AvPGalaxy Forums

Alien 5 is totally dead according to filmmaker Neill Blomkamp. We last heard from Ridley Scott himself a couple of months ago that Neill Blomkamp’s Alien 5 project was never going to happen. Scott indicated back then that there was never a script in place contrary to previous reports and that 20th Century Fox decided not to press ahead with the project.

Today, technology news site The Verge have posted an interview with the man himself Neill Blomkamp and asked him about his experimental filmmaking venture called Oats Studios. Of course, they managed to have a question about what happened to the doomed Alien 5 sequel. Unfortunately, Blomkamp puts the final nail in the coffin – Alien 5 “is totally dead” despite him putting a lot of work into the project.

You’ve been asked about this a lot, but I'm guessing that your Alien concept is completely done, right?

I think it’s totally dead, yes. That would be an accurate assumption at this point.

It's sad. I spent a long time working on that, and I feel like it was really pretty awesome. But politically, the way it's gone now, and the way that it all is — it's just not going to live.

Blomkamp goes on to say that he wanted to be respectful to Ridley Scott’s films and the world he created with Alien. He almost implies that Ridley Scott himself put the brakes on the project because Blomkamp’s ideas were too close to Ridley Scott’s films.

As in studio politics?

Yeah. Ridley [Scott] was one of my idols growing up. He’s so talented and he’s made this film that really set me off in a direction. I want to just be as respectful and not go stamping around in this world that he created. I think that if the circumstances were different, and I didn’t feel like I was getting too close to something that he obviously feels a massive personal connection to, that things that may have played out differently. But I did want to be as respectful as possible.

Have you seen Alien: Covenant?

No I haven't seen it yet. But I definitely want to check it out.

So there we have it, whether it was 20th Century Fox or Ridley Scott himself, Alien 5 is dead in the water. Neill Blomkamp originally posted some Alien 5 concept art in January 2015 and the story would have brought back Ripley and Hicks, played by Sigourney Weaver and Michael Biehn. There was a huge amount of reaction on the Internet about the project and within a month, 20th Century Fox had greenlit the project. By the end of the year, the Alien 5 sequel had been put on hiatus. You can check out the concept art that Blomkamp had posted below:

I know fans had their reservations about ‘resurrecting’ Ripley and Hicks but I think it would have been a cool movie to see. Unfortunately, with Sigourney Weaver and Michael Biehn getting older and older, the project seemed less likely as the days went on. I guess now we’ll never know what Blomkamp had in store for us – maybe he’ll post some more Alien 5 concept art in the future.

Link To Post

That is sad.  :-\

Thank god. Long live Alien 3!

Thank god.

Good. For most Aliens was the perfect ending for the Ripley character while others it was Alien 3. Time to move on.

Glad to hear it. Franchise needs to go in new directions, not repeat old stuff...

Maybe it won't change anything, however all people who still want Alien 5 should sign the Alien 5 petition:
https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/neill-blomkamp-for-alien5/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=button

Quote from: SuperM on Jun 03, 2017, 05:01:26 PM
not repeat old stuff...

Say, like Covenant did?

As someone who hates Alien 3 with a passion, this is sad news. Clearly Scott didn't want to share and killed the project or at least forced Fox's hand to do so. Thanks for that Ridley.

And good! That's because Ridley blew it out of the goddamn airlock!

Neil Blomkamp is all talk, Alien 5 is happening!

I'm joking.  :laugh:

I was never a fan of this concept to re-use Ripley, Newt and Hicks so this is good news to me personally. I didn't mind Blomkamp having an original idea without these characters which was before Weaver stepped in.

So, I look forward to seeing what Ridley Scott does with future movies.

A real shame, as it would have been nice to finally get a decent follow up to Aliens, but the writing has been on the wall for some time. Guess the series will just have to end with Aliens in my canon then...

---

Wonder if he will ever reveal where he would have gone with it? Would be very interested to find out...

Shame because this could have worked as a big budgeted work of fan fiction that wouldn't recton alien 3 but just be it's own 'what if'

I think it could still happen. Maybe we have 5 years before it wouldn't be possible to bring back Weaver and beihn.

Help us Neill Blomkamp,you're our only hope!:) ::)

Im quite relived to hear that. I liked the final cut of alien 3 and never wanted ripley newt and hicks to cpme back. Their story is done and over.  Though i did enjoy aliens outbreak-female war. I like that they changed the name of the characters.  But hopefully if we ever get a new post alien 3 film i hope we get new characters  actors and locations.

I wouldn't mind if things moved to video games, havent had a good alien perspective  game since  avp2

Someone needs to give Scott a wake up call, he doesn't own the Alien franchise. There's so much potential for it, and we're stuck with his vision of infinite prequel films that retcon his own canon.

I'm sad for Michael Biehn. He's destined to be forever shafted by this franchise, the poor fella.

I thought it looked interesting and I imagine Blomkamp would have brought 100% more excitement from himself to it than bloody Ridley can manage anymore. I genuinely liked Covenant, but I really dislike Alien becoming the Ridley Scott pondering stuff Star Trek has done a million times show. Alien should be about fresh blood. Also, I still maintain it would have been harder to do this idea than start afresh, so I dug the challenge he was setting himself. Ah well. Maybe Covenant audience numbers will change this yet.

So classy of Scott. Bah!

I think it's amusing that people are worried about Covenant not getting good enough numbers, which they think will prevent him making a new one, but at the same time people think Ridley is able to prevent Fox making a different film in that same universe.

FOX make all the decisions, not 80 year old Ridley Scott. I maintain that no matter if Covenant makes more or less money than Fox hoped, Ridley will be allowed (allowed) by Fox to make another, because he's still an A list director. But Ridley isn't making the decisions, and he isn't making the decisions about Alien5. If Fox think it would make money ...

Did anybody else notice the de-aged Michael Biehn in the Oates trailer?

Quote from: Rankles75 on Jun 03, 2017, 05:57:26 PM
A real shame, as it would have been nice to finally get a decent follow up to Aliens, but the writing has been on the wall for some time. Guess the series will just have to end with Aliens in my canon then...

---

Wonder if he will ever reveal where he would have gone with it? Would be very interested to find out...

Sometime down the road, the script will likely leak out, or Blomkamp could spill some details.

These are great news.

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 03, 2017, 07:09:20 PM
I think it's amusing that people are worried about Covenant not getting good enough numbers, which they think will prevent him making a new one, but at the same time people think Ridley is able to prevent Fox making a different film in that same universe.

FOX make all the decisions, not 80 year old Ridley Scott. I maintain that no matter if Covenant makes more or less money than Fox hoped, Ridley will be allowed (allowed) by Fox to make another, because he's still an A list director. But Ridley isn't making the decisions, and he isn't making the decisions about Alien5. If Fox think it would make money ...

Right. So why it got a green light, and they started working on it, made props and such...only to put the brakes on it all of a sudden. I'm not saying it's something unheard of, plenty of films in development have suffered sudden deaths or stalling, but you gotta admit the timing was suspicious to say the least. Then you have Scott dismissing it as "it didn't even have a script" which is bollocks. And Blomkamp saying "I wouldn't have liked to go stamping around in his work", really, tells you everything.
Sure, the Fox execs call the shots, but surely they prefer to keep their A list director happy, than one-hit wonder Blomkamp.

This franchise is cursed like no other.

i am glad, i dont like his ideas for this movie at all

It couldn't have been any worse than Covenant.

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2017, 07:57:57 PM
It couldn't have been any worse than Covenant.

Context wise, probably not. Still it is a good thing. AVP3 is a better gamble.

This is sad news. I would have loved to see Ripley, Hicks and Adult Newt for one final ride. I like Alien 3 but would have just treated it as a What-if story.

Quote from: whiterabbit on Jun 03, 2017, 07:59:29 PM

Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 03, 2017, 07:57:57 PM
It couldn't have been any worse than Covenant.

Context wise, probably not. Still it is a good thing. AVP3 is a better gamble.

Depends who they get to direct. I have fun with the Paul WS one, but the Strause Bros one is godawful.

Very, very disappointed with this. I think we could've gotten something truly special. People have been dreaming of seeing Ripley, Hicks, and Newt reunited since the comics in the 80's. This was a perfect storm opportunity that was seemingly sabotaged by Scott.

The most common complaint I saw about this film was "But I like Alien³." I love Alien³, and Blomkamp made it clear he wasn't trying to erase that film. Creating an alternate canon doesn't get rid of what came before. Blomkamp was humble, admitting his mistakes from previous films and pledging to learn from them, which is more than what can be said of most directors these days. His style would have complemented the Alien Universe immensely, just seeing those incredible pieces of art and even that prop pulse rifle got me way more pumped than anything leading up to Covenant. I really hope we get an art book or graphic novel for it someday.

Scott seems determined to keep the franchise to himself, and him saying possessive things like this franchise is "my baby" and "I'm not going to let this get away from me again" has been really off-putting. Alien was just as much of a product of Dan O'Bannon, H.R. Giger, and Ron Cobb as it was an accomplishment of Ridley Scott.

