That's a shame, still, it'd be nice to see another director take a crack at a true A L I E N film. Although depending on what Disney does, a Reboot soft or hard (no pun intended) might be inevitable.
There's always five other films with Aliens in for what another director would do.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 02, 2018, 10:23:48 PM
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Yes. I have moved on. What I meant was that I wish there was a way for fans to see some of what we had designed. It was an amazing chance to work in the world Ridley and James Cameron created. And collaborate with Sigourney. <a href="https://t.co/zgztIBj7LQ">https://t.co/zgztIBj7LQ</a></p>— Neill Blomkamp (@NeillBlomkamp) <a href="https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/948310726191411200?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 2, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The director himself saying it's dead and he's moved on.
It's not happening people.
Quote from: SM on Jan 02, 2018, 11:18:15 PM
There's always five other films with Aliens in for what another director would do.
I'm not sure I completely understand what you mean? Are you saying because we have A L I E N, ALIENS, ALIEN³, ALIEN: RESURRECTION and A L I E N: COVENANT with Xenomorphs in them that should be enough? Or are you saying that those other five movies have the creature in them time to move away from what the series is all about?
Irregardless, I would still like to see an ALIEN 5 not another Scott DAVID 8 a.i. film. If Scott gets too do another film I'll still zombie walk into the theater and see it. But, the series could do with a fresh take on the universe and creature from a new director.
You said it'd be nice to see another director take a crack at an Alien film. I'm just saying those already exist.
Quote from: SM on Jan 02, 2018, 11:48:59 PM
You said it'd be nice to see another director take a crack at an Alien film. I'm just saying those already exist.
Yeah, and the last time we saw a new directior for the Alien films was 20 years ago... Am I or other people asking too much for a new take on the series that has grown stagnant on celluloid? With a director that's new and cares about where the series can be taken in 2019?
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley. Each with diminished story returns. Also, Engineers? Killed, Black Goo? Gone. The only constant is Michael Fassbender as an Android. Real fresh, gotta love that schizophrenic kind of story telling. Not too mention his love/hate relationship with the Xenomorph.
Blomkamp confirmed it's still dead.....unless he builds up the hype and shows Disney it needs to be green lit again.
That is what Blomkamp is doing now. Getting you guys hyped up again.
Like i said earlier though now that Covenant was released and the majority of the public didn't care for it....Blomkamp actually has a chance here.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 12:10:41 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley.
You can probably lay that at Cameron's door, expectations for what makes an Alien film apparently comes from rehashing ALIEN, and Aliens does it beat for beat, but Scott does it whilst opening up a broader scope.
Quote from: Richman678 on Jan 03, 2018, 01:47:11 AM
..now that Covenant was released and the majority of the public didn't care for it....
Box office receipts are heading downwards generally - Alien isn't Wonder Woman or Star Wars, so it's a broad statement to say the majority of the public didn't care for it. Certain territories cared for it more than others.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 12:10:41 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley. Each with diminished story returns. Also, Engineers? Killed, Black Goo? Gone. The only constant is Michael Fassbender as an Android. Real fresh, gotta love that schizophrenic kind of story telling. Not too mention his love/hate relationship with the Xenomorph.
They might have the odd same beat here and there - it's an Alien film so each film is going to offer up certain expected aspects - but again they're not telling the same story over and over. It doesn't matter that the Engineers and goo are gone - the point is they were introduced as something new.
What is stagnant though is this fanbase since the release of Covenant. Every discussion devolves into 'Covenant sucks/ no it doesn't'. Or 'Ridley is an old fool who doesn't know what he's doing/ more Ridley prequels plz'. Or 'Blomkamps movie would rule/ Blomkamps is a desperate hack who wants to make colonial marine movies for idiots'. It's all a bit disappointing.
Quote from: Gash on Jan 03, 2018, 01:55:19 AM
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 12:10:41 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley.
You can probably lay that at Cameron's door, expectations for what makes an Alien film apparently comes from rehashing ALIEN, and Aliens does it beat for beat, but Scott does it whilst opening up a broader scope.
Quote from: Richman678 on Jan 03, 2018, 01:47:11 AM
..now that Covenant was released and the majority of the public didn't care for it....
Box office receipts are heading downwards generally - Alien isn't Wonder Woman or Star Wars, so it's a broad statement to say the majority of the public didn't care for it. Certain territories cared for it more than others.
It's somehow Cameron's fault Scott keeps retreading beats from his own film? Okay, then.
As for a broader scope? Yes, Space Colonization, Colonial Marine Corps. and introducing the Queen Alien are totally NOT broadening the scope.
QuoteThey might have the odd same beat here and there - it's an Alien film so each film is going to offer up certain expected aspects - but again they're not telling the same story over and over. It doesn't matter that the Engineers and goo are gone - the point is they were introduced as something new.
It's the same beats and different versions of the same story. Also, it most definitely matters if the engineers and goo are gone. What's the point of introducing new concepts? Only to do away with them as if they never mattered in your sequel? That's bad storytelling anyway you spin it.
QuoteWhat is stagnant though is this fanbase since the release of Covenant. Every discussion devolves into 'Covenant sucks/ no it doesn't'. Or 'Ridley is an old fool who doesn't know what he's doing/ more Ridley prequels plz'. Or 'Blomkamps movie would rule/ Blomkamps is a desperate hack who wants to make colonial marine movies for idiots'. It's all a bit disappointing.
I'm sorry, but I haven't seen you do anything to change the narrative. In fact, you do your part in stirring the pot. This is where the fan base has been since 1992. I don't think Covenant changed much in the way we all disagree. It just changed the subject.
The fanbase since 1992 has unfortunately just wanted bad fan fiction instead of originality.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 02:27:47 AM
Quote from: Gash on Jan 03, 2018, 01:55:19 AM
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 12:10:41 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley.
You can probably lay that at Cameron's door, expectations for what makes an Alien film apparently comes from rehashing ALIEN, and Aliens does it beat for beat, but Scott does it whilst opening up a broader scope.
Quote from: Richman678 on Jan 03, 2018, 01:47:11 AM
..now that Covenant was released and the majority of the public didn't care for it....
Box office receipts are heading downwards generally - Alien isn't Wonder Woman or Star Wars, so it's a broad statement to say the majority of the public didn't care for it. Certain territories cared for it more than others.
It's somehow Cameron's fault Scott keeps retreading beats from his own film? Okay, then.
Cameron made the most successful sequel to ALIEN by revisting it, pretty much plot point for plot point, redressed as a war film. It's reasonable to say that expectations on what an Alien film succeeds at is repackaging a similar structure and plot. That's the Aliens legacy.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 02:27:47 AMAs for a broader scope? Yes, Space Colonization, Colonial Marine Corps. and introducing the Queen Alien are totally NOT broadening the scope.
Space colonisation wasn't established in Aliens, refinery ships chugging back and forth across the universe infer that from the off. Colonial marine corps? big deal - mid 80s post Vietnam sensibilities, Queen alien - just up the big bad element. It broadens the story very little if at all.
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AMThey might have the odd same beat here and there - it's an Alien film so each film is going to offer up certain expected aspects - but again they're not telling the same story over and over. It doesn't matter that the Engineers and goo are gone - the point is they were introduced as something new.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 02:27:47 AM
It's the same beats and different versions of the same story. Also, it most definitely matters if the engineers and goo are gone. What's the point of introducing new concepts? Only to do away with them as if they never mattered in your sequel? That's bad storytelling anyway you spin it.
Who says the Engineers are gone? The black goo certainly hasn't. It was an important element in Covenant with more than one scene devoted to what it was all about - one, the deployment, the other David's explanation of the work he did utilising the pathogen. It's only bad storytelling to someone who's not paying attention to the story that's being told.
QuoteI'm sorry, but I haven't seen you do anything to change the narrative.
You've not been around here very long.
My comment wasn't aimed at you by the way. It was just a general observation I've had for some time, and your use of 'stagnant' was an apt description.
i am sorry for Neil that he cant make his movie, but honestly everything about sounds like bad fan fiction A:R style, i am glad he will never get to make it
Just make one more movie for the prequels to bridge to the first Alien movie (i.e., if the prequels are not meant to reboot the entire franchise), then Alien 5 following the fourth one to complete the series.
QuoteCameron made the most successful sequel to ALIEN by revisting it, pretty much plot point for plot point, redressed as a war film. It's reasonable to say that expectations on what an Alien film succeeds at is repackaging a similar structure and plot. That's the Aliens legacy.
No, it really isn't. That's just how you stubbornly choose to portray it.
QuoteSpace colonisation wasn't established in Aliens, refinery ships chugging back and forth across the universe infer that from the off.
Yes it did, prior to that, did you hear talk in the first film of an emergency stop at a nearby colony? No, you didn't. That's because nothing was said in regards to space colonization. I can infer allot, but it doesn't make it canon. It's all just fan speculation at that point.
QuoteColonial marine corps? big deal - mid 80s post Vietnam sensibilities, Queen alien - just up the big bad element. It broadens the story very little if at all.
Look I get it. You hate ALIENS and Cameron. That's cool and all, but the fact that you feel the need to interject this opinion every time someone else mentions they like it is tiresome. If you're doing it because you get annoyed, with all these other people doing the polar opposite with ALIEN? Then you're doing your cause no favors by stooping to the same level.
QuoteWho says the Engineers are gone? The black goo certainly hasn't. It was an important element in Covenant with more than one scene devoted to what it was all about - one, the deployment, the other David's explanation of the work he did utilising the pathogen. It's only bad storytelling to someone who's not paying attention to the story that's being told.
Well the whole point at the end of Prometheus was to get to their home world called paradise. As soon as David arrives at Paradise. He kills all the Engineers . This was shown in the film. I guess you weren't paying attention. As for the black goo? It most certainly is gone. Tell me where you saw any in the film? Aside from the death of the engineers. There isn't any. All David says in regards to it, is that he used the time he had by himself. To create a symphony. Basically by running experiments with the fallout of his attack on the engineers. But, I wasn't paying attention. So I guess, I'm wrong and it's all genius writing to do away with everything you built in the first film.
QuoteYou've not been around here very long.
You precede me on these boards by three years. I just don't post as much as you do. However, you've not embodied or attempted to embody the change you seek.
Quote
My comment wasn't aimed at you by the way. It was just a general observation I've had for some time, and your use of 'stagnant' was an apt description
.
I understand it wasn't directed at me. But, I cannot help but see the hypocrisy of such a statement. When you partake in the very same behavior you claim to detest.
I generally try to discuss points of fact, rather than debating opinions. I will question why people hold a certain opinion out of curiousity, rather than simply saying they're wrong. I would like to see more Ridley movies and am interested in what Blomkamp might've done - but I don't take issue if people take an opposing stance.
However if you have evidence of my supposed hypocrisy, then I guess I'll have to cop to it.
QuoteI generally try to discuss points of fact, rather than debating opinions. I will question why people hold a certain opinion out of curiousity, rather than simply saying they're wrong.
Don't be so modest. Sometimes all you do is insert mocking sarcasm.
QuoteI would like to see more Ridley movies and am interested in what Blomkamp might've done
Something we can amicably agree on.
Quotebut I don't take issue if people take an opposing stance.
You do if people don't word their opinions in a way you approve of. Then comes the sarcasm and so forth.
QuoteHowever if you have evidence of my supposed hypocrisy, then I guess I'll have to cop to it.
I'm sure if I took the time out of my day to rifle through each and every post I could find a few examples. I don't care too. Nor do I want to spend my spare time doing so just to continue arguing with you.
Then perhaps don't cast nasturtiums.
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 05:04:32 AM
Then perhaps don't cast nasturtiums.
You're the last person that should be doling out advice on what not to do.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 04:05:21 AM
Look I get it. You hate ALIENS and Cameron. That's cool and all, but the fact that you feel the need to interject this opinion every time someone else mentions they like it is tiresome.
Rarely do I now bring Aliens up in a topic, but I'll respond if someone brings up the fallacy of how different it was. It really wasn't. If lack of originality is being used as a stick to beat the prequels then I think some obvious things need to be highlighted.
I have in the past been drawn into futile tit for tat over the merits of the film or it's director, but I believe each to their own and I try to remain dispassionate in analysing the flaws or merits in any films that have been around for 30+ years. My personal taste in film will sometimes rear it's ugly head but these days I try to suppress it, I'm not aware of aiming any diatribe towards Cameron in recent months, unless you consider my pointing out that he made the most successful sequel to ALIEN as some sort of slur?
Bloody popular money making sequels...
;D
QuoteI'm not aware of aiming any diatribe towards Cameron in recent months, unless you consider my pointing out that he made the most successful sequel to ALIEN as some sort of slur?
Never said you did, nor did I think it was.
I'm curious as to how the close visual design would have been to the earlier films in the series? I've not seen Elysium, was there anything in that film similar too A L I E N or ALIENS?
(https://themicrogardener.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/How-to-Grow-and-Use-Nasturtiums-600x450.jpg)
-Windebieste.
Quote from: Gash on Jan 03, 2018, 05:17:49 AM
I'm not aware of aiming any diatribe towards Cameron in recent months, unless you consider my pointing out that he made the most successful sequel to ALIEN as some sort of slur?
The most successful sequel to Alien would be Prometheus, but carry on.
Quote from: windebieste on Jan 03, 2018, 05:35:35 AM
https://themicrogardener.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/How-to-Grow-and-Use-Nasturtiums-600x450.jpg
-Windebieste.
Very funny.
I'm getting tired of this.
Blomkamp sent out a tweet mentioning he's moved on from the franchise. Screen rant is reporting on it.
https://screenrant.com/alien-5-neill-blomkamp-cancelled/
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 03, 2018, 05:40:55 AM
Quote from: Gash on Jan 03, 2018, 05:17:49 AM
I'm not aware of aiming any diatribe towards Cameron in recent months, unless you consider my pointing out that he made the most successful sequel to ALIEN as some sort of slur?
The most successful sequel to Alien would be Prometheus, but carry on.
That's a prequel.
Quote from: 0321recon on Jan 03, 2018, 05:42:59 AM
Blomkamp sent out a tweet mentioning he's moved on from the franchise. Screen rant is reporting on it.
https://screenrant.com/alien-5-neill-blomkamp-cancelled/
...PLEASE!!! let it be so. I rather have no more Alien movies than a fan-film passing off as a sequel to Aliens
Sent from my ALE-L23 using Tapatalk
And adjusted for inflation, Aliens is way out in front.
Worldwide box office for Prometheus is much higher than Aliens, even taking into account inflation.
You can't accurately inflate worldwide box office receipts due to there being too many fluctuations in different currencies, which is why they restrict inflation adjusted figures to US domestic.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 03, 2018, 06:11:21 AM
Worldwide box office for Prometheus is much higher than Aliens, even taking into account inflation.
It's still a prequel. I chose the description as Aliens being the most successful sequel quite carefully.
Quote from: JungleHunter87 on Jan 03, 2018, 12:10:41 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 12:00:10 AM
How is it stagnant? They've gone off in different directions with Engineers and androids and black goo.
It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but they're not simply repeating the same thing over and over.
Same film beats, three different times, from Ridley. Each with diminished story returns. Also, Engineers? Killed, Black Goo? Gone. The only constant is Michael Fassbender as an Android. Real fresh, gotta love that schizophrenic kind of story telling. Not too mention his love/hate relationship with the Xenomorph.
The only thing that can remotely be called schizophrenic here is your complaint that the prequels are "unoriginal" (a false claim FYI) juxtaposed with your demand that Blomkamp's unoriginal remake of James Cameron's movie get made.
Oh come on we all know an "ALIENS-esque" type film, set in the future, with military hardware is in the works.
I haven't seen this much pre-production hype since the proposed, and maligned, "ALIEN remake" proposed to be produced by Ridley Scott and Directed by his ex-son-in-law Carl Rinsch (47 Ronin).
The idea, which would expand the original ALIEN mythology and unused "dissecting the derelict" a retrospective blog post talking about Ridley Scott's ambition to tell a larger story back-story to the Space Jockey and a, then, seperate race of Engineers.
http://alienexplorations.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/dissecting-derelict-scene-on-acheron.html
Of course that movie became Prometheus (2012) and the results were variable (but a relative hit at Box Office).
Its obvious from the off-set that retconning those lucrative ALIEN boxsets (which get almost annual updates) is a daft idea. Make a stand-alone sequel, get a new story, new actors and some originality in production design. Do we really need Vietnam imagery of the 1986 dropship in 2018 onwards?
Fan-wanks do not make great films.
lol "Screenrant.com."
Disney is inevitably going to make their own Alien film independent of Scott's involvement. I'm sure they have Blomkamp's contact info.
Split from the pre-prod topic and merged with another topic about the tweet.
Bloomkamp reminds me of that Lawyer from Jurassic Park.
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 06:24:38 AM
You can't accurately inflate worldwide box office receipts due to there being too many fluctuations in different currencies, which is why they restrict inflation adjusted figures to US domestic.
Prometheus
Domestic: $126,477,084 31.4%
+ Foreign: $276,877,385 68.6%Aliens
Domestic: $85,160,248 65.0%
+ Foreign: $45,900,000 35.0%35% vs 68.6% lol
:(
Rank Title Adjusted Gross
1 Alien $280,867,700
2 Aliens $204,981,400
3 Prometheus $139,725,200
QuoteIt was an amazing chance to work in the world Ridley and James Cameron created. And collaborate with Sigourney.
Neill is always going to say it's not happening until it is, enticing us all the while.
I'm glad Blomkamp has addressed this. With numerous SCI-FI outlets reporting on his preproduction stuff it's easy to be confused on the status of his Alien film. Let's not kid ourselfs here and get our hopes up about a film NOT happening. Nevertheless I'm grateful for a glimpse into his Alien universe.
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 10:22:03 AM
Rank Title Adjusted Gross
1 Alien $280,867,700
2 Aliens $204,981,400
3 Prometheus $139,725,200
That's only the US box office.
Internationally, Prometheus made much more money than Aliens. That's the point. Aliens only had 35% of its gross from overseas, while Prometheus' gross was 68%. In fact, Prometheus did even better than Alien.
