Blomkamp's Alien 5 is "Innovative, Amazing, Performs Fan Service"

[HuDaFuK]

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.

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.

[g2vd]

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.

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".

But 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?

Winde, 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!

The 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.

Alien 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?

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?

[Perfect-Organism]

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.

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.

Such a film will be fantastic right after Blomkamp's film.  Quite frankly we will be getting just such a film in Covenant.

My worry is that if there is no core story with some core characters, we may have a series of unrelated episodes.  That 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.  I really don't want that.  I don't want Ripley overdose either, but I certainly don't want a series of unrelated vignettes.  I prefer an Aliens series that is progressively coherent, and deals with big life mysteries, while providing as many answers as questions.

[BishopShouldGo]

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.

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".

But 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?

Winde, 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!

The 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.

Alien 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?

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?

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

We're having this conversation because we're hardcore fanboys on a message board. Where else would fans congregate?

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

[g2vd]

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

Explain why.

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

That really doesn't make much sense at all. Alien 3 resembles the original Alien very little with the only obvious barring resemblance such as one Alien, otherwise A3 shares very little in common with it I mean it's not even set on a Spaceship.

[Mr. Clemens]

At the end of the day, a retcon cheapens and tarnishes the brand.

Terminator, Star Trek, Spider Man... they're all jokes now. Even if they make money, nobody respects them. AvP has already taken the Alien series too close to that abyss for my liking. A retcon would would kick it down there once and for all.

[HuDaFuK]

Such 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.

My 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.

That 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.

[Perfect-Organism]

Such 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.

My 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.

That 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.

Well, there you go.

[BishopShouldGo]

I have a feeling we'll get a David cameo in Neill's movie. Like a broken model. "This was part of the A1 line."

[Master]

I also am waiting for you to explain what was so wrong with A3.

[BishopShouldGo]

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.

[Novak 1334]

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?

[SM]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

Retconning 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.

That was unfortunate.

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

Ah, I see.  When you use bold text and generally rude and condescending language it suddenly makes sense.

[BishopShouldGo]

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?

Lol I'm on this website aren't I? I have every Alien box set have seen every edition of every entry. I have seen the Assembly Cut, and my opinion still stands.

[Perfect-Organism]

I also am waiting for you to explain what was so wrong with A3.

Everybody has their own reasons.  For me the film just underdelivered on a story that had the potential to be something truly epic.  Big questions were posed in the first and second films, and the third film answered none of them, instead effectively closing the book.  As a fan, it made sense to me that the story of Aliens would continue with Ripley doing whatever she could to prevent a global infestation, while revealing the secrets of the Xenomorphs and the Space Jockeys.  Even to a casual fan, the film we got instead was something that felt cheap and contrived.  It did not follow a path that would capture the public's imagination.  It felt like we were winding up for something big and then Alien 3 just wound it down instead.  For me that's the gist of it.  I'm sure BishopShouuldGo has something valuable to add to this.

Sorry, was writing this before BSG posted..  All valid points from BSG.