Scott also seemed to actively undermine the project, claiming there was no script, even though a script was confirmed by multiple high profile people, and saying about the film "It seems like shooting your big toe off." It's clear that he doesn't want anyone to play in his sandbox. It's entirely strange to me for someone who was never known for sequels to return to this franchise and claim to be the arbiter of it. I'm honestly glad that Covenant is bombing, perhaps it may bring Fox to their senses.

Quote from: Hughughug on Jun 03, 2017, 07:43:45 PM

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 03, 2017, 07:09:20 PM
I think it's amusing that people are worried about Covenant not getting good enough numbers, which they think will prevent him making a new one, but at the same time people think Ridley is able to prevent Fox making a different film in that same universe.

FOX make all the decisions, not 80 year old Ridley Scott. I maintain that no matter if Covenant makes more or less money than Fox hoped, Ridley will be allowed (allowed) by Fox to make another, because he's still an A list director. But Ridley isn't making the decisions, and he isn't making the decisions about Alien5. If Fox think it would make money ...

Right. So why it got a green light, and they started working on it, made props and such...only to put the brakes on it all of a sudden. I'm not saying it's something unheard of, plenty of films in development have suffered sudden deaths or stalling, but you gotta admit the timing was suspicious to say the least. Then you have Scott dismissing it as "it didn't even have a script" which is bollocks. And Blomkamp saying "I wouldn't have liked to go stamping around in his work", really, tells you everything.
Sure, the Fox execs call the shots, but surely they prefer to keep their A list director happy, than one-hit wonder Blomkamp.

Getting the green light, making props, pre production even ... happens all the time.

But the idea Ridley scuppered it is surely nonsensical. Fox have scuppered it. Now perhaps they did it because they see a future in the current Alien series following Prometheus and Covenant, and don't want two different films, for audience confusion reasons, or simple financial reasons (1 alien IP at a time), who knows.

Put it this way - Fox aren't known for abandoning promising projects because another director said boo. Makes no sense. Fox did it for hard commercial reasons, whatever they were. That Blomkamp tries to implicate Scott without actually coming out and saying it ... not really buying it.

Guillermo del Toro tries to get a Lovecraft movie made, with support of Tom Cruise at one point, and studios just point blank refuse to fund it. But people think Ridley Scott can crush another project, rather than Fox being the ones who decided?

As I say, not buying it.

---

Most likely truth? Fox didn't trust Blomkamp, or the script, or both, and didnt think they would *make money*.

Simples.

(and I am disappointed, it sounded good)

Quote from: RidgeTop on Jun 03, 2017, 08:28:32 PM

Scott also seemed to actively undermine the project, claiming there was no script, even though a script was confirmed by multiple high profile people, and saying about the film "It seems like shooting your big toe off." It's clear that he doesn't want anyone to play in his sandbox. It's entirely strange to me for someone who was never known for sequels to return to this franchise and claim to be the arbiter of it. I'm honestly glad that Covenant is bombing, perhaps it may bring Fox to their senses.

I think it's the contrary. I think Covenant bombing was the final nail in the coffin for Alien 5. Ridley Scott was right: The alien isn't bankable anymore. Being happy that a movie in this franchise bombs seems strange to me. Fox might not even let Ridley finish his trilogy so they certainly aren't going to gamble on something like Alien 5. It's obvious that you hate Covenant, but it bombing hurts the fanbase more than a bad movie would have.

Sorry, but when you have Scott saying he had intentions to make a series of films before Prometheus was released, had his next Alien film green lit and Blomkamp gets the Aliens fanboys in a tizz with retrograde sentimentality via Twitter, then Blomkamp only has himself to blame.

I get rather irritated when people moan about Scott supposedly pulling the plug.

I think the path Blomkamp took was in exceptionally bad form. He's also bitterly compounded certain peoples dislike of the direction Prometheus and Covenant have taken. I'm glad he was taken to the side by his ear.

Quote from: D88M on Jun 03, 2017, 07:52:10 PM
i am glad, i dont like his ideas for this movie at all

Same here.

Ridley, give up the reigns. My favorite cinematic universe is being ripped apart.

I put it down more to bad timing than anything else. If the concept was brought up when Ridley wasn't doing his films, then I'd wager that they would've gone ahead with it. I really don't think there's anything sinister going on behind the scenes; it's just business.

As far as the script though, didn't the likes of James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver say they read it?

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 03, 2017, 08:51:25 PM


I get rather irritated when people moan about Scott supposedly pulling the plug.

Too bad. People wouldn't "moan" about it if either Fox or Scott were clear and honest about what happened. Some people are fine with Scott saying "Fox didn't want to keep pursuing it", and that's fine. Me and others don't buy it, for reasons already stated.

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 03, 2017, 08:51:25 PM


I think the path Blomkamp took was in exceptionally bad form. He's also bitterly compounded certain peoples dislike of the direction Prometheus and Covenant have taken. I'm glad he was taken to the side by his ear.

People didn't need Blomkamp to dislike the direction Scott is taking the franchise, I can assure you. Plenty of people were already bashing Prometheus way before Blomkamp took his "retrograde sentimentality" to Twitter.

Quote from: PsyKore on Jun 03, 2017, 09:38:12 PM

As far as the script though, didn't the likes of James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver say they read it?

Yes. And that's why some people are suspicious of Scott. His undermining of Alien V makes it clear he didn't like the idea of it happening.

Quote from: RidgeTop on Jun 03, 2017, 08:28:32 PM
Scott also seemed to actively undermine the project, claiming there was no script, even though a script was confirmed by multiple high profile people.

Quote from: PsyKore on Jun 03, 2017, 09:38:12 PM
As far as the script though, didn't the likes of James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver say they read it?

Ridley Scott himself had previously said that he had read the script. He even liked it. Go figure...

"We have Neill Blomkamp's Alien, which will be out in 2017. We just have the first [screenplay] draft in so far but it looks pretty good."

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2015/10/05/ridley-scott-talks-neill-blomkamps-alien-5/ (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2015/10/05/ridley-scott-talks-neill-blomkamps-alien-5/)

Quote from: Hughughug on Jun 03, 2017, 09:45:46 PM

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 03, 2017, 08:51:25 PM


I get rather irritated when people moan about Scott supposedly pulling the plug.

Too bad. People wouldn't "moan" about it if either Fox or Scott were clear and honest about what happened. Some people are fine with Scott saying "Fox didn't want to keep pursuing it", and that's fine. Me and others don't buy it, for reasons already stated.

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 03, 2017, 08:51:25 PM


I think the path Blomkamp took was in exceptionally bad form. He's also bitterly compounded certain peoples dislike of the direction Prometheus and Covenant have taken. I'm glad he was taken to the side by his ear.

People didn't need Blomkamp to dislike the direction Scott is taking the franchise, I can assure you. Plenty of people were already bashing Prometheus way before Blomkamp took his "retrograde sentimentality" to Twitter.

Quote from: PsyKore on Jun 03, 2017, 09:38:12 PM

As far as the script though, didn't the likes of James Cameron and Sigourney Weaver say they read it?

Yes. And that's why some people are suspicious of Scott. His undermining of Alien V makes it clear he didn't like the idea of it happening.

So?  Companies aren't obliged to explain their decision making processes on how they want invest their money to anyone but their shareholders.

Surely a big name like Sigourney Weaver could have a say in getting this film made. If a film won't be made maybe this could be done as a book or a comic. That concept art is so good and the story ideas that come from them seem awesome.
I wonder what the premise of the film would have been. Where did Ripley, Newt and Hicks go after ALIENS.

What a relief. Save the do-overs for the superhero twaddle!

Quote from: Jacku on Jun 03, 2017, 10:02:09 PM
Surely a big name like Sigourney Weaver could have a say in getting this film made. If a film won't be made maybe this could be done as a book or a comic. That concept art is so good and the story ideas that come from them seem awesome.
I wonder what the premise of the film would have been. Where did Ripley, Newt and Hicks go after ALIENS.

She would have a say, but not a terribly big one.  She's obviously still high profile, but not nearly enough to get a big budget film made.

"so far it looks pretty good"

How many iterations do scripts go through?

We really are desperately looking to blame Ridley here, aren't we? Does anybody actually genuinely think FOX would abandon a good script and likely profitable project on the sayso of Ridley, if they wanted it to go ahead?

Madness.

Projects can be 'dead' for years before they ultimately materialise.

The original script based on the comic for AvP was successfully pitched in 1991 and the final film didn't eventuate until 2004.

im not sure if it was michael biehn that nose looks different 4 me

It's silly to assume that Alien 5 even had a good story seeing as how I haven't heard a single plot synopsis. Maybe it's my own ignorance, but what was the story? All I've seen is some horrible concept art ( the images attached to this story ). It's also silly to assume Ridley is the one behind the project's demise. Unless someone is privy to insider knowledge this is all speculation.