This is disappointing
Disney, this is your last chance... Do something about it!!! :o
Im glad he's still releasing the concept art even though he's now officially done with it. (He may come back who knows) But who ever continues the franchise once Ridley's done (Prometheus 3 should be his last one in the universe), should/could take inspiration from Blomkamps art work
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 03, 2018, 07:24:27 AM
lol "Screenrant.com."
Disney is inevitably going to make their own Alien film independent of Scott's involvement. I'm sure they have Blomkamp's contact info.
Sure, but it won't be Blomkamp directing it. He may come on as an adviser, but beyond that he won't be involved, and it won't be his film with Sigourney. Obviously the beast isn't cooked and they'll make more without Scott, but if Blomkamp has 'moved on', let him move on. People change and get fed up with things, it happens.
Given the crap luck he's having with studio projects, I couldn't fault him. I wonder if The Gone World is far along enough that'll it'll be included with the "business as usual" projects.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 03, 2018, 11:23:50 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 03, 2018, 10:22:03 AM
Rank Title Adjusted Gross
1 Alien $280,867,700
2 Aliens $204,981,400
3 Prometheus $139,725,200
That's only the US box office.
Internationally, Prometheus made much more money than Aliens. That's the point. Aliens only had 35% of its gross from overseas, while Prometheus' gross was 68%. In fact, Prometheus did even better than Alien.
It's still irrelevant.
Prometheus cost considerably more to make and market than either Alien or Aliens. So it's silly to say it made the most money without factoring in it's production and marketing costs.
Here's what's important:
Alien made back more than x9 times it's production budget.
Aliens made back more than x7 times it's production budget.
Prometheus only made back x3 times it's production budget.
So Alien and Aliens still made more money for the studio even though they raked-in less un-adjusted dollars at the box office.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 03, 2018, 03:47:08 PM
Given the crap luck he's having with studio projects, I couldn't fault him. I wonder if The Gone World is far along enough that'll it'll be included with the "business as usual" projects.
Pretty sure it will be. But yeah, twice bitten by Fox now, first Halo now Alien 5.
Maybe in a few years we can get a brand new story and cast and charecters. And the dead horse of ripley can stop getting beaten to a nloody pulp
He said similar things earlier, yet he releases some more concept art.
If his project is totally dead, he would release his script.
The concept art (or pitch art more accurately) was commissioned out of his own pocket so I think there's no real issue with him releasing it.
The full script however would have been written under a contract and a NDA. It would therefore likely be Fox's call on whether to release it. Or otherwise if Blomkamp wants to release it, he would probably need their permission first.
There's also that comment below from Neill that might suggest his hands are also tied with regards to releasing actual concept art, props and anything else that was created during the seven months of official, greenlit, under-contract pre-production. In other words, anything that Fox paid for.
Quote"What I meant was that I wish there was a way for fans to see some of what we had designed." - Neill Blomkamp
Good! Good riddance to an under cooked video game idea! Retconning chapters of a franchise and series you claim to love just to make ALIENS part 2 is not a true fan for the world of this series. I'm glad this ridiculous fan fiction idea is no longer being pursued. To discount other chapters of the story just because you didnt like them is not only a slap in the face to the other artists and film makers who put their all into their own chapter, but its also pointless video game mentality in just restarting if you didn't like it. that's not how it works. I like you Neil, but your idea for Alien 5 offers nothing we haven't seen before and is just an ALIENS fan wet dream because they cant get over Hicks, Newt, and Ripley dying. If this story were to be made and we needed to have Ripley back... AGAIN (we don't, I love you Sigourney, but Ripley's story is told.), then keep it real and retcon everything after the first film. It could end where it began and truly makes it about Ripley and the Beast. But no matter what film gets made, just remember that in THIS story universe, there are no family friendly happy endings.... but this one.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 03, 2018, 04:56:18 PM
The concept art (or pitch art more accurately) was commissioned out of his own pocket so I think there's no real issue with him releasing it.
The full script however would have been written under a contract and a NDA. It would therefore likely be Fox's call on whether to release it. Or otherwise if Blomkamp wants to release it, he would probably need their permission first.
There's also that comment below from Neill that might suggest his hands are also tied with regards to releasing actual concept art, props and anything else that was created during the seven months of official, greenlit, under-contract pre-production. In other words, anything that Fox paid for.
Quote"What I meant was that I wish there was a way for fans to see some of what we had designed." - Neill Blomkamp
Makes sense.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 03, 2018, 04:22:26 PM
It's still irrelevant.
Prometheus cost considerably more to make and market than either Alien or Aliens. So it's silly to say it made the most money without factoring in it's production and marketing costs.
Here's what's important:
Alien made back more than x9 times it's production budget.
Aliens made back more than x7 times it's production budget.
Prometheus only made back x3 times it's production budget.
So Alien and Aliens still made more money for the studio even though they raked-in less un-adjusted dollars at the box office.
There's how much profit it made for the studio then there's also how successful it was in terms of box office. Two separate things.
Aliens was more profitable but that's because it had a low budget. Its returns weren't that high, especially in international box office numbers.
If Aliens cost $1 and made $100 then it would have made 100x its production budget. Doesn't matter, what's important is how many people actually went to see it, not the profit for the studio.
Big budget movies these days typically have very large revenues, but low profit margins. The Force Awakens made 2068 mil, that's 8x its budget, does that mean it was less successful than Alien because it made 9x its budget? According to your argument, it is.
Studio cares much more about domestic box office as they don't see every cent that comes internationally.
This much i doubt. Interest is still interest, and by making the news it constitutes as internet searchable.
And even if Neil is not as bright as a button as we think, ANYONE can take on the reigns of this project, it doesn't stop at Neil. Considering that Directors are still directors and production companies are production companies.
Moved on? Disney buys fox and Alien 5 starts to come out of the woodwork alittle. I don't blame him, it's what I'd do. The likelihood of it being made though, I think, is on the low side. It just seems too fan-ficky.
Disregarding other films in order to bring back older actors, I think this is a bad idea. Ripley is dead. Alien 3 wasn't some made for tv movie. It was a legitimate studio film that finalized her story. In the spirit of continuity, it counts. Hicks is dead, as are bishop and newt. These were good characters, but they're gone. To bring them back feels like some attempt at making Aliens 1.5 I've said it before, I'm old enough to remember Ripley dying in Alien 3 and that being the end of her story. The idea of giving original human Ripley the deja-vu treatment is just weird. More importantly, in this universe, how in the world would Ripley and Hicks still be alive at that age? Either the Aliens would've long since taken over, Wey-Yu has them killed, or I suppose they go into hiding for how many years? Given the companies resources, survival for any decent length of time would be unlikely.
As for the Aliens 86 style, when we talk about Ridley broadening any horizons, it was Cameron who took a creature and built a universe around it. The thing we must remember, is that those Marines, dropships, planet colonization, queens, hives, all that stuff now exists within the universe. It existed, even in Alien 3. In order to proceed forward from Aliens, you have to take this stuff into account. Cameron made his movie and left us where he left us. While I'd rather receive a film in the spirit of Alien Isolation, Aliens and humans can only Ping-Pong off each other so long, before one begins to dominate the other. This is why I believe Gibson was the most aware of the logical direction this series was headed after Aliens.
I don't think Neil is ready to head a film of this (or that) magnitude. District 9 and Elysium had some interesting ideas, but for something of this scale and priority, it should be given to a more experienced and accomplished director, such as Cameron.
I don't get the 'fan-fic' charge.
What makes Blomkamp's ideas fan-fic when all we know is Ripley, Hicks and marines might be in it?
Quote from: SM on Jan 04, 2018, 12:35:40 AM
I don't get the 'fan-fic' charge.
What makes Blomkamp's ideas fan-fic when all we know is Ripley, Hicks and marines might be in it?
Resurrecting dead characters, retconning Alien 3, and bringing back space marines in a film for a particularly loud segment of the Alien fanbase certainly qualifies it as being a "fanfiction" film.
The idea of a alternate sequel to Aliens appealed well beyond the fanbase.
Quote from: SM on Jan 04, 2018, 12:43:09 AM
The idea of a alternate sequel to Aliens appealed well beyond the fanbase.
According to what and who?
"The idea of a alternate sequel to Aliens appealed well beyond the fanbase."
Valid point SM. And if done well, it could be a fantastic film. I'm simply hesitant to say Neil's idea is the right one.
And just to clarify, I'm among the group of people who do not want another film made like Aliens. My endorsement of Cameron is merely based on the fact that Fincher is done with the Franchise, and would be more suited to a lone Alien film. Ridley is already doing his thing.
And I'm not opposed to the inclusion of the Marines or their equipment. I'd merely prefer they were relegated to a smaller supportive role, such as a handful working security on a station. Supporting characters, seen once in awhile. Their role could increase as things got messier. But eventually they'd be dispatched, some offscreen.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 04, 2018, 12:46:23 AM
Quote from: SM on Jan 04, 2018, 12:43:09 AM
The idea of a alternate sequel to Aliens appealed well beyond the fanbase.
According to what and who?
According to the reaction it got at the time. It wasn't just confined to the fan community. Perhaps it's just me, but when I start typing 'neil blomkamp' into Google, the first suggestion is 'neill blomkamp alien'.
You make a valid point about those aspects being fan-fic-ish, but I find the fan-fic charge a little lazy considering we know bog all about the actual story.
It wouldn't get the charge of 'fan fiction' if it was its own beast, but it's clearly not. It doesn't stand on its own.
The director himself stated he is a massive fan of Aliens. The concept art has shown Queens, dropships and pulse rifles from Aliens.
Neill himself holding his own prop pulse rifle.
How much more fanboy can you get.
If he's 'moved on' why is he still uploading derivative concept art on Instagram right around the time Disney buys out 20th Century Fox? Nothing to do with getting the fans riled up who want Ripley, Hicks and Newt back I suppose... decades after the fact.
What's his motivation in doing such a thing at such a pertinent time?
I'll tell you what would've made me feel better about it. If Neil had come out and said he was following a mutated version of Gibson's script. Where Alien 3 was left intact, and a creature, or creatures that had also stowed away on the now abandoned Sulaco, would be captured by Wey-Yu upon it's return. That and the Spore material. Hicks could be replaced by a different character (or several). As could bishop. Maybe remove the U.O.P.P. and boom. Large scale Aliens film with Marines. And Gibson's wonderful script. The series continues forward, nothing retconned and nobody brought back.
Quote from: SM on Jan 04, 2018, 12:43:09 AM
The idea of a alternate sequel to Aliens appealed well beyond the fanbase.
Just me, but I'm not so interested in 'Aliens 2'. However, after seeing a Derelict in his concept art, I was hoping for an alternate interpretation of the Space Jockey. But since Ridley's vision is canon, I guess it could be labeled as 'fan fiction' as well :P
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/gallery/albums/movies/alien5/concept-art/concept-001.jpg)
Good riddance. Disney will come up with something, no doubt, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it'd be some what of a soft or *almost* total reboot. Ridley will still undoubtedly be involved however, he has too much pull and good will behind him, to think otherwise would be foolish, but whatever it will be will largely be very loosely a sequel to Covenant but more its own thing; they'll simply market it as another instalment in the universe, and probably drop Alien from the title as well. My prediction.
That's a pity, I wanted more alien films. I didn't like the idea of retconning 3 and 4, the Alien universe is so big so there's no need to constantly follow Ripley.
I really hope Ridley gets to see through his vision, I want as many movies as it takes for him to tell his story.
WHY ? WHY ? WHY ? WHY ? WHY ? WHY ? SHAME ON THE ALIEN FRANCHISE :'(
Bye Felicia!!!
DISNEY HEAR ME PLEASE!
MAKE ALIEN 5!!!!!!!
Why is being a fan of something you're lucky enough to work on a bad thing? I don't understand the animosity towards NB simply because he's a fan (as we all are) of the series and has pictures of himself with a pulse rifle (as some of us do) or whatever. I think it goes a bit deeper than a director d'jour saying "I've always been a huge fan of the comics" (as they always are)... seems genuine affection from NB.
What could be called into question - subjectively - is his ability to deliver a satisfying movie as his films after D-9 have been divisive to say the least and - objectively though I can't quote the box office - only modest successes?
As for Ripley et al - I've said a zillion times - you can have the events of A3 and A:R in tact if they handwave them off as hyperspace dreams. Totally fits - even in the prequels, these dreams play a part in the movies (I can't remember the line in Prometheus, but Shaw quotes it directly from her father in the dream that David watches). Further, the whole reason Guy Pearce was there was to show "Young Weyland" and have David interact with him.
Given that's all established... I can't think of a better way to get rid of ... yet keep at the same time... the existing movies.
Everyone wins. Except those that think its heresy, but they're mostly on this forum. Mostly.
great news!!! ;D
Good for him, it's better this way
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 04, 2018, 01:06:39 AM
It wouldn't get the charge of 'fan fiction' if it was its own beast, but it's clearly not. It doesn't stand on its own.
The director himself stated he is a massive fan of Aliens. The concept art has shown Queens, dropships and pulse rifles from Aliens.
Neill himself holding his own prop pulse rifle.
How much more fanboy can you get.
His concept art also showed the Derelict. He'd also spoken about how much Alien: Isolation had effected his work on the project. He's also said he's a huge fan of Alien, of the psycho-sexual aspects of the series.
And besides, Alien Resurrection had a Queen, AvP had a Queen - that didn't equate to Aliens 2.0. The return of Alien equipment is visual continuity too - something people have an issue with Prometheus for.
Quote from: Russ on Jan 04, 2018, 01:13:12 PM
Why is being a fan of something you're lucky enough to work on a bad thing? I don't understand the animosity towards NB simply because he's a fan (as we all are) of the series and has pictures of himself with a pulse rifle (as some of us do) or whatever. I think it goes a bit deeper than a director d'jour saying "I've always been a huge fan of the comics" (as they always are)... seems genuine affection from NB.
What could be called into question - subjectively - is his ability to deliver a satisfying movie as his films after D-9 have been divisive to say the least and - objectively though I can't quote the box office - only modest successes?
As for Ripley et al - I've said a zillion times - you can have the events of A3 and A:R in tact if they handwave them off as hyperspace dreams. Totally fits - even in the prequels, these dreams play a part in the movies (I can't remember the line in Prometheus, but Shaw quotes it directly from her father in the dream that David watches). Further, the whole reason Guy Pearce was there was to show "Young Weyland" and have David interact with him.
Given that's all established... I can't think of a better way to get rid of ... yet keep at the same time... the existing movies.
Everyone wins. Except those that think its heresy, but they're mostly on this forum. Mostly.
...write off two movies as dreams... genius! Where did you came up with such original storytelling ideas?
Sent from my ALE-L23 using Tapatalk
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 03, 2018, 10:43:49 PM
There's how much profit it made for the studio then there's also how successful it was in terms of box office. Two separate things.
Aliens was more profitable but that's because it had a low budget. Its returns weren't that high, especially in international box office numbers.
If Aliens cost $1 and made $100 then it would have made 100x its production budget. Doesn't matter, what's important is how many people actually went to see it, not the profit for the studio.
Prometheus needed to make back a minimum of x2.5 times it's production budget, possibly even a lot more depending on the marketing costs just to break even. At the very best it's actual profit would have been around $70 - 80 Million 2012 dollars. And that's an extremely optimistic guesstimate. When you adjust Alien and Aliens box office totals and deduct the production and marketing expenses you'll find that they still made a lot more money than Prometheus.
QuoteDoesn't matter, what's important is how many people actually went to see it, not the profit for the studio.
The fact that a lot of people went to see Prometheus can mostly be attributed to it's huge marketing budget. The more you spend on hyping a film the more butts you'll get on theater seats irrespective of the film's actual quality. In some cases word-of-mouth can help a film that is actually very good but considering Prometheus' weekly box office drop-offs that wasn't the case. By contrast, word of mouth likely helped Alien and Aliens a lot considering their performance versus their relatively minuscule (in comparison the Prometheus) marketing budget.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 04, 2018, 03:54:37 PM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 04, 2018, 01:06:39 AM
It wouldn't get the charge of 'fan fiction' if it was its own beast, but it's clearly not. It doesn't stand on its own.
The director himself stated he is a massive fan of Aliens. The concept art has shown Queens, dropships and pulse rifles from Aliens.
Neill himself holding his own prop pulse rifle.
How much more fanboy can you get.
His concept art also showed the Derelict. He'd also spoken about how much Alien: Isolation had effected his work on the project. He's also said he's a huge fan of Alien, of the psycho-sexual aspects of the series.
And besides, Alien Resurrection had a Queen, AvP had a Queen - that didn't equate to Aliens 2.0. The return of Alien equipment is visual continuity too - something people have an issue with Prometheus for.
Blomkamp is on record as saying that
Alien is his favourite film in the franchise. But considering that he was planning to do a sequel to Aliens at the behest of Sigourney Weaver (what a fangirl!) it would make sense to have pulse rifles, dropships, and Queens in it, no?
Did all these nutters on here also wail and gnash their teeth when they found out that the new Star Wars films would also include lightsabers, X-Wings and Tie-Fighters? It boggles the mind.
Amen to that! You get it. Most ALIENS fans don't.
This film is dead and will stay dead. At least until Neill Blomkamp has himself a real hit at the box office. Blomkamp hasn't been with an actual financially successful film since District 9 almost a decade ago (and I credit a lot of that films success to Peter Jackson's skill as a producer). He probably won't have a new theatrical release until 2020 at the earliest. Sigourney Weaver is already pushing 70. Even if things turn around fast the earliest Blomkamp could humor doing this project again isn't until maybe 2021 or 2022. The ship has sailed. The film is dead.
I'll say again:
There's only two paths for the next ALIEN project.
A. Ridley Scott - who is not only one of the most respected film directors in the industry but as a producer is also one of the most powerful and financially successful guys around with involvement & control over dozens of highly desired projects through his Scott Free Productions (Murder on the Orient Express is a Scott Free film, was a hit and could kick off a new older audience franchise and he has his hand in that) - gets to complete his loose prequel trilogy with DAVID. Probably the project he'll get to right after he finishes THE CARTEL which has been on his docket for about 3 to 4 years now.
