This has to do with studio politics, nothing to do with fan fiction.
On the Making of AVP documentary they mentioned 'warring producers'. I assume this is John Davis (producer of Predator) VS David Giler/Walter Hil (producer of Alien).
We all know Peter Briggs script was rejected.
I am wondering if it was David Giler/Walter Hill who vetoed AVP in space, to avoid stepping on the toes of the Alien series, and they reached a compromise where they can set on Earth and make it more of a Predator movie.
Any opinions on this?
Davis' justification was saying making it on Earth would be scarier.
As SiL says. I think Davis says that on the DVD? Also, Briggs' script was rejected, it just sort of all went to nothing due to the in-fighting which seemed to be primarily around percentage of profits.
Much the same as everything after Alien 3, I don't think Giler, Hill and Carroll had much to do creatively with AvP.
Quote from: SiL on Jan 23, 2018, 08:31:18 AM
Davis' justification was saying making it on Earth would be scarier.
He talks like a salesman.
That's how a producer do.
But still, there's never been any indication that setting it on Earth in present day was a contractual obligation, just what the producer wanted.
Wasn't it Anderson's idea to set it in Antartica all along? I doubt he planned the temple on an ice planet and was forced to set it on Earth.
I remember being described how he arrived in the studio all giggly with his sketches and storyboards and the producers being impressed.
That was Anderson's idea, yes, but Davis had been commissioning scripts set on Earth prior.
Aye. The story that was doing the rounds prior to Anderson being attached sounded like an adaptation of Eternal which was Earth-bound.
Setting it on Antarctica makes no difference to setting it on another planet. You still have to build the sets, as you can't actually film it in Antarctica. They built the model for the boat as well, that could have been a spaceship easily.
There are plenty of movies with a lower budget than AVP that are set on another planet. Screamers for example.
So it's not money that is the issue here, they could have set it on another planet but didn't.
Does anyone say it was money?
Davis wanted it set on Earth as SiL said.
It was probably a money thing for AvPR, admittedly.
You'd think so, considering the extensive use of existing locations.
Though, to be fair, I swear I remember Biggs mentioning money being a concern with his AVP script. It was going to be super expensive.
Indeed. I believe he wrote out a few set pieces in the second draft to reduce the cost of that attempt.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 24, 2018, 11:12:54 AM
Indeed. I believe he wrote out a few set pieces in the second draft to reduce the cost of that attempt.
Didn't he add a new opening in space with a zero-g fight between Predators and Aliens? Doesn't sound like cost reduction.
The stuff towards the end with dozens of aliens and a sinking colony were probably tightened.
QuoteAccording to Briggs "some of the characters disappeared from it, a lot of the dialogue was re-worked, the beginning's different, some of the extra sequences are different... There's about 70% of my first draft remaining in the second."
QuoteWhilst discussing the practicality of filming Alien vs. Predator in an interview with Andy Diggle in 1996, Peter Briggs also said of his second draft: "I cut some big scenes from the first draft of Alien vs. Predator because I thought, "Well, these are throwaway, this set is superfluous." If somebody gave me the money, I think I could go out and shoot that for about 35, 40 million."
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/avp-movies/avp-movie/hunt-begins-early-days-peter-briggs-alien-vs-predator/
Hopefully most of the "grease monkeys" got cut then.
Man I wish he'd kept that second draft :(
Me too. :( It's in Fox's vaults somewhere waiting for some lucky person to get in there...
Quote from: Wweyland on Jan 24, 2018, 12:37:23 PM
Didn't he add a new opening in space with a zero-g fight between Predators and Aliens? Doesn't sound like cost reduction.
It's hard to say because the opening sequence featured a dozen Predators going into a cliff-side cave and hunting dozens of aliens in an orgy of death. Neither opening would be cheap.
And honestly i'm not big on having the film opening big like that anyway. That's like, your money shot, hold onto it!