It's just as silly to assume it had a bad one.

Quote from: SM on Jun 03, 2017, 10:39:25 PM
It's just as silly to assume it had a bad one.

I'm not assuming anything. Here's what we know: The project is most likely dead.

Quote from: SM on Jun 03, 2017, 10:13:15 PM
Projects can be 'dead' for years before they ultimately materialise.

The original script based on the comic for AvP was successfully pitched in 1991 and the final film didn't eventuate until 2004.

The only difference is that in this case, this one relies on having Ripley, Hicks and Newt. If it stays 'dead' for too long, these actors may not be able to reprise their roles given their advanced age.

However, Blomkamp or someone else could always go back to his previous ideas that didn't feature these characters or have a new idea for the story.

Obviously is dead... and we have good luck if A:C2 have "light green" by Fox.

PD: ¡Hala Madrid!

Quote from: SM on Jun 03, 2017, 10:13:15 PM
Projects can be 'dead' for years before they ultimately materialise.

The original script based on the comic for AvP was successfully pitched in 1991 and the final film didn't eventuate until 2004.

Weaver isn't getting any younger, but yes, the story could materialize in the future. Will Weaver be in any state to do the role as it's written right now? Who knows? We don't know anything about the story.

well, this has been known for a while but i guess we now have more proof of it being dead.

Now we are going to have to suffer through Scott's the Tale of David.

Unbelievable...Imo , Alien Covenant was lackluster ..I was disappointed by it and felt it was just too much emphasis on the killer psychotic android storyline, did nothing to explain the engineers and felt disjointed ..I think Neill Blomkamp could of produced a far better thrilling alien film.

I want this project to come to fruition. I really don't care about the Prometheus movies. I've never thought of the Alien series as "Ridley Scotts' franchise" and it truly isn't. He does not own the rights to the characters/stories, those belong to 20th Century Fox. He only directed 1 film until 2012, not like he was involved in every movie.

For Pete's sake, just do the film before the actors and actresses die! Then ANY chance of this movie being made will be dead, for sake of consistency. If it sucks, so be it. Didn't the majority want a second AvP film? We didn't know how awful it would be til afterwards. However, if Cameron, Weaver AND Scott all seemed to like the movie script, isn't that saying something from the people that brought these characters to life?

I still think elements of Blomkamp's proposal will make it into one of the next prequel movies.

I also believe Blomkamp could eventually get to make an 'ALIEN' movie - maybe even bring a revised version of his proposal to the Project.  I'm sure it would fit into the New canon - it will just be with new characters.

I am so glad there's not going to be a retcon.  Respect the dead, I say.  Ripley, Hicks and Newt should be remembered for the value they gave this series and not be recycled as inferior versions of their previous selves.  Enough of that has taken place in this series already without having to subject important characters to the same detestable fate.

-Windebieste.

dont want a spiderman epidemic

Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 03, 2017, 10:49:15 PM

Quote from: SM on Jun 03, 2017, 10:13:15 PM
Projects can be 'dead' for years before they ultimately materialise.

The original script based on the comic for AvP was successfully pitched in 1991 and the final film didn't eventuate until 2004.

The only difference is that in this case, this one relies on having Ripley, Hicks and Newt. If it stays 'dead' for too long, these actors may not be able to reprise their roles given their advanced age.

However, Blomkamp or someone else could always go back to his previous ideas that didn't feature these characters or have a new idea for the story.

Via de-aging, recasting, or the having the actors play their age - anything can happen.

Quote from: windebieste on Jun 03, 2017, 11:26:12 PM
I still think elements of Blomkamp's proposal will make it into one of the next prequel movies.

I also believe Blomkamp could eventually get to make an 'ALIEN' movie - maybe even bring a revised version of his proposal to the Project.  I'm sure it would fit into the New canon - it will just be with new characters.

I am so glad there's not going to be a retcon.  Respect the dead, I say.  Ripley, Hicks and Newt should be remembered for the value they gave this series and not be recycled as inferior versions of their previous selves.  Enough of that has taken place in this series already without having to subject important characters to the same detestable fate.

-Windebieste.

I agree 100%.

Sir Ridley Scott is a business-man. Probably Sir Ridley Scott is Directing ALIEN 5.

FOX DOESN'T have faith in Blomkamp.

Neill Blomkamp: "I think [Alien 5] is totally dead"

There's still a chance!

damn it, Ridley........*sigh.    Prometheus and Covenant are both terrible Alien movies. 

Quote from: Adam802 on Jun 04, 2017, 01:19:42 AM
damn it, Ridley........*sigh.    Prometheus and Covenant are both terrible Alien movies.

A stupid retcon would've been worse by definition.

Also, as much as I find A:C to be lacking, it sure gave this franchise a well-deserved vitamin shot, opening up for new possibilities as angles concerning the Alien as well as the universe it inhabits. We needed something fresh, a twist - not incestuous nercophilia.

A smart retcon would be better by definition.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Jun 04, 2017, 01:26:21 AM

Quote from: Adam802 on Jun 04, 2017, 01:19:42 AM
damn it, Ridley........*sigh.    Prometheus and Covenant are both terrible Alien movies.

Also, as much as I find A:C to be lacking, it sure gave this franchise a well-deserved vitamin shot, opening up for new possibilities as angles concerning the Alien as well as the universe it inhabits. We needed something fresh, a twist - not incestuous nercophilia.

Very much agree with you on this. Feels like we haven't got an Alien movie like this since A3 and A:R. I really like Covenant and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it afterwards considering my horrible time with Prometheus and all the issues I had with it personally. Covenant has restored my faith and trust in Ridley. But I have to say. As a fan of Sigourney Weaver they REALLY badly need to use her in one last film before she gets too old because her age is actually starting to show now and her physicality has definitely went down a few pegs since her Aliens '86 days.

Give the characters who are the anchors of this franchise a proper send-off. That's all I want to see as a fan. I embrace all the new lore and everything. I just don't feel like any character who has solidified a foothold into the story of the franchise ever got the ending they deserved. I know the Alien is meant to leave a trail of death and destruction in its path but I also think a good conclusive wrap up to important character's are right to do for audiences and appropriate for any storyline in general.

---

Quote from: PRJ_since1990 on Jun 03, 2017, 11:24:11 PM
I want this project to come to fruition. I really don't care about the Prometheus movies. I've never thought of the Alien series as "Ridley Scotts' franchise" and it truly isn't. He does not own the rights to the characters/stories, those belong to 20th Century Fox. He only directed 1 film until 2012, not like he was involved in every movie.

For Pete's sake, just do the film before the actors and actresses die! Then ANY chance of this movie being made will be dead, for sake of consistency. If it sucks, so be it. Didn't the majority want a second AvP film? We didn't know how awful it would be til afterwards. However, if Cameron, Weaver AND Scott all seemed to like the movie script, isn't that saying something from the people that brought these characters to life?

This 100%. It's disappointing it won't be made but I'm sure something similar to it will be made one day.

Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 04, 2017, 01:48:00 AM
A smart retcon would be better by definition.

Sure, a retcon can be smart, but by default a retcon can't be smart...

But I see what you did there though... Good one, hehe  ;)

If Weaver must be in another Alien movie, I'd like to see an actual sequel to Resurrection. Maybe she could give birth to another newborn. lol, I kid...I kid...

Farewell Alien 5.

For a long while anyways.

People that say Alien 5 was never a thing. Yes it was Neil wrote a script for it and did a lot of concept art and Fox even greenlighted the project and Neil signed up to direct it. So how is that not ever a thing?

Quote from: ROYCE_THE_PREDATOR on Jun 04, 2017, 02:57:11 AM
People that say Alien 5 was never a thing. Yes it was Neil wrote a script for it and did a lot of concept art and Fox even greenlighted the project and Neil signed up to direct it. So how is that not ever a thing?

You answered your own question. Just ignore them.

People keep saying this would've been a retcon, it would've been an alternate-con.

Ridley Scott: How dare this man pay tribute to James Camerons movie and not MY movie. Alien isn't supposed to be about action or horr, it's about biblical references, philosophy, and drinking in Michael Fassbender's perfect face. If he wants to make a sequel then I'll make three!

Quote from: genocyber on Jun 04, 2017, 05:45:38 AM
Ridley Scott: How dare this man pay tribute to James Camerons movie and not MY movie. Alien isn't supposed to be about action or horr, it's about biblical references, philosophy, and drinking in Michael Fassbender's perfect face. If he wants to make a sequel then I'll make three!

I might be in the minority, but I love the biblical ( and literature ) references, philosophy, and Michael Fassbender in the new series.

It's really obvious Scott didn't want this movie to happen.

Quote from: newagescamartist on Jun 04, 2017, 06:47:38 AM

Quote from: genocyber on Jun 04, 2017, 05:45:38 AM
Ridley Scott: How dare this man pay tribute to James Camerons movie and not MY movie. Alien isn't supposed to be about action or horr, it's about biblical references, philosophy, and drinking in Michael Fassbender's perfect face. If he wants to make a sequel then I'll make three!