B. Disney abandons the theatrical market for ALIEN altogether and takes the franchise to their upcoming Disney Streaming service as an Anthology TV series. Alien has always been a big franchise but even at its most successful it can never compete with the financial success of Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar or Disney animation and reaping the most profits is what Disney is after. From a business sense it would be better to abandon theaters when it comes to Alien and just go streaming.
Frankly, I just want DAVID. After that Disney can do whatever they want.
But Neill Blomkamp's ALIEN5 is dead.
What's the story on "Guest" posts?
(https://media.giphy.com/media/AjkUQrzvs5OCc/giphy.gif)
Maybe Disney will make an ALIEN 5 without Blomkamp and Sigourney instead :o
I wouldn't be surprised if it was a full reboot.
They have a very successful formula with Marvel and Lucasfilm. It would make sense to have someone take the reigns like Feige and Kennedy have.
Quote from: maron on Jan 04, 2018, 10:43:55 PM
Maybe Disney will make an ALIEN 5 without Blomkamp and Sigourney instead :o
Maybe Sigourney will make an ALIEN 5 without Blomkamp and Disney :o
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 04, 2018, 05:13:43 PM
Blomkamp is on record as saying that Alien is his favourite film in the franchise. But considering that he was planning to do a sequel to Aliens at the behest of Sigourney Weaver (what a fangirl!) it would make sense to have pulse rifles, dropships, and Queens in it, no?
Did all these nutters on here also wail and gnash their teeth when they found out that the new Star Wars films would also include lightsabers, X-Wings and Tie-Fighters? It boggles the mind.
Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?
Quote from: Gash on Jan 05, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Jan 04, 2018, 08:48:32 PM
What's the story on "Guest" posts?
Suspicious.
I think when Hicks posts a News items open for comment (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2018/01/03/neil-blomkamp-moved-alien-5/)on the main page, they - and the comments - get replicated on the forums.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 04, 2018, 03:54:37 PM
His concept art also showed the Derelict. He'd also spoken about how much Alien: Isolation had effected his work on the project. He's also said he's a huge fan of Alien, of the psycho-sexual aspects of the series.
And besides, Alien Resurrection had a Queen, AvP had a Queen - that didn't equate to Aliens 2.0. The return of Alien equipment is visual continuity too - something people have an issue with Prometheus for.
Prometheus did not copy Alien's designs, except for the Derelict and Space Jockey, kind of essential if you are making a prequel revolving around them. There was no Nostromo Mark II in Prometheus. There was a flamethrower, though, not exactly a weapon unique to Alien but fair enough.
Wasn't that a huge complaint about Prometheus is the lack of visual continuity?
Yes, A:R had a Queen, that's about it. No pulse rifles, no dropships, no colonial marines. A:R is its own universe.
AVP and AVPR are fanboy movies. Anderson is a big fan of Aliens, hence all the references to Aliens and the inclusion of the Queen for the big finale. AVPR has a mock APC and Ripley/Newt. But obviously, being set in the present day, they couldn't have dropships and pulse rifles. Neill's film would have taken this fanboyism to the next level.
Quote from: SM on Jan 05, 2018, 12:32:00 AM
Quote from: Gash on Jan 05, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Jan 04, 2018, 08:48:32 PM
What's the story on "Guest" posts?
Suspicious.
I think when Hicks posts a News items open for comment (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2018/01/03/neil-blomkamp-moved-alien-5/)on the main page, they - and the comments - get replicated on the forums.
I see that now. A chance for visitors to chime in who have no interest in registering as a forum member.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 05, 2018, 02:49:43 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 04, 2018, 03:54:37 PM
His concept art also showed the Derelict. He'd also spoken about how much Alien: Isolation had effected his work on the project. He's also said he's a huge fan of Alien, of the psycho-sexual aspects of the series.
And besides, Alien Resurrection had a Queen, AvP had a Queen - that didn't equate to Aliens 2.0. The return of Alien equipment is visual continuity too - something people have an issue with Prometheus for.
Prometheus did not copy Alien's designs, except for the Derelict and Space Jockey, kind of essential if you are making a prequel revolving around them. There was no Nostromo Mark II in Prometheus. There was a flamethrower, though, not exactly a weapon unique to Alien but fair enough.
Wasn't that a huge complaint about Prometheus is the lack of visual continuity?
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here... Yes, I'm saying that Prometheus not faithfully replicating the Derelict aesthetics and that the tech in the film doesn't look like the Nostromo or Hadley's Hope are bad things as they're not visually consistent with Alien and Aliens. And yeah, I know the reasons why and I can buy into the Prometheus being a luxury ship thing but it's still an issue for many people.
Having visual consistency by using similar rifles and ships is good and nothing to turn your nose up at Blomkamp about.
QuoteYes, A:R had a Queen, that's about it. No pulse rifles, no dropships, no colonial marines. A:R is its own universe.
But it still had a Queen. It's still set within the same continuity.
QuoteAVP and AVPR are fanboy movies. Anderson is a big fan of Aliens, hence all the references to Aliens and the inclusion of the Queen for the big finale. AVPR has a mock APC and Ripley/Newt. But obviously, being set in the present day, they couldn't have dropships and pulse rifles. Neill's film would have taken this fanboyism to the next level.
Because...it has the same elements that other films have...? Those do not equate to anything other than visual and story consistency within the film. We don't actually know anything about the story. You cannot judge with any certainty that his Alien 3 would have been "fanboyism to the next level."
If anything, this just comes across as another sad moment of this Scott vs. Blomkamp division that seems to have taken hold.
Quote from: SM on Jan 05, 2018, 12:32:00 AM
Quote from: Gash on Jan 05, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Jan 04, 2018, 08:48:32 PM
What's the story on "Guest" posts?
Suspicious.
I think when Hicks posts a News items open for comment (http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2018/01/03/neil-blomkamp-moved-alien-5/)on the main page, they - and the comments - get replicated on the forums.
When we post news items on the front page we're able to link it to a forum thread. If there isn't an existing one it'll create one with the content of the news post as the first post. These linked threads are able to posted on by Guests via the front page article. They're all pulling in from and contributing to the same data. :)
Dodged a bullet imho
Quote from: Yahzee on Jan 04, 2018, 05:03:08 PM
...write off two movies as dreams... genius! Where did you came up with such original storytelling ideas?
Sent from my ALE-L23 using Tapatalk
Thanks for your enlightening input.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 05, 2018, 12:22:04 AM
Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?
Good thing that he wasn't planning on "retconning" Alien 3 then, I guess?
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 05, 2018, 02:49:43 AM
Prometheus did not copy Alien's designs, except for the Derelict and Space Jockey, kind of essential if you are making a prequel revolving around them. There was no Nostromo Mark II in Prometheus. There was a flamethrower, though, not exactly a weapon unique to Alien but fair enough.
Wasn't that a huge complaint about Prometheus is the lack of visual continuity?
Yes, A:R had a Queen, that's about it. No pulse rifles, no dropships, no colonial marines. A:R is its own universe.
AVP and AVPR are fanboy movies. Anderson is a big fan of Aliens, hence all the references to Aliens and the inclusion of the Queen for the big finale. AVPR has a mock APC and Ripley/Newt. But obviously, being set in the present day, they couldn't have dropships and pulse rifles. Neill's film would have taken this fanboyism to the next level.
And Alien 3 had pulse rifles, Conestoga-class troop transport ships and a Queen. So by your definition Alien 3 is a "fanboy" film as well.
The Eighth Passenger doing the Lord's work.
Deep down, Neill still wants to make this movie. He hasn't moved on. I really hope he gets to make it someday.
I think there's legs in this idea of Blomkamp's, and if he has moved on then I hope it finds life with someone else.
Of all the directors out there, I'd love to see Blomkamp's take on this, as well as seeing Villeneuve make a slow-burn Alien film, especially after his BR2049.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 05, 2018, 04:47:36 PM
The Eighth Passenger doing the Lord's work.
Deep down, Neill still wants to make this movie. He hasn't moved on. I really hope he gets to make it someday.
Moved on to what? Last I checked blomkamp is doing short promo videos on youtube which the idea is to get a movie studio interested in paying him to do a full scale movie. Not working on any big movie last time I checked. So if disney offers him alien 5 I doubt he would say no since he isnt doing anything now.
He's crowdfunding Firebase.
Quote from: judge death on Jan 05, 2018, 06:41:27 PM
Moved on to what? Last I checked blomkamp is doing short promo videos on youtube which the idea is to get a movie studio interested in paying him to do a full scale movie. Not working on any big movie last time I checked. So if disney offers him alien 5 I doubt he would say no since he isnt doing anything now.
Nope, he's doing The Gone World next. Fox offered him that in lieu of Alien 5. And in-between that the Oats stuff as mentioned by SM above.
QuoteLast I checked blomkamp is doing short promo videos on youtube which the idea is to get a movie studio interested in paying him to do a full scale movie.
The theory of oats has always been - attempt to create a studio funded by fans directly. Don't take scripts to Hollywood. Rely on the audience. Believe in them. Huge risk. If it works oats could rock - Neill Blomkamp
As cool as this could be, can we stop calling it Alien 5? It's Alien 2.5, or really Aliens 2.
Quote from: Deaconschristpose on Jan 06, 2018, 03:45:22 PM
As cool as this could be, can we stop calling it Alien 5? It's Alien 2.5, or really Aliens 2.
No, because it would be the 5th movie about Ellen Ripley..... and we don't need it.
I think we deserve new story, without destroying preovious four movies + it should be something better than AVP and Prometheus.
I'm glad that Blomkamp moved on.
Quote from: Deaconschristpose on Jan 06, 2018, 03:45:22 PM
As cool as this could be, can we stop calling it Alien 5? It's Alien 2.5, or really Aliens 2.
...I always call it Aliens 2 because that's what it is
Sent from my ALE-L23 using Tapatalk
AL|ENS ||
MUST!!!! Its so infinite and unique. Didn't they blow Hadleys hope sky high anyway? Or do we drum it up to bad 80s special effects?
According to FOX, the sequel to Aliens has already been made and it's called Aliens: Colonial Marines.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 05, 2018, 04:25:30 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 05, 2018, 12:22:04 AM
Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?
Good thing that he wasn't planning on "retconning" Alien 3 then, I guess?
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead
not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.
"Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?"
Lol and prom had good story telling??.. i guess....
"and I credit a lot of that films success to Peter Jackson's skill as a producer)."
That's exactly how I feel about Ridley Scott s films...and I'm sure
Awful lot of stones in the Ridley nutt riding house
Quote from: darkvegett0 on Jan 07, 2018, 04:04:32 AM
"Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?"
Lol and prom had good story telling??.. i guess....
"and I credit a lot of that films success to Peter Jackson's skill as a producer)."
That's exactly how I feel about Ridley Scott s films...and I'm sure
Awful lot of stones in the Ridley nutt riding house
k
Quote from: Ash 937 on Jan 06, 2018, 10:38:25 PM
According to FOX, the sequel to Aliens has already been made and it's called Aliens: Colonial Marines.
Yeah, let's all just quietly ignore that ridiculousness, shall we? :laugh:
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.
Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.
Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 04:38:50 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.
Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.
Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
man, this sucks. He would've brought crazy tech and interesting battles.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 04:38:50 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.
Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.
Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
It's an alternate timeline, for the one-thousandth time.
Alien - Aliens - Neill's Movie
Alien - Aliens - Alien 3 - Alien: Resurrection
And everyone loves action. What's wrong with action. What's wrong with shadows, headbites,
and gunfire.
Everyone in the civilized world loves Alien and Aliens.
For me it was definitely more along the lines of returning characters, than an action-oriented plot. Let us not forget that for all the action that was in Aliens, Cameron really did a good job delivering some scary moments of his own. And I don't just mean big moments or set pieces. I'd dare say the ping of the motion tracker is one of the scariest sounds I've ever heard in a film. I mean, the distant howl from "an American werewolf in London" was a scary sound effect, but when that motion tracker goes off in Aliens, the nards go tight.
The inclusion of Hicks and Human Ripley in Alien 5, would necessitate the need to retcon Alien 3. Chocking that film up to space dreams, would be a rather poor way to do it, in my opinion. Then you have the whole business of them being much older, and you're basically continuing the "evil company" theme as well. If that happens then the Alien slips swiftly into terminator territory. This is a quality and much beloved franchise. Those characters that are gone should stay gone. In an entire fictional universe, with billions of humans, there must be one interesting character out there in the vast cosmos. The Alien is an unstoppable force of evolutionary evil, it stands to reason that even Ripley was gonna die at some point. To survive these things over and over is simply unrealistic, and if you want the franchise to continue indefinitely, you have to make plans that don't involve using the same actors again and again.
Alien 3 was a very under-appreciated movie for its time. It took the series back to its roots and made Ripley confront the inevitable. I'd say it sealed everything up rather nicely. Retconing Alien 3 and bringing back main characters means one thing, you're having to build the movie around those characters and their motivations/storylines. Consequently, narrative creativity is reduced, and we lose an opportunity to experience something truly original and unique. We'd actually be losing Alien 5, and getting Aliens 1.5
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 07, 2018, 08:30:25 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 04:38:50 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.
Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.
Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
It's an alternate timeline, for the one-thousandth time.
Alien - Aliens - Neill's Movie
e
Alien - Aliens - Alien 3 - Alien: Resurrection
...and how the hell do you rationalize two alternate timelines with the same character(s) happening at the same time? Storywise, it seems like you want Blomkamp's film to be even more convoluted and nonsensical than Terminator: Genisys. You really want TIME TRAVEL in the Alien series simply because you can't let go of Hicks and Newt? Is it that really hard to make an Alien action film without these characters?
This is just shameful.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.
It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.
Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?
Got no objection to Neill eventually making an ALIEN(S) movie - but bringing back dead characters is lame as f**k.
-Windebieste.
Dead characters will not be brought back.... Dead characters will not be brought back.... Dead characters will not be brought back.... Dead characters will not be brought back.... Dead characters will not be brought back.... Dead characters will not be brought back....
Did I Press THAT button?
Excellent!
-Windebieste.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.
It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.
Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?
Still, I think reviving dead characters is too much of a distraction from the Xenomorph itself. They can be mentioned, I don't see why mere mention of them would hurt, or have the story be motivated by entirely new characters on a search for them (of course, they would meet something else entirely). I find that
way more interesting. Revitalize the Xenomorph and return the story to center upon the Titular Beast again.
Alien wasn't about Ripley, as a kid it never was to me anyway, it was all about trying to survive an alien onslaught. Even
Aliens with the mother-daughter sub-plot was still about...
Aliens...
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.
It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.
Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?
I'm sorry, but this simply does not make any rational sense whatsoever. Hicks and Newt died in Alien 3; bringing them back would effectively retcon that film. It's really that simple.
Either they'll make an Alien 5 set after Alien Resurrection, "which is unlikey because that film wasn't well recieved" either they'll make a sequel without Sigourney Weaver without Ripley or they'll do a retcon Alien 3. Or just some other sequel unrelated to any specific story line or returning characters.
The biggest question here is why? That's what puzzles me the most. Why? What purpose does this serve? It's so odd.
We should also remember that this movie may never even be made. But I'll speak as though it is.
Branching universe theory of not, you are in fact dealing with resurrecting characters. Some character who died back in the 90's is suddenly alive, on screen and like 30 years older. For 19 year olds who's first or only contact with the Alien universe was Alien: Isolation, this might not be a big deal. For somebody like me, who's been around since Aliens, seeing these dead characters on screen again will be beyond distracting. It would be like Sean Connery appearing in the next Indiana Jones Movie. If time manipulation or disregard of other timelines is introduced in any fashion, we've moved into terminator territory, and that's a huge step in the wrong direction. Merely in my own opinion.
I mean absolutely no offense to anyone not opposed to this idea of character resurrection, but it's just not my bag. Even resurrection had the decency to make ripley a clone. And Newt, bless her heart, wasn't the best character in the world. Hicks was a solid character, but so were Dallas, Parker and Dillon. The same with bishop and ash. This universe is not conducive to survival. Nobody gets a good ending. It's one of the things I like about this franchise. It's not preoccupied with happy feelings, it's hard grounded. People shouldn't really be expected to survive these creatures. I'm afraid what we're dealing with here is an effort to cater to another sub-group of the fanbase which feels let-down that their favorite characters from Aliens died off-screen. It's just my opinion, but let the dead rest in peace. If they were mentioned in passing in Alien 3, or just went missing, that's one thing. They were dead on film, it's time to move on.
Golly Moses, Ripley and Hicks back? It would be like Cameron making a film called Carpathia and having Leo take that boat instead so they can meet on Carpathia after the sinking and live happily ever after. Strange, just too strange for me.
And by "they" I mean Leo and Winslet, not Leo and Cameron, cause that would be a whole other level of weirdness. I mean geez, talk about time travel elements. That would be insane. "Oh thank you for saving me. I'm a movie Director, and...I love you". ;)
QuoteThe biggest question here is why?
Aliens is arguably the most popular of the series. Using that nostalgia could net them squillions if done right.
Ah, I forgot the squillions. That's gotta be it.
The next question I'd have then is, was bringing them all back his idea or the studios?
If it was his idea, may he stay far away from Alien. If it was the studios idea, God help us all. Next thing you know Dallas will show up. He survived the explosion, was frozen in vacuum, and hurled through space at fantastic speeds. He flew into the Sulaco's path and was no doubt sucked into an exterior vent by some gravity doohickey. Someone's gonna open up a toilet seat and there he'll be. Slightly aged but just enough time to take up arms against the xeno menace. Maybe that's why Ripley was wearing that tnt vest in the drawing, this time, he's letting her go in the vents instead. 8)
Only guessing but probably his idea after discussions with Weaver while working on Chappie.
Judging from the response at the time, the only people who weren't keen on the idea were a segment of Alien fans.
That's right. Because the opinions of 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection' fans don't count, right? :P
Coz those people were definitely vocal about their favourite movies getting shunted aside by Blomkamp's proposal.
-Windebieste.
I'm guessing that guess of yours is probably right on the money SM.
