AvPGalaxy Forums

Blomkamp’s Alien 5 is “innovative, amazing, performs fan service.” Having just spoken at the Aliens 30th anniversary panel at San Diego Comic Con, the topic of Neill Blomkamp’s Alien 5 inevitably came up. It seems to have been moved on from rather quickly as a man proposed to his girlfriend in the panel (they met watching the film) but James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver apparently had some small comments to make about the currently postponed Alien sequel.

According to this Tweet from Marcus Errico, “both Sigourney Weaver & James Cameron say Neill Blomkamp’s Alien script is “amazing, performs fan service & should be made.” Den of Geek elaborates further, saying that Weaver said that the script has “everything fans want.”

Blomkamp’s Alien 5 is “innovative, amazing, performs fan Service” according to James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver. Photo via Sideshow Collectibles.

According to That Hashtag Show, Weaver also called the script “innovative” and Outer Places are reaffirming what Sigourney Weaver told Entertainment Weekly last week about their commitments to other projects coming before Alien 5. Nothing else about the project was brought up unfortunately.

Keep an eye on Alien vs. Predator Galaxy for the latest news on Alien 5!

Update 25/07/2016 – The whole panel is now available for your viewing pleasure!

Link To Post

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 24, 2016, 01:00:07 AM
You know, it's funny. People didn't pay attention to Cameron's "endorsement" for Terminator Genisys. Read the words. He never actually compliments or praises the film. He just says shit like "I'm looking at things that are familiar" etc.

Quote from: XENOMORPHOSIS on Jul 24, 2016, 12:45:00 AM
Hmm Cameron seems to speak favorably regarding this film, then again he did endorse Terminator Genisys  :P

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 24, 2016, 03:35:33 AM
"Innovative, amazing and performs Fan Service."  So?  So what..?   

You can say exactly the same thing about all of the 'ALIEN' movies.  Each one of them is 'innovative' and 'amazing' in their own way.  It's the most meaningless phrase ever in the whole History of Meaningless Phrases. lol.

-Windebieste.

QuoteThe key part is that it has everything "that fans want". I wanted WY headquarters. A futuristic Earth. A correct, organic continuation of Aliens' story, just as Aliens continued Alien's story. Big scope, you gotta blow it up a bit each time. You can't go back to self contained.

Quote from: xenoboner on Jul 24, 2016, 05:01:48 AM
Now they need not be "happy", sure, there's a way to make it work if the screenplay is intelligent enough to pull it off, but Sigourney has just totally flipped flopped; she had a large say with Ripley's fate in 3, she wanted to "liberate the series" from being beholden to Ripley, then comes along Resurrection and she praises Whedon's script as, quote, "amazing", she got a fat pay check for Resurrection, lest we forget, and no doubt she'll get another one for Alienkamp.

Quote from: SiL on Jul 24, 2016, 05:31:43 AM
Performing fan service is what got us AvPR.

Stick to writing a good story, not jerking off the audience.

Quote from: genocyber on Jul 24, 2016, 05:55:00 AM
I refuse to get hyped for this after Prometheus. I just dont want it to be bad.

Quote from: SiL on Jul 24, 2016, 05:31:43 AM
Performing fan service is what got us AvPR.

Stick to writing a good story, not jerking off the audience.

Quote from: marrerom on Jul 24, 2016, 04:10:17 AM
and also stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R.

Quote from: DaddyYautja on Jul 24, 2016, 12:11:20 AM
what's fan service?

QuoteThere has been no movement on the film for a year besides Weaver talking about how great it would be.

QuoteI doubt she truly means this, she seems to just be looking for work

Quote...and doesn't really give a shit about what the fans think

Quote from: Adam802 on Jul 24, 2016, 02:28:19 PM
If this movie doesn't acknowledge A3/A:R, and is essentially an "alternate Alien 3", then Hicks/Newt never died and it makes perfect sense for them to appear as alive.  As an alternate continuity, it isn't overwriting A3/A:R at all.  Its just a separate continuity, so those of you who don't like it can disregard it just as I disregard A:R. Prometheus, and AvP.   But there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out, which is a movie I DO want to see.  A3 IS a great film, and has grown on me over the years, but was still a mess and not what even the people working on it wanted it to really be.  A:R on the other hand, was complete corny garbage and thank God its not continuing with Ripley 8.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 24, 2016, 02:32:06 PM

Quote from: Adam802 on Jul 24, 2016, 02:28:19 PM
If this movie doesn't acknowledge A3/A:R, and is essentially an "alternate Alien 3", then Hicks/Newt never died and it makes perfect sense for them to appear as alive.  As an alternate continuity, it isn't overwriting A3/A:R at all.  Its just a separate continuity, so those of you who don't like it can disregard it just as I disregard A:R. Prometheus, and AvP.   But there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out, which is a movie I DO want to see.  A3 IS a great film, and has grown on me over the years, but was still a mess and not what even the people working on it wanted it to really be.  A:R on the other hand, was complete corny garbage and thank God its not continuing with Ripley 8.

This is an internet forum. Would you kindly refrain from talking sense. Thank you.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 24, 2016, 02:32:06 PM

Quote from: Adam802 on Jul 24, 2016, 02:28:19 PM
If this movie doesn't acknowledge A3/A:R, and is essentially an "alternate Alien 3", then Hicks/Newt never died and it makes perfect sense for them to appear as alive.  As an alternate continuity, it isn't overwriting A3/A:R at all.  Its just a separate continuity, so those of you who don't like it can disregard it just as I disregard A:R. Prometheus, and AvP.   But there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out, which is a movie I DO want to see.  A3 IS a great film, and has grown on me over the years, but was still a mess and not what even the people working on it wanted it to really be.  A:R on the other hand, was complete corny garbage and thank God its not continuing with Ripley 8.

This is an internet forum. Would you kindly refrain from talking sense. Thank you.

Quote

She's got more than enough on her plate, four Avatar sequels and evidently cameos in every second sci-fi film that gets made these days. She's hardly scrounging around for a job.

Quote from: Adam802 on Jul 24, 2016, 02:42:05 PM
Ill try to tone it down a bit lol  ;)

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 02:44:25 PM
Doesn't mean that she isn't looking for more work though.

Quote from: Adam802 on Jul 24, 2016, 02:28:19 PM
If this movie doesn't acknowledge A3/A:R, and is essentially an "alternate Alien 3", then Hicks/Newt never died and it makes perfect sense for them to appear as alive.  As an alternate continuity, it isn't overwriting A3/A:R at all.  Its just a separate continuity, so those of you who don't like it can disregard it just as I disregard A:R. Prometheus, and AvP.   But there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out, which is a movie I DO want to see.  A3 IS a great film, and has grown on me over the years, but was still a mess and not what even the people working on it wanted it to really be.  A:R on the other hand, was complete corny garbage and thank God its not continuing with Ripley 8.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 24, 2016, 02:54:10 PM
Well said!

Step aside Alien 3!

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 24, 2016, 02:56:13 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 24, 2016, 02:54:10 PM
Well said!

Step aside Alien 3!

No, Alien 3 ain't going nowhere. That is exactly the point he was making dude!

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 04:44:13 PM
BlomStaff & Company...  :laugh:

This film does not look like it's going to happen and they're so pushy to do so.

Also, I think people are misunderstanding the skepticism and resentment. It's not the alternate timeline that is an issue or that retconning Alien 3/Ressurection is a mistake that will create a new ire in the franchise but rather that the whole concept of it sounds SO f**kING SILLY!

"Alien 3 took the film in a direction that I don't like, let's change it"
"RIPLEY IN ALIEN SUIT!"
"JAMES CAMERON SAYS IT WILL BE GOOD, CONFIRMED; IT'S GOING TO BE GOOD!"

Sigourney Weaver is not going to put me and my friends on a seat, in fact it will probably shy us away if anything.

The idea of a fresh batch of characters getting scorned is the strangest thing I have ever seen.

"It smells too much like a reboot!?"

So is this going to be a new trend? Hate reboots or films that deviate away from the aesthetic of their previous entries and counter that by shoving those aesthetics back in where they don't fit?

f**king eh, why not just make the introduction of Alien 5 start off with a segment from Tales from the Crypt while we're at it seeing as it sounds like so far that it would have the same qualities of a 21 minute special.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 24, 2016, 05:34:00 PM
It's entertainment people. They're not trying to re-write real-life history like the holocaust deniers.

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 05:47:29 PM
My gripe isn't that they are rewriting Alien 3 and Rez, it's that they are bringing back decrepid actors to reprise their roles.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 24, 2016, 06:03:21 PM

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 05:47:29 PM
My gripe isn't that they are rewriting Alien 3 and Rez, it's that they are bringing back decrepid actors to reprise their roles.

Would you be on-board then if they recast them?

The thing is, we don't know anything about the story. Biehn mentioned that it was a "passing of the torch" thing, so those decrepit, geriatrics with their wheelchairs and walking canes might not even be the main cast. Might well be something similar to the new Star Wars trilogy in which the original cast takes more of a backseat.

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 04:35:41 AM
And he literally shits on all that with the concept of bringing back geriatric washed up actors to reprise their roles as characters that died in their previous entries..

Quote from: Mantis Alien on Jul 24, 2016, 08:24:25 AM
I worry that it's just gonna be another Aliens. More guns and more dumb cannon fodder bugs.
Aliens is one of the greatest action movies of all time but I really dislike the thought of getting an Aliens2 just because the first one was great.
'Fan service' is never executed correctly.

Long live alien3

Quote from: marrerom on Jul 24, 2016, 04:10:17 AM
Yeah, at this point James Cameron's endorsement means nothing. He's praised garbage like Genysis and also stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R. What wouldn't he endorse?

QuoteHe's said before that his original project took place after the third film and that it was the conversations he had with Weaver which changed that. If you want to blame someone for the inclusion of Ripley and Hicks, then blame her (the one person in the industry who has defended - and continues to defend - 'Alien 3' more consistently than perhaps anyone else).

Quote from: Xenomorphine on Jul 24, 2016, 07:03:18 PM
There was a video interview he did several months ago, where he very openly said 'Alien' is his favourite in the series and that 'Alien Isolation' has had a direct and strong influence on how he visualises this project's presentation.

Quote from: Xenomrph on Jul 24, 2016, 06:34:36 AM

Quote from: SiL on Jul 24, 2016, 05:31:43 AM
Performing fan service is what got us AvPR.

Stick to writing a good story, not jerking off the audience.

Amen. Openly saying your movie will have "fan service" doesn't instill me with confidence.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 24, 2016, 07:43:35 AM
This is awesome news!  James Cameron thinks Blomkoamp's script is amazing!!!  That's the biggest endorsement one could receive.  Finally we're going to get the movie that should have been made!  I hope Cameron  is a producer!

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 24, 2016, 09:39:20 AM

Quote from: marrerom on Jul 24, 2016, 04:10:17 AM
and also stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R.

Where did he say this?

Quote from: Le Celticant on Jul 24, 2016, 10:21:14 AM
A film that starts in the mind as a fan service can not be good.
I mean... Paul W.S. Anderson and Strauses brother.
Blomkamp's turn now.

Quote from: System Apollo on Jul 24, 2016, 05:47:29 PM
My gripe isn't that they are rewriting Alien 3 and Rez, it's that they are bringing back decrepid actors to reprise their roles.

I would be equally if not more disappointed if they did that with Arnie in The Predator.

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 25, 2016, 05:08:27 AM
Most people here are forgetting something... this is Neil Blomkamp. Is not some wanna be fresh new director. Guy now knows his stuff and his CGI is always sober and photorealistic, while the designs in his films are pretty awesome and feasible looking and neat. An Alien film by him would make wonders to the franchise...  8)

Quote from: SiL on Jul 25, 2016, 05:39:34 AM
His effects are good, but his stories leave a lot to be desired. That's way, way more important.

QuoteMy gripe isn't that they are rewriting Alien 3 and Rez, it's that they are bringing back decrepid actors to reprise their roles.

I would be equally if not more disappointed if they did that with Arnie in The Predator.

QuoteI think that's a little unfair. We don't know how they're going to be used in the films.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 25, 2016, 04:08:50 PM
Also, as Hicks quite rightly says, people losing their shit over the fact Cameron apparently likes it really need to remember that he quite emphatically said the same thing about Terminator Genisys, which was total ass.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jul 25, 2016, 09:53:32 PM

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 25, 2016, 04:08:50 PM
Also, as Hicks quite rightly says, people losing their shit over the fact Cameron apparently likes it really need to remember that he quite emphatically said the same thing about Terminator Genisys, which was total ass.

He'd also be a bit biased towards Blomkamp's script since it is bringing his dead characters back.

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 25, 2016, 10:41:34 PM
The chemistry has changed and is irrevocably unrecoverable and a movie featuring actors portraying the return of Ripley, Hicks and Newt woulda been great...

...in 1988.

Back then, yes.  You could have retained the vibrant chemistry needed between these actors to portray 2 adults and a child.  Things have changed since then.  Dramatically changed.  30 years will do that, in case you haven't noticed.  Don't even expect that chemistry between these actors to be the same now.  Each of these actors has aged 30+ years since the movie was made. 

For example, if nigh on 40 year old Rebecca Jorden declares on screen "Call me Newt!" I'll laugh eternally at whoever wrote an adult into an 8 year old's role.  F*ck me if I don't.

You're better off expecting an 'ALIEN 5' from Blomkamp with fresh actors in new roles.  Retain the whole USCM vs Aliens scenario and have them go 'a bug stompin' as much as they like!  I don't think most fans give a shit if Ripley is in it or not when compared to the possibility of A WHOLE NEW 'ALIENS' EXPERIENCE that doesn't rely on soft 'alternate reality' retcon nonsense and tired actor shoe horn to tell a story that is basically bad fan service.

Gimme a fresh spin off 'ALIENS' movie.  Yes.  I'd love that.  Does it need Ripley, Hicks and Newt?  No.   

-Windebieste.

QuoteYou can say exactly the same thing about all of the 'ALIEN' movies.  Each one of them is 'innovative' and 'amazing' in their own way.  It's the most meaningless phrase ever in the whole History of Meaningless Phrases. lol.

QuoteYeah, at this point James Cameron's endorsement means nothing. He... stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R.   What wouldn't he endorse?

QuoteThe key part is that it has everything "that fans want". I wanted WY headquarters. A futuristic Earth. A correct, organic continuation of Aliens' story, just as Aliens continued Alien's story. Big scope, you gotta blow it up a bit each time. You can't go back to self contained.

QuoteNo one wanted a depressing, violent, gory, hopeless movie. Yuck! Alien 3 makes me want to brush my tongue.

QuoteBut I guess alternate timelines are inevitable with every long running franchise now it seems, so, so be it.

QuotePerforming fan service is what got us AvPR.

QuoteBring on an alternative timeline i think it will revitalise the franchise, hell it can not be worse than Resurrection or Requim.

QuoteBut there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out

QuoteIt's just entertainment, people. They're not trying to re-write real-life history like the holocaust deniers.

QuoteAnd this idea that the alternate timeline is the problem is beyond me. The premise of the original trilogy was that Ripley purged the species into extinction.

QuoteWhat are they passing on? Random occasions that our new protagonist is going to run into Aliens ???

QuoteWhy is ageism so acceptable here?

QuoteCameron was the only director and plot writer who was insulted on a deep level in the franchise by having literally everything he built up destroyed.

Quote
I never took that from the films. I mean it's a fine idea but nothing in the films suggests they are the only xenomorphs (xenomorph/xenomorphs?) in existence. The ones in the films came from one ship. Who knows if there are more out there?

Quote from: Nazrel on Jul 26, 2016, 04:25:22 AM
Ripley is awesome and all but enough is enough. I want to see a completely new cast and characters. I want fox to stop shoehorning Ripley into everything just to sell stuff. Which you dont need. Let Ripleys story be over.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AM
Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 26, 2016, 06:18:53 AM
Let's see... Sigourney is 66 (but looks fine), Biehn is 59 (and looks fine) and Carrie Henn is 40 (some exercise and she could look fine). I don't think they are waay too old. Remember The Force Awakens? Now, if the powers that be put the project on hold, then we've got a problem.. they are not getting any younger you know?