I might be in the minority, but I love the biblical ( and literature ) references, philosophy, and Michael Fassbender in the new series.

I liked David in Prometheus. I really like Bladerunner and see what Scott is going for/trying to do.

With that said ---- Covenant it just below mediocre, convoluted , disjointed movie (which I hate most about new movies) + amped up David ten times and made the centre figure. The opening with Guy Pierce and M. Fassbander was shot beautifully , but the "philosophical" stuff was hitting you on the face with a brick, which continued throughout the rest of the movie.

People here repeating stuff like: "Ridley was right, the beast is cooked" when the most interesting parts (not saying much) were the build up to the backbuster and the field battle (basically xenos).

About the more grand scheme (that you mentioned) and not surprisingly - the other interesting thing was the flashback which showed Giger designs.

Where is the grand scheme and the interesting Engineer homeworld? Is that all they could come up with? A wide shot/s of bland architecture and 3 heads in the most uninspired "quarters", basically a cave?

With what David engineered the alien or the close form of it, cause I couldn't clearly see the bio-mechanical design? With a wooden set of cups and plates, some glass spheres and candles as a source of light? hah

Such a good Alien movie, what an interesting sci-fi design and worldbuilding.

---

Blomkamp's movie/idea may be more narrow in its core - but I think he is more passionate about the alien, sci-fi world/design and atmosphere which are the cornerstone of the Alien franchise.

I hope he still gets to make his film in the near future.

Quote from: Whos_Nick on Jun 04, 2017, 07:09:13 AM
It's really obvious Scott didn't want this movie to happen.

Is it? Amazing the psychic powers some seem to have.

But assuming that assumption is true, so what? You think Ridley dictates Fox movie decisions? He really doesn't. People here claim Ridley has prevented any future alien films by making (in their view) a poor film in Covenant, and before that Prometheus, yet he has the power to also prevent a different film?

He's a magician, that Ridley! He can do everything!  ;D

Quote from: Agent on Jun 04, 2017, 07:38:20 AM

Quote from: newagescamartist on Jun 04, 2017, 06:47:38 AM

Quote from: genocyber on Jun 04, 2017, 05:45:38 AM
Ridley Scott: How dare this man pay tribute to James Camerons movie and not MY movie. Alien isn't supposed to be about action or horr, it's about biblical references, philosophy, and drinking in Michael Fassbender's perfect face. If he wants to make a sequel then I'll make three!

I might be in the minority, but I love the biblical ( and literature ) references, philosophy, and Michael Fassbender in the new series.

I liked David in Prometheus. I really like Bladerunner and see what Scott is going for/trying to do.

With that said ---- Covenant it just below mediocre, convoluted , disjointed movie (which I hate most about new movies) + amped up David ten times and made the centre figure. The opening with Guy Pierce and M. Fassbander was shot beautifully , but the "philosophical" stuff was hitting you on the face with a brick, which continued throughout the rest of the movie.

People here repeating stuff like: "Ridley was right, the beast is cooked" when the most interesting parts (not saying much) were the build up to the backbuster and the field battle (basically xenos).

About the more grand scheme (that you mentioned) and not surprisingly - the other interesting thing was the flashback which showed Giger designs.

Where is the grand scheme and the interesting Engineer homeworld? Is that all they could come up with? A wide shot/s of bland architecture and 3 heads in the most uninspired "quarters", basically a cave?

With what David engineered the alien or the close form of it, cause I couldn't clearly see the bio-mechanical design? With a wooden set of cups and plates, some glass spheres and candles as a source of light? hah

Such a good Alien movie, what an interesting sci-fi design and worldbuilding.

---

Blomkamp's movie/idea may be more narrow in its core - but I think he is more passionate about the alien, sci-fi world/design and atmosphere which are the cornerstone of the Alien franchise.

I hope he still gets to make his film in the near future.

You don't even know what his story is. Almost everything you said here is based on assumption and opinion. Can't we enjoy Ridley's movies without it becoming an insult to someone else? I like the Alien series, and I happen to enjoy the new direction. I'd love to hear what the proposed story for Alien 5 is, but I don't think anyone here knows. If they're privy to that information, I'm sure we'd all love to hear it seeing as we're fans. Could be great, could be horrible, but to say that he has more passion about the series than Ridley Scott is kind of ridiculous. I'm all for sharing opinions and speculation, but comments about who has more passion is silly.

Too bad.  If nothing else, if Blomkamp's movie had gone ahead, it would have been an interesting exercise in creating an 'alternate' onscreen version of events to what happened in ALIEN 3 (and then subsequently what followed in ALIEN RESURRECTION too).

While there's a certain re-watchability factor in those 2 movies for me, I will only ever be able to look on them as mere 'hypersleep nightmares' which Ripley endures after ALIENS concludes - and there's several problematic continuity errors at the start of ALIEN 3 which makes this very easy to imagine - so it's not as if I required Blomkamp's movie to keep Ripley & co. alive in my imagination anyway. :P   

And as far as the 2 AvP movies and the ongoing PROMETHEUS storyline go, I'lI just continue to look on them as completey unconnected, 'alternate' Expanded Universe-type movies to the original storyline of the ALIEN/ALIENS combination...which merely show possible 'alternate' scenarios using some of their characters and source material.  This way, I can better enjoy whatever contradictions Ridley decides on with his current involvement in the franchise.  ;D

I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

@ Valaquen - Indeed.  I'll keep the 'Lovecraft'-ian vibe of ALIEN/ALIENS seperate from the 'von Daniken'-ish storyline of the PROMETHEUS, thank you very much. 

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

So many nails hit on the head...  :)

@newagescamartist

Pretty predictable answer btw. Expected.

You took the easy route, conveniently missing and not commenting on the stuff which are more crucial/important and instead based your whole post on mine being an "opinion".

Yeah, you can certainly enjoy Ridley's films, but to objectively say that they're good movies (especially Covenant, Prometheus can take a pass) is being ridiculous.

Ridley is talking out of his ass to put it bluntly and he wasn't interested in making an Alien movie "recently" at all. From the latter  alone (and Covenant)  you can infer how much passion he had/has and where it is set.

If it was titled Prometheus, we weren't even going to have this conversation cause I wouldn't care that much about the wasted potential of the franchise. It would still be a mediocre movie at best, regardless though. If it wasn't called Alien I could wave a my hand at it being alternative-prequel stuff (with Alien elements) that was the idea all along.

The retcon of the space jockey being a tall albino human (and making the entire premise human-centric) was bad enough considering what Alien and Aliens were about and what made them great, although, ALTHOUGH, the idea itself and what it was based on was interesting/good and it had potential and something going for it.

We got to see so much of it in Covenant, yeah.

Still that wasn't the original idea of the space jockey and of Alien for that matter. The space jockey is that thing sitting with its chest open, fused to the chair in some freakish Lovecraftian way and the ship itself, remnant of one big old unknown universe which the human race has no understanding of (which makes it scarier) and is better off not tinkering with.

What David (Ridley) did with it? He tinkered with it in the most uninspired/logic deficient way.

---

With these 2 films, it's getting  painfully clear that Alien is/was a masterpiece cause of the collaboration and effort of the amazing team behind it. Not just R. Scott.

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Thanks for this post - sometimes the "we won, you lost" mentality can be a bit mean-spirited, I think. An all out "Alien" movie would have been welcome (you know, not with "the DNA" and all that stuff. Whatever you say about NBs ideas, clearly he wasn't mired in retro-universe building that the new trilogy is getting weighed down with.

They were just going to make the sequel that a great many wanted to see. It's a real shame, I was totally on board with it - though, like many others, shared the concern that NBs ability may not have matched his vision.

I guess we'll never know!

Well I'm throwing my hat in the air. I would be happy if Blomkamp made an alien film, but i just have no interest in any new film that officially retcons half of the franchise and brings back dead characters for no reason. I know thats what a lot of people want and this news in unfortunate for them. That said, i cant help it if this news makes me happy though.

Maybe they should let Blomkamp direct the third Prometheus movie

Finally

Fuc*ing ridley scott who makes crap nonsensical garbage nowadays...ALIEN 5 would by far be far more relevant and logical and interesting than the utter garbage of prometheus and covenant , both which look like clueless filmmaking by hack writers and bloated ego director way past his prime...

426Buddy But you ok with Ridley shitting on lore and his retcon? LMAO

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

I disagree 100%.

A man(Sir Ridley Scott) with 40 years of success in movies ISN'T and amateur.

And BEFORE 1977, that man(Sir Ridley Scott) was the most successful in Ads and commercials.

Good news. The concept was nothing to get excited about.