I'll admit, I was kind of sad Hicks died when I watched Alien 3 as a younger fellow. But I realized the need to move forward from a great movie (Aliens) that did it's own thing. Beine (like everybody in Aliens) did a fantastic job, as he always did. But there's always a chance that he'd be written poorly in Alien 5, or something could go south narratively and I'd hate to see Hicks be revived only to look ridiculous. He went out a young warrior, and felt no pain. A good enough ending for any character in this universe. I think he'd be better off left alone.
But seriously, you don't think Tom Skerritt's coming back eh? Shame, guy's got a great voice and deserves a cameo in Alien: Genesis. Poor Dallas, nobody's gonna know he's in that toilet. Now that's a bad way to go.
Left alone forever, not pooped on to death that is. ;)
A Blomkamp Aliens sequel could very well tank, but I was interested in where it might've gone.
The Dallas comparison isn't really apt. You'd need to remake the first film if you wanted him to live.
I know SM. Just alittle sarcasm to lighten the mood. I never wanted Dallas to come back. I certainly wouldn't let that be his fate. ;)
Quote from: windebieste on Jan 08, 2018, 02:45:55 AM
That's right. Because the opinions of 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection' fans don't count, right? :P
Coz those people were definitely vocal about their favourite movies getting shunted aside by Blomkamp's proposal.
-Windebieste.
Honestly, in the grand scope of studio commerce, their opinions don't count. Correct.
We know. Aliens is the most popular movie. Only the opinions of the majority count, because they bring in the money. That's the way it is.
Quote from: Huggs on Jan 08, 2018, 02:54:57 AM
I'll admit, I was kind of sad Hicks died when I watched Alien 3 as a younger fellow.
It never even registered with me. Granted, I would have been only 10 years old when I saw it, that's why I don't get the 'controversy'. If the internet was around in its current form back then, it would have exploded.
Well, I was almost your age scorpio. But yeah, "sad" may have been a bit of an overstatement. I was kinda bummed out about it honestly because he was my favorite character from Aliens. I didn't really find Ripley that interesting back then. I kind of still don't. But I thought Hicks was awesome. Him and Drake were my two favorite characters from that movie.
Aliens in general isn't my favorite film in the franchise, but it does hold a special place in my heart. It was the first one I ever saw. I still remember when my dad found out I saw it, he said "I don't care what else has been made, those movies will scare...you...to...death." My mother was less than pleased. Then he asked me if I saw the first one, he told me he'd seen it in theaters when he was young, and it was gonna be a lot scarier than Aliens. Of course, this made me want to watch it even more. I watched it at night. I was horrified, and it was great. It's been my favorite film ever since, followed closely by John Carpenters The Thing. Every single time I watch Aliens though, I still think about my dad telling me how scary it is. To this day, we've still never watched it together.
In terms of the 'ALIEN' property, the "grand scope of studio commerce" the majority of fan's opinion has been ignored.
You may have noticed.
Otherwise, the sequel we got in 1992 would have featured Rippers and Hicks running around with pulse rifles shootin' bugs again.
-Windebieste
I'm not sure that was the thinking back then. Didn't Hill or Giler make some sort of comment during Alien 3's production about sticking the title Alien on a video of someone pissing up a wall for 3 hours and it'd make money? The fanbase or franchise probably wasn't as fractured back then.
"James Cameron always used to talk about the possibilities of Alien 3 and what would happen ... He always planned on Ripley, Hicks and Newt going back to Earth and being a family. And throughout the movie there's different parts where there's a shot of the three of us and like in medlab when the aliens had attacked Sigourney there's a shot of me giving Sigourney a hug and Hicks right behind her and that was like his big family shot."
-Carrie Henn on the Making of Alien 3
Quote from: SM on Jan 08, 2018, 02:23:58 AM
Only guessing but probably his idea after discussions with Weaver while working on Chappie.
Judging from the response at the time, the only people who weren't keen on the idea were a segment of Alien fans.
Yeah, you're quite right. Blomkamp said his original story idea was a very different beast and didn't involve Weaver at all. But it was while filming Chappie that Weaver told him she was quite keen to reprise her original Ripley character. That convinced him to re-write his story and effectively turn it into a direct Aliens sequel. At that point the studio didn't even know he was working on an Alien film.
Having Weaver on-board would very likely have increased his chances of getting the film off the ground, so it was probably a smart move. It wasn't just Blomkamp pitching an Alien movie to Fox now, it was Blomkamp
and Sigourney Weaver.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jan 08, 2018, 09:40:40 AM
I'm not sure that was the thinking back then. Didn't Hill or Giler make some sort of comment during Alien 3's production about sticking the title Alien on a video of someone pissing up a wall for 3 hours and it'd make money? The fanbase or franchise probably wasn't as fractured back then.
Well, Gearbox basically did that and yep, it still made money.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 08, 2018, 12:15:16 AM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.
It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.
Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?
I'm sorry, but this simply does not make any rational sense whatsoever. Hicks and Newt died in Alien 3; bringing them back would effectively retcon that film. It's really that simple.
Do you not understand the difference between ignoring and retconning?
There's no indication that Newt was going to come back, and for all we know Michael Biehn's presence as Hicks might have been limited to some kind of a fever-dream hallucination.
Retconning Alien 3, alternate timelines or fever dreams. I don't care whatever spin is put on it, it's still a naff and lazy idea.
We've had Ripleys story and it was a perfectly rounded arc prior to Resurrection, no need to drag her back again. I liked Hicks and he had charisma but the character didn't leave a big enough impression to require his return, from death or dream. I just don't see why it's necessary to mess about with what's already established.
Just write good new characters for people to follow, I don't think that's too much to ask.
Quote from: OpenMaw on Jan 08, 2018, 08:36:54 PM
There's no indication that Newt was going to come back, and for all we know Michael Biehn's presence as Hicks might have been limited to some kind of a fever-dream hallucination.
Did you not see the concept art?
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jan 08, 2018, 05:42:05 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 08, 2018, 12:15:16 AM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.
And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.
No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.
It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.
Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?
I'm sorry, but this simply does not make any rational sense whatsoever. Hicks and Newt died in Alien 3; bringing them back would effectively retcon that film. It's really that simple.
Do you not understand the difference between ignoring and retconning?
Are you for real ríght now??
Well, one could look at it this way. Ignoring the "process" of retconning, what we're dealing with is a group of characters in a movie. Those characters were seen dead by the viewing audience long ago, and countless times since. The effect their new presence has on the franchise is irrelevant. Alternate timelines and other shoehorns aside, it will be the same viewing audience that saw them die in Alien 3. To me, those characters are long dead and gone. Officially, they're long dead and gone. To see them resurrected for any reason, is just weird and unnecessary. David creating the Alien and the jockey being a giant member of the blue-man group is crazy enough. Having 3 dead characters alive and onscreen again would be the cow that jumps the shark.
And yes, to be technical, to ignore is to disregard. Effectively if we're ignoring Alien 3 then we're disregarding it. Which is technically retconning. Either way, I understand where he's coming from. He loves the second movie, and wants another film like it with the same characters. I just don't personally find it a good idea for this franchise. But, if it winds up being made, I hope it's made well and we all get to see a great movie. Might as well try and be positive.
Even Blomkamp, the director and creative mind behind this aberration, has moved on.
Why some of you can't??
If I were a betting man, my money would be on Ridley.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 08, 2018, 04:39:36 PM
Yeah, you're quite right. Blomkamp said his original story idea was a very different beast and didn't involve Weaver at all. But it was while filming Chappie that Weaver told him she was quite keen to reprise her original Ripley character. That convinced him to re-write his story and effectively turn it into a direct Aliens sequel. At that point the studio didn't even know he was working on an Alien film.
Having Weaver on-board would very likely have increased his chances of getting the film off the ground, so it was probably a smart move. It wasn't just Blomkamp pitching an Alien movie to Fox now, it was Blomkamp and Sigourney Weaver.
This is what I don't understand about the pre-emptive critics of this project. They keep blaming Blomkamp for the scant few details we even have about the story (Ripley being included and '
Alien 3' somehow being negated), when he was never responsible for that angle. If one wants to land the blame (or praise) for that stuff, then aim at Weaver.
And she's been the one person continuously associated with the series, who has consistently praised the third and fourth films, to this very day.
Put yourself in his position. You casually chat with one of your screen icons about a story you've been working on - one which we know would have continued after the third film. She responds positively and the ball actually seems to get rolling on something you're creatively passionate about. She's willing to not only feature, but use her contacts and reputation to help get it started.
You're going to refuse that kind of personal involvement? With one of the best actresses still in show business?
You're either an idiot or have no idea how difficult it could be in the Hollywood system, if you honestly think you would say no.
We have
very little in the way of story details to go on. Certainly not enough to decry whatever writing was done as supposed fan-fiction (any more than we have enough to cheerlead it). All I know is that NB has repeatedly voiced, in interviews, an understanding of what
works about the original two films and why those elements are so timeless. He knows it needs to return to themes like psychosexuality, biomechanics, genuine horror, etcetera.
None of use know of the end result would have been any good, but I can't argue against him on those ingredients being necessary to properly revitalise this series of films.
Is there a worry about certain things he might have tried introducing? Sure. That goes with any artistic talent getting a chance at adding something to this - including Scott. But blame Weaver for the Ripley/Hicks/Newt/retcon stuff. If it's meant to take place not long after '
Aliens' and a military element happens to be involved, one would expect Colonial Marine-related visuals to have been included in concept art. Indeed, '
Alien 3' uncluded a Sulaco-like ship, pulse rifles, Weyland-Yutani and that struck a very different tone to '
Aliens'.
We simply do not know enough about what was in the works to make any kind of judgement calls over it.
Yep.
Though this 'blame' thing is a bit silly. Blomkamp commissioned concept art of Ripley and Hicks. She didn't have a gun to his head.
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 10, 2018, 06:17:05 AM
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
]Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Is she tho??
When was her last BO hit outside Avatar? (because the same would be say about any actor from that movie), Chappie was ass and flops hardcore, The Defenders got positive/mixed reviews and most of the bad reviews fault the boring story and the terrible villain, a rol played by her.
I really like Weaver, but I don't think in this age and time she got much to bargain with Fox/Disney.
She does if they want her for an Alien flick.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 10, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 10, 2018, 06:17:05 AM
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
]Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Is she tho??
When was her last BO hit outside Avatar? (because the same would be say about any actor from that movie), Chappie was ass and flops hardcore, The Defenders got positive/mixed reviews and most of the bad reviews fault the boring story and the terrible villain, a rol played by her.
I really like Weaver, but I don't think in this age and time she got much to bargain with Fox/Disney.
Fox doesn't care about any of the other work she's done, she's an iconic movie character. What did Mark Hamill(great actor) have leading up to The Force Awakens?
And let's be honest, Blomkamp is not an amateur. One of his three movies were nominated for Best Picture. Let's give the man some respect.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 10, 2018, 08:09:46 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 10, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 10, 2018, 06:17:05 AM
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
]Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Is she tho??
When was her last BO hit outside Avatar? (because the same would be say about any actor from that movie), Chappie was ass and flops hardcore, The Defenders got positive/mixed reviews and most of the bad reviews fault the boring story and the terrible villain, a rol played by her.
I really like Weaver, but I don't think in this age and time she got much to bargain with Fox/Disney.
Fox doesn't care about any of the other work she's done, she's an iconic movie character. What did Mark Hamill(great actor) have leading up to The Force Awakens?
And let's be honest, Blomkamp is not an amateur. One of his three movies were nominated for Best Picture. Let's give the man some respect.
Okay, maybe I'm crazy, or I'm just having a hell of a day but did you just give me an order?
Oh I'm sorry but I always think Peter Jackson was the real reason for the success of District 9.
Before Neil is ever allowed to get near the Alien franchise, let him make his long lost Halo movie first. He was quite excited about it at one time if I remember it correctly. Youtube video aside, give him access to that material and a decent budget, and let's see what he brings to the table before he gets to take the reins on a full blown Aliens sequel.
The weaver situation is interesting. I don't pretend to know exactly what's going on there, but I sincerely hope any demands or conditions she "might" have (or have had) do not prove detrimental to the film, should it be made. If it was indeed re-written to include her, I hope any input and authority she might have over the script is minor going foward. To segway somewhat, I've held back from saying it for quite some time now, and no offense is implied to Weaver or Neil. But, I'm legitimately concerned that due to the current political climate, and the tone of Neil's previous films and Weaver, we might wind up with a VERY political film.
And to clarify on any possible script conditions that Weaver might have had, or may have in the future. I merely mean to state that I'd rather we get to see Neil's original idea for the film. Whatever happens, I'd rather it be the honest portrayal of his original vision for the movie.
"No offense is implied to Weaver at all".
I just hope she doesn't use any potential influence to force changes on a film that could've had serious potential just the way it was.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 11, 2018, 12:04:34 AM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 10, 2018, 08:09:46 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 10, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 10, 2018, 06:17:05 AM
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
]Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Is she tho??
When was her last BO hit outside Avatar? (because the same would be say about any actor from that movie), Chappie was ass and flops hardcore, The Defenders got positive/mixed reviews and most of the bad reviews fault the boring story and the terrible villain, a rol played by her.
I really like Weaver, but I don't think in this age and time she got much to bargain with Fox/Disney.
Fox doesn't care about any of the other work she's done, she's an iconic movie character. What did Mark Hamill(great actor) have leading up to The Force Awakens?
And let's be honest, Blomkamp is not an amateur. One of his three movies were nominated for Best Picture. Let's give the man some respect.
Okay, maybe I'm crazy, or I'm just having a hell of a day but did you just give me an order?
Oh I'm sorry but I always think Peter Jackson was the real reason for the success of District 9.
What creative role did Peter J in District 9. Being named a producer doesn't necessarily mean he had any creative input. It's more than likely he just used his clout to get the film made after the Halo film fell over.
Quote from: SM on Jan 11, 2018, 02:34:10 AM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 11, 2018, 12:04:34 AM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 10, 2018, 08:09:46 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 10, 2018, 10:39:35 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 10, 2018, 06:17:05 AM
Weaver may not have a gun to anybody's head but she still holds the cards.
She wanted to be alone in Alien 3 instead of happy family with Hicks/Newt. She states this in The Making of Alien 3.
Now she's changed her mind, because she wants in, and it's the only way it's going to happen.
Neill needs her, because his idea by itself isn't going to turn heads.
]Weaver is in a good bargaining position, unfortunately Neill is not.
Is she tho??
When was her last BO hit outside Avatar? (because the same would be say about any actor from that movie), Chappie was ass and flops hardcore, The Defenders got positive/mixed reviews and most of the bad reviews fault the boring story and the terrible villain, a rol played by her.
I really like Weaver, but I don't think in this age and time she got much to bargain with Fox/Disney.
Fox doesn't care about any of the other work she's done, she's an iconic movie character. What did Mark Hamill(great actor) have leading up to The Force Awakens?
And let's be honest, Blomkamp is not an amateur. One of his three movies were nominated for Best Picture. Let's give the man some respect.
Okay, maybe I'm crazy, or I'm just having a hell of a day but did you just give me an order?
Oh I'm sorry but I always think Peter Jackson was the real reason for the success of District 9.
What creative role did Peter J in District 9. Being named a producer doesn't necessarily mean he had any creative input. It's more than likely he just used his clout to get the film made after the Halo film fell over.
It's all speculation, but what makes me think he in fact help with the script is that Blomkamp aĺways use the same writer for alĺ his movies and it's D9, the one where PJ participate, the only decent, so take it as you wish but I believe he probably overseer the script in some capacity.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 11, 2018, 05:55:08 PM
It's all speculation
So in other words, just some shit you made up because he pissed in your cheerios?
And yes, District 9 and Chappie were written by Blomkamp and his wife. Elysium by Blomkamp only. And yes, they got an Academy Award nomination, a Bafta nomination, a Golden Globe nomination and a BFCAA nomination for best adapted screenplay (adapted from one of his own shortfilms).
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 11, 2018, 06:14:09 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 11, 2018, 05:55:08 PM
It's all speculation
So in other words, just some shit you made up because he pissed in your cheerios?
And yes, District 9 and Chappie were written by Blomkamp and his wife. Elysium by Blomkamp only. And yes, they got an Academy Award nomination, a Bafta nomination, a Golden Globe nomination and a BFCAA nomination for best adapted screenplay (adapted from one of his own shortfilms).
No, it's just speculation, SM said producer doesn't necessarily means PJ got some creative input in some capacity, well it also doesn't necessarily means he didn't, speculation.
All those nominations (not a single win anyway) comes from a movie that Peter Jackson produces.
You know what happen when PJ is not there anymore? A movie that is terrible at best (Elysium) and a literal garbage, mess of a film (Crappie).
Producer, producer... it's a different role every film.
Major filmmakers who have produced films have admitted they still wouldn't be able to tell you what a producer does.
And Neill needs to restock his cachet by making another smash hit like District 9, before making Alien. Recharge the batteries.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 12, 2018, 07:25:17 AM
You know what happen when PJ is not there anymore? A movie that is terrible at best (Elysium) and a literal garbage, mess of a film (Crappie).
Pity then that PJ wasn't there for Alien 3 then huh? A movie that must be "terrible at best" because:
Elysium RT 67%, Metacritic 61, IMDb 6.6/10 vs. Alien 3 RT 46%, Metacritic 59, IMDb 6.4/10.
Even "Crappie" beat Alien 3 on user reviews at IMDb 6.8/10. Ouch.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 04:40:39 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 12, 2018, 07:25:17 AM
You know what happen when PJ is not there anymore? A movie that is terrible at best (Elysium) and a literal garbage, mess of a film (Crappie).
Pity then that PJ wasn't there for Alien 3 then huh? A movie that must be "terrible at best" because:
Elysium RT 67%, Metacritic 61, IMDb 6.6/10 vs. Alien 3 RT 46%, Metacritic 59, IMDb 6.4/10.
Even "Crappie" beat Alien 3 on user reviews at IMDb 6.8/10. Ouch.
First off, why are you talking about Alien 3 TC now? this is about the merits of Blomhack, not Fincher or do you want to compare those two? do you? I don't think you want.
Second, we all know exactly where the Alien 3 comes from, Newt and Hicks and a big portion of the movie being cut out, atleast for the majority of the people who saw Alien 3 and think David Fincher piss on their scramble eggs. Alien 3 -AC- it will be recieved VASTLY better today than it was in 1992.
