Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Note: this post will not display until it has been approved by a moderator.
Other options
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by Nightmare Asylum
 - Mar 16, 2015, 09:35:05 PM
Thanks, glad the video's back up.
Posted by shakermakerman
 - Mar 16, 2015, 03:45:17 PM
bump its not private anymore.
Posted by Magegg
 - Mar 02, 2015, 02:25:27 PM
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Mar 02, 2015, 09:03:47 AM
I saw Alien 3 (and Resurrection) in the theater and I'm just trying not to think about the time span.

I probably should've held onto my old DH/Earth War trades from before they retconned all the f**king character names. Wilkes and Billie my ass!
Yeah, I hope they will be reprinted once again with the right names :)
Posted by Corporal Hicks
 - Mar 02, 2015, 09:04:06 AM
Sad panda. I already feel old enough without that realization.
Posted by SpeedyMaxx
 - Mar 02, 2015, 09:03:47 AM
I saw Alien 3 (and Resurrection) in the theater and I'm just trying not to think about the time span.

I probably should've held onto my old DH/Earth War trades from before they retconned all the f**king character names. Wilkes and Billie my ass!
Posted by Xenomrph
 - Mar 02, 2015, 09:02:44 AM
I know, right? It feels crazy that the first round of DH Press novels are a few years away from being a decade old. What the f**k.
Posted by SiL
 - Mar 02, 2015, 09:00:07 AM
Quote from: Xenomrph on Mar 02, 2015, 08:53:09 AM
So the whole "contradicted every few years" idea hasn't even been remotely true for almost the past 20 years. :P
Fuuuuuuuck 1997 was 18 years ago.
Posted by SpeedyMaxx
 - Mar 02, 2015, 08:55:53 AM
Quote from: Xhan on Mar 02, 2015, 08:47:27 AM
Insertion begets criticism.

That's what she said.

(someone had to do it)
Posted by Xenomrph
 - Mar 02, 2015, 08:53:09 AM
Quote from: SiL on Mar 02, 2015, 08:40:04 AM
QuoteTo claim the novels are contradicted every couple of years, aside from being objectively false,
All comics made from 1987-1992 were contradicted by Alien3 when it killed Hicks and Newt, then everything between 1992-1997 was contradicted by Alien Resurrection when it made it clear the Alien died with Ripley, so, y'know, every five years or so for a while there.

Quoteignores the fact that the movies "contradict" each other to the same degree as well (that is to say, very very little).
Until it turns out Blomkamp is actually ignoring A3 and Resurrection to have Hicks still be alive, no.
Novels, not comics. :)
Xhan was referring to the more recent novels of the DH Press/Titan era, which don't contradict each other like that (and don't even contradict the Bantam novels, and in fact directly reference them). Or at least, the person he was quoting was referring to them.
So the whole "contradicted every few years" idea hasn't even been remotely true for almost the past 20 years. :P
Posted by Xhan
 - Mar 02, 2015, 08:47:27 AM
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Mar 02, 2015, 07:37:20 AM
It's good to see you're still taking Alien: Isolation's success in stride.

A:I's success is deserved, and valid criticism is equally deserved. Insertion begets criticism.
Posted by SiL
 - Mar 02, 2015, 08:40:04 AM
QuoteTo claim the novels are contradicted every couple of years, aside from being objectively false,
All comics made from 1987-1992 were contradicted by Alien3 when it killed Hicks and Newt, then everything between 1992-1997 was contradicted by Alien Resurrection when it made it clear the Alien died with Ripley, so, y'know, every five years or so for a while there.

Quoteignores the fact that the movies "contradict" each other to the same degree as well (that is to say, very very little).
Until it turns out Blomkamp is actually ignoring A3 and Resurrection to have Hicks still be alive, no.
Posted by Xenomrph
 - Mar 02, 2015, 08:36:57 AM
Quote from: Xhan on Mar 02, 2015, 04:55:32 AM
Cameron did show that; it was the entire f**king reason for Ripley to take anything Burke said at face value, which is the entire reason for Ripley to be on board in the first place.

Cameron wouldn't have wasted film on it otherwise.

A novel? You mean the same article of faith that are routinely contradicted by other novels and media every couple of years?

What an absolutely definitive source you discovered.