Quote from: Adorianu on Jun 04, 2017, 05:25:45 PM
426Buddy But you ok with Ridley shitting on lore and his retcon? LMAO

I wasnt terribly happy with davids hand in creating the xeno, but that can still change depending on what happens in the sequel. But otherwise i didnt see anything particularily heinous about it. So yeah i enjoyed AC a lot, gave it a 7.5/10.

AC doesnt invalidate half the series and resurrect dead characters that should stay dead. I would have loved an Alien 5 but we werent getting that anyway, we were getting alien 3.2.

But you don't have to agree and by your "LMAO" comment i dont even expect you to be civil about it.

Quote from: PierreVW on Jun 04, 2017, 06:11:15 PM

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

I disagree 100%.

A man(Sir Ridley Scott) with 40 years of success in movies ISN'T and amateur.

And BEFORE 1977, that man(Sir Ridley Scott) was the most successful in Ads and commercials.

You're taking "enlightened amateur" out of context.

Turn Alien 5 into a videogame for next generation consoles, Weaver and Blehn can at least be voice actors and mo-capped. Hell, do FMV cutscenes and have them star in them!   

Quote from: Agent on Jun 04, 2017, 12:24:18 PM
@newagescamartist

Pretty predictable answer btw. Expected.

You took the easy route, conveniently missing and not commenting on the stuff which are more crucial/important and instead based your whole post on mine being an "opinion".

Yeah, you can certainly enjoy Ridley's films, but to objectively say that they're good movies (especially Covenant, Prometheus can take a pass) is being ridiculous.

Ridley is talking out of his ass to put it bluntly and he wasn't interested in making an Alien movie "recently" at all. From the latter  alone (and Covenant)  you can infer how much passion he had/has and where it is set.

If it was titled Prometheus, we weren't even going to have this conversation cause I wouldn't care that much about the wasted potential of the franchise. It would still be a mediocre movie at best, regardless though. If it wasn't called Alien I could wave a my hand at it being alternative-prequel stuff (with Alien elements) that was the idea all along.

The retcon of the space jockey being a tall albino human (and making the entire premise human-centric) was bad enough considering what Alien and Aliens were about and what made them great, although, ALTHOUGH, the idea itself and what it was based on was interesting/good and it had potential and something going for it.

We got to see so much of it in Covenant, yeah.

Still that wasn't the original idea of the space jockey and of Alien for that matter. The space jockey is that thing sitting with its chest open, fused to the chair in some freakish Lovecraftian way and the ship itself, remnant of one big old unknown universe which the human race has no understanding of (which makes it scarier) and is better off not tinkering with.

What David (Ridley) did with it? He tinkered with it in the most uninspired/logic deficient way.

---

With these 2 films, it's getting  painfully clear that Alien is/was a masterpiece cause of the collaboration and effort of the amazing team behind it. Not just R. Scott.

The easy way out? What are even talking about? Saying that Blomkamp is more passionate about the series than Ridley Scott is ridiculous. You can't possibly know that. You didn't like Covenant. That's your right. I'm not going to write multiple paragraphs detailing why I disagree because I have better things to do than argue about the same tired things or why you feel so wronged about the title of a movie. Easy way out, lol. I'm not the one making wild assumptions. This will be my last reply to you on this thread because it's obvious to me that you don't want a discussion, you want an argument. Good day.

Good riddens, Blomkamp make really flat movies with awkward dialogue nowadays and retconning the death of a couple of characters is just so much fan pleasing it's ridiculous. Covenant actually takes the universe somewhere and has made it more interesting. It would just be Friday the 13th series otherwise with characters coming back to life with the same plot over and over. I just hope they don't mess up the connection between the prequels and the original Alien in the end, they gotto explain the derelict somehow or not explain it at all since the aliens David created were different after all.

Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 04, 2017, 06:47:48 PM

Quote from: Adorianu on Jun 04, 2017, 05:25:45 PM
426Buddy But you ok with Ridley shitting on lore and his retcon? LMAO

I wasnt terribly happy with davids hand in creating the xeno, but that can still change depending on what happens in the sequel. But otherwise i didnt see anything particularily heinous about it. So yeah i enjoyed AC a lot, gave it a 7.5/10.

AC doesnt invalidate half the series and resurrect dead characters that should stay dead. I would have loved an Alien 5 but we werent getting that anyway, we were getting alien 3.2.

But you don't have to agree and by your "LMAO" comment i dont even expect you to be civil about it.

I pretty much agree.
- The retcons of Ridley (and Spaihts) with "Prometheus" and "Alien Covenant" can be limited and contained in the current franchise.
Even David creating the xenomorph (a bad idea imo) can be fixed by a filmmaker Blu-ray comment or in another Alien movie by a short piece of dialogue. (What kind of dialogue? Something like what's in the "Covenant" novelization.)

Blomkamp's A5 bluntly pushes out 2 Alien movies from the timeline.   
A huge problem imo.

;)

So...you got scared is what happened...you through you couldn't fit the shoes..and blamed it on politics...shame

Quote from: SM on Jun 04, 2017, 08:51:11 PM

Quote from: PierreVW on Jun 04, 2017, 06:11:15 PM

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

I disagree 100%.

A man(Sir Ridley Scott) with 40 years of success in movies ISN'T and amateur.

And BEFORE 1977, that man(Sir Ridley Scott) was the most successful in Ads and commercials.

You're taking "enlightened amateur" out of context.

Well, an Amateur is someone WITHOUT experience.

Sir Ridley Scott has a lot of experience. BEFORE 1977, Sir Ridley worked 15 years in Ads and Commercials. His first Ads were in 1962. Sir Ridley has all of the experiences.

You're still taking it out of the context in regards to science fiction.

I've been in two minds about this project since it looked like it would be coming to be. While I was pretty excited to see Hicks and Ripley back on screen with Pulse Rifles and etc, I wasn't sold on the idea of an alternate timeline. I'm not too sure how I feel  about the prospect of it not being made either, especially as I'm not feeling confident we'll be seeing another Alien film for sometime now.

If there is a draft of this, i would like to read it, just to see how close it was to What Ridley is doing to the prequels

I too have always had mixed feelings about this project. Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited, he hit that retro/nostalgia love that we all can fall victim too. He knows there is still a large part of the fanbase that hates Alien 3 for killing off these characters, and he played up to that.

Logically, I wouldn't like to see this film get made. I'm not for anything that will retcon Alien 3. Resurrection I wouldn't mind losing, because it feels very disconnected to the first 3 films anyway. I'm a massive fan of Aliens, who loved Hicks, and would have liked a better resolution to his character, be that surviving or having a more memorable death - I have zero issue with killing him off, I just take issue to killing him off essentially off screen in the opening credits.

But I reckon the film would only ever be good in our imaginations, in theory. In practice, pensioners Hicks and Ripley running around fighting Xeno's would probably not work out that great. I'm delighted we got to see some of the concept art, and I would love to read a draft of the script, or a novel/graphic novel based on the idea of the film, but I'm also kinda glad its not going to happen either.

Quote from: newagescamartist on Jun 04, 2017, 10:15:13 PM

The easy way out? What are even talking about? Saying that Blomkamp is more passionate about the series than Ridley Scott is ridiculous. You can't possibly know that. You didn't like Covenant. That's your right. I'm not going to write multiple paragraphs detailing why I disagree because I have better things to do than argue about the same tired things or why you feel so wronged about the title of a movie. Easy way out, lol. I'm not the one making wild assumptions. This will be my last reply to you on this thread because it's obvious to me that you don't want a discussion, you want an argument. Good day.

Exactly, part of the problem is you don't know what I'm talking about, the other part is the thesis and basis for your posts are thin as ice --->

--->

1st - Can I enjoy covenant (with thrown in passive agressive stuff such as "without being insulted" when I haven't insulted anyone)
2nd - Your post is your opinion

What discussion? We can't have a discussion cause your posts consists of only that instead of backing up your sole announcement of "I liked Covenant". What did you like about it?

Does it have something besides the heavy emphasis on David and the Bladerunner referrences and horror cliches with some interesting stuff thrown in that potentially won't go anywhere, same as the Deacon?

Where are the (interesting) sci-fi designs/sets, trademark for the Alien franchise?

And you're wrong, I enjoyed Covenant to a some extent - 1st half was nothing unseen, but good; good design of the ship; they didn't take the time (or any in the case of the  captain) to develop the crew, yet again. The cast was good/believable.

Ridley is a visioner as I've said in another thread that the direction was top notch, the build up to the backbuster and the scene were done very well. There were other spread here and there, but as whole they were scarce.

2nd half was lacking/rushed, with some (maybe one?) disturbing scene - the Neomorph just standing behind the chick at the fountain. Well done, well shot.

I wrote 6 paragraphs in 5 mins and it is one sided because you basically don't have arguments.

http://emptylighthouse.com/should-20th-century-fox-go-ahead-neil-blomkamps-alien-5-232170709

Answer:  Yes!

Um, no.

"Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited"

He wasn't smart at all, he acted like an arsehole if you actually think about it for a moment. Now people have the gall to moan about Scott 'taking away' their favourite Aliens movie that doesn't exist? It was all pointless, short sighted, obnoxious and... just plain c**tish behaviour. 

I've got zero respect for the fellow now, he thinks he can wrangle a film together knowing he'll get the rabid online presence of Aliens fans backing him? What a silly twat.

For decades, the idea of a new Alien 3 was nothing but an impossible dream.  Blomkamp almost made it a reality.  I'm grateful to him for trying and hope he continues to do so.

I Have yet to see Blomkamp make something that I have enjoyed. So I am very pleased this dreadful idea seems dead and buried.

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 05, 2017, 05:36:37 PM
"Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited"

He wasn't smart at all, he acted like an arsehole if you actually think about it for a moment. Now people have the gall to moan about Scott 'taking away' their favourite Aliens movie that doesn't exist? It was all pointless, short sighted, obnoxious and... just plain c**tish behaviour. 

I've got zero respect for the fellow now, he thinks he can wrangle a film together knowing he'll get the rabid online presence of Aliens fans backing him? What a silly twat.

Yup!

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 05, 2017, 05:36:37 PM
"Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited"

He wasn't smart at all, he acted like an arsehole if you actually think about it for a moment. Now people have the gall to moan about Scott 'taking away' their favourite Aliens movie that doesn't exist? It was all pointless, short sighted, obnoxious and... just plain c**tish behaviour. 

I've got zero respect for the fellow now, he thinks he can wrangle a film together knowing he'll get the rabid online presence of Aliens fans backing him? What a silly twat.

What's silly about trying to pimp a project?

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 05, 2017, 05:36:37 PM
"Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited"

He wasn't smart at all, he acted like an arsehole if you actually think about it for a moment. Now people have the gall to moan about Scott 'taking away' their favourite Aliens movie that doesn't exist? It was all pointless, short sighted, obnoxious and... just plain c**tish behaviour. 

I've got zero respect for the fellow now, he thinks he can wrangle a film together knowing he'll get the rabid online presence of Aliens fans backing him? What a silly twat.

Oh, cry me a river.

Quote from: Tonyhartmorph on Jun 05, 2017, 05:36:37 PM
"Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited"

He wasn't smart at all, he acted like an arsehole if you actually think about it for a moment. Now people have the gall to moan about Scott 'taking away' their favourite Aliens movie that doesn't exist? It was all pointless, short sighted, obnoxious and... just plain c**tish behaviour. 

I've got zero respect for the fellow now, he thinks he can wrangle a film together knowing he'll get the rabid online presence of Aliens fans backing him? What a silly twat.

I meant more in relation to the way he whipped up a bit of a frenzy online. He knew the nostalgia/retro angle was going to create a buzz and get him a foot in the door. It may have been an arsehole move, but it was a smart arsehole move. It was extremely cheeky and it was arguably out of line, but it was a bold move that almost paid off. It looks like he won't get to make an Alien movie, but it got a whole lot closer by going the route he went than he ever would have by sitting on the sidelines waiting for the call. He took the initiative into his own hands and it never paid off.

Arsehole? Maybe. But smart all the same.

It doesn't make him an asshole.  Neill made the choice not to be chained by Alien 3 continuity. Good for him!

anyone responsible for causing this movie NOT to be made should be ashamed of themselves

Blomkamp may have been cheeky to do what he did (I think so), and perhaps that makes him an arsehole. But the film isn't being canned for that reason, if it was going to be good for Fox it wouldn't matter. That's how it got as far as it did.

Lots of people, Scott, Blomkamp, being blamed for this.

It's Fox. Making a commercial decision. The rest is tittle tattle and irrelevant.

 :'(  :'(  :'(
That's so sad. We had a chance to see a proper ending to the series but mr Ridley had other plans.
Alien Covenant was such a bad movie because  it didn't respect the franchise,  and it destroyed the potential of the Prometheus. I wasnt waiting to see Ridley Scott deal so bad with Alien and scrapping Blomkamp's project .

ALIEN 5 (or ALIENS II if you prefer) may have been killed off, never to be resurrected, alas...but here's a glimpse of Sigourney in the latest trailer for Blomkamp's upcoming sci-fi/horror shorts.  And things are gonna get quite gory in some of these mini features it seems...

www.io9.gizmodo.com/sigourney-weaver-pops-up-in-a-weird-new-trailer-for-nei-1795830348

(just noticed that she was also briefly seen in the first teaser trailer linked to in that article too, at the 0.41 secs mark)

If the Blomkamp who made District 9 showed up, I think he could have done a good job with an Alien movie. I was not excited for a return of the Aliens survivors, but I'd have liked to see what he could do in the universe. As it is, it will be okay if the movies go away for a while. No one with the power to make an Alien movie seems to know what to do or how to do it, not even RS. It is unfortunate.

I wish someone would leak the plot. I really want to see what this movie would have been about. The one piece of concept art that intrigues me is the ship in the warehouse.

Funny trailer. Is this Alec Gillis in the end?

Quote from: JohnnyChimpo on Jun 05, 2017, 12:29:49 PM
Logically, I wouldn't like to see this film get made. I'm not for anything that will retcon Alien 3.

Agreed. I have my problems with A3 but do I really want to pretend that it didn't happen in the main timeline?

Quote from: JohnnyChimpo on Jun 05, 2017, 12:29:49 PM
Resurrection I wouldn't mind losing, because it feels very disconnected to the first 3 films anyway.

It still has some connection with the franchise. I feel uncomfortable dumping any of the Alien movies as part of the main story.

* Also what really galls me about the A5 project is that Cameron wanted to make another sequel right after "Aliens" with Ripley, Hicks and Newt.
And Sigouney vetoed the idea.
Weaver approved of A3 and A4 and now she wants to get rid of them from the timeline?
smh

Quote from: JohnnyChimpo on Jun 05, 2017, 12:29:49 PMI would love to read a draft of the script, or a novel/graphic novel based on the idea of the film, ...

That might be the best place for this Alien story, as an alternate version in an EU novel.

;)

The only way Alien 5 will get made now, is if James Cameron returns to do it, which would not be for a while yet.  Given he was going to do Alien 5 before AVP came alone.

Quote from: Scorpio on Jun 06, 2017, 10:32:50 AM
The only way Alien 5 will get made now, is if James Cameron returns to do it, which would not be for a while yet.  Given he was going to do Alien 5 before AVP came alone.

Could be another decade. He's consumed with Avatar for the foreseeable future.

The most unfortunate thing to come from the butchering that Covenant is doing.

Jim Cameron? When was his last good film?

Terminator 2.

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 04:56:46 PM
Jim Cameron? When was his last good film?

Terminator 2.

I agree. 26 years ago.

And He made only 2 movies in the last 20 years: titanic(1997) and avatar(2009).

I can see that the viagra for Cameron is still in effect...

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Jun 06, 2017, 07:28:05 PM
I can see that the viagra for Cameron is still in effect...

So is the weird 'James Cameron took a shit and made me smell it' attitude that a lot of his detractors have.

You go around enough fandoms and you find it's just everyday movie talk  :-\

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 06, 2017, 08:09:57 PM

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Jun 06, 2017, 07:28:05 PM
I can see that the viagra for Cameron is still in effect...

So is the weird 'James Cameron took a shit and made me smell it' attitude that a lot of his detractors have.

You go around enough fandoms and you find it's just everyday movie talk  :-\

It's NOT realistic to talk about Cameron because the man only made a movie every 11 years.

Cameron said his Avatar 2 is in 2020 and his final Avatar 5 is in 2025.

And he was making movies every 2-3 years between 1981 and 1997.

Not sure what point you're trying to make.

I think the point is that was  .... in 1997?

In 1997 I was young, stupid, drunk, and absolutely f**king brilliant. It's, sadly, 2017 now.  ;D

---

Here's how to think about Jim Cameron, director without a good film to his name since 1997 (that's not a criticism btw, just a fact).

John Carpenter made some of THE BEST MOVIES ever. Along with Alien, he made arguably the best lovecraftian horror ever, in the The Thing remake, and some of the best genre movies in cinema history, redefining horror with Halloween. Hell, I think In The Mouth of Madness is bordering on genius.

But as he hasn't made a good movie since the 90's, would I think he would be the best choice for a big budget horror movie? Um ....

Yeah I don't understand the hate Cameron gets. I've liked all his movies, even Abyss. Titanic wasn't my cup of tea but I still think it's a good movie and worthy of every good thing said about it.

The man is a great director, and the hate I see for him on this forum mostly stems from people who hold Alien and Alien 3 as the best movies in the series.

The point surely isnt whether cameron is a good director, he is. the question is whether we think he is the man to "save" the alien movies, or to do a new Alien 5-ish.

No. Because a) he shows no sign of interest in other projects than his own nebulous vapor-ware movie these days, and b) he hasn't made a good movie, less a studio contracted and restricted movie since, well, T2.

It's a fantasy idea.