As for the users reviews in IMDb I say it before, fanboys and haters dominate those pool votes, decieving General Audience of what is good or bad, don't believe me? fine, let me prove it to you when Black Panther premieres.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 12, 2018, 08:33:37 PM
First off, why are you talking about Alien 3 TC now?
Because it's a bit hypocritical saying "Elysium is terrible at best" while saying Alien3 is a "masterpiece". In your opinion they might be but the majority of professional critics and regular viewers think otherwise.
QuoteAlien 3 -AC- it will be recieved VASTLY better today than it was in 1992.
So does the Alien 3 assembly cut totally redeem the film then?
QuoteAs for the users reviews in IMDb I say it before, fanboys and haters dominate those pool votes, decieving General Audience of what is good or bad, don't believe me? fine, let me prove it to you when Black Panther premieres.
Biomechanoid already explained earlier in this thread how IMDb deals with skewed user review scores.
Guys, please don't compare Chappie (one of the most poorly executed blockbuster I've ever seen) to Alien 3. You hurt my feelings :).
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 09:36:53 PM
Because it's a bit hypocritical saying "Elysium is terrible at best" while saying Alien3 is a "masterpiece". In your opinion they might be but the majority of professional critics and regular viewers think otherwise.
¨
The majority of critics at the time say that, indeed. I don't think critics nowadays will critize the movie so heavily. But to each his own.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 09:36:53 PM
So does the Alien 3 assembly cut totally redeem the film then?
¨
Almost. Anyhow I would love to see the original cut of the movie.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 09:36:53 PMBiomechanoid already explained earlier in this thread how IMDb deals with skewed user review scores.
He thinks he know how it works, yeah, but he is wrong and when BP premieres I will demostrate that EASILY.
Quote from: Ingwar on Jan 12, 2018, 10:01:38 PM
Guys, please don't compare Chappie (one of the most poorly executed blockbuster I've ever seen) to Alien 3. You hurt my feelings :).
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yellmagazine.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F05%2Falien-3-picture-1.jpg&hash=2b36d28b861fc484f4c6a62378dc1fb28581eba7)
How are you going to demonstrate the flaw IMDB's rating system when Black Panther comes out, exactly?
Lol this better be good.
So, Neill has his idea. We start after Aliens and move forward from there. This timeline shift and the direction of the Covenant 2 are often spoke of. But what if Alien 3 and ripleys death were left alone? What other directions could they have gone after Alien 3 besides resurrection? Or should the franchise have ended with the death of ripley?
As for me, I think if they would've written Alien 4 as something totally different than resurrection, and given it to somebody like Carpenter, we'd have gotten something truly special. Maybe something along the lines of (not necessarily river of pain) normal people at a random outpost. Sort of a blend of Alien 79 and The Thing. It would've demonstrated that these creatures were not confined to lv-426, and allowed the series to continue with new characters and locations.
QuoteAlien 3 -AC- it will be recieved VASTLY better today than it was in 1992.
Why?
All the problems in the TC in 1992 are still there.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 09:36:53 PM
QuoteAlien 3 -AC- it will be recieved VASTLY better today than it was in 1992.
So does the Alien 3 assembly cut totally redeem the film then?
;D
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 12, 2018, 10:30:33 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 09:36:53 PMBiomechanoid already explained earlier in this thread how IMDb deals with skewed user review scores.
He thinks he know how it works, yeah, but he is wrong
Heh, heh. No, I don't THINK how it works. I READ how it works. They give details on their site, breaking down how their weight average system works. I'm not saying you're ignorant, but you're making ignorant comments right now because you're foolishly choosing to believe your uniformed assumptions trump stated facts that you don't bother to educated yourself on.
Educate yourself
before mouthing off, it saves you from that whole foot in mouth thingy.
Quote from: Beatnation on Jan 12, 2018, 10:30:33 PM
and when BP premieres I will demostrate that EASILY.
I'll be here when you offer up your demonstration . . . . ;)
That's too bad, but they need to come up with a very good story (to complete the franchise?) and not involving characters from previous films.
They're not going to 'complete' the franchise any time soon.
Either they make a sequel to Alien Resurrection, do another spin-off or reboot. But if they retcon it they'll ruin it. Yes, I say retcon because if you make Aliens 2, you ruin any chance of continuing after Alien Resurrection. It's putting the series on a totally different path to the one before.
I would like to see a spin-off, they already brought Ripley back from the dead, time to let her character rest unless they commit to doing a sequel to A:R.
Quote from: Huggs on Jan 13, 2018, 02:28:45 AM
So, Neill has his idea. We start after Aliens and move forward from there. This timeline shift and the direction of the Covenant 2 are often spoke of. But what if Alien 3 and ripleys death were left alone? What other directions could they have gone after Alien 3 besides resurrection? Or should the franchise have ended with the death of ripley?
As for me, I think if they would've written Alien 4 as something totally different than resurrection, and given it to somebody like Carpenter, we'd have gotten something truly special. Maybe something along the lines of (not necessarily river of pain) normal people at a random outpost. Sort of a blend of Alien 79 and The Thing. It would've demonstrated that these creatures were not confined to lv-426, and allowed the series to continue with new characters and locations.
That's the direction they should have gone, sort of like many of the comics. Move on from Ripley and gang, and tell a bunch of stories. Some could be in the vein of Alien/Alien 3 and some like Aliens. I just hope that Disney is not stupid enough to reboot the franchise, though.
There's no point to doing a sequel to Alien Resurrection, anyway. There's only the crisis of Ripley 8's duality to work with, really. The USM are throwaway, and there's no meat on the bones of any of the other Resurrection survivors, really, except for Call and the Auton units... None of that would really, in my opinion, make for a compelling sequel. Especially going on 21 years later.
Personally, i'd love the series to go the route of Alien Isolation. Something like that, anyway. Pull back from the mythos aspects being explored in the prequels and go back to the mystery and bizarre horror of this universe.
Hell, something along the lines of Alien Isolation, broken into six hour long parts for Netflix. Do an Alien miniseries.
You could do a The Thing-Esque miniseries. Call it, say, "ACHERON"
Story would show the life, struggle, and ultimate downfall of the people of Hadley's Hope to the aliens. Even ending it on a bleak Carpenter-esque note. Newt left alone somewhere in the base, the only other human character is left cradling a gun with one bullet, a fire dying down under sprinkler systems, an old style motion tracker bleeping as the Aliens close in. HARD CUT to DARKNESS.
I'm becoming an open-maw fanboy ;D
https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352 (https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352)
More speculation from our good friends at Sci-fied. :laugh:
Wonder if he thinks they're an official site too.
I do hope that if we don't get his film then we get his script in some form or another. I think novel would be best suited but I'd take comic or game.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 20, 2018, 04:49:24 PM
https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352 (https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352)
More speculation from our good friends at Sci-fied. :laugh:
They were wondering if my Planet 4 map (https://alientimeline.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/planet-4-map.jpg)was official the other day...
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 20, 2018, 04:49:24 PM
https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352 (https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/954550245349732352)
More speculation from our good friends at Sci-fied. :laugh:
Arguably it already is a video game.
First he tries to make Halo, but that falls apart (Halo is heavily inspired by Aliens). Then he tries to make Aliens 2, and it falls apart.
Anyone see a pattern here or is that just me?
He's a filmmaker whose projects fall apart sometimes.
Which is every filmmaker ever.
o hai
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F02851%2Fterry_gilliam_2851446k.jpg&hash=9988866c4f15b831d1881079d009772484fdcc3e)
Quote from: SM on Jan 23, 2018, 08:31:41 AM
o hai
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F02851%2Fterry_gilliam_2851446k.jpg&hash=9988866c4f15b831d1881079d009772484fdcc3e)
"Hold My Beer"
Quote from: Scorpio on Jan 16, 2018, 01:28:10 PM
Either they make a sequel to Alien Resurrection, do another spin-off or reboot. But if they retcon it they'll ruin it. Yes, I say retcon because if you make Aliens 2, you ruin any chance of continuing after Alien Resurrection. It's putting the series on a totally different path to the one before.
It would only be 'ruined' if it wasn't any good. If it turned out to
be good, then it would hardly ruin anything.
As for the possibility of anything set after '
Resurrection', Weaver's already said she's turned down several scripts specifically because she has no desire to reprise the clone version of her character. So, not happening, regardless.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Jan 29, 2018, 12:09:20 PM
Weaver's already said she's turned down several scripts specifically because she has no desire to reprise the clone version of her character
Really, she did? I did not know that. Can you provide a source so I can read what she said?
Not directly related to Alien 5, but in this new EW interview Blomkamp talks a bit about his next big project, The Gone World.
QuoteTom Sweterlitsch's novel The Gone World has already created quite a stir. The rights to the book were acquired by Fox months ago before it was even published, with Neill Blomkamp (District 9) now attached to direct the adaptation. All this and the book still hasn't hit shelves — it'll be released on Feb. 6.
QuoteSo, as it became clear that Alien was collapsing, Mark Roybal, who was the executive, told me there's a book we're looking at optioning, that he really thought that I should take a look at, and then he forwarded me a paragraph summary that had been done internally at Fox, just to summarize what the book was. - Neill Blomkamp
More at: http://ew.com/books/2018/01/29/district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-and-tom-sweterlitsch-the-gone-world/ (http://ew.com/books/2018/01/29/district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-and-tom-sweterlitsch-the-gone-world/)
The synopsis of that novel sounds even more stale than Blomkamp's pitch for Aliens: Part II.
Agreed.
I still hope he gets to make his Alien movie. After Ridley is done with the franchise, they should give Blomkamp a chance.
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 31, 2018, 03:48:59 AM
The synopsis of that novel sounds even more stale than Blomkamp's pitch for Aliens: Part II.
Except that everyone
who has actually read the book seems to think otherwise.
Let the guy move on, no more Alien franchise suggestion to him (in any form, and that include videogames). Let him do The Gone World, which sounds like ass (I didn't read the book, so), pretty sure that would be the final nail of the coffin of such superb movie career.
Quote from: SiL on Jan 12, 2018, 11:07:44 PM
How are you going to demonstrate the flaw IMDB's rating system when Black Panther comes out, exactly?
How is a critically acclaimed movie as Black Panther is getting so many ones???
Is the DC fanboys downvoting this movie EVEN BEFORE THE PREMIERE
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1825683/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1825683/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt)
How is that not flawed?? Casual moviegoers will go to imdb to check out the score and it got the same score than BvS and Suicide Squad, are you kidding me? IMDB SYSTEM IS FLAWED.
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 09, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
Is the DC fanboys downvoting this movie EVEN BEFORE THE PREMIERE
Your witch screaming is getting really boring. The film has already had a limited release. Additionally, IMDB has already explained in their Get Satisfaction board, that any private screenings, participates can submit their ratings.
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 09, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
How is a critically acclaimed movie as Black Panther is getting so many ones???
I've explained many times here, you don't know how many of the 1,000 1.0 ratings are actually applied to the weighted average, they do not reveal that formula. Every IMDB member has a "voting value" rating. Someone who uses an account to do nothing but vote all 10's or all 1's has a near zero, or absolute zero submitter rating.
The Godfather has 36,000 1.0 ratings. Alien 79 and Aliens 86 has 4,000 1.0 ratings each. 2001 ASO has 11,000 1.0 ratings. People can be very extreme about their movie tastes. You can find in these very forums people rating a given film a perfect 10 or a lowly 1.
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 09, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
IMDB SYSTEM IS FLAWED.
Then don't go to IMDB.......derp. Perhaps you should stick with rotten tomatoes since it currently has over 80 critics rating it 8.4 rating for BP. That should silence your ranting for awhile.....that is, until a movie comes along you love and RT has given it a lowly rating while IMDB rates it highly. Then you will have to switch back to appease your ranting. Perhaps install a revolving door between the two sites.... ;)
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 31, 2018, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 31, 2018, 03:48:59 AM
The synopsis of that novel sounds even more stale than Blomkamp's pitch for Aliens: Part II.
Except that everyone who has actually read the book seems to think otherwise.
You're talking about
The Gone World? Have you read it? What did you think of it?
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 09, 2018, 10:08:06 PM
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 09, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
Is the DC fanboys downvoting this movie EVEN BEFORE THE PREMIERE
Your witch screaming is getting really boring. The film has already had a limited release. Additionally, IMDB has already explained in their Get Satisfaction board, that any private screenings, participates can submit their ratings.
Actually any person with a facebook or imdb account can vote, no just the ones who saw early screenings.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 09, 2018, 10:08:06 PMQuote from: Beatnation on Feb 09, 2018, 08:29:36 PM
IMDB SYSTEM IS FLAWED.
Then don't go to IMDB.......derp. Perhaps you should stick with rotten tomatoes since it currently has over 80 critics rating it 8.4 rating for BP. That should silence your ranting for awhile.....that is, until a movie comes along you love and RT has given it a lowly rating while IMDB rates it highly. Then you will have to switch back to appease your ranting. Perhaps install a revolving door between the two sites.... ;)
Well the question was how I demostrate IMDb ratings are flawed and I did, I don't care for Rotten Tomatoes User rating neither you should after TLJ debacle.
(https://i.imgur.com/g32B3pV.gif)
But you didn't demonstrate it. People being allowed to vote on the film doesn't mean it's a flawed system, and imdb weighs scores with an algorithm.
Damn lol this escalated quickly... HA!
Quote from: SiL on Feb 10, 2018, 03:55:47 AM
But you didn't demonstrate it. People being allowed to vote on the film doesn't mean it's a flawed system, and imdb weighs scores with an algorithm.
How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??
(https://i.imgur.com/zujOGPy.png)
"Not Flawed"
(https://media.giphy.com/media/NPyHgTkMStCXC/giphy.gif)
No online system that allows people to vote or review has a system in place for ensuring someone actually saw the movie before doing so.
And you really, really like ignoring the weighting algorithm, which makes the flood of 1s and 10s effect the rating less - making it a pretty good system.
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 10, 2018, 05:33:17 AM
How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??
You're so eager to scream witch, you're blind to your own evidence you're bringing forward that the IMDB system buffers out ballot stuffers. No system is flawless. Ballot stuffers are a plague internet wide, not just imdb. But IMDB put in a system to block the ballot stuffers.
Now I'm going to take this real slow. You posted earlier the link to the same page, correct? At that time, the 1.0 ratings were just barely over a thousand. You didn't post a screen capture, but you can see my earlier post acknowledging there was only around 1,000 1.0 rating votes. The rating was 6.7 collectively.
Now look at your screen capture, it shows DOUBLE the 1.0 ratings. Now look at the rating, it's STILL 6.7. How can that be? That increase of 1.0 ratings is over 10% of the total vote count, how could it not affect the collective rating? Is any of this seeping through to you yet?
I'm going to explain this one more time here at AVPG, and then I'm done with it. People want to showcase their ignorance screaming for IMDB blood, have at it.
I've explained here before that you have to earn the right to have your submitted ratings applied to IMDB's weighted average ratings. No, I don't work for IMDB or have no desire to defend IMDB. It's information I researched on a number of ratings/accolade sites for one of my site projects. Here's the criteria I was able to compile on what you must have under your belt before your submitted ratings are actually applied to the weighted average........
1) Age of account - Your account must be an unknown minimum age. If you create a brand new account, rate a movie, it will accept your submission, and it will "tally" your vote in total vote count....but it will not be applied to the weighted average until you reach the minimum age of your account (six months?, one year?, I don't know, they don't make that public). Let's say six months. After six months, your rating is applied to the weighted average. But, if that was the only rating you submitted, it will have a zero "voting value" because of criteria 2....
2) Minimum quantity of ratings - you must have an unknown minimum number of ratings for any of your ratings to be applied. They do not make public what the minimum is. This is to buffer out throw away accounts that are used just to place an extreme rating then forget about it. Some maintain the account so they can use it long term for a whole slew of voting all one's or ten's. This will knock your voting value down to near zero because of criteria 3.......
3) Extreme voting is punished - If you look at any of IMDB's Top 1000 Voters (it's marked on their account page), you will see members whose accounts are a number of years old, they have hundreds if not thousands of ratings, and their voting pattern is in the spirit of why the rating system was created. No given rating dominates their vote pattern. A minimum age account with hundreds of votes dominated with one's and ten's will have a very low or zero "vote value" determined by IMDB's formula, which they do not make public for the obvious reason people would try to circumvent it.
Would've thought the nice friendly blue 'weighted average' that's quite plain the above screencap was a bit of a giveaway...
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 10, 2018, 07:08:26 AM
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 10, 2018, 05:33:17 AM
How in the world is not a flawed system when the system let A LOT of haters and fanboys vote a bunch of 10's and 1's even before see the frikkin movie??
You're so eager to scream witch, you're blind to your own evidence you're bringing forward that the IMDB system buffers out ballot stuffers. No system is flawless. Ballot stuffers are a plague internet wide, not just imdb. But IMDB put in a system to block the ballot stuffers.
Then I rest my case, because I say IMDb User rating system is flawed, which it is because, under your logic, every system is, which was the discussion about this topic in first place.
You can't trust on any User Rating System in internet no IMDb, no Rotten Tomatoes.
LOL! He totally side stepped the evidence IMDB blocks ballot stuffers.
Enjoy your whine fest, Ms. "Flawless".
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 10, 2018, 09:08:33 AM
LOL! He totally side stepped the evidence IMDB blocks ballot stuffers.
Enjoy your whine fest, Ms. "Flawless".
And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/625028003a812d32451442a1f0e19f6e/tumblr_inline_mv8tz0qRRT1rxsol3.gif)
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 10, 2018, 09:25:07 AM
And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.
Who here said it was flawless? No one here said it was flawless, you're arguing with yourself and you're keying in on an insignificant aspect of what you're being schooled on. Oh wow, Beatnation is the first person ever on the internet to discover people try to circumvent voting systems. Nope, no one but you.... You and only you. You're a genius! :laugh:
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 10, 2018, 09:33:19 AM
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 10, 2018, 09:25:07 AM
And you totally side stepped that with under your logic, every system is flawed, hence, IMDb User rating system is flawed and that's what the discussion was about.
