-camera, we can only interpret the kills, but I'd hazard a guess and say that Alien fatalities were minimal in the first confrontation. During the second one in Operations and the vents, they'd have been larger, but still not substantial enough to actually make the Aliens back off.

Remember that, after the Operations battle, there were still enough Aliens to overwhelm the motion tracker. And if there were only 160 or so to begin with, not that many could've died thus far.

Quote from: steveperry on Oct 22, 2009, 11:37:42 PMYour comments are articulate and well-considered. I just don't agree with them. The Xenos seem like bugs to me, and while you are obviously passionate in your belief, I don't hear anything that changes my mind. Sorry.

Thanks, and I extend the same to you. This kind of discussion occurs a lot on this forum, and I wanted to have it with someone in a position of relative influence within the franchise. And now I have.

One last note. Sorry.  :P

Quote from: James CameronNow this is a distinction - I never actually got a sense in the first film that the Alien actually had an intelligence that allowed it to manipulate their technology, but I didn't see that necessarily as a barrier here, because certainly these creatures have been around long, you know. You have to remember, the Alien in the first film had only been alive for twenty-four hours, it was still an infant even though it had grown full size.
These Aliens have had weeks or months to figure things out. There's no reason they couldn't figure out how the electrical system worked and that sort of thing. I'm not saying they're technological, but there's rudimentary stuff. So the implication here is that they're actually pretty clever. And I think it's clear by the end of the film that the Alien Queen knows how to operate an elevator, if nothing else.

SiL

SiL

#761
QuoteThe crew of the Nostromo were typical monster-movie idiots and every place they had a choice, they picked the stupid one.
We went over this in detail, and when looking at the situation as presented, the only thing that really stands out as stupid is Kane sticking his face in the egg. Everything else was justifiable given the circumstances.

QuoteTwenty characters in A2 versus how many Aliens? Hundreds, at least, maybe thousands. When the cutting was done, the aliens were all dead, and Ripley, Newt, and Hicks weren't. Humans over Aliens.
Thermonuclear explosion caused by ruptured cooling units over Aliens. The humans did very little - For all their hardware and talks of their baddassery, the on-screen kills (This is including the sentry gun sequence) was only in the 20s. Not bad considering Aliens have no defense at long range.

(Maybe thousands of Aliens? From where? Colony population was only 157 or so. And some people clearly didn't get to be used as hosts.)

steveperry

steveperry

#762
Yeah, we went over it in detail and I still think they were stupid. Thelma and Louise in space.

However you want to slice it, when the movie was over -- stay with me here -- all the Aliens in it were dead, weren't they? And Ripley wasn't.

I'm not saying that the smart always survive. In this case, that's what happened.


MadassAlex

MadassAlex

#763
Sure, but that was circumstantial more than anything. The Marines didn't intend to cause the rupture that caused the explosion and were desperately trying to escape before that happened.

Only one Marine and two civilians escaped while the explosion did the work for them. The Marines didn't defeat the Aliens as much as they messed up and, well, died, mostly.

SM

SM

#764
Didn't the much smarter Predators invariably get beat too?

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News