Quote from: newagescamartist on Jun 06, 2017, 03:23:31 AM
I wish someone would leak the plot. I really want to see what this movie would have been about. The one piece of concept art that intrigues me is the ship in the warehouse.

I agree. It seems like the plot of a whole movie could be built around that one painting. How'd it get there, what's it doing there, what happens next?

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 08:50:13 PM
I think the point is that was  .... in 1997?

In 1997 I was young, stupid, drunk, and absolutely f**king brilliant. It's, sadly, 2017 now.  ;D

---

Here's how to think about Jim Cameron, director without a good film to his name since 1997 (that's not a criticism btw, just a fact).

John Carpenter made some of THE BEST MOVIES ever. Along with Alien, he made arguably the best lovecraftian horror ever, in the The Thing remake, and some of the best genre movies in cinema history, redefining horror with Halloween. Hell, I think In The Mouth of Madness is bordering on genius.

But as he hasn't made a good movie since the 90's, would I think he would be the best choice for a big budget horror movie? Um ....

Don't forget Big Trouble in Little China.

As for him directing a new horror film, I just don't think his heart is in it. Say what you want about Ridley Scott, I think he's still pretty passionate about actually making movies. I can't say the same about Carpenter or Cameron. I think Blompkamp is a little disenfranchized, lately.

Sad.

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 08:50:13 PM
I think the point is that was  .... in 1997?

In 1997 I was young, stupid, drunk, and absolutely f**king brilliant. It's, sadly, 2017 now.  ;D

---

Here's how to think about Jim Cameron, director without a good film to his name since 1997 (that's not a criticism btw, just a fact).

John Carpenter made some of THE BEST MOVIES ever. Along with Alien, he made arguably the best lovecraftian horror ever, in the The Thing remake, and some of the best genre movies in cinema history, redefining horror with Halloween. Hell, I think In The Mouth of Madness is bordering on genius.

But as he hasn't made a good movie since the 90's, would I think he would be the best choice for a big budget horror movie? Um ....

I agree 100%.

---

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 09:46:20 PM
The point surely isnt whether cameron is a good director, he is. the question is whether we think he is the man to "save" the alien movies, or to do a new Alien 5-ish.

No. Because a) he shows no sign of interest in other projects than his own nebulous vapor-ware movie these days, and b) he hasn't made a good movie, less a studio contracted and restricted movie since, well, T2.

It's a fantasy idea.

I agree.

It's NOT realistic.

---

Quote from: NickisSmart on Jun 07, 2017, 01:31:52 AM

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 08:50:13 PM
I think the point is that was  .... in 1997?

In 1997 I was young, stupid, drunk, and absolutely f**king brilliant. It's, sadly, 2017 now.  ;D

---

Here's how to think about Jim Cameron, director without a good film to his name since 1997 (that's not a criticism btw, just a fact).

John Carpenter made some of THE BEST MOVIES ever. Along with Alien, he made arguably the best lovecraftian horror ever, in the The Thing remake, and some of the best genre movies in cinema history, redefining horror with Halloween. Hell, I think In The Mouth of Madness is bordering on genius.

But as he hasn't made a good movie since the 90's, would I think he would be the best choice for a big budget horror movie? Um ....

Don't forget Big Trouble in Little China.

As for him directing a new horror film, I just don't think his heart is in it. Say what you want about Ridley Scott, I think he's still pretty passionate about actually making movies. I can't say the same about Carpenter or Cameron. I think Blompkamp is a little disenfranchized, lately.

I agree.

Sir Ridley Scott loves to work. Right now, Sir Ridley is Filming his new film ALL THE MONEY IN THE WORLD.

John Carpenter is retired.

Quote from: JohnnyChimpo on Jun 05, 2017, 12:29:49 PM
I too have always had mixed feelings about this project. Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited, he hit that retro/nostalgia love that we all can fall victim too. He knows there is still a large part of the fanbase that hates Alien 3 for killing off these characters, and he played up to that.

I don't know that it was that smart a move. Sure it stirred up certain fan circles and got him name-checked a lot in news feeds looking for a new angle, but I'm guessing he's now most famous in Hollywood for a couple of significant failures and for muscling in on someone else's ongoing project.

The only positive spin you could put on the whole thing is that it probably compelled Scott to forge ahead a little sooner than he would have done otherwise.

Quote from: zoidy on Jun 06, 2017, 09:46:20 PM
The point surely isnt whether cameron is a good director, he is. the question is whether we think he is the man to "save" the alien movies, or to do a new Alien 5-ish.

No. Because a) he shows no sign of interest in other projects than his own nebulous vapor-ware movie these days, and b) he hasn't made a good movie, less a studio contracted and restricted movie since, well, T2.

It's a fantasy idea.

This.

Quote from: Gash on Jun 07, 2017, 07:44:16 PM

Quote from: JohnnyChimpo on Jun 05, 2017, 12:29:49 PM
I too have always had mixed feelings about this project. Blomkamp was definitely smart with the way he went around getting everyone excited, he hit that retro/nostalgia love that we all can fall victim too. He knows there is still a large part of the fanbase that hates Alien 3 for killing off these characters, and he played up to that.

I don't know that it was that smart a move. Sure it stirred up certain fan circles and got him name-checked a lot in news feeds looking for a new angle, but I'm guessing he's now most famous in Hollywood for a couple of significant failures and for muscling in on someone else's ongoing project.

The only positive spin you could put on the whole thing is that it probably compelled Scott to forge ahead a little sooner than he would have done otherwise.

That was stupid in Blomkamp's part. Now, he is only famous for his dead ALIEN 5.

Guillermo Del Toro makes all the time the same mistake. Guillermo talks about his DEAD projects. Both of them(Neill and Guillermo) are most famous for their dead projects: AT THE MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS, ALIEN 5, etc....

I bet my entire butt Blomkamp's film would've been better than Covenant AND Prometheus combined

Pretty sure Blomkamp is famous for District 9, and Del Toro is famous for Pacific Rim.

Del Toro has plenty to be famous for - Pan's Labyrinth (#130 in the IMDb top 250), Hellboy 1&2, Pacific Rim. His aesthetic and visual style are very well known.

Blomkamp is a bit different. District 9 is VERY well known and as a result so is his dirty cyberpunk aesthetic.

---

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
I don't understand folk throwing their hats in the air over the news. If you thought Blomkamp's film was going to be bad, then you probably shouldn't fork out your money for it. Fans are not hostages to franchises (though some are happy to make themselves so) and don't have to see or own every film, book, merchandise.

Personally I'm at the stage where I really don't care what they release, Scott's prequel series or a sequel series. Neither will be like ALIEN or ALIENS in terms of quality. I don't see the point in getting emotional about it. I'm not sure how some people can tell others to accept the third film when they cannot abide those same people having a preferred sequel of their own to turn to.

Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

Best post in the entire thread, and I especially agree with the third paragraph.

...And I bet my entire butt that Blomkamp's A5 would've sucked just as hard as the rest of his movies (not counting District 9). Amazing designs and lots of eye-candy - but that's about it! Empty carbs.

The retcon part of his A5 movie project is the last nail in the coffin and kind of relegates this whole thing to the same basket of silliness as AVP and AVP:R.

I would bet that Blomkamp's A5 would work much better as a big budget video game. You know - sequel to A:CM, or something like that. They already brought Hicks back from the dead in A:CM and they could easily circumvent Ripley's death as A:CM already isn't considered canon (Fox de-canonized the game, right?). They kind of have free reign to do whatever they want. Throw a late thirties-something Newt in there and call it a day. No need to remove two official Alien movies from the series out of spite and nostalgia.

Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Jun 07, 2017, 08:42:20 PM
...And I bet my entire butt that Blomkamp's A5 would've sucked just as hard as the rest of his movies (not counting District 9). Amazing designs and lots of eye-candy - but that's about it! Empty carbs.

The retcon part of his A5 movie project is the last nail in the coffin and kind of relegates this whole thing to the same basket of silliness as AVP and AVP:R.

I would bet that Blomkamp's A5 would work much better as a big budget video game. You know - sequel to A:CM, or something like that. They already brought Hicks back from the dead in A:CM and they could easily circumvent Ripley's death as A:CM already isn't considered canon (Fox de-canonized the game, right?). They kind of have free reign to do whatever they want. Throw a late thirties-something Newt in there and call it a day. No need to remove two official Alien movies from the series out of spite and nostalgia.

This. All of this.

The divide on how people feel about Blomkamp is astounding. I've thoroughly enjoyed everything he's done since the live action Halo 3 trailers.

If this film isn't happening can that fan film about an adult Newt be made now?

So the official sequel for alien franchise will be A3 and A:R

I feel emptiness by not seeing Weaver and Biehn , the rest of the team and for honoring Bill Paxton in A5.

Well this is it then.    :-[

I don't think Bill was going to be in Alien 5...