I think the problem with setting it on earth is that it undermines the threat posed by the Xenomorph and of course, Ripley's actions in later films. I mean we got two AVP films set on earth and both had infestations out of the Predator's control, yet earth was not overrun because the infestations were easily contained. It kind of makes Ripley come off as paranoid and overzealous. Though to be fair, paranoia would be a realistic state of mind after encountering such creatures, mental trauma can be far worse than what caused it in the first place.
Still, I would prefer the avp films to be set on another planet. I mean the first film for instance wasn't that bad, it was not a great film but it had the chance to be one if properly executed. If that film was set on an ice planet (or even a desert one since it would be more in line of how predators hunt ) and had better character development, R-rating and less artistic license on Mayans etc. then it could have been a fairly good movie.
To answer the question, I think budget was a factor, I think I remember it being said that "space was too expensive".. :P
They were contained - mostly - by nuclear explosions; one launched by a government on it's own populace (based on some grainy video footage). Not sure if I call that easy.
It is if one believes in the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, the whole "greater good" thing is at play. Nuclear (and sometimes non nuclear) explosions have been fairly effective at ending Xenomorph infestations, the only cost is the potential collateral damage and even then its x population vs potentially the world's population.
Might be hard choice morally but easy choice logically which is probably what any high ranking military officer would think about.
It's not just a hard choice morally...
The main problem in AvP:R is that it's almost a first resort rather than a last resort.
Things are a bit muddled with the way "Colonel" Stevens fits into things if he's attached to OWLF. Where does his authority come from, etc.
I always interpreted, even though it's not really ever stated in the film, that Stevens was basically operating on his own without anyone above him knowing what was going on. Especially since things went to shit so fast there was no time to get presidential authority or anything of that sort. That's strictly speaking, my B.S.
Things escalated fast that's for sure, also as SM pointed out, the nuke response should be last and not first or second if you count the Natguard as the first response. The only way the instanuke response would make sense, is if Col. Stevens knew what they were dealing with or had some idea of it anyway but he says to the screen "What the hell are you?" or something like that, meaning he has no clue.
Well, not knowing what the ALIEN is makes sense, of course. OWLF is fully aware of the Predators.
It should make sense but certain characters is already thinking it is an infestation (which it is but they shouldn't know that). They should be thinking invasion or an attack, neither which requires the use of a clean up nuke on domestic ground, at least not until there is no friendlies or civvies left. At least that is my opinion anyway. Nukes are mostly deterrents against another nuke armed country, they are rarely used as far as I know, the only one I can think of at the top of my head is the Hiroshima bomb. I'm sure there is more but can't think right now.
I just know its not something to use lightly and not without proper intel on the enemy and the situation.
Nagasaki.
Nuke a foreign country = their fault
Nuke your own country = accident
(not including the thousands of test nukes)
I'd wager the nuke didn't get them all. Wolf got a lot of the ones in the sewer system, but there was a lot of time between that fight and the end of the movie. Basements, sewers, personal storm shelters, schools and other buildings that may have been equipped to act as shelters during attacks or natural disasters. The only way to guarantee a successful nuclear clean up, is to take that big ol' firecracker and shove it straight in Alien #1's pie hole.
As for why the movies are set on earth, I'd wager it's for both budget and narrative reason. Its easy to feel detached when stuff is happening on spaceships hundreds of years in the future. To see it happening in a modern town is unsettling, not to mention cheaper.
The Aliens were either at the hospital or attacking the people at Gilliam Circle and both locations were vapourised.
Quote from: SM on Apr 03, 2018, 05:34:37 AM
The Aliens were either at the hospital or attacking the people at Gilliam Circle and both locations were vapourised.
I hear what you're sayin. I was merely putting forward a fan theory.
Honestly I would have assumed that the aliens would be carrying eggs all over the state by the time the nuke drop... oh right, the predalien was an egg barfer. Well a whole lot of no where that got the species.
I think AVP was set on Earth because it sounded interesting. Plus to make a sequel there wasn't any where else for current day humans to go. All of our space tech dosen't exist yet. Though with the predators canon left behind... that could change quick.