Who here said it was flawless? No one here said it was flawless, you're arguing with yourself and you're keying in on an insignificant aspect of what you're being schooled on. Oh wow, Beatnation is the first person ever on the internet to discover people try to circumvent voting systems. Nope, no one but you.... You and only you. You're a genius! :laugh:
You can't trust on a flawed system that's the discussion was about, you can't trust sites as Rotten Tomatos or IMDb when it comes to User Scores, you can when it's Critics Score because that's pretty quantifiable, but no User Scores.
And all this argument starts because The Eight Passenger type this;
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 12, 2018, 04:40:39 PM
Even "Crappie" beat Alien 3 on user reviews at IMDb 6.8/10. Ouch.
Why bother use IMDb User Scores if its a flawed system ?? His choice, for sure, but if you gonna start showing numbers trying to downplay Alien 3 in favor of Crappie gimme something more concrete that "IMDb User Scores", my goodness.
So...you got nothing. Eight Passenger mentioned absolutely nothing about "flawless". All this "flawed, flawless" whining was generated by you. You and only you. You're arguing with yourself.
When there was 1,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating was 6.7.
Now there's 2,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating is STILL 6.7.
That increase is OVER 10% of the TOTAL VOTES. Using that genius level aptitude of yours, explain to us how it is mathematically possible for it to remain at 6.7. ..... tick tock. ;)
Quote
Why bother use IMDb User Scores if its a flawed system ?? His choice, for sure, but if you gonna start showing numbers trying to downplay Alien 3 in favor of Crappie gimme something more concrete that "IMDb User Scores", my goodness.
Chappie and Alien 3 are both rated using the same system, and have a similar number of votes. All it shows is people liked Chappie more.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 10, 2018, 10:05:19 AM
So...you got nothing. Eight Passenger mentioned absolutely nothing about "flawless". All this "flawed, flawless" whining was generated by you. You and only you. You're arguing with yourself.
When there was 1,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating was 6.7.
Now there's 2,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating is STILL 6.7.
Quick! Cover your eyes to ignore that fact so you can continue your whine fest. ;)
Excuse me, what??
He mention nothing but he trust on a flawed system (with your own logic and words), trying to downplay Alien 3 in favor of Crappie basing his reasons on a FLAWED NOT RELIABLE SYSTEM, just because that's the only place in the whole internet where that movie was above Alien 3 in any form, is just bollocks.
Now keep quoting me, next time I log in I will answer to you. I promess.
Google users rate Chappie higher than Alien 3 too.
Quote from: Biomechanoid on Feb 10, 2018, 10:13:41 AM
So...you got nothing. Eight Passenger mentioned absolutely nothing about "flawless". All this "flawed, flawless" whining was generated by you. You and only you. You're arguing with yourself.
When there was 1,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating was 6.7.
Now there's 2,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating is STILL 6.7.
That increase is OVER 10% of the TOTAL VOTES. Using that genius level aptitude of yours, explain to us how it is mathematically possible for it to remain at 6.7. ..... tick tock. ;)
Quote from: Beatnation on Feb 10, 2018, 10:18:18 AM
He mention nothing but he trust on a flawed system blah, blah, blah.........
Heh, heh. Poor Beatnation he is so........
(https://m.popkey.co/71acee/l3ol6.gif)
Enough of your diversions, I repeat........
When there was 1,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating was 6.7.
Now there's 2,000 1.0 ratings for BP, the collective rating is STILL 6.7.
That increase is OVER 10% of the TOTAL VOTES. Using that genius level aptitude of yours, explain to us how it is mathematically possible for it to remain at 6.7. According to you this "flawed" system allows people to alter ratings by ballot stuffing. Still waiting......Still tick tock.......;)
Quote from: D. Compton Ambrose on Feb 10, 2018, 01:12:08 AM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 31, 2018, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Jan 31, 2018, 03:48:59 AM
The synopsis of that novel sounds even more stale than Blomkamp's pitch for Aliens: Part II.
Except that everyone who has actually read the book seems to think otherwise.
You're talking about The Gone World? Have you read it? What did you think of it?
I haven't read it yet but there were quite a few people raving about it on twitter after the first review copies were sent out last year.
Quote from: SM on Feb 10, 2018, 10:29:45 AM
Google users rate Chappie higher than Alien 3 too.
Rotten Tomatoes users as well:
Chappie: 56% Liked it, average rating 3.4/5.
Alien 3: 47% Liked it, average rating 3.1/5.
Just for you, Beat...... ;)
Update on Black Panther, another 1,000 votes have been added. 300 more for the 1.0 rating bringing it now to 2,300. And another 600 more for 10.0 rating, bringing it to 6,000.
And yet ....... the collective rating remains ................................
wait for it................................. 6.7.
Gather around, gang, form a half circle. Beatnation is going to educate us how now over 2,000 rating votes of 10 and 1 added to only a 9,600 vote count somehow maintains a 6.7 constant rating level, yet he claims members are are altering the rating with ballot stuffing. Will he answer or will he dish out more diversions? We shall see. ;)
Meh, I like them both about even. I still don't think Beatnation's claims hold any water. But they're not really all that comparable; two different genres and directorial styles and all.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstream1.gifsoup.com%2Fview5%2F2479816%2Ff%2A%2Akin-thing-sucks-o.gif&hash=6912afd2cd03188f760f1f98fc58c1249123b295)
Honestly, at this point They should just let James Cameron make another Alien Sequel for Us So we can Actually Be Happy.
• No Political Correctness
• No Social Justice Warrior Nonsense
• Hard R Rating geared towards Adults
• Realism
• Minimal CGI
• Use of Old School Camera Trickery, Props, Models and Make Up instead of Stupid Over Done Green Screens
Etc Etc.
Setting aside the right wing nonsense which is oh so prevalent in Alien movies anyway - why on Earth would Cameron use old school effects?
He's the king of CGI.
Nostalgia.
I wouldn't expect Cameron to go all nostalgia old school if he came back. He did a podcast in 16 where he said if he did another it'd be using today's tech.
https://audioboom.com/boos/4827956-fm-podcast-12-aliens-exclusive-interview-w-james-cameron?t=0
Can't remember the timecode though.
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 09:14:23 AM
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2479816/f**kin-thing-sucks-o.gif
Honestly, at this point They should just let James Cameron make another Alien Sequel for Us So we can Actually Be Happy.
• No Political Correctness
• No Social Justice Warrior Nonsense
• Hard R Rating geared towards Adults
• Realism
• Minimal CGI
• Use of Old School Camera Trickery, Props, Models and Make Up instead of Stupid Over Done Green Screens
Etc Etc.
...have you not seen a James Cameron movie?
Quote from: SiL on Mar 08, 2018, 01:26:00 PM
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 09:14:23 AM
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2479816/f**kin-thing-sucks-o.gif
Honestly, at this point They should just let James Cameron make another Alien Sequel for Us So we can Actually Be Happy.
• No Political Correctness
• No Social Justice Warrior Nonsense
• Hard R Rating geared towards Adults
• Realism
• Minimal CGI
• Use of Old School Camera Trickery, Props, Models and Make Up instead of Stupid Over Done Green Screens
Etc Etc.
...have you not seen a James Cameron movie?
Yes they used CGI But they also used A Ton of Camera Tricks, Real Models and Real Stage Props for T2:
Have you seen Avatar?
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Mar 08, 2018, 03:39:22 PM
Have you seen Avatar?
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F082%2F456%2FOkay.png&hash=66fbb2e3489afe07a29d7cb2ff82184ae4c1ac22)
Cameron would have some of the most gorgeous CGI aliens.
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 03:10:57 PM
Quote from: SiL on Mar 08, 2018, 01:26:00 PM
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 09:14:23 AM
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2479816/f**kin-thing-sucks-o.gif
Honestly, at this point They should just let James Cameron make another Alien Sequel for Us So we can Actually Be Happy.
• No Political Correctness
• No Social Justice Warrior Nonsense
• Hard R Rating geared towards Adults
• Realism
• Minimal CGI
• Use of Old School Camera Trickery, Props, Models and Make Up instead of Stupid Over Done Green Screens
Etc Etc.
...have you not seen a James Cameron movie?
Yes they used CGI But they also used A Ton of Camera Tricks, Real Models and Real Stage Props for T2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri9gxYFTVgE
The same movie where he was pioneering the use of CGI. 27 years ago. Why would he go backwards?
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Mar 08, 2018, 01:21:39 PM
I wouldn't expect Cameron to go all nostalgia old school if he came back. He did a podcast in 16 where he said if he did another it'd be using today's tech.
https://audioboom.com/boos/4827956-fm-podcast-12-aliens-exclusive-interview-w-james-cameron?t=0
Can't remember the timecode though.
15:18.
But the entire interview is fascinating. It always is when it comes to Cameron.
Quote from: SM on Mar 08, 2018, 07:13:52 PM
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 03:10:57 PM
Quote from: SiL on Mar 08, 2018, 01:26:00 PM
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 08, 2018, 09:14:23 AM
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2479816/f**kin-thing-sucks-o.gif
Honestly, at this point They should just let James Cameron make another Alien Sequel for Us So we can Actually Be Happy.
• No Political Correctness
• No Social Justice Warrior Nonsense
• Hard R Rating geared towards Adults
• Realism
• Minimal CGI
• Use of Old School Camera Trickery, Props, Models and Make Up instead of Stupid Over Done Green Screens
Etc Etc.
...have you not seen a James Cameron movie?
Yes they used CGI But they also used A Ton of Camera Tricks, Real Models and Real Stage Props for T2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri9gxYFTVgE
The same movie where he was pioneering the use of CGI. 27 years ago. Why would he go backwards?
I don't mind if they use CGI. I just don't want it to be 100% CGI. In T2 they used both real things like Models, Camera Trickery Etc with the CGI and it actually looks real because that.
When he's making flicks with wall-to-wall CG and unlimited budgets - he's not going to go back to models.
Perhaps he has gotten tired of all of the cgi and stuff and wants to go back to his roots. Stop motion -non cgi- terminator for the win. :laugh:
Quote from: SM on Mar 09, 2018, 06:12:12 AM
When he's making flicks with wall-to-wall CG and unlimited budgets - he's not going to go back to models.
I'm talking about stuff like this :
@4:23
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=263&v=Ri9gxYFTVgE
Yes, I hope they make an Alien movie with no SJW politically correct crap like a woman beating the aliens, just like the ones they used to make back in the day. :P
Quote from: cheachea on Mar 09, 2018, 10:39:03 AM
Quote from: SM on Mar 09, 2018, 06:12:12 AM
When he's making flicks with wall-to-wall CG and unlimited budgets - he's not going to go back to models.
I'm talking about stuff like this :
@4:23
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=263&v=Ri9gxYFTVgE
Gags like that are easier now with CGI because you don't have to reset squibs and things like that. Especially if you have access to WETA.
Quote from: Kane's other son on Mar 09, 2018, 01:27:36 PM
Yes, I hope they make an Alien movie with no SJW politically correct crap like a woman beating the aliens, just like the ones they used to make back in the day. :P
It was different though. She was actually vulnerable and natural instead of being Tomb Raider/110 Pounds/ Fighting Dudes that are 250 pounds of muscle while doing Matrix Style Back Flips and totally unrealistically kicking their asses.
It Was Actually Realistic back in the day.
And Sarah Connor, Lindsay Brigman, Rose Dawson, and Neytiri add nothing to the social justice thing.
If only people understood what they were saying instead throwing 'SJW' around as a dopey perjorative.
Careful. He might label you a "cuck" for that.
Blomkamp is doing another Reddit Ask Me Anything on Thursday 9am PST. So if you want to try and squeeeze more Alien 5 info from him, here's another chance Corporal.
https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/983733823333482496 (https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/983733823333482496)
Thanks. I don't think he'll be sharing many specifics about the film for a while though.
QuoteEvery so often you'll throw up an image on your Instagram from the Aliens sequel that didn't happen. Is that a project that's still dancing around in your head or is it just something you share to display the work you've already put into it?
Yeah, I mean, I wish I could share more, but obviously Fox owns it. It's just an unfortunate thing. I speak to Sigourney about it sometimes. At this point it's kinda like the fire that was burning within me to make that is gone. Stepping outside of even the legal kind of studio-based politics I just feel like its time has come and gone. So, yeah...I think no. And I say that really reluctantly, because I cannot state how much of a fan of Sigourney I am and how much of a fan I am of ALIEN and ALIENS and the idea of doing a sequel to James Cameron's film is amazing on all levels. But, there's a point at which when you're years into it you have to move on. So, I think that has happened to me.
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/ex-neill-blomkamp-on-the-future-of-oats-studios-funding-a-firebase-sequel-190
Thanks to Nick from Hybrid Network for sending the link over.
He'll find the fire again some day.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Apr 11, 2018, 03:06:06 PM
Thanks. I don't think he'll be sharing many specifics about the film for a while though.
QuoteEvery so often you'll throw up an image on your Instagram from the Aliens sequel that didn't happen. Is that a project that's still dancing around in your head or is it just something you share to display the work you've already put into it?
Yeah, I mean, I wish I could share more, but obviously Fox owns it. It's just an unfortunate thing. I speak to Sigourney about it sometimes. At this point it's kinda like the fire that was burning within me to make that is gone. Stepping outside of even the legal kind of studio-based politics I just feel like its time has come and gone. So, yeah...I think no. And I say that really reluctantly, because I cannot state how much of a fan of Sigourney I am and how much of a fan I am of ALIEN and ALIENS and the idea of doing a sequel to James Cameron's film is amazing on all levels. But, there's a point at which when you're years into it you have to move on. So, I think that has happened to me.
http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/ex-neill-blomkamp-on-the-future-of-oats-studios-funding-a-firebase-sequel-190
Thanks to Nick from Hybrid Network for sending the link over.
Man, That's Depressing. I honestly kind of feel bad for him. Why do the studios hate Us Fans ?
I mean we all know Alien 5 would have been Awesome, but no we get "Here play the flute and I'll do The Fingering" type of BS.
I genuinely dig Blomkamp but I'll take Covenant over Blomkamp's Alien fanfiction concept any day.
He managed to step on a lot of people's toes, trying to undermine a film already in production. And he probably affected its box office as well. Not very professional. He deserved to have his film cancelled.
:laugh:
Quote from: SM on Apr 15, 2018, 10:25:28 PM
:laugh:
what you laughin at sir, covenant's BO was clearly hugely influenced by the evil blomp kid's terrible fanfic project
Yeah, that wiley Seth African cost Fox at least dozens of dollars.
Laugh all you want but it makes perfect sense to me. So many people were talking about how they were dismayed that Alien 5 got cancelled.
How many people didn't go and see Covenant because they were so cut that Blomkamp's film didn't get made, exactly?
I don't know but you can find plenty of posts on here from people mad that Blomkamp's film got cancelled. So that probably soured their attitude towards Covenant, hence deciding not to see it.
Even some youtubers have mentioned it. "They cancelled Alien 5 for this?". But that's after the fact.
Which means Fox already has their money.
But the other stuff was from before.
The broader film audience wouldn't have even been aware there was a Blomkamp film in development. Alien fans - a fraction of that audience - were aware, and a fraction of them cracked the shits when it got canned.
What actually affected its box office was a lack of appetite for these sorts of movies.
I think you underestimate just how aware people are now, given social media. Plus people who don't normally watch these types of films, won't see it anyway.
Social media could've affected the box office via word of mouth.
But that's got nothing to do with the Blomkamp movie.
Quote from: Scorpio on Apr 16, 2018, 01:49:51 AM
I don't know but you can find plenty of posts on here from people mad that Blomkamp's film got cancelled. So that probably soured their attitude towards Covenant, hence deciding not to see it.
Even some youtubers have mentioned it. "They cancelled Alien 5 for this?". But that's after the fact.
I didn't like that Blomkamp's film got canceled... Still went and saw Covenant.
It's negative publicity. It's not going to help the film, at the very least.
I don't think anyone avoided the film because of Blomkamp's project. If you have proof otherwise, I'd love to see it.
Quote from: Scorpio on Apr 15, 2018, 09:53:37 PM
He managed to step on a lot of people's toes, trying to undermine a film already in production. And he probably affected its box office as well. Not very professional. He deserved to have his film cancelled.
:laugh:
How did he "undermine a film already in production"? Covenant/Prometheus II wasn't even in active pre-production when he made his pitch to Fox. He even consulted with Scott in order to prevent his film conflicting with any possible planned prequels. Scott was also signed on as a producer, he would have gotten a nice pay-cheque if Blomkamp's film was released.
And how come "he deserved to have
his film cancelled" when it was Fox who greenlit it in the first place?
Quote
Yeah, I mean, I wish I could share more, but obviously Fox owns it.
It's just an unfortunate thing. I speak to Sigourney Weaver about it sometimes.
At this point it's kinda like the fire that was burning within me to make that is gone.
Stepping outside of even the legal kind of studio-based politics I just feel like its time has come and gone.
So, yeah... I think no. And I say that really reluctantly, because I cannot state how much of a fan of Sigourney Weaver I am and how much of a fan I am of ALIEN and ALIENS and the idea of doing a sequel film is amazing on all levels.
But, there's a point at which when you're years into it you have to move on. So, I think that has happened to me.
I wonder if this still holds true.
Quote from: The Old One on Apr 06, 2019, 09:00:15 PM
Quote
Yeah, I mean, I wish I could share more, but obviously Fox owns it.
It's just an unfortunate thing. I speak to Sigourney Weaver about it sometimes.
At this point it's kinda like the fire that was burning within me to make that is gone.
Stepping outside of even the legal kind of studio-based politics I just feel like its time has come and gone.
So, yeah... I think no. And I say that really reluctantly, because I cannot state how much of a fan of Sigourney Weaver I am and how much of a fan I am of ALIEN and ALIENS and the idea of doing a sequel film is amazing on all levels.
But, there's a point at which when you're years into it you have to move on. So, I think that has happened to me.
I wonder if this still holds true.
With any luck.
It's nothing personal. I just don't care for the style and tone of his films. Nor do I believe he has the requisite talent and ideas to make a proper alien movie.
Neil is good at making his particular style of film, and that's all.
