Blomkamp is officially making an Alien film

[SM]

Aliens ended with a 45 minute action sequence.

[The Cruentus]

Point being? Aliens is like 2 hours long and not all of it is action packed.
Anyway, my whole point was that Alien3 is crapped on way too much, and other than the obvious production issues, part of the blame is the bar that was raised by Aliens.

Just because Hicks, Newt and Ripley are sleeping with the space fishes, that is no excuse for a retcon. People are too hung up on the past.

[SM]

Point being?

"Mood swing" I believe is the term du jour.

Alien3 is crapped on usually for entirely legitimate reasons. Problem in fan circles is it somehow gets deified.  The inferior Assembly Cut even more so.

[The Cruentus]

Aliens ended on a happy note and Alien 3 started on extremely dark note, that is a major mood swing.

Not denying that, but certain things did not help and Alien 3 may have been reviewed better if there was another film before it and slowly worked its way towards that tone.

[SM]

If would have been reviewed better if it were a better film.

[The Cruentus]

Obvious aside, not necessarily. Alien 3 is not the best film no, but comparing it to classics is not going to help it.

[SM]

It's very flawed without bringing other films into it.

[The Cruentus]

Still not denying that, I only said it didn't help which is true.

[Perfect-Organism]

Neither of which warrant the movie being retconned.  For all of its problems, it's still a decent movie and a damned fine 'ALIEN' piece. 

While I agree with much of the points above, we need movies that step outside of our comfort zones and that's what this series is all about.  Too many times big studios make safe decisions and the result is much like so much homogenised content already on the market.   

I don't see trading in a bold movie like this for what amounts to Round 2 of 'bullet proof' characters that aren't allowed to die running around doing the same things they did previously.  Leave that to Disney.  I need my entertainment to be be challenging as much as it is light and easy to digest.  As it is, however, with Disney dominating the big fluffy comic book action scene with 'Marvel' and 'Star Wars' we need meatier, grounded and challenging scenarios as well.  Anything 'ALIEN' needs that harsh edge - and 'ALIEN 3' delivers it in spades. 

Blomkamp's current proposal is so much of a pipe dream.  How much more appropriate would it have been if he was around in 1988 to present this to Fox?  Then it would have made sense.  As it is now, being Ripley's 2nd 'Resurrection', all the sense of vulnerability and apprehension that is at the core of these movies evaporates. 

Ripley already has super powers (corrosive blood, super senses, ridiculous strength) by the time of the 4th movie.  What exactly is there to give her now?

A cape?  lol.

-Windebieste.

You keep saying this over and over, and it never made sense.  I'm referring to the idea that it would have been good in 1988, but not now.  The opposite is true...

Assuming that the Derelict was destroyed in Aliens, the likelihood of an encounter with the Aliens two years after the events of Aliens would have been slim.  It is likely that it would take 30+ years for humanity to encounter the aliens again (as is actually evidenced by Alien: Resurrection).  So in 1988, you would have a film that might as well take place 30 years after the events of Aliens, in which case Sigourney would have been too young to play that role.  Now we have a scenario where 30 years passed since the events of Aliens, and a chance encounter with the Aliens is realistic.  It is not far-fetched that Ripley and her pals would still want to wipe the creatures out after 30 years of nightmares.  It's not like Ripley, Hicks and co would actually run into them somewhere.  Most likely, Hicks would be called in as a consultant to WY, but secretly he would enlist Ripley and Rebecca to sabotage the WY mission in order to destroy the aliens.  This is the most likely scenario.  The timing is perfect, and it is the most likely, the most realistic, the most satisfying continuation of the Aliens story.  It is neither unnecessarily negative or positive.  It is just a natural progression.

[windebieste]

That's a lot of assumptions you have going right there.

Which leads to the obvious question:  How is an assumption 'true?'

-Windebieste.

[Perfect-Organism]

They're not assumptions.  I'm talking about what is likely vs, what is contrived.  If you accept Alien 3 and Resurrection as canon, then it is a FACT that there are no further recorded encounters with the aliens between the events of Alien 3 and Resurrection.  The exception to that being if there is some sort of convoluted inner-cabal at Wal-mart / W-Y.

However, if you don't count those films as canon, and you have a blank canvas in front of you, then it is more likely that you would encounter the aliens again after 30 + years, than 2 years after.  Again, this takes into account that the derelict is destroyed, which has to be a fact if Alien: resurrection is considered canon.  The odds of running into the aliens again completely independently of the derelict within 2 years are slim.  Just consider how long it is taking us to find any indication of extra-terrestrial life right now.

Your concern is that we would have a scenario where Ripley once again accidentally encounters the aliens, which would put her in some sort of super-hero territory.  How could one person have so much bad luck?  Your concern is valid, and I don't think anybody wants that.  The fact that we actually already have a super-hero Ripley as per A:R notwithstanding.

I don't think retcon proponents want to have a desire for a gloomy or overly cheerful film.  They want something that is likely and realistic.

If you consider Ripley's encounter with the aliens in the Aliens film, it is not coincidental.  She doesn't run into them randomly in space.  She has moral motivations that don't allow her to ignore the plight of families that are exposed to the aliens on LV-426.  She has a legitimate motivation to encounter the aliens again.  The motivations in Alien 3 are unlikely, and in fact contrived.  The odds that she would be so stupid as to allow the aliens to remain on the Sulaco are slim to none.

So, ignoring ALien 3, if she finds out 30 years down the road that the aliens have been discovered again, randomly, by some other people, her response to intervene, would be a likely one, and it would be fully consistent with her character, without taking her into super-hero territory.