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 26, 2016, 06:25:52 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AM
Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

You're right.  She's just being shoe horned into one movie.  :P

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 26, 2016, 06:18:53 AM
Let's see... Sigourney is 66 (but looks fine), Biehn is 59 (and looks fine) and Carrie Henn is 40 (some exercise and she could look fine). I don't think they are waay too old. Remember The Force Awakens? Now, if the powers that be put the project on hold, then we've got a problem.. they are not getting any younger you know?

So you expect the same chemistry between 2 adults and a child to exist in this proposal?  Because that's what made Ripley, Hicks and Newt's relationship in 'ALIENS' work.

As  for 'The Force Awakens', nobody is campaigning to have deceased Han Solo returned to the series and retcon that movie.  That would just be stupid.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AMRipley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AMThe rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 07:59:49 AMNope.  The abandonment was where the mystery of Ripley was.

Quote from: SM on Jul 26, 2016, 08:32:46 AMIt was explained in the original version of Earth War.

Quote from: SiL on Jul 26, 2016, 09:35:17 AM
Newt being a head case kind of makes sense, but clearly isn't suggested by the end of Aliens.

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jul 25, 2016, 09:47:21 AM

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 24, 2016, 09:39:20 AM

Quote from: marrerom on Jul 24, 2016, 04:10:17 AM
and also stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R.

Where did he say this?

IIRC it came up in those articles asking about his opinions on AVP. I think they're on YouTube.

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 26, 2016, 02:31:55 PMNever seen him say AvP is better than A3 or A:R.

Quote from: Beatnation on Jul 26, 2016, 11:01:31 PM
First off, Ripley, Hicks and Newt all of them die in Alien 3, we got 25 years to get used to it, so deal with it.

I will give Blomhack's Alien 5 a chance if they show he can create a new and frsh take on the franchise with interesting and likeable new characters, instead trying to retcon other movies in favor or stupid wet fan-fiction, what a piece of shit director you must be if you can't tell a good story without reviving those long time dead characters.

Last time I checked the name of the franchise was ALIEN not ELLEN.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 11:05:36 PM

Quote from: Beatnation on Jul 26, 2016, 11:01:31 PM
First off, Ripley, Hicks and Newt all of them die in Alien 3, we got 25 years to get used to it, so deal with it.

I will give Blomhack's Alien 5 a chance if they show he can create a new and frsh take on the franchise with interesting and likeable new characters, instead trying to retcon other movies in favor or stupid wet fan-fiction, what a piece of shit director you must be if you can't tell a good story without reviving those long time dead characters.

Last time I checked the name of the franchise was ALIEN not ELLEN.

No.  Alien 3 was the wrong direction to go in in 1992, and it is just as bad with the passage of time.  It's time to fix the chronology, dump Alien 3 and its bastard child A:R and fix the franchise.

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 27, 2016, 12:15:45 AM
^ All of this.  All of the above as expressed by Alien Predator.  So many good reasons to not retcon. 

Blomkamp could do so much better and should do a fast 180⁰ turnabout on his current divisive proposal and retcon it from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: bboo on Jul 26, 2016, 12:58:45 PM
you really think people want to see a 44 year non actor school teacher and  70 year old woman run around with a flame thrower fighting aliens making out with a 64 year old dude...   not going to happen people.

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 27, 2016, 01:38:53 AM

Quote from: bboo on Jul 26, 2016, 12:58:45 PM
you really think people want to see a 44 year non actor school teacher and  70 year old woman run around with a flame thrower fighting aliens making out with a 64 year old dude...   not going to happen people.

You forgot the part about stripping down near naked in a space shuttle locker.  Hubba hubba!

-Windebieste.

Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jul 26, 2016, 06:17:04 PM
Alien 3 needs to die and be shoved into a shallow grave.
I mean, Aliens Colonial Marines also confirmed Hicks was alive  ;D so you can't say HE'S dead.

All that aside, I'd welcome a Blomkamp Alien film and I've been hoping for one since it was first mentioned. I'm a big fan of his movies so I'm sure the wait for this will be worth it.
I don't see why everyone assumes it'll be action packed and full of "dumb" bugs. You can easily have the aliens be dangerous and intelligent when facing the marines. If anything I feel that the movie would portray the aliens better if they did face the marines face to face and pushed them back without the marines losing some important aspect of their equipment prior to the encounter like they did in Aliens. Just because the Marines (or a security force) are in it doesn't mean the aliens will be dumb.

I'm not sure why fan service is such a trigger word either, it could be something as simple as bringing back the look of the marines or the pulse rifle, since those are (imo) as iconic to the franchise as the Alien or the face hugger. Fan service doesn't automatically equal bad things.

The picture of the marines "piloting" the Aliens is great, and probably exactly what WY wants. The Alien suit Ripley is wearing I can live without though.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jul 26, 2016, 11:26:14 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 11:05:36 PM

Quote from: Beatnation on Jul 26, 2016, 11:01:31 PM
First off, Ripley, Hicks and Newt all of them die in Alien 3, we got 25 years to get used to it, so deal with it.

I will give Blomhack's Alien 5 a chance if they show he can create a new and frsh take on the franchise with interesting and likeable new characters, instead trying to retcon other movies in favor or stupid wet fan-fiction, what a piece of shit director you must be if you can't tell a good story without reviving those long time dead characters.

Last time I checked the name of the franchise was ALIEN not ELLEN.

No.  Alien 3 was the wrong direction to go in in 1992, and it is just as bad with the passage of time.  It's time to fix the chronology, dump Alien 3 and its bastard child A:R and fix the franchise.

Nah, I'd much rather they dump Alien 5, it sounds like an even bigger bastardization than those films. It's your opinion that it was a wrong direction, to me, it was the right one. Alien 3 is amazing and I even love Resurrection.

Beatnation does have a point, it's been 25 years... can't we stop being bereaved and move on to brand new and interesting chapters? I truthfully think this franchise has so much potential to branch out and introduce new faces. Nothing is sadder than wasted talent and potential... seeing a great series cave in on itself and go "sod it, I give up. Retcon time!"

What's seriously wrong with going past Resurrection? It just boggles my mind. I mean, you can still have Ripley... 8... but she's still Ripley! And we can see more of that further future. Maybe see some new technology humanity developed in those 200 years. Perhaps even see the slow rise of Weyland-Yutani once more as they fix the damage that the Auriga has done to Earth and earns huge public support. Show Colonial Marines again in this setting with more advanced gear.

And we can still have a "passing of the torch" moment as a new lead takes over for an ageing Ripley 8. Speaking of which, the clones were artificially aged, so that means Ripley 8's age won't be something that needs a lot of explaining. It can be literally set a few years after Resurrection or a few decades if the story demands it (explain it as Ripley's advanced biology or maybe she was in a cryotube again)

So many opportunities and possibilities! It's a shame Blomkamp chose a more banal option.

QuoteIf there is more of them they haven't found them yet. That's why in Alien 3 the company went out of its way to bring an android developer and armed personnel to a prison planet via a transport ship in order to obtain the Alien.
In Resurrection they cloned Ripley and the Alien in order to obtain it.

QuoteIf the timeline were to have Weyland Yutani finding another derelict craft and Colonial Marines trying to fight off Aliens not only would that retcon Resurrection but also make Ripley's sacrifice pointless.

QuoteRipley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

QuoteIn that book, the relationship between our heroes has completely changed and evolved.  And yet it felt natural.

QuoteHan Solo's death was much more poignant.  He wasn't killed off in the opening credits.

QuoteRemember The Force Awakens?

QuoteFan service doesn't automatically equal bad things.

QuoteIt's really sad starting an Alien movie and everyone knows what they are already..Anyways just trust Ridley...not Ripley

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 27, 2016, 05:17:11 AM
He had nothing to do with that second picture. And that first picture? She's clearly wearing a suit, not morphing.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 26, 2016, 03:05:32 PM

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 26, 2016, 02:31:55 PMNever seen him say AvP is better than A3 or A:R.

"It was actually pretty good. I think of the five Alien films, I'd rate it third. I actually liked it. I actually liked it a lot." - Cameron

From an interview (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/22405) with Ain't It Cool News.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 11:05:36 PMAlien 3 was the wrong direction to go in in 1992, and it is just as bad with the passage of time.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 04:18:48 AMYou said it in your first sentence.  This is all opinion.  You want to pin the future of this franchise on the half-baked ideas of Alien 3 and A:R, that's fine.

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 27, 2016, 06:58:01 AMCheers for that.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:25 AM
Says who? Fox clearly didn't think so. With the exception of William Gibson's, every single one of the many scripts written for it killed off Hicks and Newt. They were dead in 1989.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:25 AM
Also the film made a ton of money outside America, so plenty of other people didn't think it was "the wrong direction" either.

Quote from: CelticPred97 on Jul 27, 2016, 05:12:20 AM
I'm not sure what point you were trying to make but yeah and I specifically remember the poor performances of Carrie Hen and Harrison Ford.'

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 27, 2016, 08:58:54 AM

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:25 AM
Says who? Fox clearly didn't think so. With the exception of William Gibson's, every single one of the many scripts written for it killed off Hicks and Newt. They were dead in 1989.

Not quite. One of the several many ideas for new Alien films had Hicks becoming a protagonist along with Ripley. That never happened... but what remained of the concept became the 1988 Aliens: Outbreak comic series by Dark Horse comics...  8)

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jul 27, 2016, 09:07:12 AM
I'm don't believe any of that played into Book 1/Outbreak though. I'm pretty sure Verheiden had no idea what was going on with Alien 3.

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 27, 2016, 09:13:19 AM
And yet the success of Outbreak clearly shows that fans really really wanted Hicks and Newt alive...  ::) the whole killing them off was probably a dumb studio thing.  ::)

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 27, 2016, 08:58:54 AMNot quite. One of the several many ideas for new Alien films had Hicks becoming a protagonist along with Ripley.

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 27, 2016, 08:58:54 AMThat never happened... but what remained of the concept became the 1988 Aliens: Outbreak comic series by Dark Horse comics...  8)

Quote from: Kronnang_Dunn on Jul 27, 2016, 08:58:54 AMBack in 1992, many many people (myself included) came into the cinema just expecting to see Hicks teaming up with Ripley and Newt in Alien 3.

Quote from: Nostromo on Jul 27, 2016, 03:27:10 AM

Quote from: JokersWarPig on Jul 26, 2016, 06:17:04 PM
Alien 3 needs to die and be shoved into a shallow grave.
I mean, Aliens Colonial Marines also confirmed Hicks was alive  ;D so you can't say HE'S dead.

All that aside, I'd welcome a Blomkamp Alien film and I've been hoping for one since it was first mentioned. I'm a big fan of his movies so I'm sure the wait for this will be worth it.
I don't see why everyone assumes it'll be action packed and full of "dumb" bugs. You can easily have the aliens be dangerous and intelligent when facing the marines. If anything I feel that the movie would portray the aliens better if they did face the marines face to face and pushed them back without the marines losing some important aspect of their equipment prior to the encounter like they did in Aliens. Just because the Marines (or a security force) are in it doesn't mean the aliens will be dumb.

I'm not sure why fan service is such a trigger word either, it could be something as simple as bringing back the look of the marines or the pulse rifle, since those are (imo) as iconic to the franchise as the Alien or the face hugger. Fan service doesn't automatically equal bad things.

The picture of the marines "piloting" the Aliens is great, and probably exactly what WY wants. The Alien suit Ripley is wearing I can live without though.

Erase Alien 3 or leave it I could care less. Same about Ripley or Hicks or Newt. The franchise is about THE ALIEN (S) not about Ripley!

Concerning Blomkamp, at least most of us agree this picture or thing he drew is total crap. I can no longer trust a director who drew this feces. Sorry. Game over.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn1.sciencefiction.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F04%2Falien-new-concept-art.png&hash=a14cb2371607eb158a9eba6918f1e7cc28208bb3)

That's like showing me a Newborn again! F no take this garbage and stick it. We've suffered enough with A3 A4 AVP AVPR!  4 straight loser films because of some directors or writers who wanted to show us they're artistic side@ boohoofkinhoo cry me a river.

Now you want to tell me that this is cool??? Aliens with sunglasses running around? That's it I've had it! I'm taking out the bat and breaking something! I can't take this. Someone tell him something lol.

https://cdna0.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/000/535/156/large/marek-okon-under-control-1920.jpg?1443927823

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 04:18:48 AM

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jul 26, 2016, 11:26:14 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 11:05:36 PM

Quote from: Beatnation on Jul 26, 2016, 11:01:31 PM
First off, Ripley, Hicks and Newt all of them die in Alien 3, we got 25 years to get used to it, so deal with it.

I will give Blomhack's Alien 5 a chance if they show he can create a new and frsh take on the franchise with interesting and likeable new characters, instead trying to retcon other movies in favor or stupid wet fan-fiction, what a piece of shit director you must be if you can't tell a good story without reviving those long time dead characters.

Last time I checked the name of the franchise was ALIEN not ELLEN.

No.  Alien 3 was the wrong direction to go in in 1992, and it is just as bad with the passage of time.  It's time to fix the chronology, dump Alien 3 and its bastard child A:R and fix the franchise.

Nah, I'd much rather they dump Alien 5, it sounds like an even bigger bastardization than those films. It's your opinion that it was a wrong direction, to me, it was the right one. Alien 3 is amazing and I even love Resurrection.

Beatnation does have a point, it's been 25 years... can't we stop being bereaved and move on to brand new and interesting chapters? I truthfully think this franchise has so much potential to branch out and introduce new faces. Nothing is sadder than wasted talent and potential... seeing a great series cave in on itself and go "sod it, I give up. Retcon time!"

What's seriously wrong with going past Resurrection? It just boggles my mind. I mean, you can still have Ripley... 8... but she's still Ripley! And we can see more of that further future. Maybe see some new technology humanity developed in those 200 years. Perhaps even see the slow rise of Weyland-Yutani once more as they fix the damage that the Auriga has done to Earth and earns huge public support. Show Colonial Marines again in this setting with more advanced gear.

And we can still have a "passing of the torch" moment as a new lead takes over for an ageing Ripley 8. Speaking of which, the clones were artificially aged, so that means Ripley 8's age won't be something that needs a lot of explaining. It can be literally set a few years after Resurrection or a few decades if the story demands it (explain it as Ripley's advanced biology or maybe she was in a cryotube again)

So many opportunities and possibilities! It's a shame Blomkamp chose a more banal option.

You said it in your first sentence.  This is all opinion.  You want to pin the future of this franchise on the half-baked ideas of Alien 3 and A:R, that's fine.  I don't.  I would say most people don't.  Both Cameron and Scott respect the script of Blomkamp, and with Scott producing the film, I believe we will get something really cool.

But I will agree that we don't need Ripley with Alien headgear.  That opens the door to all sorts of stupid..

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:25 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 26, 2016, 11:05:36 PMAlien 3 was the wrong direction to go in in 1992, and it is just as bad with the passage of time.

Says who? Fox clearly didn't think so. With the exception of William Gibson's, every single one of the many scripts written for it killed off Hicks and Newt. They were dead in 1989.

Also the film made a ton of money outside America, so plenty of other people didn't think it was "the wrong direction" either.

Quote from: Nostromo on Jul 27, 2016, 03:27:10 AM
Now you want to tell me that this is cool??? Aliens with sunglasses running around? That's it I've had it! I'm taking out the bat and breaking something! I can't take this. Someone tell him something lol.

https://cdna0.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/000/535/156/large/marek-okon-under-control-1920.jpg?1443927823

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:25 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 04:18:48 AMYou said it in your first sentence.  This is all opinion.  You want to pin the future of this franchise on the half-baked ideas of Alien 3 and A:R, that's fine.

Other than the Newborn, what ideas exactly were "half-baked" in those two films?

Quote from: PsyKore on Jul 27, 2016, 06:58:01 AMCheers for that.

No worries!

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 27, 2016, 03:12:35 PM
The possibilities were endless with the four surviving characters and the additions Cameron made to that world. A real organic upwards trend. Fox was so stupid to forego that.

Alien 3 is the definition of half-baked, once you take your rose-tinted glasses off.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 02:34:40 PMHere's your recipe:

1/4 baked - The premise of an alien on the Sulaco.

1/2 baked - An actual egg that makes 2 facehuggers aboard the Sulaco.

