New LA Times interview with Ridley Scott on Alien.

Started by 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔈𝔦𝔤𝔥𝔱𝔥 𝔓𝔞𝔰𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔤𝔢𝔯, May 30, 2020, 05:07:44 PM

Author
New LA Times interview with Ridley Scott on Alien. (Read 21,467 times)

426Buddy

Quote from: PAS Spinelli on Jun 05, 2020, 04:53:26 PM
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 04, 2020, 10:49:00 PM
Quote from: PAS Spinelli on Jun 04, 2020, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: Evanus on Jun 04, 2020, 08:38:08 PM
Quote from: PAS Spinelli on Jun 04, 2020, 07:41:23 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jun 04, 2020, 01:38:30 PM
Ridley has no obligation to stick around if he doesn't have any interest. He clearly does–his interest just doesn't align with the interests of some groups of fans.
You mean majority of fans and movie goers.
Very doubtful.
How so? I recall the voting from here coming to the conclusion Covenant was at max a 6, which isn't good
Casual movie goers also didn't like the movie much, and from a boxoffice standpoint, Covenant did a bit over half of what Prometheus did
That's also not mentioning how turning the Alien into the child of a sexually frustrated robot is a direct downgrade of it's earlier vague origins

You can go to the covenant fan reviews thread and the poll results clearly say differently.

https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=57277.0
55% of voters found it good and 45% found it average, so no it doesn't say that much differently.




You're either twisting the poll results because you can't admit when you're wrong or you're not much of a numbers/stats guy.

Either way, lol.


Nightmare Asylum

Nightmare Asylum

#121
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.

The raw materials are still entirely otherworldly, however, and the Alien has clearly existed in other forms before David ever laid a finger on it. Prometheus and Alien: Covenant both reinforce this. The Pathogen's origins are still entirely unknown. Is it a naturally occurring substance? Did the Engineers make it? What else is it capable of? Nobody knows. Creatures in Prometheus that David was in no way responsible for had traits entirely evocative of the Alien.

The particular incarnation of the Alien that we are most familiar with, the "Perfect Organism" designed as David's antitheses to humanity, being the work of his own hands strikes me as a rather profound and interesting exploration of his character.

Evanus

Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Jun 05, 2020, 07:17:07 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.

The raw materials are still entirely otherworldly, however, and the Alien has clearly existed in other forms before David ever laid a finger on it. Prometheus and Alien: Covenant both reinforce this. The Pathogen's origins are still entirely unknown. Is it a naturally occurring substance? Did the Engineers make it? What else is it capable of? Nobody knows. Creatures in Prometheus that David was in no way responsible for had traits entirely evocative of the Alien.

The particular incarnation of the Alien that we are most familiar with, the "Perfect Organism" designed as David's antitheses to humanity, being the work of his own hands strikes me as a rather profound and interesting exploration of his character.
Totally.

I like how the pathogen produces creatures vaguely similar to the Xenomorphs, only the key features present. Elongated skull, inner mouth, acid for blood. Perhaps remnants of some ancient creature that somehow fused with the pathogen, who knows.

[cancerblack]

Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.


No, it just goes against the grain of what you wanted. It's not cheap, lazy or redundant at all.




Quote from: Evanus on Jun 05, 2020, 07:48:07 PM
Perhaps remnants of some ancient creature that somehow fused with the pathogen, who knows.

Or that the pathogen was derived from. Blood of the gods and all that.

Huggs

Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 09:03:43 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.


No, it just goes against the grain of what you wanted. It's not cheap, lazy or redundant at all.

I just think they could've put a bit more thought into it than, "the bad guy did it".

Of course, we're dealing with a storyline that's already turned the space jockey into the jesus brothers, scientists that cant think straight, and one of the most foreseeable plot twists in recent memory.

The prequels are like two shiny dildos. They look clean, but still smell like @$$.

426Buddy

For many, including myself, the good outweighs the bad.

Sooooo much better than anything made since Alien3. Personally I rate A3 along side the prequels in terms of enjoyment.

[cancerblack]

Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 10:10:43 PM
Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 09:03:43 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.


No, it just goes against the grain of what you wanted. It's not cheap, lazy or redundant at all.

I just think they could've put a bit more thought into it than, "the bad guy did it".


They did, but I'll never convince you, so f**k it.