It's not about people wanting a perfect happy family thing as you are always saying.  Nor is it about wanting the Alien universe to be unrealistically gloomy, where everyone has to be killed off as per trope.  People just want the alien stories to be grounded in realism and likelihood.  Blomkamp's film offers that possibility.  Will it deliver?  Who knows?  But it is the best chance right now to fix the core story in the series.

[BishopShouldGo]

Also cheaply killing off survivors of previous film in opening titles and replacing them with faceless rapists and murderers who exist solely to run down dark corridors shouting "f**k" and being chased by a dodgy special effect.

And having the audience ahead of Ripley for half the film.

SM doing the Lord's work.

[windebieste]

Still just assumptions on your part. 

Beside we already know that Ash tells Ripley "Ripley, for God's sake, this is the first time that we've encountered a species like this.." and yet we have 'Prometheus' and 'ALIEN: Covenant'.  Despite having taken place decades prior to the events of 'ALIEN' it's obvious these are isolated incidents the crew of the Nostromo are not aware of.

That's how to treat 'ALIEN 5' as an isolated incident parallel to 'ALIEN 3'.  There's no need for 'She Who Cannot Die' to appear at all.  It would be a much better movie for it. 

I say we ignore 'ALIENS' instead.  Retcon the shit out of that piece of over-rated bombastic childish nonsense and it's juvenile humor. All future version of 'ALIEN 3' should have all evidence of Hicks and Newt removed.  No more USCM at all.  Ditch that shit.  It sucks like a bad chest wound anyway.  Which shouldn't be hard and digitally replace the EEV with the Narcissus.  QED. 

No one really cares about out of date junk movies from the mid-1980's, anyway.  Sure as shit, Fox certainly doesn't.   

Scott appears to think so, too.   

-Windebieste.

[BishopShouldGo]

They're not assumptions.  I'm talking about what is likely vs, what is contrived.  If you accept Alien 3 and Resurrection as canon, then it is a FACT that there are no further recorded encounters with the aliens between the events of Alien 3 and Resurrection.  The exception to that being if there is some sort of convoluted inner-cabal at Wal-mart / W-Y.

However, if you don't count those films as canon, and you have a blank canvas in front of you, then it is more likely that you would encounter the aliens again after 30 + years, than 2 years after.  Again, this takes into account that the derelict is destroyed, which has to be a fact if Alien: resurrection is considered canon.  The odds of running into the aliens again completely independently of the derelict within 2 years are slim.  Just consider how long it is taking us to find any indication of extra-terrestrial life right now.

Your concern is that we would have a scenario where Ripley once again accidentally encounters the aliens, which would put her in some sort of super-hero territory.  How could one person have so much bad luck?  Your concern is valid, and I don't think anybody wants that.  The fact that we actually already have a super-hero Ripley as per A:R notwithstanding.

I don't think retcon proponents want to have a desire for a gloomy or overly cheerful film.  They want something that is likely and realistic.

If you consider Ripley's encounter with the aliens in the Aliens film, it is not coincidental.  She doesn't run into them randomly in space.  She has moral motivations that don't allow her to ignore the plight of families that are exposed to the aliens on LV-426.  She has a legitimate motivation to encounter the aliens again.  The motivations in Alien 3 are unlikely, and in fact contrived.  The odds that she would be so stupid as to allow the aliens to remain on the Sulaco are slim to none.

So, ignoring ALien 3, if she finds out 30 years down the road that the aliens have been discovered again, randomly, by some other people, her response to intervene, would be a likely one, and it would be fully consistent with her character, without taking her into super-hero territory.

It's not about people wanting a perfect happy family thing as you are always saying.  Nor is it about wanting the Alien universe to be unrealistically gloomy, where everyone has to be killed off as per trope.  People just want the alien stories to be grounded in realism and likelihood.  Blomkamp's film offers that possibility.  Will it deliver?  Who knows?  But it is the best chance right now to fix the core story in the series.

My favorite post I've ever read on this site. So many Alien 3 fans are incredibly condescending, and think Blomkamp proponents want more of the same. Like, huh? I didn't necessarily want an Alien 3 to be full of guns and explosions and one-liners, I just wanted it to be organic and "correct". I mean we all love ALIEN around here, which has none of that stuff.

Windebieste thinks that dark and depressing means thoughtful and cerebral and challenging, and that really is delicious.

[Perfect-Organism]

Still just assumptions on your part. 

Beside we already know that Ash tells Ripley "Ripley, for God's sake, this is the first time that we've encountered a species like this.." and yet we have 'Prometheus' and 'ALIEN: Covenant'.  Despite having taken place decades prior to the events of 'ALIEN' it's obvious these are isolated incidents the crew of the Nostromo are not aware of.

That's how to treat 'ALIEN 5' as an isolated incident parallel to 'ALIEN 3'.  There's no need for 'She Who Cannot Die' to appear at all.  It would be a much better movie for it. 

I say we ignore 'ALIENS' instead.  Retcon the shit out of that piece of over-rated bombastic childish nonsense and it's juvenile humor. All future version of 'ALIEN 3' should have all evidence of Hicks and Newt removed.  No more USCM at all.  Ditch that shit.  It sucks like a bad chest wound anyway.  Which shouldn't be hard and digitally replace the EEV with the Narcissus.  QED. 

No one really cares about out of date junk movies from the mid-1980's, anyway.  Sure as shit, Fox certainly doesn't.   

Scott appears to think so, too.   

-Windebieste.

All hands up for those who want to retcon Aliens out of existence?