3/4 baked - Killing off 2 fan-favorite characters in the opening credits.

fully baked - Killing off Ripley, the main character

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 27, 2016, 03:12:35 PMAlien 3 is the definition of half-baked, once you take your rose-tinted glasses off.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 04:09:47 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 02:34:40 PMHere's your recipe:

1/4 baked - The premise of an alien on the Sulaco.

1/2 baked - An actual egg that makes 2 facehuggers aboard the Sulaco.

3/4 baked - Killing off 2 fan-favorite characters in the opening credits.

fully baked - Killing off Ripley, the main character

An Alien being on the Sulaco is half-baked? The Queen got there just fine at the end of Aliens. So having one Alien there is OK, but having any more than that is half-baked?

What's so silly about a Facehugger that can implant a Queen as well as a drone to protect her? That actually makes total sense from a survival point of view. Isn't the Alien meant to be the perfect killing machine? Why wouldn't it evolve to give the infant Queen a bodyguard from the word go?

Given how their deaths and their impact on Ripley are the major point of the first act of the film, it's hardly a half-baked idea to kill Hicks and Newt, even if the actual offing is done right at the start.

And Ripley's death is probably the most beautifully executed scene in the entire franchise. Calling her death "half-baked" is a bit ridiculous.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 27, 2016, 03:12:35 PMAlien 3 is the definition of half-baked, once you take your rose-tinted glasses off.

Actually it would be the definition of turning an almighty clusterf*ck into a surprisingly decent film.

Quote from: Kaltes on Jul 27, 2016, 07:01:22 PM
Somehow I feel like including the phrase "performs fan service" is not a good sign.

QuoteWe had a set-up for a grand confrontation between the mystery of the alien and our favorite heroine, and the whole opportunity was wasted on Fox's cheap quick-profit

QuoteThe whole "multiple spores from one egg" is a stretch

QuoteRipley is the core character, so killing her off is stupid.

QuoteI mean none of the mysteries of the Alien or the derelict were even addressed.  Even Ridley Scott was perplexed that nobody looked into that.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 07:05:31 PMTo give you an analogy that you may understand, it's like if we had Star Wars, and then Empire Strikes Back, and then at the beginning of Return of the Jedi, the main characters die in a silly accident at the Mos Eisley Cantina.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 02:34:40 PMHere's your recipe:

1/4 baked - The premise of an alien on the Sulaco.

1/2 baked - An actual egg that makes 2 facehuggers aboard the Sulaco.

3/4 baked - Killing off 2 fan-favorite characters in the opening credits.

fully baked - Killing off Ripley, the main character

Contrary to what many people on this site say, the Aliens series is not just about the "aliens" as characters.  It is still about the people, just as every good story is.  Ripley is the core character, so killing her off is stupid.  Newt gave her the reason to go on living, so killing her, kills Ripley on the inside.  And Hicks, well Hicks was just the coolest space marine ever, and he was the last one left from that James Cameron crew that everyone loved.  Killing him off too just closed the door on that whole Colonial Marine aspect of the second film.

You want new characters?  Fine.  You have them with the Prometheus series.  Now the fans of James Cameron's masterpiece also want to have a film which respects the accomplishments of that film.  Go Blomkamp!  Go Blomkamp!  (Just no Ripley / Alien face masks please.

Quote from: g2vd on Jul 27, 2016, 07:31:57 PM

QuoteWe had a set-up for a grand confrontation between the mystery of the alien and our favorite heroine, and the whole opportunity was wasted on Fox's cheap quick-profit

..But Weaver wanted Ripley to die and in fact it was a stipulation made by her that Ripley was to die in the film and it was in fact the only reason she got involved with Alien 3, that and the boatloads of money and being able to have the say on what should happen in the movie. so you kinda lost me here.

Fox was the one that never wanted her to die.

QuoteThe whole "multiple spores from one egg" is a stretch

How? we're talking about a fictional Alien Race with acid for blood how is that anywhere close to a stretch?

QuoteRipley is the core character, so killing her off is stupid.

While she may be the Core Character of several films she shouldn't be the core character of a whole Universe. and the idea of killing off a core character isn't stupid it depends on it's execution as anything does, if killing off a Core Character is needed to progress further in a Universe and explore other avenues than it can be done and probably should be done. otherwise if the very idea of killing off a character is bad Game Of Thrones couldn't exist.

QuoteI mean none of the mysteries of the Alien or the derelict were even addressed.  Even Ridley Scott was perplexed that nobody looked into that.

While I like the idea of exploring the SJs and Xenos I actually prefer their origins to not be explained much. because the Xenos represent the fear of the unknown telling us what they are and where they came from takes away that mystery, not to say they shouldn't touch on it especially in the case of the SJs. I just don't like having something explained to me that didn't need to be explained that's the main problems of the Prequel Series.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PM

Quote from: g2vd on Jul 27, 2016, 07:31:57 PM

QuoteWe had a set-up for a grand confrontation between the mystery of the alien and our favorite heroine, and the whole opportunity was wasted on Fox's cheap quick-profit

..But Weaver wanted Ripley to die and in fact it was a stipulation made by her that Ripley was to die in the film and it was in fact the only reason she got involved with Alien 3, that and the boatloads of money and being able to have the say on what should happen in the movie. so you kinda lost me here.

Fox was the one that never wanted her to die.

QuoteThe whole "multiple spores from one egg" is a stretch

How? we're talking about a fictional Alien Race with acid for blood how is that anywhere close to a stretch?

QuoteRipley is the core character, so killing her off is stupid.

While she may be the Core Character of several films she shouldn't be the core character of a whole Universe. and the idea of killing off a core character isn't stupid it depends on it's execution as anything does, if killing off a Core Character is needed to progress further in a Universe and explore other avenues than it can be done and probably should be done. otherwise if the very idea of killing off a character is bad Game Of Thrones couldn't exist.

QuoteI mean none of the mysteries of the Alien or the derelict were even addressed.  Even Ridley Scott was perplexed that nobody looked into that.

While I like the idea of exploring the SJs and Xenos I actually prefer their origins to not be explained much. because the Xenos represent the fear of the unknown telling us what they are and where they came from takes away that mystery, not to say they shouldn't touch on it especially in the case of the SJs. I just don't like having something explained to me that didn't need to be explained that's the main problems of the Prequel Series.

Yes, Weaver wanted her to die.  And that was dumb.  Youth has its poor decisions.  But the studio wanted to make a cheap film and cash in on the appeal of the first 2 films.  It was the blind leading the blind.  Now both the studio and Weaver, recognize the value of the franchise from a dollars and sense perspective, but also from a story perspective.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PMYes, Weaver wanted her to die.  And that was dumb.  Youth has its poor decisions.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PMYes, Weaver wanted her to die.  And that was dumb.  Youth has its poor decisions.  But the studio wanted to make a cheap film and cash in on the appeal of the first 2 films.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PMYes, we are talking about a fictional creature.  This is an opinion thing.  If you prefer your aliens to have all sorts of surprise powers and abilities that have not been explored, that's fine.  But make a story out of it, rather than sheepishly saying, this kinda happened.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PMIf you want a franchise with longevity, don't kill off the main character(s).

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 09:11:57 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PMIf you want a franchise with longevity, don't kill off the main character(s).

Sure, who cares what the film's about as long as we can make a sequel!

Give me a break.

QuoteThe fans always get the final word

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:55 PM
Yeah, what g2vd said.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 07:05:31 PMTo give you an analogy that you may understand, it's like if we had Star Wars, and then Empire Strikes Back, and then at the beginning of Return of the Jedi, the main characters die in a silly accident at the Mos Eisley Cantina.

Also, that's not a particularly great analogy.

For starters, it wouldn't be like offing the main supporting cast of Star Wars because Hicks and Newt were never even in the first movie.

There's also the fact Star Wars is a hell of a lot lighter fare than Alien, a series that's ultimately about the harsh bleakness of space, not family, magic and cute cuddly Ewoks.

(And even if that did happen in Star Wars, I wouldn't care so long as it brought something to the story, which I'd argue Hicks and Newt being killed does, at least as far as Ripley's arc goes.)

QuoteLol diminishing returns. Alien and Aliens were two of the top ten grossing films in their respective years, and had 9 Oscar nominations total. Both while being R-rated horror films.

QuoteYes, Weaver wanted her to die.  And that was dumb.  Youth has its poor decisions.

QuoteBut the studio wanted to make a cheap film

Quotecash in on the appeal of the first 2 films.

QuoteNow both the studio and Weaver, recognize the value of the franchise from a dollars and sense perspective, but also from a story perspective.

QuoteThe whole beginning of Alien 3 is as if someone were embarrasingly setting a stage.  They're like, ok first this happened, then this happened, still with us?  Oh, and this kinda happened, whew.  Ok, now that we got the play pretend out of the way, here's our story.  The first 10 minutes were just 1 half-baked clustertruck after another.

QuoteIf you want a franchise with longevity, don't kill off the main character(s).

QuoteYou know, exploring a mystery is not the same as solving it.  This is where Prometheus excelled.  Every question just led to more questions.  This could also have been the subject of Aliens 2.0.

QuoteWhoever didn't tell Sigourney to shut up and let us handle the story, and back up an extra dump truck of money into her driveway, was being financially irresponsible.

QuoteThey wasted time and money because they couldn't decide on a story, hence the whole script not being finished and sets never being used situations.

Quote from: windebieste on Jul 27, 2016, 10:40:28 PM

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jul 27, 2016, 07:54:55 PM
Yeah, what g2vd said.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 07:05:31 PMTo give you an analogy that you may understand, it's like if we had Star Wars, and then Empire Strikes Back, and then at the beginning of Return of the Jedi, the main characters die in a silly accident at the Mos Eisley Cantina.

Also, that's not a particularly great analogy.

For starters, it wouldn't be like offing the main supporting cast of Star Wars because Hicks and Newt were never even in the first movie.

There's also the fact Star Wars is a hell of a lot lighter fare than Alien, a series that's ultimately about the harsh bleakness of space, not family, magic and cute cuddly Ewoks.

(And even if that did happen in Star Wars, I wouldn't care so long as it brought something to the story, which I'd argue Hicks and Newt being killed does, at least as far as Ripley's arc goes.)

I want the 'Force Awakens' retconned because Han Solo died and clearly Disney has no idea what they are doing with their first 'Star Wars' movie. 

He should come back in an 'alternate' Universe and be given the ending he deserves!  That will fix the obvious wrongness of 'Force Awakens' which is a bad movie because he died unfairly.  This heinous crime against the fans desperately needs to be corrected. 

RETCON 'STAR WARS' NOW!   BRING BACK Han Solo!  Even if it takes 30 years we can do it.   All we need is some fan boy Director to stand up for this cause and we got to first base...  Get Harrison Ford on board (wave a 10 figure fee under his nose) and we're at 2nd...  Circulate some photoshop images of Han Solo in bounty hunter garments online and whip up some hype in the 'Star Wars' fan Community where EVERYONE wants to see this happen and 3rd Base is covered.  C'mon, Disney, we need you on board to make the home run!

BRING BACK HAN SOLO
IN THE CORRECT AND DEFINITIVE 'ALTERNATE'
STAR WARS UNIVERSE NOW!

This will be the greatest Fan Service ever!  You KNOW you want it!  We'll even bring back, Greedo, some Bothans and all those cute Ewoks coz they all died unfairly, too!

THE R(ETCON)BEL ALLIANCE NEEDS YOU TO FIX THIS MISTAKE!*

-Windebieste.

*For those of you not sure, yes.  This is a parody, OK?  It's what this current 'ALIEN 5' Proposal sounds like from the outside.

Quote from: Kelgaard on Jul 27, 2016, 11:49:29 PM
Look at it this way...

We'll probably never see a sequel to Ressurrection.  There's no demand.

QuoteThe Force Awakens is a great film

QuoteIts production was handled with care, from the scriptwriting stage to principle photography all the way to finalizing.

QuoteTFA and A3 are not remotely in the same league.

Quotecommercial success.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 27, 2016, 11:13:33 PM
The Force Awakens is a great film, with commercial success and critical acclaim. Its production was handled with care, from the scriptwriting stage to principle photography all the way to finalizing.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 28, 2016, 12:22:09 AM
Nah. Alien 3 is a poor film.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jul 28, 2016, 12:33:09 AM
Nah. Abrams is an amazing filmmaker. And so is Fincher. If Fincher had been allowed to on Alien 3 do what Fincher does, perhaps people would be more forgiving.

Quote from: FiorinaFury161 on Jul 28, 2016, 02:25:25 AM
As this has been mentioned countless times before: Considering what Fincher dealt with from FOX, practically no script, countless last minute changes and everything else going on, he did a helluva job.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jul 27, 2016, 08:48:28 PM
You know, exploring a mystery is not the same as solving it. This is where Prometheus excelled. Every question just led to more questions.

Quote from: Mr. Clemens on Jul 29, 2016, 04:38:19 PM
Funny thing is, if it does get made, it'll probably be just another so-so movie that we all complain about.  :P

Quote from: Master
link=topic=54986.msg2130717#msg2130717 date=1469815465
You mean, like predators?

That's exactly the effect of "I'll do a better sequel, f**k  the work of others! " attitude.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 01, 2016, 02:45:15 PM
He means Predators and Prometheus. And he's right on both accounts.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 01, 2016, 06:49:13 PM
Love it or hate it, good or bad, Prometheus did more to rejuvenate interest in the franchise than any entry since Aliens, and made a ton of money to boot. Your saying it didn't give anything to the franchise is way off the mark.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

1,000% wholeheartedly hope it doesn't happen or it is replaced by a much better idea without RIpley, Hicks n' Newt in it.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

1,000% wholeheartedly hope it doesn't happen or it is replaced by a much better idea without RIpley, Hicks n' Newt in it.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 08:09:15 PM

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

1,000% wholeheartedly hope it doesn't happen or it is replaced by a much better idea without RIpley, Hicks n' Newt in it.

I mean, I just don't get why they have to bring Hicks and Newt back? It's blatant Aliens fanboy service that will just make the Alien franchise lose even more integrity.

A:R pretty much opened up for an entirely new chapter with endless possibilities. It just boggles my mind that no one is giving it a try and would rather hack up the continuity and brutally shoehorn fanboy favorites back into some contrived new story line just because.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 08:15:48 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 08:09:15 PM

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

1,000% wholeheartedly hope it doesn't happen or it is replaced by a much better idea without RIpley, Hicks n' Newt in it.

I mean, I just don't get why they have to bring Hicks and Newt back? It's blatant Aliens fanboy service that will just make the Alien franchise lose even more integrity.

A:R pretty much opened up for an entirely new chapter with endless possibilities. It just boggles my mind that no one is giving it a try and would rather hack up the continuity and brutally shoehorn fanboy favorites back into some contrived new story line just because.

Because most people loved those characters and that doesn't even take into account the fanboys.  Besides, there just weren't as many A3 or A:R fanboys, so why appease them?  The Alien franchise has been trying to find its bearings since the debacle of Alien 3, and finally somebody with a grain of common sense decided to pick up the story at the point where it was still good.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 08:30:03 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 08:15:48 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 08:09:15 PM

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 04:34:40 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 30, 2016, 03:13:04 AM
Let's hope it doesn't

1,000% wholeheartedly hope it doesn't happen or it is replaced by a much better idea without RIpley, Hicks n' Newt in it.

I mean, I just don't get why they have to bring Hicks and Newt back? It's blatant Aliens fanboy service that will just make the Alien franchise lose even more integrity.

A:R pretty much opened up for an entirely new chapter with endless possibilities. It just boggles my mind that no one is giving it a try and would rather hack up the continuity and brutally shoehorn fanboy favorites back into some contrived new story line just because.

Because most people loved those characters and that doesn't even take into account the fanboys.  Besides, there just weren't as many A3 or A:R fanboys, so why appease them?  The Alien franchise has been trying to find its bearings since the debacle of Alien 3, and finally somebody with a grain of common sense decided to pick up the story at the point where it was still good.

A3's fanbase is growing, thank you, and more and more people admit that it got a lot of undeserved flack. I can assure you that most people don't give a crap about Hicks & Newt outside the Alien community and will only find it confusing and campy with this retcon stuff.