RIP Alien 5
I was so looking forward to this...Aliens has been my favorite movie since I was about 6.
As I get older (33 now), I enjoy Alien more and more, but still prefer Aliens.
I would love to see the colonial marines one more time...if we dont get Alien 5...please give us some movie that takes place shortly after Alien 3, with different characters.
An Aliens rip off could be quite fun if handled right...

or a proper avp movie...predator vs alien the reboot lol

Wow I'm surprised that people are defending alien covenant that was  horrible and to tell with a3 and A:R and Ridley Scott needs to step down asap...

I think perhaps take some of those full stops at the end of your post and place them in the appropriate places in that run-on sentence.

Quote from: darkvegett0 on Jun 09, 2017, 12:25:18 AM
Wow I'm surprised that people are defending alien covenant that was  horrible and to tell with a3 and A:R and Ridley Scott needs to step down asap...

Some people like Covenant, Alien 3, and A:R. We know nothing about Alien 5, but I'd love to see what the story was going to be about. I think that could settle this yay or nay once and for all. The fact that it hasn't leaked tells me that it's under tight wrap which means there is probably still a small glimmer of hope.

The fans have the power to still make this happen.  ::)

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

With a complicated, big budget film, there is no one creator in terms of the people involved. Big budget/complicated movies are a team effort.
Still, there is often going to be a debate about which person on the team was the most important in making a big budget/complex film which launches a franchise.
What does launch a franchise?
That can get confused with semantics and knowing the role of the director.

1. Follow the money; Movies that make good money can create a franchise.
"Alien" made money. That is why the studio approved the next sequel.
Why did it make money?
2. Scott as the director of "Alien", gets some credit for why "Alien" was a financial success.
- With a strong director, he / she is usually one of the main creative forces in a film.
When Ridley has a passion project, which is true of his science fiction movies expect for "The Martian", he is going to be involved with almost all aspects of the production.
3. Professional writers create stories but they may never get filmed such as with Asimov's "Foundation" series. Asimov being a professional writer has almost nothing to do if a movie franchise is created.
- Producers who get the funding and directors who call the shots on the set are usually not professional science fiction writers.
But directors who are not professional writers can have a tremendous effect in launching a science fiction film franchise.
- Take Star Trek movies. Director Robert Wise was not a professional science fiction writer but his "ST: The Motion Picture" made money.
The next ST movie, "Wrath of Khan", was directed by Nicholas Meyer who knew nothing about Star Trek so on that level would be an "amateur".
But Meyer was the right director. Of the thousands of decisions needed to make a film, Meyer made the right ones with "Wrath of Khan".
WOK not only made money but it started the formula for how Star Trek movies could be successful.
Leonard Nimoy has said that Meyer saved the Star Trek movie franchise.   
4. Other directors who were considered for "Alien" before Ridley were going to make a schlock horror film where blood and guts were thrown at actors.
Scott as the director made many decisions about the visual look of the film.
- Importantly, Ridley guided Giger in creating the xenomorph and the Space Jockey.
- The movie's pace, use of lighting, the intensity of the film was mostly due to Scott.

* Once the team was beginning to form, no Ridley, no Alien franchise imo. In that sense Scott can be argued as the most important creator of the series.

:)

Quote from: bb-15 on Jun 09, 2017, 07:12:32 PM

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

With a complicated, big budget film, there is no one creator in terms of the people involved. Big budget/complicated movies are a team effort.
Still, there is often going to be a debate about which person was the most important in making a big budget/complex film which launches a franchise.
What does launch a franchise?
That can get confused with semantics and knowing the role of the director.

1. Follow the money; Movies that make good money can create a franchise.
"Alien" made money. That is why the studio approved the next sequel.
Why did it make money?
2. Scott as the director of "Alien", gets some credit for why "Alien" was a financial success.
- With a strong director, he / she is usually one of the main creative forces in a film.
When Ridley has a passion project, which is true of his science fiction movies expect for "The Martian", he is going to be involved with almost all aspects of the production.
3. Professional writers create stories but they may never get filmed such as with Asimov's "Foundation" series. Asimov being a professional writer has almost nothing to do if a movie franchise is created.
- Producers who get the funding and directors who call the shots on the set are usually not professional science fiction writers.
But directors who are not professional writers can have a tremendous effect in launching a science fiction film franchise.
- Take Star Trek movies. Director Robert Wise was not a professional science fiction writer but his "ST: The Motion Picture" made money.
The next ST movie, "Wrath of Khan", was directed by Nicholas Meyer who knew nothing about Star Trek so on that level would be an "amateur".
But Meyer was the right director. Of the thousands of decisions needed to make a film, Meyer made the right ones with "Wrath of Khan".
WOK not only made money but it started the formula for how Star Trek movies could be successful.
Leonard Nimoy has said that Meyer saved the Star Trek movie franchise.   
4. Other directors who were considered for "Alien" before Ridley were going to make a schlock horror film where blood and guts were thrown at actors.
Scott as the director made many decisions about the visual look of the film.
- Importantly, Ridley guided Giger in creating the xenomorph and the Space Jockey.
- The movie's pace, use of lighting, the intensity of the film was mostly due to Scott.

* Once the team was beginning to form, no Ridley, no Alien franchise imo. In that sense Scott can be argued as the most important creator of the series.

:)

I agree 100%.

Quote from: bb-15 on Jun 09, 2017, 07:12:32 PM

Quote from: Valaquen on Jun 04, 2017, 11:30:13 AM
Also kind of tired of Ridley being called the creator of the series. He's not really a sci-fi guy: O'Bannon, Cobb, Shusett all were. They knew Lovecraft. Scott invokes von Daniken. Moebius called him "an enlightened amateur". I think I agree wth that.

With a complicated, big budget film, there is no one creator in terms of the people involved. Big budget/complicated movies are a team effort.
Still, there is often going to be a debate about which person on the team was the most important in making a big budget/complex film which launches a franchise.
What does launch a franchise?
That can get confused with semantics and knowing the role of the director.

1. Follow the money; Movies that make good money can create a franchise.
"Alien" made money. That is why the studio approved the next sequel.
Why did it make money?
2. Scott as the director of "Alien", gets some credit for why "Alien" was a financial success.
- With a strong director, he / she is usually one of the main creative forces in a film.
When Ridley has a passion project, which is true of his science fiction movies expect for "The Martian", he is going to be involved with almost all aspects of the production.
3. Professional writers create stories but they may never get filmed such as with Asimov's "Foundation" series. Asimov being a professional writer has almost nothing to do if a movie franchise is created.
- Producers who get the funding and directors who call the shots on the set are usually not professional science fiction writers.
But directors who are not professional writers can have a tremendous effect in launching a science fiction film franchise.
- Take Star Trek movies. Director Robert Wise was not a professional science fiction writer but his "ST: The Motion Picture" made money.
The next ST movie, "Wrath of Khan", was directed by Nicholas Meyer who knew nothing about Star Trek so on that level would be an "amateur".
But Meyer was the right director. Of the thousands of decisions needed to make a film, Meyer made the right ones with "Wrath of Khan".
WOK not only made money but it started the formula for how Star Trek movies could be successful.
Leonard Nimoy has said that Meyer saved the Star Trek movie franchise.   
4. Other directors who were considered for "Alien" before Ridley were going to make a schlock horror film where blood and guts were thrown at actors.
Scott as the director made many decisions about the visual look of the film.
- Importantly, Ridley guided Giger in creating the xenomorph and the Space Jockey.
- The movie's pace, use of lighting, the intensity of the film was mostly due to Scott.

* Once the team was beginning to form, no Ridley, no Alien franchise imo. In that sense Scott can be argued as the most important creator of the series.

:)

Not to undermine Scott's achievements, but then again, he wanted to end Alien like this  ::)

http://ew.com/movies/2017/04/03/alien-ridley-scott-alternate-ending/

Take the series forward in written form. No need to cast aged actors, or make digital changes. Literature knows no boundaries. Gibson's Alien 3 was one of the most enjoyable reads I've ever read, and it's just a movie script.

Or, hehe, go full throttle ridiculous, and eliminate the freakin' prequels. Say the David storyline was a "mental" product of Ash trying to imagine what his "kind" could accomplish if granted free will. Ripley has been in acoma since he attacked her on the nostromo. The remaining crew was "expended". The specimen was protected and returned to the company. There was no Alien's, Alien 3, or Resurrection. She awakens in a dark room, lights flickering, to haunting silence. She struggles to stand, and moves toward a mirror on the other side of the room. She sees her aged reflection, and screams. Weeping, she pushes open the door to the hospital room, and steps into the hallway. It is destroyed. During her coma, the Aliens broke loose and multiplied, escaping the facility and taking over the world. She hears a distant Alien screech, and something moves just ahead in the darkness. It charges, she screams, it's a man....Bryan Cranston in his season 1 undies. He pulls a .45 from nature's holster, and says "we gotta move baby!"  ;D  Flash the amc logo.

 :laugh:

It's brilliant. I love it!