Blomkamp is officially making an Alien film

[Perfect-Organism]

I agree to strongly disagree with you on this point.  Newt became the raison D'etre for Ripley to go on.  That child was arguably more important than Hicks.  Hicks was just a super cool addition.  I cansee though why back in the day Sigourney didn't want him back for Alien 3.  He could have stolen her spotlight and ALL FILMS are about the strength of woman (maternity aside).  But Sigourney's decisions basically painted her character into a corner.  It was kind of selfish if you think about it.

[HuDaFuK]

I cansee though why back in the day Sigourney didn't want him back for Alien 3.  He could have stolen her spotlight and ALL FILMS are about the strength of woman (maternity aside).  But Sigourney's decisions basically painted her character into a corner.  It was kind of selfish if you think about it.

Sigourney had nothing to do with it. She only wanted Ripely to die. Hicks was killed off by the writers before Weaver got anywhere near it.

[Russ]

I know the feeling, Russ.

HuDa is completely right. Hicks and Newt are no more vital to the over-arcing story of the Alien than Morse or Johner. They maybe more likable (Newt is debatable) but no more important. Hicks and Newt are important to Aliens because the theme of Aliens was the atomic family and maternity.

That theme wasn't present in any other Alien film. Morse is just as vital to Alien 3 because that was a film about desperation and hopelessness. What's more hopeless than the dredges of humanity flung out into space.

I think we may be getting to the heart of the matter, Hicks (it only took 45 pages). The second two films are lesser than the first because of the changes written to Ripley. We (the Aliens fans we) know that A3 went through a gazillion rewrites, sets being built with no script in place... all that stuff.

But here's the thing: "most people" need to connect with movie characters on an emotional level. I was blown away with PO's post because this really just occurred to me (in this context) when he wrote it. Morse might be funny in a deranged way, Johnner might be a "cool" anti-hero but we don't really give a crap about them. We don't connect with them, we don't care if they live or die.

The crews of the Nostromo and Sulaco on the other hand, we do care. And Ripley cares about them (in 3 she cares about killing the alien, in 4... actually, I don't know about 4).

We (general public we) especially care about Hicks, Ripley and Newt and we hope that they will end up happy ever after (they hint at all the time. The way Hicks is looking at her when she's doing her opening speech, the "I can take care of myself" piece, the "See you, Ellen" bit... the way Ripley deals with Newt's hot chocolate issues, the way she sleeps under the cot... all that stuff.

Now, I get that A3 wasn't supposed to be like that - it is all the things you say it is. But perhaps it fails because, ultimately, we can't connect with anyone in that movie. It's dark and depressing, a "fitting end" all that stuff. But it's a flawed movie as everyone acknowledges both in technical terms (rewrites etc) and in emotional terms.

Whereas 1 and 2 win on all levels because of the characters and the attachment we and Ripley feel towards them to a greater or lesser extent. She has a relationship with all of them to a greater or lesser extent - even Parker and Brett who she doesn't like particularly (or perhaps vice versa).

So no, Hicks and Newt aren't important in the story as we have it - but they are important to the character and I'm thinking that PO has nailed why 3 and 4 are widely regarded as forgettable and / or crap by Joe Public, whereas 1 and 2 make onto every list of "Best Sci-Fi Movies" since lists of Best Sci-Fi movies started coming out. The themes of 3 (and 4) are wrong for the character established in one and two and they failed because of it.

What do you think?

[Tough little S.O.B.]

I couldn't care less about Hicks and Newt outside the ALIENS movie.

Some people agree, some disagree, but saying that MOST people do isn't the truth, as saying most people don't isn't either.

Unless somebody has a poll about it saying otherwise.

I Don't want A3 dismissed, and even tho I absolutely despise A:R, I don't think they are dismissing it, and it would feel really strange if they did.

Anyway, this is an interesting debate but absolutely pointless at this moment.

[Perfect-Organism]

I couldn't care less about Hicks and Newt outside the ALIENS movie.

That is really cold.  But I guess eponymously so.

[Valaquen]

HuDa is completely right. Hicks and Newt are no more vital to the over-arcing story of the Alien than Morse or Johner. They maybe more likable (Newt is debatable) but no more important. Hicks and Newt are important to Aliens because the theme of Aliens was the atomic family and maternity.

That theme wasn't present in any other Alien film. Morse is just as vital to Alien 3 because that was a film about desperation and hopelessness. What's more hopeless than the dredges of humanity flung out into space.

I disagree, for reasons that have been very well explained here already. Newt especially has far more function than Morse or Johner. Remove Newt from Aliens and see what you're left with. Do the same for these other aforementioned characters and what happens? The movies lose a couple of one-liners.

There's also another consideration: that outside of these forums and fan circles, the other movies might as well not exist. We are outnumbered, I would hazard to say, by casual fans who still hold Alien and Aliens very close but don't come online to dissect the movies. Some of the biggest fans I know have never so much as graced a forum. Alien 3 and 4 are lesser works seems to be the general response, unless you appreciate, say, Alien 3 for various aesthetic reasons. History is littered with lesser works. A successful series should make concessions with its continuity or it won't survive. This is new to the realm of cinema because film is still in its relative infancy compared to, say, poetics and other forms of fiction.

I can imagine that hundreds of years ago there were folk who might have said, "I love Arthurian literature but I ignore anything that Layamon or Wace wrote," and others might have said in retort, "But it's important to the canon! You can't just ignore so-and-so. It would be a headf**k!"