To me the story line was good at the end of ALIEN and then it flat-lined until A3 picked it up. Why not retcon ALIENS and then make a retcon story that patches ALIEN and A3 together? That's my A3 fanboy equivalency to what Blomkampf is doing. IT's moronic.

Seriously, A:R really opened up for so many possibilities and there is are a few Alien sequels waiting there to be made.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:05:27 PMAnd that is why we are sick of Ripley.

Quote from: g2vd on Aug 30, 2016, 09:15:43 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:05:27 PMAnd that is why we are sick of Ripley.

Are you literally speaking for everyone?

NO. the majority of us are burned out on the character because she's been the spotlight of FOUR movies and tons of EU stuff.

We want something new. For We Are Many.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:05:27 PM
Alien Predator, do you even see how you've contradicted yourself?

The silly thing that happened was a completely improbabe Alien encounter between Ripley and the Aliens in Alien 3.  That begat an even more improbable encounter.  And that is why we are sick of Ripley.  She was in one bad story after another.  If Alien 3 and A:R didn't happen you'd be saying her story wasn't explored enough.  Now is the right time to ignore those travesties and finish off her story with something more interesting, and then, I agree with you, we should move on to other characters.

It is most probable that Ripley wouldn't encounter the aliens for another 2 or three decades after ALIENS, or at least until the home-world is discovered.  Once that happens, it is probable that Ripley does everything she can to sabotage man's quest to weaponize the aliens.  That is such a better movie waiting to happen.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:29:24 PM
You are many, LOL.  Neither you nor I can quantify just how many, so who really knows?  But I am pretty sure that the number of people out there including casual fans or even non-fans would prefer the retcon, so all these vocal people who are trying to prevent it from happening are the Alien 3 fanboys and they don't represent the majority.  Why?  Because that's common sense.

Quote from: Kurai on Aug 30, 2016, 09:46:45 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:29:24 PM
You are many, LOL.  Neither you nor I can quantify just how many, so who really knows?  But I am pretty sure that the number of people out there including casual fans or even non-fans would prefer the retcon, so all these vocal people who are trying to prevent it from happening are the Alien 3 fanboys and they don't represent the majority.  Why?  Because that's common sense.

Well...

So far, according to the poll, more people want a new story without Ripley or with Ripley 8 instead. :P
Yes, this only accounts for 26 people, but it seems to go against your common sense. 73.1% of those 26 people on THIS forum want something other than Blomkamp's Alien 5.

It also sets a bad example for holywood, I swear I read somewhere that one of the other Marines who died in Aliens has come up to say he'd be good for reprising his role, I think it was Hudson... But as I've said many times, it throws out integrity. It's like if Game of Thrones started resurrecting chara... Ah... Wait... Dagnabbit!  ::)

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 09:34:21 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:05:27 PM
Alien Predator, do you even see how you've contradicted yourself?

The silly thing that happened was a completely improbabe Alien encounter between Ripley and the Aliens in Alien 3.  That begat an even more improbable encounter.  And that is why we are sick of Ripley.  She was in one bad story after another.  If Alien 3 and A:R didn't happen you'd be saying her story wasn't explored enough.  Now is the right time to ignore those travesties and finish off her story with something more interesting, and then, I agree with you, we should move on to other characters.

It is most probable that Ripley wouldn't encounter the aliens for another 2 or three decades after ALIENS, or at least until the home-world is discovered.  Once that happens, it is probable that Ripley does everything she can to sabotage man's quest to weaponize the aliens.  That is such a better movie waiting to happen.

It's not an improbable encounter.

In Alien, she finds them by chance.

In Aliens, after hesitating, she decides to go back to where she found them.

Now knowing Aliens, they always have a nasty trick. Alien snuck upon the Nostromo, Aliens, the Queen snuck aboard the Sulaco via the dropship.

Alien 3, she also snuck aboard an egg. I am aware that people were pointing out that the egg is in some awkward corner in a ceiling somewhere right near the cryo-pods but that doesn't get in my way of enjoying the film. It's still a decent film with memorable moments and quite a fan base.

Then Resurrection has her literally ripped out of death just so they can get the Alien within her DNA. Some EU sources do state the Facehugger gives its victim a type of cancer which helps form the Xeno, cancer alters DNA (or so I've heard) so it makes sense why they'd clone her to get the Queen.

So as you can see, she's been showing up in so many films that like g2vd said, we're starting to get burned out.

I mean, come on, even you weren't happy with Covenant just having a relative of RIpley. I think I remember you weren't happy with it, neither was I. It's like either Ellen or her family are cursed with this, and it's getting silly now. With Amanda it made some sense as she was heading out to look for her mother, but jeeze, now her grandma also had an encounter... *sigh*

Oh yeah, I forgot that in Sea of Sorrows, a descendant of Ripley's also had an encounter.

God... it's like, so long as your name's not "RIpley", and you're nowhere near ANY Ripley, you should be fine in this universe.  ;D

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:29:24 PM

LOL, I'm definitely not speaking for everyone.

QuoteYou are many, LOL.

Quoteso all these vocal people who are trying to prevent it from happening are the Alien 3 fanboys and they don't represent the majority.  Why?  Because that's common sense.

QuoteBut I am pretty sure that the number of people out there including casual fans or even non-fans would prefer the retcon

Quote from: Scorpio on Aug 31, 2016, 12:23:15 AM
I'm a huge fan of Alien 3 and Resurrection, in fact I watch them more than Alien/Aliens. 

Resurrection is a strange ending for Ripley, though.  It's a bit like the happy family ending of Aliens.  Imagine having Johner, Vriess, Ripley & Call instead of Ripley, Hicks, Bishop & Newt.  I always wanted to see a sequel but I'm not complaining, if Blomkamp's movie happens it happens.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 11:47:14 PM
I actually like Resurrection a bit more than Alien 3, so I'd hardly be classed as an Alien 3 fanboy.  :laugh:

But yeah, what Kurai said, they should just get things right the next time they make a story in the franchise. But I'd prefer they not retcon or reboot anything. Just carry on and start a new chapter if you must in the same timeline.

Quote from: g2vd on Aug 30, 2016, 10:37:25 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:29:24 PM

LOL, I'm definitely not speaking for everyone.

https://thumb7.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/1001462/126294965/stock-photo-mean-angry-bull-126294965.jpg

NO. Don't you dare Back-Peddle on me don't you dare!

You can say that "We" isn't a exact number and a whole number and it just meant some people. but you're wording specifically seemed to say that everybody that does not want Aliens "2" are just upset at the quality of the last two Alien movies or they are fanboys of A3.

QuoteYou are many, LOL.

It was a joke at you're comments.

Quoteso all these vocal people who are trying to prevent it from happening are the Alien 3 fanboys and they don't represent the majority.  Why?  Because that's common sense.

So...let me get this right you just said that no one knows how many people there are that don't want Aliens 2. but now you just went and MADE a estimate and profiling of these people, by saying they are nothing more than Alien 3 fan boys and are a tiny minority...in the same sentence. that makes sense because the lack of estimates, data and polls clearly suggest this...mathematically accurate count.

QuoteBut I am pretty sure that the number of people out there including casual fans or even non-fans would prefer the retcon

And I'm pretty sure those same people the way you described them wouldn't mind either way.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:24:26 AM... James Cameron's masterpiece.

... Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:24:26 AM... James Cameron's masterpiece.

... Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement.

Quote from: Mr. Clemens on Aug 31, 2016, 11:38:19 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:24:26 AM... James Cameron's masterpiece.

... Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement.

Wouldn't recommend going around calling people "Alien3 fanboys" while also saying things like the above.

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Aug 31, 2016, 11:56:04 AM

Quote from: Mr. Clemens on Aug 31, 2016, 11:38:19 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:24:26 AM... James Cameron's masterpiece.

... Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement.

Wouldn't recommend going around calling people "Alien3 fanboys" while also saying things like the above.

Let's refrain from using fanboy as an insult. We're all fans here. Alien just has a bit of an eclectic spread of genres and fans.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:24:26 AMOh no you didn't!!!

Quotebecause Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement

QuoteThe fact that we have about 30 super hard-core fans on here making their opinions heard pro or con, while fun to read, can hardly be considered representative of the broader public opinion.

QuoteThere were legions of people disappointed with Alien 3

Quoteand that is why nobody really has any high expectations from alien films anymore.  Blomkamp's idea represents a means to set things right.

Quote from: Novak 1334 on Aug 31, 2016, 12:13:59 PM
I've never understood 'fanboy' as an insult

Quotebecause Aliens represented the pinnacle of Science Fiction film achievement

Quote...What about 2001, 2010, Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien, Blade Runner, Dune, Forbidden Planet, District 9, Total Recall, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, The Day The Earth Stood Still, Solaris, ET, Plan 9, Titan A.E, The Last Starfighter anything

Aliens is a absolutely fantastic movie but THE pinnacle of Space Sci-fi....yeah no.

QuoteThere were legions of people disappointed with Alien 3

QuoteThere you go again with the gauging of the population with no numbers to support it. sure one can say that quite a lot of people didn't like Alien 3 when it first released which is true. but over time their opinions have softened on that movie and many have probably gone on to like the movie, once they let go of their preconceived notions on what Alien 3 should have been like and realized the quality of the actual movie.

Quoteand that is why nobody really has any high expectations from alien films anymore.  Blomkamp's idea represents a means to set things right.

QuoteI think those people are more distraught over the quality of the AVP films than they are A3.

Quote from: JokersWarPig on Aug 31, 2016, 12:53:46 PM

Quote from: Novak 1334 on Aug 31, 2016, 12:13:59 PM
I've never understood 'fanboy' as an insult

I have, but I've only seen it used as an insult to people who are a fan of something and don't admit its flaws when they're pointed out.
I completely embrace the fact that I'm an Aliens fanboy, and that's why I'm for Blomkamps film.

I'd be fine if it took place with completely different characters and still had the USCM, the movie would probably be getting less flak from people here if that were the case. I do think Hicks and Newt were killed off very unceremoniously, and it should have been done better, but I don't need them back.
I also don't need Ripley back. I liked Ripley in Alien and Aliens, but I don't need her back. I'd like the torch to be passed to other characters, and have a movie that's kind of a "spiritual" successor to Aliens.

Quote from: Novak 1334 on Aug 31, 2016, 12:13:59 PM
I've never understood 'fanboy' as an insult

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:53:24 PM
[It's not a nice phrase.  It implies that whoever this is aimed at is somehow immature.  We are all fans on here.  Otherwise, why bother coming to this site at all?

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 08:28:55 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 06:53:24 PM
[It's not a nice phrase.  It implies that whoever this is aimed at is somehow immature.  We are all fans on here.  Otherwise, why bother coming to this site at all?

I don't see it as something infringing on one's maturity level rather than how biased one is when it comes certain movies of the franchise.

Fanboy = Highly partisan / Biased.

I'm not going to pretend I'm not an A3 fanboy, because I am. I love that movie and personally think it's on par with ALIEN, albeit the two have completely different qualities. As ALIENS is a very different type of movie compared to ALIEN and A3 I simply don't like it that much even though I appreciate it's technical qualities and designs.

Just because a person is a fanboy it doesn't mean that you have to give into your fanboyism all the time. The idea to rather retcon a certain movie just because you don't like and because it killed off characters that you like rather than going with a natural sequel (i.e. take off from where the last edition/movie ended) IS fanboyism. To jumble and butcher everything already established just to get some revenge and to avenge your favorite movie IS fanboyism.

Like I said, imagine some director who thinks that ALIENS is hollywood sci-fi action trash would try to retcon ALIENS and find a more "favorable" story to bridge between ALIEN and A3 that didn't include Cameron's fun jive cardboard Marines, sappy Hollywood moments (Newt, Ripley, Hicks), boss fights (Powerloader vs. Queen), cannon fodder alien shooting galleries etc. and instead wen't for something more similar to ALIEN and A3? Not that it would ever happen, but let's say it did - you guys would freak out, and rightly so, because that would be blatant A3 fanboyism.

See what I'm getting at?

A:R opened up for endless new storylines, narratives and concepts - but for some reason we're still stuck with Ellen Ripley (not Ripley 8 ), Hicks, Newt and Colonial Marines... And even so - nothing says that we can't have the Colonial Marines in the world presented in A:R - maybe the leftover Colonial Marines is now a mercenary contractor business, maybe they are a branch of the Military? No Derelict on Acheron doesn't mean much as Prometheus opened up for the possibility of Engineer derelicts elsewhere. Sure, W&Y merged (?) with Wall-Mart, but that doesn't mean that it has to stay that way, or maybe some other mega-corporation can take their place as the Evil Empire? I mean, that is if you necessarily have to follow the formula given to us by Cameron in ALIENS.

Just because you didn't like A:R doesn't mean that the sequel has to be in the same vein as A:R. It's as if people think that making a sequel to A:R you will have to follow the tone and style of Jeunet and Whedon, when in reality you don't.

QuoteI mean I see your point, but the calibre of the films is just so much different.

QuoteAlien 3 is no where near that sort of level. The idea of retconning Aliens instead of Alien 3 is really an apples and oranges comparison don't you think?

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 08:28:55 PM
I don't see it as something infringing on one's maturity level rather than how biased one is when it comes certain movies of the franchise.

Fanboy = Highly partisan / Biased.

I'm not going to pretend I'm not an A3 fanboy, because I am. I love that movie and personally think it's on par with ALIEN, albeit the two have completely different qualities. As ALIENS is a very different type of movie compared to ALIEN and A3 I simply don't like it that much even though I appreciate it's technical qualities and designs.

Just because a person is a fanboy it doesn't mean that you have to give into your fanboyism all the time. The idea to rather retcon a certain movie just because you don't like and because it killed off characters that you like rather than going with a natural sequel (i.e. take off from where the last edition/movie ended) IS fanboyism. To jumble and butcher everything already established just to get some revenge and to avenge your favorite movie IS fanboyism.

Like I said, imagine some director who thinks that ALIENS is hollywood sci-fi action trash would try to retcon ALIENS and find a more "favorable" story to bridge between ALIEN and A3 that didn't include Cameron's fun jive cardboard Marines, sappy Hollywood moments (Newt, Ripley, Hicks), boss fights (Powerloader vs. Queen), cannon fodder alien shooting galleries etc. and instead wen't for something more similar to ALIEN and A3? Not that it would ever happen, but let's say it did - you guys would freak out, and rightly so, because that would be blatant A3 fanboyism.

See what I'm getting at?

A:R opened up for endless new storylines, narratives and concepts - but for some reason we're still stuck with Ellen Ripley (not Ripley 8 ), Hicks, Newt and Colonial Marines... And even so - nothing says that we can't have the Colonial Marines in the world presented in A:R - maybe the leftover Colonial Marines is now a mercenary contractor business, maybe they are a branch of the Military? No Derelict on Acheron doesn't mean much as Prometheus opened up for the possibility of Engineer derelicts elsewhere. Sure, W&Y merged (?) with Wall-Mart, but that doesn't mean that it has to stay that way, or maybe some other mega-corporation can take their place as the Evil Empire? I mean, that is if you necessarily have to follow the formula given to us by Cameron in ALIENS.

Just because you didn't like A:R doesn't mean that the sequel has to be in the same vein as A:R. It's as if people think that making a sequel to A:R you will have to follow the tone and style of Jeunet and Whedon, when in reality you don't.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 09:21:15 PM
You're ignoring that word fanboy has the word boy in it.  That is where the immaturity implication comes from.  It basically means that you think whoever you assign that term to, for a certain thing they do, is on the level of a child.  So what you said above, where you say that because I want Alien 3 retconned is fanboyism, you are effectively calling that idea childish.  It is an insult.  Absolutely.

QuoteYou would feel the same way if I said that the people who don't want the retcon are nothing but Alien 3 fanboys.  That is effectively what I said and its how we find ourselves in this polemic.  Anyway, I probably shouldn't have said it as I have absolutely no interest in insulting fellow fans, but I am trying to show the other side of the equation.  It's not ok to call people who want the retcon fanboys.  You're implying that the person is a child.  (I presume that there shouldn't be any children on this forum considering it is about a mostly adult films, but I may be wrong)

QuoteAlso Aliens is revered as one of the best sci-fi films of all time.  Alien 3 is no where near that sort of level.  The idea of retconning Aliens instead of Alien 3 is really an apples and oranges comparison don't you think?  I mean I see your point, but the calibre of the films is just so much different.

