Ask Steve Perry

[steveperry]

You, uh, were going to demonstrate some knowledge for us? Those eight words?

The audience is listening ...

And waiting ...

[steveperry]

We can sit here and nitpick every scene in the first two Aliens movies to a fare-the-well and come up with our interpretation of who did what and why.

I maintain that Aliens is a horror movie thinly-disguised as science fiction and nobody has said anything there that convinces me otherwise.

A2, while not perfect, is a science fiction picture because the science that is in it is more intrinsic to the story.

The intent of the writers and marketing folks was to sell these as science fiction from the git-go. Remember the first ad campaign? In space, nobody can hear you scream? Take out the science, it will play just as well as a werewolf or vampire flick set in a mansion on an island with no way off.

In A2, if you take out the science, there's no movie. No Ripley in suspended animation, no corporation looking for a war toy, no atomic-powered plant terraforming a planet's atmosphere, no marines who have gone on bug hunts. A1 is a ship -- a truck. A2 has a much more viable backstory, planets, a galactic civilization and they are part of the tale.

A2 is, by anybody who knows SF, a science fiction story. That's why I liked it better than A1, which was a gotcha movie. I didn't believe for a second that even movie-real people would behave that way. Past a certain point, I couldn't buy the reason -- not once they had some idea of what they were up against.

There was no reason compelling enough to go down a corridor alone. Not for me as a watcher or a writer.

None of these people ever saw a horror movie? Would you have done what they did? No, because you have seen horror movies.

Like that scene in a vampire flick where the cops find a body. All drained of blood, two little holes in its neck, and the idea of it being a vampire never crosses anybody's mind. C'mon. It doesn't have to be real, but it has to sound real -- what, nobody in the movieland ever saw a Dracula movie?

Like I said, what works for you is your business. A1 had a scary monster, and I was rooting for it because I was not convinced the people it was killing had any reason to be alive except for that. 

[Kimarhi]

Theres always a price for what you want.

But I never believed that anyways.  I'm a horror AND scifi fan.  I'm not turned off by the fact that Alien is a horror movie and turned on by the fact that Aliens attempts to be harder science fiction, and think that most people are like that.  I've found stories to like out of every genre.  The people turned off of a movie just because it has a romance/action/horror tag could be missing out on a once and a lifetime thing.

Think about missing star wars or the like.

[Kimarhi]

We can sit here and nitpick every scene in the first two Aliens movies to a fare-the-well and come up with our interpretation of who did what and why.

I maintain that Aliens is a horror movie thinly-disguised as science fiction and nobody has said anything there that convinces me otherwise.

A2, while not perfect, is a science fiction picture because the science that is in it is more intrinsic to the story.

The intent of the writers and marketing folks was to sell these as science fiction from the git-go. Remember the first ad campaign? In space, nobody can hear you scream? Take out the science, it will play just as well as a werewolf or vampire flick set in a mansion on an island with no way off.

In A2, if you take out the science, there's no movie. No Ripley in suspended animation, no corporation looking for a war toy, no atomic-powered plant terraforming a planet's atmosphere, no marines who have gone on bug hunts. A1 is a ship -- a truck. A2 has a much more viable backstory, planets, a galactic civilization and they are part of the tale.

A2 is, by anybody who knows SF, a science fiction story. That's why I liked it better than A1, which was a gotcha movie. I didn't believe for a second that even movie-real people would behave that way. Past a certain point, I couldn't buy the reason -- not once they had some idea of what they were up against.

There was no reason compelling enough to go down a corridor alone. Not for me as a watcher or a writer.

None of these people ever saw a horror movie? Would you have done what they did? No, because you have seen horror movies.

Like that scene in a vampire flick where the cops find a body. All drained of blood, two little holes in its neck, and the idea of it being a vampire never crosses anybody's mind. C'mon. It doesn't have to be real, but it has to sound real -- what, nobody in the movieland ever saw a Dracula movie?

Like I said, what works for you is your business. A1 had a scary monster, and I was rooting for it because I was not convinced the people it was killing had any reason to be alive except for that. 

I feel where your coming from, but again, you said it yourself.  Different interpretation.  There is plenty of things to suggest that man was feeling pretty immortal about himself in the original movie.  Just by judging from the dialogue we knew that societal prejudices were alive and well.  Parker had to act in the typical black male fashion to talk to ripley, despite being attracted to her.

Most people don't pick up that kind of stuff, but its there (and I'm not questioning your perception, that kind of stuff doesn't resonate to everybody).  If you have a whole society that has been led to believe YOUR the biggest baddest mofo in the galaxy and that your tech makes you superior, thats a hard thing to get over, regardless of what monster movies you've seen.  Look at the completely nonchalant way they talk about getting the pecker with teeth.  They simply think it poses no threat.  They are going to catch it.........with a net!

Now again, maybe thats not good enough for you.  But I felt that the writers had covered enough of their bases so that the characters weren't completely stupid, but I always had less trouble accepting the majority of their actions in the first film over Ripley's decision to go back in the second.  Nightmares would be better than actually getting killed imo.  But hey, thats the difference between people.