From what I read on here (my own straw poll if you like), I think that there are many people that would like to see Aliens2 (or Alien 5 if you prefer) with a more respectful treatment of Hicks and Newt and so on (again, I don't want to get into Alien3 was perfect/nihilistic and all that - to some it is and others it isn't)
... but there doesn't seem to be much support for NB doing it even if his was his concepts that broke the internet every time something was leaked.
I think that the prospect of a Weaver / Biehn movie gets more remote with each year that goes by, more's the pity.
Quote from: Russ on Apr 08, 2019, 09:22:15 AM
From what I read on here (my own straw poll if you like), I think that there are many people that would like to see Aliens2 (or Alien 5 if you prefer) with a more respectful treatment of Hicks and Newt and so on (again, I don't want to get into Alien3 was perfect/nihilistic and all that - to some it is and others it isn't)
... but there doesn't seem to be much support for NB doing it even if his was his concepts that broke the internet every time something was leaked.
I think that the prospect of a Weaver / Biehn movie gets more remote with each year that goes by, more's the pity.
Well Aliens 2 can be shot without Ripley and Hicks but with Newt. Just be competent in creating a story.
Quote from: Drukathi on Apr 08, 2019, 09:30:50 AM
Well Aliens 2 can be shot without Ripley and Hicks but with Newt. Just be competent in creating a story.
Sure, but that's kind of missing the point - it seemed like NB wanted to do a Quantum Leap and "set right what once went wrong" in terms of the treatment of Hicks and Newt in Alien3 and provide a more satisfying end to the trilogy than was served up in Alien3.
As I say, I don't want to turn this thread into "Alien3 rules" - I totally get that some people were perfectly happy with it. Equally, there are others (myself included) that were not.
I think actually that NB's idea started out as having nothing to do with the established characters, it was only after he got talking to Signourney Weaver on the Chappie project and she expressed an interest in doing the movie when he wrote them into the story.
I would have loved to have seen it - maybe he'll leak the treatment one day.
It wouldn't surprise me if Fox was very interested in Blomkamp's movie. Then they heard Weaver wanted it.
Then Fox probably turned around and said "She had sooo much influence over 'ALIEN 3' and 'ALIEN Resurrection' - and look how they turned out. Nope. We're no longer interested. Bye."
...and with the press of a button, Blomkamp's proposal got scuttled, sent down the chute into the dumpster.
-Windebieste.
I dunno about that - I mean, sure, it's possible, but maybe its a "confusion" issue.
Like in Supergirl - one season they didn't have Superman in it cos BvS was out and WB didn't want to confuse audiences with which Superman was which (entirely contradictory that they have Flash, but it really makes no sense to me that they think people are really that stupid).
In this case, we've got the Prequels and then Alien5 - maybe they felt it was too much of the same thing going on and people "wouldn't understand").
Also, it's often said that Ridley Scott scuppered the project - I don't know how much truth there is in that (and I'll guess we'll never know!).
I think Scott was onboard and was going to produce it. God knows what must've happened for him to change his mind.
I think at some point he said it was Fox decision to ditch the project.
-Windebieste.
Quote from: Russ on Apr 08, 2019, 11:29:15 AM
I dunno about that - I mean, sure, it's possible, but maybe its a "confusion" issue.
Like in Supergirl - one season they didn't have Superman in it cos BvS was out and WB didn't want to confuse audiences with which Superman was which (entirely contradictory that they have Flash, but it really makes no sense to me that they think people are really that stupid).
In this case, we've got the Prequels and then Alien5 - maybe they felt it was too much of the same thing going on and people "wouldn't understand").
Also, it's often said that Ridley Scott scuppered the project - I don't know how much truth there is in that (and I'll guess we'll never know!).
I've heard that Blomkamp likes to write and direct his own stuff and is quite protective of that, and Fox wasn't keen on him writing it on his own.
Don't know how true that is.
Kind of rings true, SM.
Neil: I want to write and direct.
Ridley: No, you can write it, I'll direct it.
Neil: No, you can produce, I'll write and direct.
Ridley: No, you write, I'll direct.
Neil: I can't work under those conditions.
Fox: You're fired, Neil.
Quote from: Russ on Apr 08, 2019, 11:00:26 AM
Sure, but that's kind of missing the point - it seemed like NB wanted to do a Quantum Leap and "set right what once went wrong" in terms of the treatment of Hicks and Newt in Alien3 and provide a more satisfying end to the trilogy than was served up in Alien3.
QuoteI think actually that NB's idea started out as having nothing to do with the established characters, it was only after he got talking to Signourney Weaver on the Chappie project and she expressed an interest in doing the movie when he wrote them into the story.
That's precisely what happened, according to him: It took place after '
Alien 3' and was Ripley-less. It was Weaver who liked it and introduced the revision to make it take account of Ripley (although, to this day, we still don't know how).
Quote from: windebieste on Apr 08, 2019, 11:24:04 AM
It wouldn't surprise me if Fox was very interested in Blomkamp's movie. Then they heard Weaver wanted it.
They already knew that when they initially authorised it. If memory serves right, her involvement was one of the chief reasons which convinced them to buy it.
Quote from: SM on Apr 08, 2019, 11:40:35 AM
I've heard that Blomkamp likes to write and direct his own stuff and is quite protective of that, and Fox wasn't keen on him writing it on his own.
Don't know how true that is.
Think some of the last interviews mentioned his wife was teaming up on the writing of it.
Quote from: SM on Apr 08, 2019, 11:40:35 AM
Quote from: Russ on Apr 08, 2019, 11:29:15 AM
I dunno about that - I mean, sure, it's possible, but maybe its a "confusion" issue.
Like in Supergirl - one season they didn't have Superman in it cos BvS was out and WB didn't want to confuse audiences with which Superman was which (entirely contradictory that they have Flash, but it really makes no sense to me that they think people are really that stupid).
In this case, we've got the Prequels and then Alien5 - maybe they felt it was too much of the same thing going on and people "wouldn't understand").
Also, it's often said that Ridley Scott scuppered the project - I don't know how much truth there is in that (and I'll guess we'll never know!).
I've heard that Blomkamp likes to write and direct his own stuff and is quite protective of that, and Fox wasn't keen on him writing it on his own.
Don't know how true that is.
Genuinely can't blame them there. He's got a great visual flair and can do pacing, but his original ideas are largely poo. Ridley-Lite/Pulp, in that regard.
Agreed. As Elysium and Chappie display.
This my idea of Aliens sequel that will ignore/ retcon Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection
- Neil Blomkamp is not a director.
- Ripley and Hick are not feature in the movie. But both of them are still alive.
- The film will ignore the event in Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection
- A new actress (age between 25-35 years old) will be cast to play adult version of Newt.
- Newt is the main character, and the future of the franchise.
- The reason why Ripley and Hick are not feature in the film. Because they live seperately.
And If they want to tell the the story prior to the event of the movie, when Ripley, Hick and Newt are still living together. All they need to do is made it into comic, video game or CGI TV series, animated series. etc
The film would be amazing! if done right.
(https://www.avpcentral.com/images/newt-dead.jpg)
Quote from: Huggs on Dec 13, 2019, 04:49:53 AM
https://www.avpcentral.com/images/newt-dead.jpg
Blessed post.
Truly excellent.
Quote from: Huggs on Dec 13, 2019, 04:49:53 AM
https://www.avpcentral.com/images/newt-dead.jpg
But that upsets people.
"Unidentified". Might not even be Newt.
Turkette?
Instant franchise realignment. Just add water.
Its too late. I was screaming about this at the top of my lungs years ago. Everyone ignored me. Time to move on its not happening.
And that's a good thing, it never deserved to exist to begin with.
Quote from: Fiendishly Inventive on Dec 18, 2019, 03:08:55 PM
And that's a good thing, it never deserved to exist to begin with.
Yeah, it would have probably suffered a...
-puts on shades-
Dark Fate
Quote from: D. Compton Ambrose on Dec 19, 2019, 01:31:27 PM
Quote from: Fiendishly Inventive on Dec 18, 2019, 03:08:55 PM
And that's a good thing, it never deserved to exist to begin with.
Yeah, it would have probably suffered a...
-puts on shades-
Dark Fate
YYYYEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote from: Whiskeybrewer on Dec 19, 2019, 02:17:51 PM
Quote from: D. Compton Ambrose on Dec 19, 2019, 01:31:27 PM
Quote from: Fiendishly Inventive on Dec 18, 2019, 03:08:55 PM
And that's a good thing, it never deserved to exist to begin with.
Yeah, it would have probably suffered a...
-puts on shades-
Dark Fate
YYYYEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(https://i.imgflip.com/1hc98e.jpg)
https://comicbook.com/horror/news/alien-5-neill-blomkamp-reaction-future-franchise-disney-update/
QuoteWhen asked if the project could come back to life in the future, Blomkamp confirmed with ComicBook.com, "No, would be my guess. I would say nothing will come out. But, who knows? At this present moment, I would say it's just dead."
"I think the answer would be a mixture of both things, meaning it has turned me off and I am weary of huge IP that's owned and controlled by corporate interests, but I simultaneously, if some awesome studio came to me some awesome piece of existing IP, I would be a fool to not look at what, at least, it was," Blomkamp confirmed of corporate collaboration. "It's like, going in weary would be the way that I would look at it. My instinct is to just keep working on my own stuff, basically, but if someone came to me with something awesome, I would definitely look at it."
Rejoice, Blomkamp haters !
And also, "Blomkamp likers who just happen to not have been fond of his particular take on Alien based on what we've seen of it."
After what we seen Im happy we didnt get this aliens v2 fanmovie.
I was hyperbolic btw
I think, Blomkamp had a potential. I like his direction and films. And Alien 5 looked promising. Technically he could be a second Carpenter as a legendary storyteller.
BUT!
Blomkamp made a mistake. He started and stuck (and finished the career) with his African trilogy about poverty, inequality, class struggle and blah-blah-blah. Not surprisingly, people began to think that he couldn't film anything else. And his works were less and less successful. Again, because people don't want watch third times one film about blah-blah-blah.
And guess what? After Chappie (tbh better than D9 for me) his first indie film was again about beggars in rags vs alien invasion. I'm more than sure - Alien 5 also was about these themes.
I vote for Blomkamp only for a true Aliens sequel. But I don't care who will do it in the end: Blomkamp, Walter Hill or someone else.
Film's clearly not going to happen, but no reason why we can't get a graphic novel down the line.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 19, 2021, 06:00:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8zuLUNyVK4
Beat me to the cake :laugh: . This wasn't the crossover that I was expected but doesn't surprise me Rogan likes Aliens :D
Leaving aside the resurrected characters and the Kenner suit, it looked compelling enough to want to learn more about the script.
Quote from: Drukathi on Aug 19, 2021, 02:38:07 PM
Blomkamp made a mistake. He started and stuck (and finished the career) with his African trilogy about poverty, inequality, class struggle and blah-blah-blah. Not surprisingly, people began to think that he couldn't film anything else. And his works were less and less successful. Again, because people don't want watch third times one film about blah-blah-blah.
Rakka is a lizard-people mod for
District 9.
Quote from: Immortan Jonesy on Aug 20, 2021, 05:26:57 AM
Leaving aside the resurrected characters and the Kenner suit
I literally, physically, cannot leave these aside.
I had absolutely no interest in Aliens: The Force Awakens so I'm glad that movie died. But, but if Neill Blomkamp and William Gibson (They interact a fair bit on social media) where to team on an original Alien movie I'd be pretty keen.
I have no problem with Blompkamp doing an original Alien movie; but f**k no to the alternative Alien 3 thank you.
Quote from: Mr.Turok on Aug 19, 2021, 11:10:44 PM
Beat me to the cake :laugh: . This wasn't the crossover that I was expected but doesn't surprise me Rogan likes Aliens :D
From that video clip I took the opposite, that Rogan isn't much of a fan of Aliens but Blomkamp is, where Rogan complains in Aliens that the Alien is much easier to kill, yada yada yada, overlooking the context of the Nostromo crew was just a bunch of unarmed blue-collar workers... or Ripley was able to penetrate the Aliens hide with a small grappling hook - no explosive tipped ammo necessary. Same ol' song.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah I didn't care for Rogen's take of on the series myself.
Listening to the full Rogan interview, Neil is a really interesting guy with a lot of interesting ideas. He just needs a few more collaborators to help him with the scripts.
QuoteOne person who he suggests Chappie wasn't for was Ridley Scott, the gatekeeper of the Alien franchise, who earlier that year had expressed interest in Blomkamp's concept for a sequel. In February, it was announced. In March, Chappie was released. In October, it was cancelled. "It's possible that Ridley watched Chappie and he was like, this guy can't do Alien so let's just go ahead and move on," he says with a smile.
Blomkamp's film would have carried on from James Cameron's Aliens, bringing back Sigourney Weaver, who also starred in Chappie. The collapse was hard on him. "I also felt bad for Sigourney because she was really into what I had brought forward," he says. "I felt like [for] audiences who loved Aliens, there was an opportunity to do one more film with Sigourney in a way that may have satiated what people were looking for and what I think I was looking for." He adds: "What doesn't make sense is that I feel like it's what the audience wanted so it's strange because Fox would never really turn down money."
I ask if he spoke to Scott after, if any more specific clarification was given. "Not after, no no no, there's no coming back from that," he says. "I'm not gonna work on a film for two years and have the rug pulled out from underneath me and then go hang out and have beers. It's exactly why I don't want to do IP based on other people's stuff ever again." (He also denied a report that emerged earlier this year that his Alien film was back on track: "I'm sure they will make many films with that piece of IP, it just doesn't include me.")
His comment about intellectual property seems extreme, especially given his dalliances with other franchises but when I ask if he's serious, he relents a tad. "It's not that black and white," he says. "If there's something amazing and the set-up is right, I wouldn't say no but generally speaking after Halo and after Alien, it would be unwise to do that."
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/aug/21/neill-blomkamp-interview-demonic-chappie-alien
Honestly, after Halo's collapse I'm shocked that he did end up trying with Alien (and then again with Robocop) at all.
I do feel bad for him in this situation, 'cause I'm genuinely into his style and really like District 9 and Chappie and some of the Oats stuff, but as much as I think he could have done a very good Alien movie, I don't think the particular one he was working on (based on what we had seen in the released concept art) would have been for me at all.
His Robocop movie's cancelation honestly still feels to me like a much, much bigger loss than his Alien movie's cancelation, to be quite honest. A Blomkamp-directed Robocop, satirizing the current socio-political climate, is something I was all over from day one.
I'm going to check out his new movie, Demonic, today I think.
- I ask if he spoke to Scott after, if any more specific clarification was given. "Not after, no no no, there's no coming back from that," he says. "I'm not gonna work on a film for two years and have the rug pulled out from underneath me and then go hang out and have beers. It's exactly why I don't want to do IP based on other people's stuff ever again." (He also denied a report that emerged earlier this year that his Alien film was back on track: "I'm sure they will make many films with that piece of IP, it just doesn't include me.")
Ridddddleeeey....(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/FeminineAlarmedIndri-size_restricted.gif)
Quote from: Ingwar on Aug 21, 2021, 09:39:21 AM
Quote"Not after, no no no, there's no coming back from that," he says. "I'm not gonna work on a film for two years and have the rug pulled out from underneath me and then go hang out and have beers.
Guess he ain't gonna be watchin' The Last Duel and Gucci then? :D
QuoteHe adds: "What doesn't make sense is that I feel like it's what the audience wanted so it's strange because Fox would never really turn down money."
The fact he's probably right about most of the audience wanting it is the best reason for not doing it.
People with shit taste don't deserve to get their way.
I appreciate it Riddles.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 21, 2021, 03:50:58 PM
Quote from: Ingwar on Aug 21, 2021, 09:39:21 AM
Quote"Not after, no no no, there's no coming back from that," he says. "I'm not gonna work on a film for two years and have the rug pulled out from underneath me and then go hang out and have beers.
Guess he ain't gonna be watchin' The Last Duel and Gucci then? :D
There's always ice cream.
The man needs to realize he needs help, and that it's ok.
Bit similar in the music business. Like being good a singer doesn't automatically mean you can write good lyrics.
I don't know, I feel like only someone like Scott, Cameron or Nolan can do almost what they want. But maybe he should catapult his name by working with big IP's. I admit that it sounds easier said than done. Oh well, I'm just guessing. :-\
But ultimately Blomkamp needs good scriptwriters. Perhaps in that sense it is something similar to Scott. He is an excellent director, but his films are genuinely good as long as he has a good script to work with.
Almost.
If they we're able to do what they wanted we would've got some different movies.
Almost every director needs a solid (co-)writer.
And both need a studio willing to back up those ideas.
Ah, movie business...
Seriously Jonesy, why don't you think more about what you're going to say? :'( I couldn't have said it better. :)
"I felt like [for] audiences who loved Aliens, there was an opportunity to do one more film with Sigourney in a way that may have satiated what people were looking for and what I think I was looking for.... What doesn't make sense is that I feel like it's what the audience wanted so it's strange because Fox would never really turn down money."
Honestly people wanted to see a movie like this again way back in the 90s and Fox gave us Alien 3 lul though part of the blame I'd give to Sigourney herself who didn't want another run and gun movie....and years later she wants to be a part of it.
If Disney were smart they should've revived the project but hearing about the new tv-series in the works, set on Earth, and probably star a bunch of activists getting face hugged :P ...maybe it'll be entertaining to watch.
Had to be rough spot for N.B.--even though I'm curious to what he would have done, I think his movie would have polarized fans on the retcon alone. Alien 3 was important in many ways--especially for those fans who have had massive personal loss and look around not seeing anyone else experience the same.
Quote from: [cancerblack] on Aug 21, 2021, 06:50:44 PM
People with shit taste don't deserve to get their way.
That's why David Fincher renounced the Alien 3. He acted smart and didn't ruin his career with such a mistake.
'You know,' he concludes, 'if I make 10 shitty movies, I'll deserve the flak and if I go on to make 10 great ones, this'll probably be looked upon as my first bungled masterpiece.' -David Fincher
kek. Someone's crap is a shit, but someone's - a pure gold. But in the end - a crap is a crap.