We have to make room for new works, even if they sometimes override established ones. It might seem palimpsestuous but that's been the nature of storytelling since its beginnings. We might not get something that's better, but that's the gamble. I say if Neill and Fox think they can do something with a Hicks/Ripley angle, then bring it. I imagine general audiences might be relieved that they only have to swat up on two (classic) movies rather than a messy four.

[Perfect-Organism]

HuDa is completely right. Hicks and Newt are no more vital to the over-arcing story of the Alien than Morse or Johner. They maybe more likable (Newt is debatable) but no more important. Hicks and Newt are important to Aliens because the theme of Aliens was the atomic family and maternity.

That theme wasn't present in any other Alien film. Morse is just as vital to Alien 3 because that was a film about desperation and hopelessness. What's more hopeless than the dredges of humanity flung out into space.

I disagree, for reasons that have been very well explained here already. Newt especially has far more function than Morse or Johner. Remove Newt from Aliens and see what you're left with. Do the same for these other aforementioned characters and what happens? The movies lose a couple of one-liners.

There's also another consideration: that outside of these forums and fan circles, the other movies might as well not exist. We are outnumbered, I would hazard to say, by casual fans who still hold Alien and Aliens very close but don't come online to dissect the movies. Some of the biggest fans I know have never so much as graced a forum. Alien 3 and 4 are lesser works seems to be the general response, unless you appreciate, say, Alien 3 for various aesthetic reasons. History is littered with lesser works. A successful series should make concessions with its continuity or it won't survive. This is new to the realm of cinema because film is still in its relative infancy compared to, say, poetics and other forms of fiction.

I can imagine that hundreds of years ago there were folk who might have said, "I love Arthurian literature but I ignore anything that Layamon or Wace wrote," and others might have said in retort, "But it's important to the canon! You can't just ignore so-and-so. It would be a headf**k!"

We have to make room for new works, even if they sometimes override established ones. It might seem palimpsestuous but that's been the nature of storytelling since its beginnings. We might not get something that's better, but that's the gamble. I say if Neill and Fox think they can do something with a Hicks/Ripley angle, then bring it. I imagine general audiences might be relieved that they only have to swat up on two (classic) movies rather than a messy four.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Russ]

Anyway, this is an interesting debate but absolutely pointless at this moment.

</avpgalaxyforum>

[xeno-kaname]

HuDa is completely right. Hicks and Newt are no more vital to the over-arcing story of the Alien than Morse or Johner. They maybe more likable (Newt is debatable) but no more important. Hicks and Newt are important to Aliens because the theme of Aliens was the atomic family and maternity.

That theme wasn't present in any other Alien film. Morse is just as vital to Alien 3 because that was a film about desperation and hopelessness. What's more hopeless than the dredges of humanity flung out into space.

I disagree, for reasons that have been very well explained here already. Newt especially has far more function than Morse or Johner. Remove Newt from Aliens and see what you're left with. Do the same for these other aforementioned characters and what happens? The movies lose a couple of one-liners.

There's also another consideration: that outside of these forums and fan circles, the other movies might as well not exist. We are outnumbered, I would hazard to say, by casual fans who still hold Alien and Aliens very close but don't come online to dissect the movies. Some of the biggest fans I know have never so much as graced a forum. Alien 3 and 4 are lesser works seems to be the general response, unless you appreciate, say, Alien 3 for various aesthetic reasons. History is littered with lesser works. A successful series should make concessions with its continuity or it won't survive. This is new to the realm of cinema because film is still in its relative infancy compared to, say, poetics and other forms of fiction.

I can imagine that hundreds of years ago there were folk who might have said, "I love Arthurian literature but I ignore anything that Layamon or Wace wrote," and others might have said in retort, "But it's important to the canon! You can't just ignore so-and-so. It would be a headf**k!"

We have to make room for new works, even if they sometimes override established ones. It might seem palimpsestuous but that's been the nature of storytelling since its beginnings. We might not get something that's better, but that's the gamble. I say if Neill and Fox think they can do something with a Hicks/Ripley angle, then bring it. I imagine general audiences might be relieved that they only have to swat up on two (classic) movies rather than a messy four.

Agreed!

[KiramidHead]

I can imagine that hundreds of years ago there were folk who might have said, "I love Arthurian literature but I ignore anything that Layamon or Wace wrote," and others might have said in retort, "But it's important to the canon! You can't just ignore so-and-so. It would be a headf**k!"

I love this paragraph so much. We'd only lose the freaking Round Table completely of we ignored them.

[Tough little S.O.B.]

I couldn't care less about Hicks and Newt outside the ALIENS movie.

That is really cold.  But I guess eponymously so.

You know they are not real people right?

Anyway, this is an interesting debate but absolutely pointless at this moment.

</avpgalaxyforum>

I mean that we have no idea yet about where the story is going, so we can debate of course, but some people debate as they knew something we don't. Anyway, as I said it's interesting to see all opinions of course.

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

Neill and Siggy spill all the beans!*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th8os-IfZhg#ws











                                                                                                                                                                                               



*well, not really...

[Adam802]

Neill and Siggy spill all the beans!*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th8os-IfZhg#ws












                                                                                                                                                                                               



*well, not really...

"It's Alien, Aliens, then this movie."  YES please!  Its retcon time, baby! 

[𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯]

R.I.P Alien³ & Alien: Resurection 

[RakaiThwei]

Wait wait wait...

"It's Alien, Aliens, then this movie."

So ARE we looking at a retcon?!  Please tell me this is conjecture.. Please.