QuoteI stand by my assertion that Aliens was the pinnacle of sci-fi films at the time.  The overall look of the film really set the tone for what sci-fi would be for decades to come.  The other films like 2001, ET, Star Wars, also shared that sort of place in the annals of sci-fi, but when Aliens came out, it made them "look" dated.  Overnight, there was a sea change in the look of sci-fi that was brought on by Aliens.

QuoteI see the notion of "pinnacle" as an evolving thing.  It's zeitgeist.  The look of Aliens was overtaken by other sci-fi films over time, but it still largely resonates.  I would say that it has become such a huge influence, that directors are in a position where they are rebelling to find a different look.  Anyway, I know that there will be those that disagree.  That's fine.  It's common these days to rebel against the look of Aliens.

Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 31, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
I've said before that they could easily make a sequel to AR and reveal that the USM was actually a neo-communist rival to the corporatist nations of Earth, much like the UPP from William Gibson's Alien 3 script.  I mean, just look at their patch...

http://i66.tinypic.com/2q8aszq.jpg

It's all about the red star (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_star), Comrades.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 04:02:57 AM
Lol. Amazing. Aliens simply is one of the most revered sci-fi films of all time. That's fine if you don't think so, and that's fine if you love Alien 3, but your opinion doesn't detract from that. I hate Blazing Saddles, but I'm aware that it's one of the most revered comedies of all time! So in this case, the majority of the people love the apples and dislike the oranges, so to stock up on more apples and forgo the oranges makes sense.

QuoteAnd Cameron didn't invent the Alien movies, but he sure as hell expanded the universe and made one of the only two Alien films of quality. 50% of the good Alien films come from Cameron. :D

QuoteBut yeah, no one's gonna miss Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection when they get the boot. Neill's got some nice shiny apples to look at, but will they taste good? Likely! I'm willing to chuck the oranges to find out!

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Sep 01, 2016, 04:26:22 AM
Wow, BishopShouldGo, you once asked me if I was insane in my response to you showing my displeasure with Blomkamp's idea.

Looks like you are CRAZY for Aliens.  :laugh:

And yes, there'll be plenty of people who will miss Alien 3 and Resurrection, and I'll be among them.

I bet if Steven Spielberg came out and said "hey guys, ALIENS sucked because it was too different from ALIEN and it also made RIpley too out of character. I'mma retcon the shit out of it." You, Perfect Organism and many other ALIENS fans who are pro-retcon would be singing a vastly different tune.  :P

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:39:00 AM
What you just said is nowhere even near reality.  The reason nobody will ever retcon, much less want to retcon Aliens, is because IT IS ONE OF THE BEST SCIENCE FICTION FILMS EVER MADE!

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 04:46:10 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:39:00 AM
What you just said is nowhere even near reality.  The reason nobody will ever retcon, much less want to retcon Aliens, is because IT IS ONE OF THE BEST SCIENCE FICTION FILMS EVER MADE!

The main problem is that you keep ignoring that no one is saying that Aliens should get retconned, no one is saying that it is possible. What they're asking is for you to empathize and see how you would feel if something like that DID happen. I feel you're either purposefully ignoring that to keep the "TROLOLOLOL" rolling or simply can't empathize...  :-\

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:57:39 AM
(Though it's hard to empathize when you will still get to keep your Alien 3 and A:R blu-rays.  Come on, open your mind)

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 01, 2016, 04:55:20 AM
All Blomkamp has to do to please just about everyone and have all the fans on side is simple.  It's Soooo simple:  Ditch Ripley, Hicks and Newt.   Most, if not everyone, will still see that movie.  Even you. You'll love it, too!

Aliens!  USCM!  PULSE F*CKING rifles..!  Fresh characters!  New story!  Yeah bring it!!1!!!  How many people want to see that movie?

Does it need Ripley?

errr... Nope. 

Would you still want to see it even if 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection' aren't retconned?

YOU BET YOUR SWEET PAIR OF HONEY COATED NUTS YOU WILL!!1!!!!

A retcon is completely unnecessary. 

-Windebieste.

QuoteRetconning is a failure in consistency that shouldn't be allowed when a franchise actually has an ongoing narrative that doesn't need to be retconned.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:09:40 AM

QuoteRetconning is a failure in consistency that shouldn't be allowed when a franchise actually has an ongoing narrative that doesn't need to be retconned.

I'd hardly call 'sitting there stagnating for nearly 20 years and no one is interested in picking it up' an ongoing narrative.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:34:42 AM
I love Alien Resurrection and would love to see more from Ripley8, Call, Vriess and Johner.  But we are very few and it's supremely naïve to believe otherwise.  In the last 19 years there's been one novel and one comic series crossover with Predators and Terminators, and neither left fans clamouring for more.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:56:39 AM
It left doors open that almost no one wanted to go through.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:56:39 AM
There's only been one novel that was linked to Resurrection.  Not sure what the other four are.

QuoteThe same could be said of Star Wars before Episode 8 was announced based on the concept that the prequels preceded the release of the new sequel trilogy. Your argument is fallacious, insulting to the franchise and not based on fact. Just because something has yet to be made doesn't mean that no one has touched it because they didn't want to.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 07:20:22 AM
Only Original Sin dealt with the characters and setting that Resurrection created.  Sea of Sorrows was a return to the setting circa Aliens.  Rage War is the progression of that setting centuries into the future.  It's not something that has roots in the world Resurrection created.

QuoteHis grandfather had lived in Chicago at that time and had told Decker plenty of stories while he was growing up. One of the USM research vessels, the Auriga, had been taken by terrorists and crashed into France, a country that until that point had been an important part of the European continent. It was a big ship and it did a lot of damage. The massive devastation took the planet literally to the brink of a new ice age, and it wasn't the USM that came to the rescue—it was Weyland-Yutani.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 07:20:22 AM
But the fact remains - they didn't want to.  Resurrection wasn't popular enough to spawn any more sequels,

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 07:20:22 AM
I'm not sure what your point is regarding Star Wars.  That had 25 years worth of books and comics set in that universe, all of which sold in copious volumes.

QuoteBull.

QuoteRight out of Sea of Sorrows, or are you trying to say the Auriga was in Aliens?

Quote
Who is this "They"? Citation required.

QuoteGive me examples of people who were specifically approached to make a sequel to A:R and refused because they didn't want to make a sequel to it.

QuoteI swear you aren't reading what I'm saying. It's simple: It took 33 years for them to pick up and make a sequel to Return of the Jedi, does the time taken to make a sequel to a movie have anything to do with lack of desire to make a movie? No. The whole argument that it hasn't been touched in nearly 20 years is ridiculous. If your premise is false, then what you are saying is false.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:06:39 AM
You seem a little upset?

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:06:39 AM
What do you base this on?  You seem to have read these books.  Where's the USM?

Quoteis grandfather had lived in Chicago at that time and had told Decker plenty of stories while he was growing up. One of the USM research vessels, the Auriga, had been taken by terrorists and crashed into France, a country that until that point had been an important part of the European continent. It was a big ship and it did a lot of damage. The massive devastation took the planet literally to the brink of a new ice age, and it wasn't the USM that came to the rescue—it was Weyland-Yutani.
Aliens - Sea of Sorrows (page 43 of ebook, third page of the chapter HOME AGAIN)

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:06:39 AM
I didn't suggest any such thing.  I'm quite clearly talking about "the characters and setting that Resurrection created".  That has completely gone from Sea of Sorrows.  The USM collapsed towards the end of the 24th century, and Sea of Sorrows is over a century later where Weyland-Yutani has regained it's former glory.  And then some.  The setting is akin to Alien and Aliens; not Resurrection.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:06:39 AM
You need to compare apples with apples.  There was a huge audience out there who were dying to find out what happened to Luke, Han and Leia.  There is not a huge audience out there wondering what happened to Ripley, Noni Ryder, Hellboy and that guy in the chair.

On the other hand, lots of people would like to revisit Ripley, Hicks and Newt.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:06:39 AM
You seem a little upset?

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 08:35:22 AM
I think SM's point is more about while Sea of Sorrows and Rage Wars maybe post Resurrection and mention elements established in Resurrection, they don't rely on them. Sea of Sorrows is a soft reboot that returns the Resurrection-era to something resembling the Alien and Aliens era.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:56:39 AM
There's only been one novel that was linked to Resurrection.  Not sure what the other four are.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 08:24:38 AMI just gave you a quote, right out of the book, featuring mention of the USM and the Auriga but sigh...

QuoteI just gave you a quote, right out of the book, featuring mention of the USM and the Auriga but sigh... Here it is again, this time with page number included and USM in bold if that's what you're missing:

QuoteI was making a mocking gesture about the Auriga, I'm talking about the universe and lore established by Resurrection.

QuoteI was commenting on your false reasoning, comparing the time gaps and saying that the time passing between the end of Resurrection and now is stagnation when clearly it isn't since we've had a movie in the last four years and have another coming next year.

QuoteYou can't just dismiss valid reasoning and comparisons by taking it out of context of the discussion then ignoring it all together and claim the other is comparing apples and oranges, that's childish and incorrect.

QuoteWhich was the point I was contending with in that case.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 08:39:23 AM

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 08:35:22 AM
I think SM's point is more about while Sea of Sorrows and Rage Wars maybe post Resurrection and mention elements established in Resurrection, they don't rely on them. Sea of Sorrows is a soft reboot that returns the Resurrection-era to something resembling the Alien and Aliens era.

Except he clearly stated:

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:56:39 AM
There's only been one novel that was linked to Resurrection.  Not sure what the other four are.

Which was the point I was contending with in that case.

Though honestly, that's the kind of reboot that I do like, a soft reboot.  :D

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 08:39:54 AM

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 08:24:38 AMI just gave you a quote, right out of the book, featuring mention of the USM and the Auriga but sigh...

That hardly makes it a direct follow-up.

SM's right, the book essentially resets the universe to what it was in Aliens.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
What you're missing is the fact I'm talking about the setting.  The setting for Alien, Aliens and Alien3 is quite different to the setting of Resurrection.  It's Company and marines vs. United Systems Military.  The latter setting was dispensed with, in favour of returning to a vibe that was more in common with Alien, Aliens and Alien3 with the Company and marines.  Doesn't mean Resurrection didn't happen, but it was long way in the past during the time of Sea of Sorrows - as the passage you quoted makes clear.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
The universe and lore of Resurrection was changed in the decades after those events to be more like the universe and lore of the earlier films.  USM gone; Company back in charge.  More or less.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
Sea of Sorrows references Resurrection; it isn't linked to it.  There's no USM, no Ripley8, no Call, no Betty, no cloned Aliens.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
My original point was - there has been no ongoing narrative in the sense of following on from Resurrection for nearly 20 years.  What have I taken out of context?

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
Neither of which have anything to do with Alien Resurrection.  Ditto AvP.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 06:23:19 AM

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:09:40 AM

QuoteRetconning is a failure in consistency that shouldn't be allowed when a franchise actually has an ongoing narrative that doesn't need to be retconned.

I'd hardly call 'sitting there stagnating for nearly 20 years and no one is interested in picking it up' an ongoing narrative.

Shame on you SM, I expected you of all people not to make such a silly fallacious comment.  :-[

As of 2012 (4 years ago) we have the prequel series with a new release coming next year, and say what you will about the quality of Alien: Resurrection it left the doors wide open for a sequel.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:51:04 AM
That was unfortunate.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 09:27:10 AMNo, what you're talking about is theme. The setting does in fact take place in the world established by A:R, it just get's rid of a couple of things in a believable fashion.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 09:46:31 AM
I think it's more that you could delete the fourth film entirely and it really wouldn't affect the book at all. Apart from having to change a couple of throw-away references (maybe a page at the most), the story could still happen as it is regardless of Resurrection.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 09:46:31 AM
The author even went out of his way to state that the hero is a descendant of the original Ripley (somehow), rather than Ripley 8.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 02:01:09 PM
I expect that Sea of Sorrows was liked the least.

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 01, 2016, 05:20:42 AM


Ya.  Of course.  I will agree with you there. 

There's all that plus there's nothing to add to Ripley's character.  It's all been spelled out and explored across 3 movies*.  What else is there to add without retreading the ground in the first 2 movies?  What is it, exactly, that people want from her? 

More of the same..?  Ripley running around corridors, holding a flame thrower and rescuing children..? ? ? ?

Give it a break, Man. 

It's time for the series to move on and it can't do so if its  permanently shackled to what amounts to a character that's already run her course. 

-Windebieste.

* I guess 4; but Ripley 8 really is a different character.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PMYou have to understand that every time you start a new film with new characters, you waste a lot of time with exposition.  That wastes action time.  But if you don't do it, you have hollow characters that nobody cares about.  That is what will happen if you have an Aliens film with all new characters.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
I couldn't get through it.  It languished on my night-stand for ages before I was able to pick it up and force myself through it.  More disposable characters that it was impossible could connect with.  You have to understand that every time you start a new film with new characters, you waste a lot of time with exposition.  That wastes action time.  But if you don't do it, you have hollow characters that nobody cares about.  That is what will happen if you have an Aliens film with all new characters.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
I certainly don't want more of the same Ripley type of story.  Having the same character does not mean being imprisoned to repeat their story.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
What if she reluctantly understands and even condones what Ash did?  Wouldn't that be an amazing arc?

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 04:03:27 PM
Characters, new or returning, are as good as you make them. Saying a new film will be crap if they opt to use all-new characters is ridiculous.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 04:03:27 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PMYou have to understand that every time you start a new film with new characters, you waste a lot of time with exposition.  That wastes action time.  But if you don't do it, you have hollow characters that nobody cares about.  That is what will happen if you have an Aliens film with all new characters.

Yes, because Alien really sucked with it's crappy, undeveloped characters. Wish they would've recycled some characters from an existing movie, it would've made it so much better.

Characters, new or returning, are as good as you make them. Saying a new film will be crap if they opt to use all-new characters is ridiculous.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:13:29 PM
I'm not saying that a film would be crap with new characters.  I'm saying that it will spend more time on character development and exposition and less on the actual business end of the movie which is the action with the aliens.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:13:29 PM
Moreover, the fact that I am Captain Retcon, doesn't mean that I don't want a film that doesn't include the established characters.  I'm all for a completely new Aliens story without any of the main characters, after Blomkamp's film gets made.  Those type of movies can be made whenever.  But to use some of the original cast from Aliens, that needs to be done now or time will run out on that possibility.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 04:10:16 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
I couldn't get through it.  It languished on my night-stand for ages before I was able to pick it up and force myself through it.  More disposable characters that it was impossible could connect with.  You have to understand that every time you start a new film with new characters, you waste a lot of time with exposition.  That wastes action time.  But if you don't do it, you have hollow characters that nobody cares about.  That is what will happen if you have an Aliens film with all new characters.

Did you read Out of the Shadows? Heck, going into that you know no one is gonna make it out alive except for the Ripster. XD

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
I certainly don't want more of the same Ripley type of story.  Having the same character does not mean being imprisoned to repeat their story.

Very true, Alien and Aliens is a great example of this. In Alien Ripley was the victim, in Aliens she was the fighter.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 03:57:49 PM
What if she reluctantly understands and even condones what Ash did?  Wouldn't that be an amazing arc?

You lost me. I don't see that as good at all.  :-\

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 04:03:27 PM
Characters, new or returning, are as good as you make them. Saying a new film will be crap if they opt to use all-new characters is ridiculous.

True words are true.  :D

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 05:01:41 PM
And the theme to that hypothetical is that you can't better evil with evil; both are bad.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 05:13:52 PM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 05:01:41 PM
And the theme to that hypothetical is that you can't better evil with evil; both are bad.

Arguably in keeping with the theme of the series, while not painting the series into a corner and depriving the series of its lead heroine and her raison d'etre.  Ripley could be cursing the company the whole time as she does their work.  Maybe it's just me, but that would be compelling.  Nah, it's not just me..

