Neil Blomkamp Has "Moved On" From Alien 5

Started by Corporal Hicks, Jan 02, 2018, 10:23:48 PM

Author
Neil Blomkamp Has "Moved On" From Alien 5 (Read 56,384 times)

Nightmare Asylum

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.

Immortan Jonesy

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:



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 ? 🤔


Voodoo Magic

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.

Nightmare Asylum

Nightmare Asylum

#333
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.

Local Trouble

What face did you make when you saw the helmets in The Last Duel?

The Eighth Passenger


Nightmare Asylum

Nice helmets. 10/10 would be historically inaccurate again.

The Eighth Passenger

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.

Nightmare Asylum

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.

Voodoo Magic

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.

BlueMarsalis79

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.

Hatemorph

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.

Mungo Baobab

Mungo Baobab

#342
Make it animated, that way the original actors can voice the characters and it's easier for it to be non canon.

Rankles75

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.

Voodoo Magic

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! :)

Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube RSS Feed