I posted this on April 29 in the Topic: "ALIEN DAY: Sigourney Weaver Talks A5 at Aliens Special Event" thread. I would be really curious if anybody can come up with a less convoluted way than the below to make all the films work together...
On principle I agree that Alien 3 and Alien: R should just be ignored, but if they really had to ...
I think I have a solution for everything. I have taken into account mostly what Cainsson said here, though keeping in mind what the skeptical Mr. Huda had said. To make the story make sense, there would have to be motivation for the cloning. I think I figured it out in a way that is neither convoluted, nor requires a retcon, and can in fact sync everything up nicely. So here goes, in point form.
-Firstly, we have to accept the premise that Bishop is operating under conflicting directives. Firstly, he is unable to harm a human being, but secondly, he has a specific request to secure an return an alien to company labs. But would Bishop consider a clone to be a human? Do you see where I am going with this?
-So how did the eggs get on the Sulaco? Simply, when Bishop was sent into the tunnels to get the second Dropship from the Sulaco, he went and secured 3 eggs from the egg chamber before the second dropship arrived. At this time he knew that there were only 3 survivors. He packed them neatly on the Dropship for return to company labs. At no time did he intend any malice towards any of the humans though, because since he was a scientific android sent on a scientific mission, he had a lab on board the Sulaco where he could store and secure such organisms.
-Once everyone is sleeping, Bishop wakes up and gets to work. But he is a bit of a spaz now that he is damaged. During the weeks of sleep that everyone is under, he clones Ripley, Newt and Hicks for the purpose of incubation. This does not conflict with his prime directive, because they are not humans. He could just deliver the eggs whole to the company labs, but he is concerned that they may hatch and screw things up for everyone, so he figures the best bet is to have the eggs get fertilized inside the clones, so that they can be frozen for further study once he arrives back at company labs.
-He successfully impregnates CloneRipley, and while he is delivering the second egg, being a spaz, he falls over, it hatches, and just goes for Clone Hicks on its own but it cracks the glass, hurts itself, and the blood starts the electrical fire that destroys the ship. This also explains why we have the burn marks inside the capsule from the acid. The clones are jettisoned along with Bishop to Fury 161, along with data on the cloning methods used. Perhaps Bishop was funneling DNA directly from the originals and that is how memories got included? I know this bit is a stretch. So we have a dead facehugger that causes burn marks in the capsule, an impregnated Ripley Clone, Clones of Newt and Hicks, Bishop plus 1 unopened egg in the capsule, + the data. When Bishop is reactivated in Alien 3, he sees that his Ripley clone is conscious and has all her memories and now that makes him guilty of violating his prime code. So he asks to be deactivated. The other egg hatches and impregnates the dog or ox. Hicks and Newt clones never once had an y consciousness.
-In Alien Resurrection, the marines are still trying to use Bishops original data for cloning purposes. In fact the previous point explains exactly why they went the cloning route, and how Ripley 8 was able to have memories. They never bothered to clone Hicks and Newt because they had no Alien DNA associated with them.
-And that leaves the 3 remaining survivors from Aliens who are also jettisoned in their own EEV, but without Bishop. That will deserve an explanation. Then they are floating out there until Alien 5. They are picked up eventually after they age about 30 years in stasis. Ultimately, the theme of Alien 5 could be about them learning what happened. Perhaps they could even end up frozen again after Alien 5 so that Ripley meets Ripley 8 eventually..
Here's a simple 3 step way of making Blomkamp's 'ALIENS' movie working without retconning 'ALIEN3' and 'ALIEN: Resurrection':
1). Ditch Ripley, Hicks and Newt as characters.
2). Make a new direct movie sequel to 'ALIENS' with fresh characters that depicts events parallel to 'ALIEN 3' and then there's no need for any retcon at all.
3). Problem solved.
This insistent idea that these 3 characters must be in the movie is where the problem lies. Blomkamp's proposal woulda been Great - in 1988. Not now. I'm disappointed he wasn't around to make this proposal back then. My attitude to it would be one of full support.