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:13:29 PMI'm not saying that a film would be crap with new characters.  I'm saying that it will spend more time on character development and exposition and less on the actual business end of the movie which is the action with the aliens.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 04:02:57 AM
Lol. Amazing. Aliens simply is one of the most revered sci-fi films of all time. That's fine if you don't think so, and that's fine if you love Alien 3, but your opinion doesn't detract from that. I hate Blazing Saddles, but I'm aware that it's one of the most revered comedies of all time! So in this case, the majority of the people love the apples and dislike the oranges, so to stock up on more apples and forgo the oranges makes sense.

And Cameron didn't invent the Alien movies, but he sure as hell expanded the universe and made one of the only two Alien films of quality. 50% of the good Alien films come from Cameron. ;D

QuoteBut yeah, no one's gonna miss Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection when they get the boot.

QuoteWinde, do you remember Air-Wolf the TV series?  There was the original series, and then they dumped the original cast and continued the story... To disastrous effect.

QuoteThe general moviegoing audience will go nuts when they see Ripley.

QuoteAlien 3 was regression. Haunted house. Vietnam war. Back to haunted house? Alien 3 was aching to be a big, sci-fi action-horror bonanza with even some political undertones.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:39:00 AM

What you just said is nowhere even near reality.  The reason nobody will ever retcon, much less want to retcon Aliens, is because IT IS ONE OF THE BEST SCIENCE FICTION FILMS EVER MADE!

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 07:24:02 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:13:29 PMI'm not saying that a film would be crap with new characters.  I'm saying that it will spend more time on character development and exposition and less on the actual business end of the movie which is the action with the aliens.

If the character development's done well, so what?

Go too far down the "screw character development, give us action and Aliens!" route and you get AVP:R. I'd rather see a film that takes it's time and bothers to give me some interesting characters. In fact that's what I want most of all.

Quote from: g2vd on Sep 01, 2016, 07:40:53 PM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 04:02:57 AM
Lol. Amazing. Aliens simply is one of the most revered sci-fi films of all time. That's fine if you don't think so, and that's fine if you love Alien 3, but your opinion doesn't detract from that. I hate Blazing Saddles, but I'm aware that it's one of the most revered comedies of all time! So in this case, the majority of the people love the apples and dislike the oranges, so to stock up on more apples and forgo the oranges makes sense.

And Cameron didn't invent the Alien movies, but he sure as hell expanded the universe and made one of the only two Alien films of quality. 50% of the good Alien films come from Cameron. ;D

Bishop...I have a question. Could you honestly tell me what is the problem with Alien 3 in FULL not "It too drk bro" or "he kill nuts and jik".

QuoteBut yeah, no one's gonna miss Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection when they get the boot.

If nobody cared than how are we having this conversation?

QuoteWinde, do you remember Air-Wolf the TV series?  There was the original series, and then they dumped the original cast and continued the story... To disastrous effect.

Yes, bring in every worst example in the world DO IT! show nothing else to balance it out! because you all know you have no real concrete evidence for why it has to retread and bring up everything in Aliens because you prefer Aliens 2 with Ripley instead of a real new movie!

QuoteThe general moviegoing audience will go nuts when they see Ripley.

Yes, because everybody goes crazy when they see Arnold in Terminator, Grant in Jurassic Park, the cast of ID:4 in ID4:R. because Aliens is so far up on the average Millenial's watch list.

QuoteAlien 3 was regression. Haunted house. Vietnam war. Back to haunted house? Alien 3 was aching to be a big, sci-fi action-horror bonanza with even some political undertones.

So you're idea to fix the going back syndrome is to go back to the Vietnam War previous scenario stuff with the same people...Really?

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 04:39:00 AM

What you just said is nowhere even near reality.  The reason nobody will ever retcon, much less want to retcon Aliens, is because IT IS ONE OF THE BEST SCIENCE FICTION FILMS EVER MADE!

Ghostbusters has been retconned, the Magnificent Seven has been retconned, Fox Retconned both Terminator movies...do I have to go on?

QuoteI don't like Alien 3 for the usual reasons.

QuoteLol no. Don't go back to haunted house OR Vietnam War. Do something different!

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMSuch a film will be fantastic right after Blomkamp's film.  Quite frankly we will be getting just such a film in Covenant.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMMy worry is that if there is no core story with some core characters, we may have a series of unrelated episodes.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMThat would take us into latter Dark Horse territory.  You couldn't invest into any of their characters because even if they survived, odds are, the story thread would never get picked up again.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:01 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMSuch a film will be fantastic right after Blomkamp's film.  Quite frankly we will be getting just such a film in Covenant.

Such a film would be fantastic right now. And what Covenant will or won't be remains to be seen. Prometheus was hardly a landmark exercise in interesting, memorable characters.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMMy worry is that if there is no core story with some core characters, we may have a series of unrelated episodes.

Since when were Hicks and Newt "core characters"? They were along for the ride in a single film. They were no more "core" than Morse in Alien 3 or Vriess in Resurrection. Ripley was the only central character the series ever had other than the titular Alien, and she had her arc, which was wrapped up nicely regardless of the overall quality of the film that did it.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 07:49:33 PMThat would take us into latter Dark Horse territory.  You couldn't invest into any of their characters because even if they survived, odds are, the story thread would never get picked up again.

You couldn't invest in them because the vast majority of them were simply cardboard cut-out clichés with no personality whatsoever. Which is also probably why they never appeared again. Make an interesting character and odds are they'll be back. Look at David in Covenant.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 09:49:30 PM
I don't like the story or the majority of the characters.

The story's foundation is established on a plot hole.

The tone is far too bleak for my taste.

Three characters I've invested myself in have been chucked out. (Even Aliens brought back the cat! Loops being closed appropriately, no matter how minute, is always satisfying. Baton-passing.)

The mo-motion alien is the worst effect I've ever seen in a major motion picture.

A large bulk of the characters are indiscernible.

There is no world-building. Where's WY headquarters? We're on the third film, so we should be seeing some headquarters by now, right? We graduated from data logs, to a face of the company(Burke), and now is the time we see the curtain pulled back right? We're going to get some good, weighty scenes with the CEO right? Maybe we'll explore more of that derelict spacecraft? Maybe we'll see a futuristic Earth? What's going on with Earth anyway? Does it look like Blade Runner? Are we going to get more than one android this time, perhaps? Is Newt now a grown up warrior? Alien had some great sets and Aliens had some great sets, are we going to feast our eyes on some more great sets(No, we're going to be treated to brown corridors). Are we going to get more adrenaline pumping set pieces, a'la Dallas in the vents or Ripley rescuing Newt? Are we going to get scenes that fill us with amazement, a'la the derelict discovery and the queen reveal? No? None of that sounds good, Fox? Ok then.

Now I want to counterbalance my disdain with elements I like about the picture:

1) The acting is uniformly terrific. Any scene with Clemens is magical. His scene with Andrews is magic, as is the "Are you attracted to me?" scene.

2) The practical alien looks great.

3) Dillon's speech is beautiful.

4) Ripley's scene with the rebooted Bishop is great.

5) Loved the Morse character.

6) The gore splashing across Golic's face, and the alien "smiling", gives me goosebumps.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 09:27:10 AM

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
What you're missing is the fact I'm talking about the setting.  The setting for Alien, Aliens and Alien3 is quite different to the setting of Resurrection.  It's Company and marines vs. United Systems Military.  The latter setting was dispensed with, in favour of returning to a vibe that was more in common with Alien, Aliens and Alien3 with the Company and marines.  Doesn't mean Resurrection didn't happen, but it was long way in the past during the time of Sea of Sorrows - as the passage you quoted makes clear.

No, what you're talking about is theme. The setting does in fact take place in the world established by A:R, it just get's rid of a couple of things in a believable fashion.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
The universe and lore of Resurrection was changed in the decades after those events to be more like the universe and lore of the earlier films.  USM gone; Company back in charge.  More or less.

Yes it was.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
Sea of Sorrows references Resurrection; it isn't linked to it.  There's no USM, no Ripley8, no Call, no Betty, no cloned Aliens.

That. Is. A. Link. It is a connection, it is a statement that that particular movie occurred. No, it does not follow the same characters, I never said it did.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
My original point was - there has been no ongoing narrative in the sense of following on from Resurrection for nearly 20 years.  What have I taken out of context?

The movie provides an end point capable of establishing a new movie in a franchise that is ongoing. The time between A:R and now doesn't factor into this as there are many precedents for sequels being made after equally long or longer periods.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:42:05 AM
Neither of which have anything to do with Alien Resurrection.  Ditto AvP.

Prometheus is part of the same world, the prequel series is just going backwards and starting from a point further back before connecting in to the first film in the franchise once more. AvP is a spinoff but the same thing can be said about it. Their existence doesn't mean there won't be a sequel set after A:R and their existence doesn't mean that the franchise has stagnated.

Seriously, I don't even like A:R that much, I don't get how you hooked me into this debate.  :P

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 01, 2016, 06:23:19 AM

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:09:40 AM

QuoteRetconning is a failure in consistency that shouldn't be allowed when a franchise actually has an ongoing narrative that doesn't need to be retconned.

I'd hardly call 'sitting there stagnating for nearly 20 years and no one is interested in picking it up' an ongoing narrative.

Shame on you SM, I expected you of all people not to make such a silly fallacious comment.  :-[

As of 2012 (4 years ago) we have the prequel series with a new release coming next year, and say what you will about the quality of Alien: Resurrection it left the doors wide open for a sequel.

I stand by this and this is all I mean. I see now that you were focused on Alien: Resurrection, something that I only later brought up in regards to the open endedness of its' ending while I was specifically talking about the franchise as a whole.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 08:51:04 AM
That was unfortunate.

I had to reply, I couldn't be out for long.  ;D

Quote from: Novak 1334 on Sep 01, 2016, 09:52:33 PM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 09:49:30 PM
I don't like the story or the majority of the characters.

The story's foundation is established on a plot hole.

The tone is far too bleak for my taste.

Three characters I've invested myself in have been chucked out. (Even Aliens brought back the cat! Loops being closed appropriately, no matter how minute, is always satisfying. Baton-passing.)

The mo-motion alien is the worst effect I've ever seen in a major motion picture.

A large bulk of the characters are indiscernible.

There is no world-building. Where's WY headquarters? We're on the third film, so we should be seeing some headquarters by now, right? We graduated from data logs, to a face of the company(Burke), and now is the time we see the curtain pulled back right? We're going to get some good, weighty scenes with the CEO right? Maybe we'll explore more of that derelict spacecraft? Maybe we'll see a futuristic Earth? What's going on with Earth anyway? Does it look like Blade Runner? Are we going to get more than one android this time, perhaps? Is Newt now a grown up warrior? Alien had some great sets and Aliens had some great sets, are we going to feast our eyes on some more great sets(No, we're going to be treated to brown corridors). Are we going to get more adrenaline pumping set pieces, a'la Dallas in the vents or Ripley rescuing Newt? Are we going to get scenes that fill us with amazement, a'la the derelict discovery and the queen reveal? No? None of that sounds good, Fox? Ok then.

Now I want to counterbalance my disdain with elements I like about the picture:

1) The acting is uniformly terrific. Any scene with Clemens is magical. His scene with Andrews is magic, as is the "Are you attracted to me?" scene.

2) The practical alien looks great.

3) Dillon's speech is beautiful.

4) Ripley's scene with the rebooted Bishop is great.

5) Loved the Morse character.

6) The gore splashing across Golic's face, and the alien "smiling", gives me goosebumps.

Fair points.  This question is probably redundant but you have seen the Assembly Cut?

Quote from: Master on Sep 01, 2016, 09:17:25 PM
I also am waiting for you to explain what was so wrong with A3.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 01, 2016, 03:46:55 AM

Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 31, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
I've said before that they could easily make a sequel to AR and reveal that the USM was actually a neo-communist rival to the corporatist nations of Earth, much like the UPP from William Gibson's Alien 3 script.  I mean, just look at their patch...

http://i66.tinypic.com/2q8aszq.jpg

It's all about the red star (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_star), Comrades.

Nice one, Local Trouble!

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 02, 2016, 12:42:54 AM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 01, 2016, 03:46:55 AM

Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 31, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
I've said before that they could easily make a sequel to AR and reveal that the USM was actually a neo-communist rival to the corporatist nations of Earth, much like the UPP from William Gibson's Alien 3 script.  I mean, just look at their patch...

http://i66.tinypic.com/2q8aszq.jpg

It's all about the red star (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_star), Comrades.

Nice one, Local Trouble!

I thought it was a more elegant way to reconcile the absence of the company and the marines from AR without resorting to a soft reboot.

Quote from: Kurai on Sep 02, 2016, 01:35:24 AM

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 02, 2016, 12:42:54 AM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 01, 2016, 03:46:55 AM

Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 31, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
I've said before that they could easily make a sequel to AR and reveal that the USM was actually a neo-communist rival to the corporatist nations of Earth, much like the UPP from William Gibson's Alien 3 script.  I mean, just look at their patch...

http://i66.tinypic.com/2q8aszq.jpg

It's all about the red star (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_star), Comrades.

Nice one, Local Trouble!

I thought it was a more elegant way to reconcile the absence of the company and the marines from AR without resorting to a soft reboot.

I for one liked the Iron Bears in AvP2 and would be interested in seeing some more diversity on the stellar scene. Right now it's pretty much American and British.

I could totally go for the Japanese side of Weyland-Yutani popping up as well.

Quote from: SM on Sep 01, 2016, 06:34:42 AMI love Alien Resurrection and would love to see more from Ripley8, Call, Vriess and Johner.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 10:17:24 PMMany A3 fans condescendingly say that people who didn't like Alien 3 just wanted bigger, louder, and more guns(typical "Aliens is a dumb movie cuz one liners n' guns n' bugs" yada). Not at all, we just wanted a story that was consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 10:45:37 PMI can appreciate it for what it is, while also knowing that it is the wrong story that was told for so many reasons.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 08:59:49 AM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 10:17:24 PMMany A3 fans condescendingly say that people who didn't like Alien 3 just wanted bigger, louder, and more guns(typical "Aliens is a dumb movie cuz one liners n' guns n' bugs" yada). Not at all, we just wanted a story that was consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies.

See, whatever else you might dislike about the third film, I just don't see how the story isn't "consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies". The first two films are pretty bleak and deal heavily in loss. Alien 3 just took that further. But it's hardly a jarring tonal discontinuity.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 10:45:37 PMI can appreciate it for what it is, while also knowing that it is the wrong story that was told for so many reasons.

again, there's nothing "wrong" about it. It's just not what you wanted.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 07:25:08 PM

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 08:59:49 AM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 10:17:24 PMMany A3 fans condescendingly say that people who didn't like Alien 3 just wanted bigger, louder, and more guns(typical "Aliens is a dumb movie cuz one liners n' guns n' bugs" yada). Not at all, we just wanted a story that was consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies.

See, whatever else you might dislike about the third film, I just don't see how the story isn't "consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies". The first two films are pretty bleak and deal heavily in loss. Alien 3 just took that further. But it's hardly a jarring tonal discontinuity.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 10:45:37 PMI can appreciate it for what it is, while also knowing that it is the wrong story that was told for so many reasons.

again, there's nothing "wrong" about it. It's just not what you wanted.

Yup.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 08:59:49 AM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 10:17:24 PMMany A3 fans condescendingly say that people who didn't like Alien 3 just wanted bigger, louder, and more guns(typical "Aliens is a dumb movie cuz one liners n' guns n' bugs" yada). Not at all, we just wanted a story that was consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies.

See, whatever else you might dislike about the third film, I just don't see how the story isn't "consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies". The first two films are pretty bleak and deal heavily in loss. Alien 3 just took that further. But it's hardly a jarring tonal discontinuity.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 10:45:37 PMI can appreciate it for what it is, while also knowing that it is the wrong story that was told for so many reasons.

again, there's nothing "wrong" about it. It's just not what you wanted.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Sep 02, 2016, 07:55:45 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 07:25:08 PM

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 08:59:49 AM

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 01, 2016, 10:17:24 PMMany A3 fans condescendingly say that people who didn't like Alien 3 just wanted bigger, louder, and more guns(typical "Aliens is a dumb movie cuz one liners n' guns n' bugs" yada). Not at all, we just wanted a story that was consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies.