I'm not trying to come off arrogant (even though people always tell me I am) or mean, I'm just a dude, that can't type fast and cuts through bullshit to make a point.

I LIKE that you post here, and think your opinions are interesting because you are one of the few writers on the board.  I'm in no way trying to be snotty and wringing my hands in a, "I can make an author quit the interwebz!" kind of way.

Feel me?

[Space Disc Jockey]

Hi Steve,

I have a couple of questions for ya, but first, I want to say that I loved AVP:Prey.

Here are my questions:

1. When you watched the first AVP movie, were you hoping Lex would join the Predator clan, like Machiko did in the original comic and AVP: Prey?

2. Without giving away any info, do you have any ideas for future AVP novels, if given the opportunity to write more AVP novels?

3. Could the Space Jockey species ever fit in the AVP universe?

4. What do you think of a Terminator vs Predator story?

5. Have you seen the Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem trailers and the IGN clip? What are you thoughts on them?

6. What are your thoughts on the PredAlien (aka "Chet"), from the trailers and photos released so far?


Thank you for taking the time in answering our questions. I can't wait for Predator: Turnabout.

[steveperry]

Theres always a price for what you want.

But I never believed that anyways.  I'm a horror AND scifi fan.  I'm not turned off by the fact that Alien is a horror movie and turned on by the fact that Aliens attempts to be harder science fiction, and think that most people are like that.  I've found stories to like out of every genre.  The people turned off of a movie just because it has a romance/action/horror tag could be missing out on a once and a lifetime thing.

Think about missing star wars or the like.

But I didn't miss out on it. I saw the original Alien in a theatre. And it was scary. But I went expecting a horse of a slightly different color and that matters. And as a viewer, I need to believe in the characters in order to feel for them if they get in trouble. For me, O'Bannon didn't do nearly as good a job as Cameron. Ripley in A2? Better motivations for what she did. Going back for Newt is not the same as going back for the cat -- not for me.

And when Ripley came out of the hold in the fork-lift suit? People cheered in the theater where I saw it. That's who they wanted to be their Mama, somebody who would come back to save them, and did. That was a feel-good moment.

There weren't any like that in A1 for me.

[Kimarhi]

So that eight letter phrase wasn't it?

Thats the one I'd heard growing up from my mom *whose an english lit teacher* because you run the risk of putting off writers just because of the genre tag.

Hence people not liking horror movie conventions not going to see the movie.

What else could it be. *racks brain*

As for Ripley saving the cat.  Kinda different imo.  She hears cat.  Goes to find it.  Probably trying to rationalize that everybody but Kane was killed in the darkness, then goes to find parker/lambert after their whacked, leaving the cat.  Then goes to leave and sees the alien.  Leaving the cat.

The third time she gets it, its never moved, its just in the exit way.  But I understand your take on it.

[SiL]

I decided to go out and look for information from someone who knew what they were talking about.

So I went to the library and found The Science of Science Fiction Writing by James Gunn. This guy wrote his master's thesis in 1951; he wrote a four-volume anthology on the subject; the book was written in 2000. I'd say his 50-plus years of study, at the time, on the subject matter would be a wee bit more authoritative when trying to find a definition of the genre than my vicarious experiences on the matter and your considerable 30 year publication history.

In his chapter defining what science fiction is, he comes to the conclusion that the difference between science fiction and fantasy is that fantasy invents its own world and/or rules - Vampires, werewolves, ghosts, Lord of the Rings - whereas science fiction is a continuity of the real world into the unknown, which responds to the laws of the real world.

Don't ask how Alice can go through a mirror into the world beyond. Feel free to ask how the guys stay on the floor in 2001: A Space Odyssey.

On this front Alien is undoubtedly science fiction. You can ask it 'real' questions and it can still stand up; a cursory glance at the fan-made Anchorpoint Essays shows just how technical you can get with the Alien creature itself; Ron Cobb's design notes explain, for the most part, how every aspect of the ship and human technology actually works.

True, the film doesn't dwell on technicalities. Ash's technobabble on his observations on the Alien is about as technical as it gets, but the film still allows you to ask questions about it within the context of reality without having to resort to fantasy.

But;

No Ripley in suspended animation

What about the crew of the Nostromo in suspended animation?

no corporation looking for a war toy

You seem to have confused Aliens with either Alien or Alien 3. The Company wasn't looking for the Alien in Aliens - Burke was. He made it very clear he was doing the whole thing for personal gain, and not for the Company itself.

In that regard, Aliens more closely follows the mad individual seeking the monster. Would you say that in Alien, without science fiction there could be no Company?

That's an honest question - The Company's role was much larger in Alien, even if it was only ever mentioned, through its external influence of the plot. With no Company, Alien never happens. With no Company, Burke is still out to make himself rich.

no atomic-powered plant terraforming a planet's atmosphere

No exploration of a hostile alien planet in Alien - No suit? You freeze, you can't breathe, goodbye.