(Actually you just made my earlier point for me)
To claim the novels are contradicted every couple of years, aside from being objectively false, ignores the fact that the movies "contradict" each other to the same degree as well (that is to say, very very little).

Ripley takes Burke's statements at face value, and we learn everything Burke says is full of shit and meant to steer Ripley into helping him get an Alien. That means it's hardly out of character for anything Burke says about Amanda to be totally full of shit. As for Ripley, either she takes what he says at face value and doesn't look into Amanda's history, which leaves the door wide open for A:I to take place, or she does look into it and finds who-knows-what, which also leaves the door wide open for A:I to take place. Whether the "official records" of Amanda's life were doctored, or incomplete, literally wrong due to a clerical error, or actually 100% correct, A:I's whopper of a cliffhanger ending leaves the door wide open for a huge number of potential explanations for what is otherwise an amazingly tiny continuity speedbump in the grand scheme of things.
Posted by NetworkATTH
 - Mar 02, 2015, 07:53:27 AM
Quote from: Xhan on Mar 02, 2015, 04:16:47 AM
Quote from: Xenomrph on Mar 01, 2015, 01:31:31 AM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Mar 01, 2015, 01:07:34 AM
Quote from: CainsSon on Feb 28, 2015, 02:29:19 AM
Alien Isolation - to my knowledge... Just expanded on her daughter's story. Was there something else added that contradicts anything in the Alien films? Apart from the idea of the Company lying to ripley about her daughter. Cause that's not the same thing as a retcon.

Burke had no reason to lie - and Ripley had every reason to look up her daughter's life details from non-company sources. She would have been at her utmost paranoid about trusting the company at that point. Finding out Amanda went off in search of her voice recorder to somewhere which came to grief, Nostromo-style, would have been a big red flag.

And the fact nobody's heard about anything remotely like the Alien... Nobody mentoning that the woman's daughter mentioned encountering something similar, at Ellen's own hearing? Not plausible.

And if the company was nefarious and evil, having a reason for covering it up, then they would have also had every reason to go and seek out LV-426 and actively scour it before Ellen returned. They didn't. It's just another colony to them. One which they never bothered putting any real dedicated bio-warfare personnel or facilities on.

The game's really well presented and worthy of being praised, but even its own writers copped out of providing an explanation for Amanda's inclusion. :)

So, again, if people can take that gaming experience to heart, they can enjoy a movie which retcons the third/fourth movie, too. 'Isolation' proved that, so well as something is done well, people just won't care.
To be fair, all of those "continuity" issues you bring up can all be explained away really, really easily.

Amanda's fate in the game and her fate in 'Aliens' don't line up, but the game ends on a massive cliffhanger so there's obviously more story to tell, and dozens of ways to tie it all together.

W-Y didn't scour LV-426 for Alien stuff because they didn't know it was there - you shut off the Derelict's beacon in Isolation, and all other data from the Nostromo incident was destroyed (or floating in the Narcissus, awaiting pickup decades later). Even the crew files in the inquest in 'Aliens' mention the Nostromo case had been closed years after Isolation is supposed to take place - W-Y had simply stopped searching. It was obviously getting to be cost prohibitive - they'd lost the Nostromo, and 15 years later they lost an entire space station, all with absolutely nothing to show for it.

I mean we're not talking Colonial Marines degrees of continuity speedbumps here.


No, they can't; unless you're the kind of mouthbreather par excellence that thinks Big Show really does hate Dolph Ziggler for taking his lunchmoney because it's all so, so very real. A:I shits all over Ripley's characterization and you can't say otherwise unless you're an apologist. Ripley was always ahead of the curve and that's why she and anyone else survived Acheron in the first place.

Brah, relax. You're overlooking some things. Some many things.
Posted by SpeedyMaxx
 - Mar 02, 2015, 07:37:20 AM
It's good to see you're still taking Alien: Isolation's success in stride.
Posted by Xhan
 - Mar 02, 2015, 04:55:32 AM
Cameron did show that; it was the entire f**king reason for Ripley to take anything Burke said at face value, which is the entire reason for Ripley to be on board in the first place.

Cameron wouldn't have wasted film on it otherwise.

A novel? You mean the same article of faith that are routinely contradicted by other novels and media every couple of years?

What an absolutely definitive source you discovered.

(Actually you just made my earlier point for me)
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube RSS Feed