See, whatever else you might dislike about the third film, I just don't see how the story isn't "consistent with the trajectory carved out by the first two movies". The first two films are pretty bleak and deal heavily in loss. Alien 3 just took that further. But it's hardly a jarring tonal discontinuity.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 01, 2016, 10:45:37 PMI can appreciate it for what it is, while also knowing that it is the wrong story that was told for so many reasons.

again, there's nothing "wrong" about it. It's just not what you wanted.

Yup.

Indeed, it really boils down to opinions. There's nothing wrong with Alien 3 or Resurrection, some people just wanted something else from these films and didn't get their expectations met, so they understandably felt gutted.

While others appreciated the different route Alien 3 took. Just like how Aliens is quite different from Alien. Alien 3 took the route of "no one is safe" whereas the last two movies pretty much assured us that the action heroine and the people she's protecting will make it out alive.

Some fans were a bit too attached to our action heroine, so they don't like this Game of Thrones style killing of a main character out of nowhere. And unfortunately, one of these fans happens to be a film director who is using his influence to try and derail a storyline to fulfil his fantasy.

No offense to us lot, but I always thought that fans should never be in charge of the project of which they are a fan of. Like directing the next movie. Weren't the Strausse Brothers huge Predator fanboys? Look how that turned out.  ;D

We need someone who is more balanced about their views, someone who is not obsessed with the franchise. Like Ridley Scott or Jim Cameron. They may or may not like this franchise, I don't know, but they're not fanboys of it, they're not obsessed with particular bits of it like Blomkamp is (Rips, Nut, Hiks), and actually want to go to new and interesting directions.

If Cameron was a huge Alien fanboy, we probably wouldn't have had the "Aliens" that we got. But no, he was a sensible minded director with brilliant ideas and that's why we got a great film from him.

While AvP-r (as much as I enjoyed it), re-treaded many previous things while introducing only a few new things. They re-used so many older assets like Predator vision sound effects from first film, cloaking effect from first film, being huge Pred fans, they made Wolf kick so much Alien ass that many Alien fans had acid nosebleeds from the cringe.

Whereas Riddles and Cameron actually energized and expanded upon the franchise so much with Prometheus and Aliens.

I am still hoping Blomkamp sees the light at the end of the tunnel and returns to his older idea before Weaver convinced him to shoe-horn her into the franchise which caused a domino effect of shoe-horning in Newt and Hicks via the laziest of writings and most banal of ideas. He was honestly on the right track.

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 02, 2016, 10:02:31 PM

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Remakes = Dead Ends

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 02, 2016, 10:15:22 PM

Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 02, 2016, 10:02:31 PM

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Remakes = Dead Ends

You guys are totally right.  I got retcon mixed up with remake.  It was just paranoid delusion.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 08:24:51 PM
Lol did someone just say that Ridley and James were not fans? Who said that? Ahaha Ridley directed the first movie, directed Prometheus, and is directing three more Alien movies. He started this whole thing and wants to contribute more.

James Cameron is a huge Alien fan. So since Aliens is an action film, he's not a fanboy? Quite the opposite. Huge self proclaimed fanboy. It just so happens he's a talented fan whereas the Strauses aren't.

At the end of the day, think what you want about the four nominal Alien movies, but we all know which two are loved and which two aren't viewed favorably. I don't make the rules.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 02, 2016, 08:08:24 PM
Unless you know something we don't, you really have no idea if Blomkamp was on the right track before his discussions with Weaver.  Most likely, he wanted to have Hicks, Ripley, and Newt back in the series, but just didn't think in his wildest dreams that it was an option available to him.  If Weaver says "why not?  Let's do it", then why not indeed.  Just guessing here..

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 10:19:14 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 02, 2016, 10:15:22 PM

Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 02, 2016, 10:02:31 PM

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Remakes = Dead Ends

You guys are totally right.  I got retcon mixed up with remake.  It was just paranoid delusion.

It's really sad. It's pathetic.

Anyway guys, Aliens is basically a remake of Alien.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 02, 2016, 10:15:22 PM

Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 02, 2016, 10:02:31 PM

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 08:58:32 PM
I don't know the formula for another great Alien classic, but I am certain  the way doesn't lead through remaking pieces of earlier entries.

Remakes = Dead Ends

You guys are totally right.  I got retcon mixed up with remake.  It was just paranoid delusion.

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 10:51:53 PM
But premise of A3 is much more in style of Alien.

Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 10:49:21 PM
Aliens hits many of the same beats as Alien.  In many ways its a remake hidden in a different genre.

Alien3 has an entirely different structure.

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 03, 2016, 12:05:55 AM
Would've been great.

...in 1988!

-Windebieste.

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 02, 2016, 11:40:09 PM

Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 10:49:21 PM
Aliens hits many of the same beats as Alien.  In many ways its a remake hidden in a different genre.

Alien3 has an entirely different structure.

Especially towards the end of both films.  Many of the plot points of 'ALIENS' mimic the original film down to last sequence of events:

After rescuing X/Y, Ripley just barely escapes in the only vehicle available.  Not just that, but a nuclear detonation to boot!  That's fine because Ripley and X/Y are safe now.  Excellent!  The movie is about to end.  OH, NOES!  Surprise!  A giant face ripping monster has stowed away aboard their ride!  Quickly, Ripley races into the closest closet to gear up.  She emerges for the final confrontation with the unwelcome guest.  After a brief encounter that involves opening the door to the outseid, she sends the bug out the airlock.  Bam!  Exciting finale delivered!  Everyone lies down for a long nap and the credits roll.

Where:
X = Jones
Y = Newt

The plot path is so similar you won't even know which movie I'm talking about!

It all starts well before that, and while there's some deviation, both movies follow this essential path towards the end. I've always found the end to 'ALIENS' to be the weakest part of the movie for this reason.  It's just an escalation of everything towards the end of the movie repeated from the original.  It's the trappings that make it unique.

"ALIEN 3", on the other hand, is a very different movie in so many ways.  At the very least it has the balls to take a different, much more original ending. 

I'm all for different and challenging.  Even 'ALIEN: Resurrection' is to be admired for this reason.

There's nothing 'innovative' or 'amazing' about retconning half the series just to restore deceased characters featured in movies where mortality is a crucial theme.   Blomkamp may as well adorn Ripley with a superhero cape and give the Aliens rubber teeth and lemonade for blood if he pursues his current proposal and give her 'the ending she deserves'. 

His whole idea is retarded - not innovative.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 03, 2016, 03:31:18 AM
Love the 'ALIEN 3' ending.  It forces future film makers into taking this series into fresh directions.  While its debatable that 'ALIEN: Resurrection' was the best route to take after that, it does leave ample opportunity to pick up from the end of either of the previous movies. 

This series is deserving of more than just seeing Ripley returning endlessly.  4 movies she's featured in.  It's time to move; and to do so without unnecessary retconning is the best way to go. 

I guess Ripley #5 shoving yet another Alien out the airlock is what you want, right?  Coz that would just be outta control stupid.   Especially when other - more deserving - stories just get wasted for the sake of having Ripley back again. 

Man.  There's so many reasons to not take this retcon path, it's ludicrous that Blomkamp even considered it viable in the first place. 

Like I say... Would've been great, in 1988.   Time to move on has long passed.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 03:52:54 AM
Except that no director in their right mind will pick up after A:R.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 03:52:54 AM
People don't care about that timeline or those characters.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 03:52:54 AM
Nobody is asking to retread those old film patterns from Alien and Aliens.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 03:52:54 AMPeople just want a continuation with the characters they want to see on screen.  The characters in which they have a vested interest.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 03:52:54 AMYou have no idea what Blomkamp's script calls for, so why blame him for something he didn't do?

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 03, 2016, 04:36:15 AM
I totally understand that FOX doesn't wan't her to go. They want to milk her name as long as possible. She is a brand of her own. People want to see her on the screen, that's why A:C (Alien: Covenant) is so interesting as it's an Alien movie without her. Maybe they (FOX) are trying the waters to see if there is a market for Alien movies without Ripley in them?

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 03, 2016, 04:54:27 AM
Too bad Blomkamp's Proposal is almost 30 years overdue.  Wow... 30 years. 

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 02, 2016, 08:08:24 PMIf you assume that they made a film in the hopes that it will turn into an ongoing story franchise, they were wrong.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 03, 2016, 04:52:23 AM
Lol, no one's saying Hicks and Newt are important. But they survived in Aliens, the movie where Neill will be picking up from.

Just because certain people didn't like Alien 3 or its treatment of those characters, doesn't mean we want everything super idyllic. It's not like the only other option besides killing everybody off is making everything super happy. Why are we thinking in extremes?

But honestly? That all sounds good to me anyway. Yeah, I would've loved to have seen Ripley and Hicks on the beach, or in a Gold Coast villa. So patronizing you are with your suggestions Winde, but actually yeah that all sounds good to me.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 04:40:54 PM

Careful!  You're going to make Windebieste's head explode.  Dude don't like happy endings!

---

Winde, this on'e for you.

It would be great to see Ripley and Hicks dance to this at their wedding!   :D

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 03, 2016, 03:31:18 AM

Like I say... Would've been great, in 1988.   Time to move on has long passed.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 03, 2016, 08:19:30 PM
I don't think this film would have been great in 1988 at all.  You'd be stuck with Ripley and Hicks running around with a little Newt unless they aged her in the film in which case the film would be taking place 15 - 20 years after the events of Aliens to have an fully grown, adult Newt.  So regardless, it would be a movie that takes place decades after Aliens.

QuoteMoreover, it is highly unlikely that Hicks, and Ripley would have another encounter with the Aliens 2 years after the events of Aliens.  30 years later makes perfect sense.  They find out that someone discovered the homeworld, regroup, and go try to stir shit up.

QuoteMoreover, Guns N' Roses is so popular now because they've been apart for 25 years.  The recipe for making something desirable again is to close the door on it for a few decades.  This is how reunions are such a success.  You have to miss the thing you once had.  I think many people miss those characters and what that story promised.  So now is the perfect time to make the film.  It's gonna be gangbusters!  (I have no idea what that word means but...)

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 04, 2016, 12:17:49 AM
We have a disagreement then. ;)

Quote from: windebieste on Sep 03, 2016, 11:49:28 PM
I never never said I didn't like happy endings. 

My objection and disdain is directed at bringing back deceased characters solely to achieve this goal at the expense of half the series.  Besides, a Disney ending might be your kind of thing but I for one want to embrace content that is more adult in nature, including the ending. 

Oh, any by the way, what has Guns n Roses got to do with it, anyway?  Did the band members all die in a tragic EEV accident, or something, and the fans brought them back to life?

What exactly is this mysterious Alien Homeworld..?  Where is it..?  How do you know it even exists?

Retcon is stupid.  Bury it.

-Windebieste.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 04, 2016, 12:43:08 AM
What happened in Alien 3 and then in Res is so unlikely unfortunate that it robs the series of the realism one might expect. 

Quote from: FiorinaFury161 on Sep 04, 2016, 02:04:34 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 04, 2016, 12:43:08 AM
What happened in Alien 3 and then in Res is so unlikely unfortunate that it robs the series of the realism one might expect. 

You're just another droid, sent by the f^ckin' company! :P

Seriously, the odds of the events in Alien 3 happening were very realistic. Very.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 04, 2016, 08:52:53 PM

Quote from: FiorinaFury161 on Sep 04, 2016, 02:04:34 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 04, 2016, 12:43:08 AM
What happened in Alien 3 and then in Res is so unlikely unfortunate that it robs the series of the realism one might expect. 

You're just another droid, sent by the f^ckin' company! :P

Seriously, the odds of the events in Alien 3 happening were very realistic. Very.

Ok, you're (Perfect-Organism) blaming A3 for robbing the series on realism?? Are you actually saying that with a straight face? If anything A3 BROUGHT BACK THE REALISM. In fact it is just as "realistic" as ALIEN.

The movie that robbed the series on realism _IS_ ALIENS.

Sure, the movie (ALIENS) starts on a realistic note but goes full super hero the second Ripley decides to go look for Newt and just gets sillier and sillier. We have Ripley going all Rambo with duct taped weapons shooting up Aliens to the left and right, staring down a 12 feet alien monster, which she later on fights hand-to-hand inside a forklift robot suit. And to top it all of she defies the laws of physics by climbing up a ladder with the said 12 feet alien monster latched on to her ankle with the added weight of the powerloader, and she does all of this with the vacuum of space sucking and flushing everything out underneath her, including the realism of the series.

A3 on the other hand turned her into a flesh-and-blood human being again with limitations and multi-faceted feelings and traits. It's back to basics, back to reality. The Hollywood romanticism and escape from reality is over and the cold harsh reality of the universe is back in the driver seat, where there are no super heroes and where the only consistent truth is death - you can't escape death, no matter how hard you try, and what matters is what you do with your life before you die no matter if you are an innocent child or animal like Newt and Spike, or a brave and caring person like Ellen Ripley or Hicks or a loathsome murderer, pedophile or/and a rapist women like the convicts on Fury.
((Warning! I'm gonna go semi off-tangent from this point and on, just so you know...))
In the eye-less face of the Universe and the Alien we're all the same and we don't matter, we're nothing, so it's up to us give things a meaning, even if that is believing in (some imaginary) God, because without that there is nothing, and if there is nothing then there is only nihilism and death and there are no rules and no respect for life, and without respect for life we are reduced to beasts capable of anything in order to survive and get ahead in the food-chain. There is life and death and good and bad timing, sometimes the circumstances are beneficial, sometimes they aren't, but there is no such thing as fate, universal justice, fairness or karma, so how do we deal with it? The Alien on the other hand thrives in it as it, in a sense, IS the cold harsh reality of Universe personified, hence Ash's comment "the perfect organism".

Anyways.

Figuratively the prisoners on Fiorina "Fury" 161, in a way, are in the Purgatory (almost literally as the place is a lead works located far, far away from the rest of humanity). In a way they already died, but they haven't passed yet to the other side (Heaven or Hell). They have been stored away for their final battle, their final test, and the test starts with this Christ-like character in disguise (Ripley) ascending on their world, in fire and flames, broken and demoralized, full of temptation as she is a woman and many of them are rapists; and as if temptation isn't enough she also brought the Beast with her - the Grim Reaper and the Angel of Death in one. Of course none of them see themselves in this scope in the movie (except for maybe Dillon, who by the way probably is the ONLY true believer in there), to them it's just about primal survival and to Ripley it's about taking responsibility and finish this once and for all, no matter the cost. There is no easy way out even though the realization of her carrying one of them inside of her tempts her to take her own life, just like Mr. Bishop & W-Y tempt her by offering to save her life by surgically removing the creature from her, which pretty much make them the Devil - the temptation to get what you want at the expense of others.

With that said, A3 manages to bring back realism to the series in the most fittingly poetic manner possible. The movie has no bells and whistles, it doesn't try to come up with new sci-fi gimmicks and concepts - it focuses on the story, the meaning, and the meta-narratives, and in that sense I would say that it is as mature as a gory sci-fi monster movie can get. And the ending, it's not an unhappy ending but a bitter sweet ending, empowering and full of hope yet dark and heavy.

Oh, and some fun trivia on the name of Fiorina "Fury" 161 and ALIEN 3 - "Fiorina" means blossom, new life, flower, flora, innocence and virginity, whereas a synonym to Fury is Rage. But a Fury (pl. Furies) is also a Greek mythological creature somewhat similar to an angel - a winged female, sometimes engulfed in flames, sometimes portrayed as a monstrous chimera creature, but always given the attribute of an arbiter and a matriarch just as strong (if not stronger) as opposing patriarchs. The number 3:16:1 (as in ALIEN 3 and Fiorina 161) is a code for the most famous Gospel from the New Testament - the Gospel of John (John 3:16), which goes: "I have told you these things so you won't fall away" and is a part of the Gospel where Jesus Christ resurrects Lazarus four days after Lazarus's death as well as the foreboding resurrection of Jebus himself. I don't know if that is a play with the character of Ripley and the Alien, or if it in fact is a cryptic summary of the entire movie (A3), making Dillon's character even more of a narrator than he already is contrasting the cold harsh indifference and godless existence of the universe established in ALIEN.


There you got it. That's why I love A3. It might not be as entertaining and exciting as ALIENS but it has tons of substance and qualities that it deserves to be acknowledged for whether you like the movie or not. Heavy poetic down-to-earth realism with perfectly balanced religious symbolism is one of them.