I'll take messy and interesting over competent and bland any day. Alien 3 is very much the former. Other Aliens followups we've gotten, like those first three Dark Horse runs, fall into the latter category to me (despite what teenage me responsible for coming up with a username on this site may have thought at the time :D ).
Quote from: Trash Queen on Aug 23, 2021, 12:28:49 PM
'You know,' he concludes, 'if I make 10 shitty movies, I'll deserve the flak and if I go on to make 10 great ones, this'll probably be looked upon as my first bungled masterpiece.' -David Fincher
Hmm. A bungled masterpiece? As in a badly done outstanding work of artistry? Strange pairing of words.
Do you have a link for it TQ? Even in the past couple years I've still read Fincher rightly or wrongly dogging the Alien3 script and referring to the experience as a nightmare, so I'd love to read this in context.
The prequels suck and have done for Alien what AVP did for, well Alien. The franchise has effectively been ruined. This was the movie that should have been made. But It's not surprise it didn't get made. It's far too interesting and risky a concept for a studio to support.
It's no secret he's no fan, my point's more that he didn't disown it until after becoming a made Director:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/interview-real-horror-show-filming-alien-3-was-nightmare-its-director-david-fincher-mark-burman-reports-1541578.html
Quote from: Trash Queen on Aug 23, 2021, 02:25:54 PM
It's no secret he's no fan, my point's more that he didn't disown it until after becoming a made Director:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/interview-real-horror-show-filming-alien-3-was-nightmare-its-director-david-fincher-mark-burman-reports-1541578.html
Thanks for the link!
Nothing interesting about it Private.
Quote from: Nameless Corporal on Aug 23, 2021, 07:02:40 AM
If Disney were smart they should've revived the project but hearing about the new tv-series in the works, set on Earth, and probably star a bunch of activists getting face hugged :P ...maybe it'll be entertaining to watch.
Quote from: Drukathi on Aug 23, 2021, 12:50:59 PM
kek.
Quote from: Private Buttz on Aug 23, 2021, 02:15:49 PM
But It's not surprise it didn't get made. It's far too interesting and risky a concept for a studio to support.
Threadly reminder that if you wanted this movie, these are the people who agree with you.
I'd be more than willing to bet any money that, if Disney did briefly consider bringing this back after acquiring Fox, any desire they probably had to make it was likely squashed by how Terminator: Dark Fate performed. Realistically speaking, why would this perform any differently from that? It's the same exact situation - it's an expensive, R-rated sci-fi film serving as a partial sequel bringing back the original franchise lead and wiping away the lesser-liked installments. And it bombed.
Was it really a secret that Chappie underperformance seriously hurt possibility of Blomkamp's Alienmovie being made ?
I love the idea that Ridley watched Chappie and refused to ever utter another word to Blomkamp ever again. Damn mate the movie wasn't that bad.
Chappie and David should converse about the meaning of life.
I was never interested in seeing another Distinct 9 sprinkled with Aliens nostalgia so I'm honestly relieved that he's no longer involved.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 23, 2021, 06:54:06 PM
I'd be more than willing to bet any money that, if Disney did briefly consider bringing this back after acquiring Fox, any desire they probably had to make it was likely squashed by how Terminator: Dark Fate performed. Realistically speaking, why would this perform any differently from that? It's the same exact situation - it's an expensive, R-rated sci-fi film serving as a partial sequel bringing back the original franchise lead and wiping away the lesser-liked installments. And it bombed.
Hmm. I don't personally think it's the same exact situation.
First I love Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor. But while fantastic, Linda was never the international draw or the star. Arnold Schwarzenegger had always been the title draw in the Terminator franchise, and Sigourney Weaver in Alien is more equivalent to him, than to her.
But to be the same exact situation, Sigourney would have tried to retcon Alien 3
twice. If you recall Terminator Genisys with Arnold in 2015 retconned T3 & Salvation to a tally of 440 Million, but audiences were turned off to its casting and quality. But it made enough worldwide to justify another try. So in 2019, they retconned both T3 & Salvation again with Dark Fate with a tally of $261 Million and clearly at that point, collectively, audiences started having enough.
Quote from: Some Old Dude on Aug 24, 2021, 04:58:46 AM
I love the idea that Ridley watched Chappie and refused to ever utter another word to Blomkamp ever again. Damn mate the movie wasn't that bad.
:laugh:
Below Right: Ridley Scott photographed while watching Chappie:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DwkuMo_VYAAmHa9?format=jpg&name=large)
Interesting though... Chappie was a unmitigated mullet fest. Then along comes Raised by Wolves & The Last Duel and what do we get? Mullets...
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on Aug 24, 2021, 02:07:04 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 23, 2021, 06:54:06 PM
I'd be more than willing to bet any money that, if Disney did briefly consider bringing this back after acquiring Fox, any desire they probably had to make it was likely squashed by how Terminator: Dark Fate performed. Realistically speaking, why would this perform any differently from that? It's the same exact situation - it's an expensive, R-rated sci-fi film serving as a partial sequel bringing back the original franchise lead and wiping away the lesser-liked installments. And it bombed.
Hmm. I don't personally think it's the same exact situation.
First I love Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor. But while fantastic, Linda was never the international draw or the star. Arnold Schwarzenegger had always been the title draw in the Terminator franchise, and Sigourney Weaver in Alien is more equivalent to him, than to her.
But to be the same exact situation, Sigourney would have tried to retcon Alien 3 twice. If you recall Terminator Genisys with Arnold in 2015 retconned T3 & Salvation to a tally of 440 Million, but audiences were turned off to its casting and quality. But it made enough worldwide to justify another try. So in 2019, they retconned both T3 & Salvation again with Dark Fate with a tally of $261 Million and clearly at that point, collectively, audiences started having enough.
Arnold had been in all of the bad ones right though. His return in
Dark Fate was no different than him coming back in
Rise of the Machines or
Genisys. His return was a given.
The presence of Hamilton and Cameron is what actually differentiated it from past movies. And it still bombed. Like the Terminator movies being a few installments removed from Hamiltion, Alien was a few removed from Sigourney. But at the end of the day, the general audience doesn't care about whether it's a reboot or a sequel or what have you. It's just another new installment in a franchise that had been seeing diminishing returns.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 24, 2021, 03:57:17 PM
Quote from: Some Old Dude on Aug 24, 2021, 04:58:46 AM
I love the idea that Ridley watched Chappie and refused to ever utter another word to Blomkamp ever again. Damn mate the movie wasn't that bad.
:laugh:
Below Right: Ridley Scott photographed while watching Chappie:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DwkuMo_VYAAmHa9?format=jpg&name=large)
Interesting though... Chappie was a unmitigated mullet fest. Then along comes Raised by Wolves & The Last Duel and what do we get? Mullets...
Isn't it similar to that time when he saw
AVP ? 🤔
(https://s9.gifyu.com/images/gif-19650203dad85d149.gif)
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 24, 2021, 05:30:10 PM
Arnold had been in all of the bad ones right though. His return in Dark Fate was no different than him coming back in Rise of the Machines or Genisys. His return was a given.
A given? Arnold was 68 years old! Nah, the last time Arnold had played a Terminator was in 2003 in "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines". (No one counts that horrible cg "Arnold" face that was on screen for a collective 30 seconds in "Terminator Salvation".) So Arnold's return was not a given, especially at that age in a reboot, but in conversations with Cameron, Ellison and Cameron's friend writer Laeta Kalogridis, it was a necessity. So staying uncredited, Cameron came up with a way for Arnold to return in Terminator Genisys... where Terminators can age, etc. And the top billing attraction of the film was the young Arnold versus old Arnold fight. (Nice CG!)
So you have Cameron's idea of the T800 aging in "Terminator Genisys", Cameron in the forefront of promoting "Terminator Genisys" raving about the film and that he considers it the true T3 third movie in the franchise, and the 1984 Arnold fighting a 2015 Arnold. Just plain awesome! (Until many saw the reviews or movie)
Then 4 years later, they do the same thing again? James Cameron is back saying "Terminator Dark Fate" is the real T3 again. Arnold is back as an aging cybernetic organism again. The trailers look bad again. But this time we brought back Linda Hamilton? Yeah, pass... like so many did. So I think what you're doing is not a fair apples to apples comparison.
Anyway, the poor box office of Alien Covenant was likely the final nail in Blomkamp's Alien film coffin way back in 2017... two years before you could even buy a ticket for Terminator Dark Fate.
Oh Covenant's box office is absolutely a big part of it. As is Chappie's reception and box office. And Ridley's plans. And the fact that the Blomkamp's film was dead long before Dark Fate ever released. That's all very undeniable.
I brought up Dark Fate specifically in response to a response someone made about the studio (that currently being Disney, of course) finding this iteration too "interesting and risky a concept for a studio to support," and I was just pointing out that Dark Fate's release aligns pretty well with the aftermath of Disney's acquisition of Fox, and represents many of the factors as to why I can't see Disney/20th Century Studios imagining that Blomkamp's film would have been any more financially viable than any other attempt at Alien at the time.
Like Terminator, the Alien box office has been dwindling as of late. Covenant couldn't even make enough money to make a direct sequel to that viable, and the last stab at the Terminator franchise with the series leads in place didn't do anything at all to help out in that franchise's case. Why should that be different in Alien's case? How many more people would actually flock to Blomkamp's film than did Covenant solely for Ripley and Hicks?
This kind of semi-franchise reboot with the original leads back only really worked financially with an R-rated film in Halloween's case in 2018, but that's a much cheaper to make horror movie as opposed to the big budget R-rated sci-fi that was Dark Fate. Halloween was a financial success with two sequels immediately green lit and Dark Fate was a financial disaster, despite the two making roughly the same amount of money domestically. Alien isn't really any bigger a franchise than either of those and would likely make roughly the same amount as they did (just as Covenant's box office numbers sit very comfortably alongside both Dark Fate's and Halloween's), but it would cost much closer to Dark Fate's budget to make than it would Halloween's.
What face did you make when you saw the helmets in The Last Duel?
(https://c.tenor.com/dMRtLnWyKfEAAAAM/blink-182.gif)
Nice helmets. 10/10 would be historically inaccurate again.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 24, 2021, 09:03:40 PM
Nice helmets. 10/10 would be historically inaccurate again.
And.... onto my ignore list.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 24, 2021, 09:08:50 PM
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 24, 2021, 09:03:40 PM
Nice helmets. 10/10 would be historically inaccurate again.
And.... onto my ignore list.
I hope you enjoy the two whole unignored posts in the
Furiosa thread.
Quote from: Nightmare Asylum on Aug 24, 2021, 07:33:07 PM
This kind of semi-franchise reboot with the original leads back only really worked financially with an R-rated film in Halloween's case in 2018, but that's a much cheaper to make horror movie as opposed to the big budget R-rated sci-fi that was Dark Fate. Halloween was a financial success with two sequels immediately green lit and Dark Fate was a financial disaster, despite the two making roughly the same amount of money domestically. Alien isn't really any bigger a franchise than either of those and would likely make roughly the same amount as they did (just as Covenant's box office numbers sit very comfortably alongside both Dark Fate's and Halloween's), but it would cost much closer to Dark Fate's budget to make than it would Halloween's.
I still think comparing this to Dark Fate is somewhat misguided. I'm personally confident that Dark Fate would have made more money if Terminator Genisys didn't exist several years prior with the same James Cameron proclaiming to audiences that this is the true T3 again. Call it the Suicide Squad effect, Tomb Raider effect, what have you.
The correct comparison to me in the Terminator world to Blomkamp's Alien film is Arnold's return after 12 years to Terminator Genisys. It made $440 Million worldwide (enough to greenlight a course correction film) after two poisonous trailers, poisonous reviews and poisonous word of mouth. Now imagine if it was good. Maybe we'd be anticipating a Furiousa/Newt film right now.
It's the correct comparison.
This idea's successful in no reality with the mainstream audiences.
Genisys made most of its money from China, for the same reason Transformers makes a lot, schlock trash.
He didn't denounce it solely because of the quality, but for the nightmare production. I do agree the theatrical cut is bad, but the special edition is great. I'm sure if Fincher got his way, it would have been a masterpiece.
The fact that Hicks and Newt die is what makes Aliens fan boys denounce and hate it, but really, the story was always about Ripley and this was Ripley's ending. That's it.
Make it animated, that way the original actors can voice the characters and it's easier for it to be non canon.
Quote from: Mungo Baobab on Aug 26, 2021, 06:24:25 PM
Make it animated, that way the original actors can voice the characters and it's easier for it to be non canon.
Exactly.
Quote from: Rankles75 on Aug 27, 2021, 02:45:08 AM
Quote from: Mungo Baobab on Aug 26, 2021, 06:24:25 PM
Make it animated, that way the original actors can voice the characters and it's easier for it to be non canon.
Exactly.
Or canon if it turns out to be excellent. Either way, I'd be all in for an animated tale! :)
After seeing his new movie demonic I can say I´m convinced he would had done a bad alien V movie as he tried to do simple horror in demonic and mixing it with monster/abstract humanoid demon designs which didnt hold up very well, and still one get a sense of him wanting to dos cifi and shoter movie as he mixes in scifi into it and high tech priests with weapons which was best part of the movie but ends up in a big let down.
Chappie was a master piece in comparison to this movie.
Quote from: judge death on Sep 02, 2021, 05:57:12 PM
Chappie was a master piece in comparison to this movie.
If this is true then I wonder what would happen if Ridley were to watch this?
a lot of the concept art for Alien V just feels generic too.
The mercenaries look like standard enemies from Cyberpunk 2077
Nothing unique about them.
And the stuff that is unique, like the biomechanical suits.. just looks embarrassing.
There's nothing in this about sexuality gone wrong, or anything else that makes the alien really interesting..
It would've been a story about RIpley defeating the BIG COMPANY!
directed by a rich kid.. who simps for Elon Musk.
Yeah it's just embarrassing.
NA was supposed to have checked out his new movie the other day but he hasn't said a word - no review, no nothing.
So I can only assume he was so shocked by it that he will never ever speak a single word about Blomkamp ever again. :-\
it's really bad. NA didn't like it.
sounds like a career killer.
It needed more Chappie stuff 👌
(https://s9.gifyu.com/images/chappie-yolandi-1.gif)
Only fictional rapists ty. (Signed a former Die Antwoord fan)
Yeah, I wasn't into this at all unfortunately. I'm a Blomkamp supporter by and large (I still stand by Chappie!) but this movie was just a big ol' nothing. Grew bored while watching, and I've mostly completely forgotten it by now.
I'll still check out whatever he does next, since I dig District 9 and Chappie... and Elysium has its moments. I want to see Blomkamp do more cool, oddball things, and the intent behind this one, to do something small in scale while the world was shut down with limited resources, was admirable I guess, but this one ain't it, Neill. And I don't think his Alien movie would have been it, either.
Neill seems to have kind of gone the way of M. Night Shyamalan, it seems (a much more apt comparison than the Paul W.S. Anderson comparison I see people throwing around occasionally).
Yeah the M. Night Shyamalan comparison seems to be fair.
Quote from: judge death on Sep 02, 2021, 05:57:12 PM
high tech priests with weapons which was best part of the movie but ends up in a big let down.
Also agreed with this. Very fun idea that honestly could have carried a (much better) movie in its own right, that is ultimately cast aside here and nothing of note is done with it. It all just feels so arbitrary in the end. :-\
And where visuals and satire are usually Blomkamp's stronger suits, even in
Elysium which I'd say was his weakest outing prior to
Demonic, there's literally nothing intetesting at play in the way of either of those assets here.
I just think the way he explores stuff's become tired because of so many imitators between his films. I got tired of that kind of chunky technology science fiction visual style back in 2011.
He rip off himself constantly. But I agree, his futuristic perspective is so 2011. He must just let it go.
Neill Blomkamp calling Denis Villeneuve a "f*cking asshole": :laugh:
https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/1438509882441809931 (https://twitter.com/NeillBlomkamp/status/1438509882441809931)
Envy can be so ugly...
Quote from: Local Trouble on Aug 21, 2021, 08:52:09 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Aug 21, 2021, 03:50:58 PM
Guess he ain't gonna be watchin' The Last Duel and Gucci then? :D
There's always ice cream.
...guess we can add Dune to the list as well then? :laugh:
He's not wrong :laugh:
Denis, that is.
Neill lost the plot.
"Cut and paste" hit too close to home for Neil.
Apparently he was being sarcastic in a follow up tweet.
... Was that not obvious?
Seems it wasn't. ;) Twitter is making everyone stupid.
Quote from: Necronomicon II on Sep 17, 2021, 04:15:57 AM
Apparently he was being sarcastic in a follow up tweet.
The first rule of the internet - you can't understand sarcasm or serious things without a smile. He don't put the smile = he can be serious.
Blomkamp has lashed out at people before on twitter, so it's very difficult to discern his so-called "sarcasm". More like he's probably just doing damage control after he got berated numerous times and cooled down a bit.
Villeneuve (unlike Blomkamp) did "get to play in Ridley Scott's universe". 2049 then proceeded to bomb at the box office and what happens? Villeneuve gets to make another big-budget film based on one of the best sci-fi novels ever written (that also happens to be Villeneuve's favourite book),
Now Dune is getting rave reviews and Warner media have assured Villeneuve that he'll still get to make part two even if Dune underperforms at the box office.
Whereas Blomkamp has numerous big sci-fi projects that never came to fruition, Halo, Alien 5, Robocop, D9 sequel and now his latest film is getting negative reviews.
So one can understand why Blomkamp would be feeling a wee bit jealous towards this fellow Canadian director. Still very bad form to lash out at him like that.
Apparently I'm a dummy if I didn't realize his plain text tweet of "What a f**king a**hole" was just sarcasm?
Right ::)
Quote from: Necronomicon II on Sep 17, 2021, 04:15:57 AM
Apparently he was being sarcastic in a follow up tweet.
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/015/352/Screen_Shot_2021-02-17_at_2.52.46_PM.png)
Blomkamp has no horse in this race, his horse ran away a long time ago. In fact I don't think he ever had a horse. 🤣 And yeah he really should be clear if he's being sarcastic or not.
You read it. I though it was clear?