Mind you, I still believe Blomkamp is a great choice to pull a thematically appropriate sequel to 'ALIENS' together. He just needs to address the movie's biggest concern - relinquish the dubious need to retcon half the series for the sole reason of returning deceased characters played by aging actors who haven't performed these roles in decades. Just lose that single aspect and the movie just about writes itself.
It's a great opportunity for a fresh start, have all the extant continuity remain in place and we still have a new 'ALIENS' movie. I think it's long passed due for Denialists to let go of the 'Golden Triumvirate of Heroes who can Never Die' idea. It's inane, juvenile and backward.
It's time to be progressive and bring a fresh troop of Marines into the fray. Tell a new story that's not hamstrung by rampant nostalgia. Have it bring the core essences of the series into the 21st Century without the need to prioritise top heavy and mediocre fan service.
Ditch Ripley, Hicks and Newt and at least half the problems this movie proposal faces dissipate in an instant.
-Windebieste.
Winde, your opinion is an entirely valid one, though I don't share it. I used to be very gung-ho about doing a retcon, but I am increasingly thinking about if there would be a way to bring back the "Golden Triumvirate" without destroying existing continuity. I do love Alien 3 and even Resurrection to a somewhat lesser degree. It should be possible, and perhaps even quite interesting to figure out a way to make this work.
Anyway, we are left at this time with the premise that it is a foregone conclusion that Hicks, Ripley, and Newt will return. If we accept that as a fait accompli. Then all that remains is to either discount A3 and AR, or to find a way to make this all work together somehow. I look forward to seeing what fans come up with.
I personally can't see Ripley, Hicks and Newt returning without retconning those 2 movies. As you have clearly demonstrated, it just can't happen without jumping through too many hoops that just don't line up without providing extremely complex narrative backflips.
I'll be very interested in seeing what other fans come up with; but I just can't see all three characters appearing without a retcon to movies 3 and 4... There's just too much complexity involved to make it credible.
I don't really think that it's a foregone conclusion that R, H and N will return in Blomkamp's movie. The entire movie is currently on hold and therefore subject to any number of changes. Blomkamp may yet realise the problems that the resurrection of these 3 characters will create and that other narrative alternatives that are just as worthwhile and easier to deliver can be just as viable and rewarding.
-Windebieste.
Cloning just doesn't cut it. They tried that with hick's in that video game and it fell flat on its arse. It's all just a convoluted scheme.
To break this shit down as simple as possible, the events of Alien³ and A|R were nothing more than a really bad couple of dreams. Wrap it up and put on a pretty bow. That or just ignore it and go the alternative universe route. Which is a perfectly acceptable concept.
Quote from: whiterabbit on May 18, 2016, 09:13:12 AM
Cloning just doesn't cut it. They tried that with hick's in that video game and it fell flat on its arse. It's all just a convoluted scheme.
To break this shit down as simple as possible, the events of Alien³ and A|R were nothing more than a really bad couple of dreams. Wrap it up and put on a pretty bow. That or just ignore it and go the alternative universe route. Which is a perfectly acceptable concept.
The dream thing is a horrible idea. Nobody has dreams like that. Nobody dreams in 3rd person. I can see why the cloning seems off and jumping like a wild rodeo, but so long as they start the film between Aliens and Alien 3, and in doing so, add a scientific / company subplot scenario, it doesnt have to be that wild.
I think the events in Prometheus make a midquel set bw Alien and Aliens - practically a necessity. As of now, with Prometheus' input, that 57 years is basically a blank space in the timeline. Ive personalky always thought of the space bw Aliens and A3 as if there was a big ole blank space there as well. There is story to tell about the Company's knowledge, cover-ups and involvement.
Quote from: windebieste on May 18, 2016, 06:56:09 AM
I personally can't see Ripley, Hicks and Newt returning without retconning those 2 movies. As you have clearly demonstrated, it just can't happen without jumping through too many hoops that just don't line up without providing extremely complex narrative backflips.