StrangeShape

StrangeShape

#127
Well, these prequels aren't really interesting to me. They feel very contemporary scifi. I cant say theyre bad or that I dislike them, they just dont grab me above a single viewing. Having seen them both since Covenant hit theaters. Of course, like to most others, the idea of David creating the alien and Space Jockeys being what they are as oppose to being some gruesome fusion of tech and body repulsed me and ruined the whole terror/unknown aspect of the first film. But thats all behind us. But I never ever liked the David character, always reminded me some Monty Python character in Prometheus, I dont know why, maybe it was his bad C3PO expression. I was annoyed by the character so you can guess my reaction to Covenant being all him and putting him in the center of the alien mythology.

Everybody likes what they like, for me THE meat of alien mythos is the story of Ripley, beginning with Ridley Scotts terrific very good looking film ending with Ripleys death in Fincher's nihlistic and also very well shot Alien 3. But despite prequel's whacky ideas that I so dislike, they dont offend me as much as Resurrection

Many seem to attribute the alien mythos to Scott, neglecting credit to Dan Obannon and Giger, who were equally as crucial to the first film and the creation of this thing as Scott was. Scott isnt the father of Alien, he is one of the fathers.

Huggs

Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 10:30:15 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 10:10:43 PM
Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 09:03:43 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.


No, it just goes against the grain of what you wanted. It's not cheap, lazy or redundant at all.

I just think they could've put a bit more thought into it than, "the bad guy did it".


They did, but I'll never convince you, so f**k it.

Everybody can't always agree on everything. The world would be boring as hell if we did. For me, the movies have fallen short in crucial areas. If they haven't for you, that's great. It means there are two more alien movies you enjoy more than I can.

[cancerblack]

Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 10:35:50 PM
Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 10:30:15 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 10:10:43 PM
Quote from: [cancerblack] on Jun 05, 2020, 09:03:43 PM
Quote from: Huggs on Jun 05, 2020, 05:43:55 PM
Making David the creator of the alien means that it is simply a proxy creation of humanity. It was made by something that we made.

That is cheap, lazy and redundant.


No, it just goes against the grain of what you wanted. It's not cheap, lazy or redundant at all.

I just think they could've put a bit more thought into it than, "the bad guy did it".


They did, but I'll never convince you, so f**k it.

Everybody can't always agree on everything. The world would be boring as hell if we did. For me, the movies have fallen short in crucial areas. If they haven't for you, that's great. It means there are two more alien movies you enjoy more than I can.


I'm not trying to convince you to like anything. I'm saying it wasn't lazy or vapid.

Huggs

I see what you mean.

SiL

The mental gymnastics needed for Scott to think it make sense alone disqualify it from laziness. That was an effort.

Huggs

Quote from: SiL on Jun 05, 2020, 11:00:22 PM
The mental gymnastics needed for Scott to think it make sense alone disqualify it from laziness. That was an effort.

I'm just glad they deal with Scott's thoughts on the afterlife and not a childhood fear of postal workers, Mall Santa's or gym class or something.

Capt.Dallas at Thedus

Capt.Dallas at Thedus

#133
This Too Shall Pass-Sir Ridley Scott:)Thank Christ Someone can kick some optimism in the midst of this diabolical event,God Bless&Always Be Well,Mr.Scott:)

Necronomicon II

To quote Ernst Fuchs on Giger, "He's the archaeologist of the future. He is the reporter."

Giger's aesthetic isn't so much predicated on the unknown but the erotic and metamorphic transfiguration of sex, death and machines. His eyes were on the horizon. Thus thematically, the beast being moulded by the sexual nightmare visions of an A.I. is entirely consistent with his vision and aesthetic. The eggs are too explicitly labial to be completely foreign, Giger used human fingers for the huggers (he found human fingers particularly creepy), not to mention parasites and hosts require a history of intimacy/co-evolution; ET does not simply recognise mammal proteins and bind successfully to cell surfaces, thwart the immune system and provide oxygen haphazardly  :laugh:

All David did was sexualise a shoggoth, origins of the shoggoth unknown. It's bold, provocative. It's A.I. repressed sexuality fusing with alien biology baby.  :-*

It's lazier just to repeat Planet of the Vampires tbh...  ;D :laugh: ;D :o ;D *drops mic*

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