The atmosphere processor was a means to an end; you could just have the characters in a location that already had a breathable atmosphere.

no marines who have gone on bug hunts.

With the term 'bug hunt' never being define; you could still have the marines be battle hardened and cocky.

A1 is a ship -- a truck.

And yet, at the same time, so much more.

[steveperry]

No Ripley in suspended animation

What about the crew of the Nostromo in suspended animation?

Wasn't necessary. Could have just as easily started with them awake. They threw it in to show they were in the future. Wasn't necessary to the plot at all.

no corporation looking for a war toy

You seem to have confused Aliens with either Alien or Alien 3. The Company wasn't looking for the Alien in Aliens - Burke was. He made it very clear he was doing the whole thing for personal gain, and not for the Company itself.[/quote]

And you believed that?

Never mind. I'm going to change your opinion because you don't want to hear it, and you aren't gonna change mine because you don't have the wherewithal. We're done. You want to take another shot, have at it. You haven't hit anything yet, I can't say I'm at all worried you will ...

[SiL]

I was never trying to change your opinion, just understand the reasoning. Except the reasoning didn't particularly make sense; the technology can be stripped away from Aliens just as much as it can with Alien. All the examples you pointed out of what couldn't be taken out of Aliens without affecting the movie, as I showed, could be, just as much as they could with the original film.

And when I defined science fiction, you didn't comment, but shrugged the entire thing off as 'Yeah, well, whatever, you don't have anything to hit me with and you just don't want to hear it'. I gave a level ground to define sci-fi - Which is incredibly difficult to define in the first place - and then it all gets down to 'meh'.

[steveperry]

Hi Steve,

I have a couple of questions for ya, but first, I want to say that I loved AVP:Prey.

Here are my questions:

1. When you watched the first AVP movie, were you hoping Lex would join the Predator clan, like Machiko did in the original comic and AVP: Prey?

2. Without giving away any info, do you have any ideas for future AVP novels, if given the opportunity to write more AVP novels?

3. Could the Space Jockey species ever fit in the AVP universe?

4. What do you think of a Terminator vs Predator story?

5. Have you seen the Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem trailers and the IGN clip? What are you thoughts on them?

6. What are your thoughts on the PredAlien (aka "Chet"), from the trailers and photos released so far?


Thank you for taking the time in answering our questions. I can't wait for Predator: Turnabout.

When I saw AvP, I wished they'd used the graphic novels/novelization as a basis for the script. I wasn't too thrilled with the story they did use.

I haven't thought about doing more Aliens, Predators, or AvP's -- I have other projects lined up. Haven't considered Space Jockey/Terminator tie-ins at all.

From the clips I've seen of the trailers, the new movie looks to be violent, gory, and not rmuch to the story. The trailers are almost all action.

I worry that, as in a lot of movie trailers, once you have seen them, you have essentially seen the movie. If the plot is that the yautja crash land near a remote town and a bunch of aliens get loose and everybody runs around slaughtering everybody else and the U.S. military moves in and eventually nukes the place, the acting and writing and editing are going to have to be really good, because that's what they will have.

Just as all people don't look exactly alike, I have no problem with the yautja not all looking exactly alike.
At the risk of pissing off people, anybody who gets all bent out of shape because they liked the first Predator's look and hate the new one needs to get a life. In the grand cosmic scheme of things, it doesn't matter to me. It's just a movie.

SiL: Oh, and James Gunn's idea of what science fiction is? His, and not what most of us who work in the field use. He's a nice guy and a good writer, but he just picked a place to stand, and since he's an academic, made it more complex than it needed to be. Generally accepted definition is that science fiction is a particular form of fantasy in which the science is a necessary part of the story. That's what I posted, and that you didn't seem to think it was valid? No surprise.

It needs science in it. If the science isn't necessary for the story to work, it isn't science fiction. Which part of that do you have trouble understanding?

I know you SiL. You like to argue for its own sake, and you could just as easily take the other side and put forth as much passion. Blowin' and goin', the process and not the end. I expect I could have said the sun rises in the east and you would have argued that it doesn't. You need to get a life past the Aliens/Predator stories. There's a lot more out there and you haven't scratched the surface, but I'm done trying to educate you.

Adios.

[echobbase79]

Have you ever thought about writing scripts?

[SiL]

Which part of that do you have trouble understanding?

The part where you think that applies to Aliens.

You like to argue for its own sake, and you could just as easily take the other side and put forth as much passion.

Not at all. I'd rather not argue, but I do find seeing how the movies could be done in different genres interesting, and looking at how, by your definition, the only Alien movie that's truly science fiction is Alien Resurrection.

[Bob Saget]

Steve im half way done with your new star wars book Deathstar and so far im really liking it(shadows of the Empire is one of my favorites along with Zahns trilogy), i know this is an avp site, but do you have anyother Star Wars books planned for the future?

[Space Disc Jockey]

Steve,

Thank you very much for answering my questions. I really appreciate it.