You can't. As much as I appreciate the effort you're putting into trying to make it work, P-O, it can't. It's too contrived and includes jumping through too many loops. Just to pick at one thread in your idea - Bishop clones them. Why does a military transport vehicle have cloning facilities on board?
The insistance on returning to Hicks and Ripley is a detrimental one. As Winde says -
Quote from: windebieste on May 18, 2016, 04:40:03 AM
1). Ditch Ripley, Hicks and Newt as characters.
2). Make a new direct movie sequel to 'ALIENS' with fresh characters that depicts events parallel to 'ALIEN 3' and then there's no need for any retcon at all.
3). Problem solved.
That's what should be being done. Obviously, this wasn't Blomkamp's original intent (that came as a result of talking to Sigourney Weaver) and I would have preferred to have seen that.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 18, 2016, 02:47:00 AM
I posted this on April 29 in the Topic: "ALIEN DAY: Sigourney Weaver Talks A5 at Aliens Special Event" thread. I would be really curious if anybody can come up with a less convoluted way than the below to make all the films work together...
On principle I agree that Alien 3 and Alien: R should just be ignored, but if they really had to ...
I think I have a solution for everything. I have taken into account mostly what Cainsson said here, though keeping in mind what the skeptical Mr. Huda had said. To make the story make sense, there would have to be motivation for the cloning. I think I figured it out in a way that is neither convoluted, nor requires a retcon, and can in fact sync everything up nicely. So here goes, in point form.
-Firstly, we have to accept the premise that Bishop is operating under conflicting directives. Firstly, he is unable to harm a human being, but secondly, he has a specific request to secure an return an alien to company labs. But would Bishop consider a clone to be a human? Do you see where I am going with this?
-So how did the eggs get on the Sulaco? Simply, when Bishop was sent into the tunnels to get the second Dropship from the Sulaco, he went and secured 3 eggs from the egg chamber before the second dropship arrived. At this time he knew that there were only 3 survivors. He packed them neatly on the Dropship for return to company labs. At no time did he intend any malice towards any of the humans though, because since he was a scientific android sent on a scientific mission, he had a lab on board the Sulaco where he could store and secure such organisms.
-Once everyone is sleeping, Bishop wakes up and gets to work. But he is a bit of a spaz now that he is damaged. During the weeks of sleep that everyone is under, he clones Ripley, Newt and Hicks for the purpose of incubation. This does not conflict with his prime directive, because they are not humans. He could just deliver the eggs whole to the company labs, but he is concerned that they may hatch and screw things up for everyone, so he figures the best bet is to have the eggs get fertilized inside the clones, so that they can be frozen for further study once he arrives back at company labs.
-He successfully impregnates CloneRipley, and while he is delivering the second egg, being a spaz, he falls over, it hatches, and just goes for Clone Hicks on its own but it cracks the glass, hurts itself, and the blood starts the electrical fire that destroys the ship. This also explains why we have the burn marks inside the capsule from the acid. The clones are jettisoned along with Bishop to Fury 161, along with data on the cloning methods used. Perhaps Bishop was funneling DNA directly from the originals and that is how memories got included? I know this bit is a stretch. So we have a dead facehugger that causes burn marks in the capsule, an impregnated Ripley Clone, Clones of Newt and Hicks, Bishop plus 1 unopened egg in the capsule, + the data. When Bishop is reactivated in Alien 3, he sees that his Ripley clone is conscious and has all her memories and now that makes him guilty of violating his prime code. So he asks to be deactivated. The other egg hatches and impregnates the dog or ox. Hicks and Newt clones never once had an y consciousness.
-In Alien Resurrection, the marines are still trying to use Bishops original data for cloning purposes. In fact the previous point explains exactly why they went the cloning route, and how Ripley 8 was able to have memories. They never bothered to clone Hicks and Newt because they had no Alien DNA associated with them.
-And that leaves the 3 remaining survivors from Aliens who are also jettisoned in their own EEV, but without Bishop. That will deserve an explanation. Then they are floating out there until Alien 5. They are picked up eventually after they age about 30 years in stasis. Ultimately, the theme of Alien 5 could be about them learning what happened. Perhaps they could even end up frozen again after Alien 5 so that Ripley meets Ripley 8 eventually..