"Pretentious much?  :-X ::) "
I don't care!  :P 8)

Quote from: SM on Sep 04, 2016, 09:56:49 PM
I don't usually read childishly asinine bickering, but when I do it's this thread.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 04, 2016, 09:55:24 PM
Nah, you're not being pretentious at all.  Alien 3 truly is a great film.  Perhaps the film was pretentious, in trying to deal with these topics, but I still think it did it in a great way.  That being said, I will always enjoy it on its own merits, but I would still prefer a different story told instead.  One which includes some of the great characters established in Aliens.

I've never said I disliked Alien 3.  I do think it was out of left field though, and I would have preferred if the series retained the characters and the vibe of Aliens.  It really is just entertainment.  There is nothing wrong with that.  To each their own.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 04, 2016, 10:20:10 PM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 04, 2016, 09:55:24 PM
Nah, you're not being pretentious at all.  Alien 3 truly is a great film.  Perhaps the film was pretentious, in trying to deal with these topics, but I still think it did it in a great way.  That being said, I will always enjoy it on its own merits, but I would still prefer a different story told instead.  One which includes some of the great characters established in Aliens.

I've never said I disliked Alien 3.  I do think it was out of left field though, and I would have preferred if the series retained the characters and the vibe of Aliens.  It really is just entertainment.  There is nothing wrong with that.  To each their own.

Well, I think we can all agree that that's what it all comes down to in the end. Different blokes different strokes.

In the meantime I guess we'll just have to sit down to wait and see, and we're going to have to wait for a long time since I doubt they will start this project until after the sequel of A:C has been released and FOX has all the cards on the table. Who knows, maybe they'll screw us all?

Quote from: SM on Sep 04, 2016, 09:56:49 PM
I don't usually read childishly asinine bickering, but when I do it's this thread.

Quote from: SM on Sep 05, 2016, 02:32:21 AM
My stance is - "Who the hell cares?"

If it's entertaining - great; if not - then it's not. It's a movie. 

It's great that people are passionate, and the "nah, you", "nah YOU!" incessant back and forth has been mostly restrained.  But it's still 2 dozen pages of incessant "nah, you", "nah, YOU!" back and forth achieving precisely nothing.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Sep 02, 2016, 07:55:45 PM
There's nothing wrong with Alien 3 or Resurrection, some people just wanted something else from these films and didn't get their expectations met, so they understandably felt gutted.

Quote from: Master on Sep 02, 2016, 10:42:53 PM
If you said A3 is basically a remake of Alien, I'd think about it. But Aliens? It's hard to make sequel as different to original as Aliens to Alien.

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Sep 05, 2016, 03:09:20 AM

Quote from: SM on Sep 05, 2016, 02:32:21 AM
My stance is - "Who the hell cares?"

If it's entertaining - great; if not - then it's not. It's a movie. 

It's great that people are passionate, and the "nah, you", "nah YOU!" incessant back and forth has been mostly restrained.  But it's still 2 dozen pages of incessant "nah, you", "nah, YOU!" back and forth achieving precisely nothing.

I think we've all established our views and our points have been made. SM is right, we're just running in circles and mostly repeating ourselves... mostly...  :laugh:

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 05, 2016, 08:09:03 AM
Alien 3 and Resurrection have stuff that I enjoy but they are fundamentally flawed films,

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 05, 2016, 08:54:23 AM

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 05, 2016, 08:09:03 AM
Alien 3 and Resurrection have stuff that I enjoy but they are fundamentally flawed films,

A lot of people keep saying they are 'flawed' but I never understood what that was about.  Unless you're talking about the theatrical versions.  The extended versions fixed all the flaws for me.

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 05, 2016, 02:56:41 PM

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 05, 2016, 08:54:23 AM

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 05, 2016, 08:09:03 AM
Alien 3 and Resurrection have stuff that I enjoy but they are fundamentally flawed films,

A lot of people keep saying they are 'flawed' but I never understood what that was about.  Unless you're talking about the theatrical versions.  The extended versions fixed all the flaws for me.

The inexplicable egg, the prop continuity gaffes and the horrid puppetry effects are the only real flaws with Alien 3 as far as I'm concerned.  The rest of it really boils down to taste.  I found it to be terribly dull compared to its predecessors, but I also think it has some of the best acting and photography of the entire series.

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 06, 2016, 12:09:43 AM
I don't recall any glaring continuity errors in Aliens.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 06, 2016, 12:18:31 AM
Oh Alien 3 fans will find some! Gotta "level" the playing field.

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 06, 2016, 12:49:20 AM
Depends on what you mean by "glaring", I suppose.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 06, 2016, 12:18:31 AM
Oh Alien 3 fans will find some! Gotta "level" the playing field.

I don't see any playing fields.  I have nothing against Aliens but I don't hate Alien 3.

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 06, 2016, 08:33:33 PM
Alien Resurrection not only brought her back, it shat upon all the excellent worldbuilding done by the first three movies. 

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 07, 2016, 11:42:02 AM
There was no more "world building" to do.

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 07, 2016, 12:06:06 PM

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 07, 2016, 11:42:02 AM
There was no more "world building" to do.

You're right.  It was already well-established and Alien Resurrection flushed it all down the toilet.

Quote from: Novak 1334 on Sep 07, 2016, 10:27:05 PM

Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 07, 2016, 12:06:06 PM

Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 07, 2016, 11:42:02 AM
There was no more "world building" to do.

You're right.  It was already well-established and Alien Resurrection flushed it all down the toilet.

f**king Walmart....

Quote from: Toxic34 on Oct 28, 2018, 11:35:25 PM
Jim will have considerable clout with Disney once the acquisition is complete, and they officially become on the hook to release the Avatar sequels. Given they will own everything Jim-related except Terminator and T2 (of course, to be fair, they'll only own Fox's share of Titanic while Paramount continues to own the other share), he'll be in a position where everyone would have to listen. He'll also obviously never stop being strident in his approach or give up being willing to fight to the death for his vision. This is especially important, because he won't meekly submit to whatever Alan Horn wants. So if Jim tells them he really wants Disney to revive Blomkamp's film, they'll seriously consider it.

Quote from: Toxic34 on Oct 28, 2018, 11:35:25 PM
Also, do you foresee Jim also injecting himself to stand up to other decisions Horn has pushed Disney for, like potentially shuttering R-rated projects and pushing they reverse position on James Gunn?

Quote from: SM on Oct 29, 2018, 10:28:22 AM
If the next Avatar does well, Cameron will be one of the few people who could boss Disney around.

Quote from: Huggs on Oct 30, 2018, 08:22:46 PM
If the franchise isn't dead now, it would be after Blomkamp's 2 cents.

Quote from: PsyKore on Oct 30, 2018, 10:13:55 PM

Quote from: Huggs on Oct 30, 2018, 08:22:46 PM
If the franchise isn't dead now, it would be after Blomkamp's 2 cents.

I don't know about that. If it's intended to be "Aliens 2" and rides on the coat tails of Cameron's film, it would be successful. They could market it as "the sequel we always wanted" and all that crap. Fox, I think, would definitely consider this.

Quote from: CristianoRonaldo7 on Oct 30, 2018, 08:12:47 PM
Today, I read a new article about Sigourney Weaver talking about ALIEN 5. It's obvouis is coming. I hope Mediocre Blomkamp ISN'T Directing.

Quote from: N-Shifter on Oct 30, 2018, 09:44:55 PM
Why everyone is so against giving Blomkamp a chance is really strange to me

Quote from: Huggs on Oct 31, 2018, 02:10:29 PM

Quote from: N-Shifter on Oct 30, 2018, 09:44:55 PM
Why everyone is so against giving Blomkamp a chance is really strange to me

The movies he's already made is a good place to start.  ;D

Quote from: PsyKore on Oct 30, 2018, 10:13:55 PM

Quote from: Huggs on Oct 30, 2018, 08:22:46 PM
If the franchise isn't dead now, it would be after Blomkamp's 2 cents.

I don't know about that. If it's intended to be "Aliens 2" and rides on the coat tails of Cameron's film, it would be successful. They could market it as "the sequel we always wanted" and all that crap. Fox, I think, would definitely consider this.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 12:26:32 AM
Nope.

The two best bets now are David Part 3 or Blomkamp.  And the former is way more likely.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:14:44 AM

It's your money.  What are you going to do?

Quote from: The Old One on Nov 01, 2018, 12:29:50 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:14:44 AM

It's your money.  What are you going to do?

Leave Sigourney Weaver and Neill Blomkamp in the dust.

Post Resurrection (All but Retconning AR) sequel Directed by an Auteur that has a vision for sexually charged horror film,
You could even set The Cold Forge after AR/A3, for instance.

Denis Villeneuve, Christopher Nolan, Tim Burton, Peter Jackson.

Go nuts, do your own thing.
You can even act like AR, doesn't exist- it doesn't matter.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:27:22 AM
The Old One, the question is aimed at you.  I respect your passion for established continuity, but if you were a producer would you honestly put your money on continuing after A3 or AR?

---

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 12:26:32 AM
Nope.

The two best bets now are David Part 3 or Blomkamp.  And the former is way more likely.

I definitely think David's story merits a conclusion next.  But after that?  If the actors are still around?  Go with Blomkamp's film

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:22:40 AM
Giger is still dead tho.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:38:42 AM
Get someone new.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:03:20 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:27:22 AM
The Old One, the question is aimed at you.  I respect your passion for established continuity, but if you were a producer would you honestly put your money on continuing after A3 or AR?

---

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 12:26:32 AM
Nope.

The two best bets now are David Part 3 or Blomkamp.  And the former is way more likely.

I definitely think David's story merits a conclusion next.  But after that?  If the actors are still around?  Go with Blomkamp's film

Depends on the success of David 3.

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 01, 2018, 01:05:22 AM
Let Scott finish what he had to say. Give him what he needs but keep an eye on the script, and make sure questions are answered decently and everything is wrapped up this time. But don't link it up to Alien, link it to Blade Runner.

Then get Villeneuve or Fincher to do a film post Alien 3.  Fincher would be preferable but it would take a miracle to get him back.

Weaver, Blomkamp and Alien resurrection can sit this one out.

Like old one said, sexually charged horror. Go back to the roots, and don't skimp on the Giger. Take us straight to hell.

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 01, 2018, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:38:42 AM
Get someone new.

Yeah, that's kind of the point I'm trying to make.

Villeneuve and someone that can really feel Giger and incorporate it well.

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 01:44:52 AM

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:03:20 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:27:22 AM
The Old One, the question is aimed at you.  I respect your passion for established continuity, but if you were a producer would you honestly put your money on continuing after A3 or AR?

---

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 12:26:32 AM
Nope.

The two best bets now are David Part 3 or Blomkamp.  And the former is way more likely.

I definitely think David's story merits a conclusion next.  But after that?  If the actors are still around?  Go with Blomkamp's film

Depends on the success of David 3.

True, but even if Scott gets to do 2 more films, eventually they will end up arriving at the "back door of Alien" as he said.  Unless he goes off on a completely different tangent, which he is often wont to do.  Be that as it may, we are still likely looking at facing a situation where all the prequel gaps are finished, and we now get to continue the story with all the core Alien films behind us.  So we will yet again be faced with the same conundrum.  To continue after Alien 3, Alien Resurrection, or after Aliens.  Though it would be possible that some of the actors just may be too frail to play the roles by then.  I guess the question is, will Ridley convince the powers to give him the money to do all his planned remaining films, or does he get one last shot wrap up everything he had hoped in one film.  I'm betting on the latter.  After that?  Well, as you say SM, if his film is stellar, than who knows what will happen, but my money would be on Blomkamp.

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 01, 2018, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:38:42 AM
Get someone new.

Yeah, that's kind of the point I'm trying to make.

Villeneuve and someone that can really feel Giger and incorporate it well.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 02:08:09 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 01:44:52 AM

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:03:20 AM

Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Nov 01, 2018, 12:27:22 AM
The Old One, the question is aimed at you.  I respect your passion for established continuity, but if you were a producer would you honestly put your money on continuing after A3 or AR?

---

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 12:26:32 AM
Nope.

The two best bets now are David Part 3 or Blomkamp.  And the former is way more likely.

I definitely think David's story merits a conclusion next.  But after that?  If the actors are still around?  Go with Blomkamp's film

Depends on the success of David 3.

True, but even if Scott gets to do 2 more films, eventually they will end up arriving at the "back door of Alien" as he said.  Unless he goes off on a completely different tangent, which he is often wont to do.  Be that as it may, we are still likely looking at facing a situation where all the prequel gaps are finished, and we now get to continue the story with all the core Alien films behind us.  So we will yet again be faced with the same conundrum.  To continue after Alien 3, Alien Resurrection, or after Aliens.  Though it would be possible that some of the actors just may be too frail to play the roles by then.  I guess the question is, will Ridley convince the powers to give him the money to do all his planned remaining films, or does he get one last shot wrap up everything he had hoped in one film.  I'm betting on the latter.  After that?  Well, as you say SM, if his film is stellar, than who knows what will happen, but my money would be on Blomkamp.

I think Ridley could wrap up what he wants to wrap up in a Covenant sequel - but if that is really popular, they'll look for ways to spin off it, rather than looking at ways to continue after other films.

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 01, 2018, 01:43:27 AM

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 01:38:42 AM
Get someone new.

Yeah, that's kind of the point I'm trying to make.

Villeneuve and someone that can really feel Giger and incorporate it well.

The point I'm trying to make is - get someone new.  Not someone aping Giger.

QuoteWouldn't it be funny if Ripley woke up to face David?

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 04:31:19 AM

QuoteWouldn't it be funny if Ripley woke up to face David?

No.

Quote from: The Old One on Nov 01, 2018, 04:38:16 AM
Don't let the bedbugs bite.™

Quote from: The Old One on Nov 01, 2018, 04:15:20 AM
It would be trite for David to meet Ripley.

David should be eliminated by his own hubris in the final prequel.

Returning the Space Jockey to a mysterious corpse and  establishing David as mistaken about his authorship.
I hope.

Quote from: N-Shifter on Oct 31, 2018, 06:15:34 PM

Quote from: Huggs on Oct 31, 2018, 02:10:29 PM

Quote from: N-Shifter on Oct 30, 2018, 09:44:55 PM
Why everyone is so against giving Blomkamp a chance is really strange to me

The movies he's already made is a good place to start.  ;D

He's made one movie that was a mess imo and that was largely down to the horrific casting of Die Antwoord as the main characters, just about everything else in that movie would have been vastly superior with actual actors replacing those two.

I like District 9 and Elysium.

Quote from: HuDaFuK on Oct 31, 2018, 09:28:32 PM
Elysium was absolutely gorgeous to look at, but beyond that (and perhaps Sharlto Copley's villain) it was entirely bland and forgettable.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 04:31:19 AM

QuoteWouldn't it be funny if Ripley woke up to face David?

No.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 02:08:09 AM
The point I'm trying to make is - get someone new.  Not someone aping Giger.

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Nov 01, 2018, 08:30:14 AMNow Chappie...I know I'm in the minority here but I love Die Antwoord. Just fricking love them. If anything, it was Hugh Jackman I really didn't like in Chappie. Otherwise I love that film too.

Quote from: SiL on Nov 01, 2018, 09:00:16 AMI thought the trilobite was a generally well-received design.

Quote from: SM on Nov 01, 2018, 09:09:02 AM
I don't want a Giger inspired planet.

Quote from: Frosty Venom on Nov 02, 2018, 01:39:30 AM
Don't forget Giger is pretty much responsible for the entire aesthetic of LV-426.

Quote from: D. Compton Ambrose on Nov 15, 2018, 04:54:44 PM
The point is that we've already seen a Giger-inspired planet. It wouldn't be fresh or new.

Quote from: Necronomicon II on Jan 23, 2019, 01:16:50 PM
Valleys and valleys of dong is all I want.

Quote from: Roby on Jan 29, 2019, 12:18:39 AM
I'd love the chance to read the script at least! Do you think there's any chance of a script release if this movie is really truly dead?

Quote from: P-Rock on Feb 07, 2019, 11:46:02 PM
And then Fox said: F*** that! We'll go with this awesome script where Predators hunt Aliens instead! SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!