This is terrible, I'm sorry man. If this is what people are coming up with, then I think it's better to just ignore A3 and Res. Or do what Winde or any sane person would do and ditch the old characters.
Just like Edna mode would say.... NO CLONES !!
So no clones, no dreams, no retcon, no dick... well just what the hell does that leave us with? I'll tell you what right now. In Alien:Covenant the crew begs god to resurrect their lord and savior Jesus Christ; but instead he resurrects Ellen Ripley and her squad of ultimate bad ass. Yea Newt included; this is totally a package deal. No Burke.
Just ignore it. That's the only thing you can really do without being cheesey or contrived. Just crack on as if Alien 3 and Resurrection never happened and leave it to the fans to argue about multiverse crap.
Or do what I do and pretend it's not Ripley and Newt. ;D
Every time they say RIpley or Newt, just shove your fingers in your ears and scream real loud for a second to forget the fact that it's Ripley and Newt.
Then resume enjoying the film. :)
Don't mind me guys, the nice people in white coats will come and pick me up soon.
They should just re-release the original saga but do some new voice-overs to rename some of the locations and names.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on May 19, 2016, 05:35:02 PM
Or do what I do and pretend it's not Ripley and Newt. ;D
Every time they say RIpley or Newt, just shove your fingers in your ears and scream real loud for a second to forget the fact that it's Ripley and Newt.
Then resume enjoying the film. :)
Don't mind me guys, the nice people in white coats will come and pick me up soon.
Ha ha! It would be total poetic justice if they retconned Alien 3 so that Ripley was some sort of advanced android and Hicks and Newt were renamed Billie and Wilks. (Tongue firmly planted in cheek)
At the end of the day I just want to see a new Alien film. I like the idea of sequel that works somehow with A3 and AR but
I dont think there is any safe way out.
I cant tell which is worse, folding in too many clones or the retcon. I prefer they just made this take place after A:R to anything else and while I can understand why people would hate to have them cloned, lets not forget that there is also concept art for this film out there of Ripley wearing an Alien so... It doen't seem that outside the spectrum of fantasy either way, and we can't overlook the fact that the final film may be much worse than A3 no matter what they do.
Either way they try it messes something up so it just makes the most sense to me to continue after A:R. I always wanted Blomkamp to make an ALIEN film, ever since I saw District 9. The irony being that I thought he was the perfect person for, and has the right themes in his work, to tackle a continuation of A:R. He seems to really like this idea of feeling alien-ated or different from yourself. All of his heros are dealing with being separated from their humanity. It fits right in with Ripley 8.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
That's what should be being done. Obviously, this wasn't Blomkamp's original intent (that came as a result of talking to Sigourney Weaver) and I would have preferred to have seen that.
Wait... the whole idea of it being a direct sequel to Aliens, ignoring Alien 3 and Resurrection was not his idea but Weaver's?
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 01:16:24 PM
leave it to the fans to argue about multiverse crap.
To be honest... as much as I want one... I'm not sure if we're getting that anymore.
When I first saw the concept art of Ripley in an Alien suit, or whatever it is, I thought it would be a follow-on from A:R. I'm still unsure if that was the initial intention or if it was done just for the hell of it.
Quote from: RakaiThwei on May 20, 2016, 05:02:04 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
That's what should be being done. Obviously, this wasn't Blomkamp's original intent (that came as a result of talking to Sigourney Weaver) and I would have preferred to have seen that.
Wait... the whole idea of it being a direct sequel to Aliens, ignoring Alien 3 and Resurrection was not his idea but Weaver's?
If I'm remembering rightly. I'll have to go look it up but I'm pretty sure Blomkamp said Ripley and Hicks' inclusion came from talking to her on the set of Chappie.
QuoteQuote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 01:16:24 PM
leave it to the fans to argue about multiverse crap.
To be honest... as much as I want one... I'm not sure if we're getting that anymore.
Suits me just fine. The films don't need to go out their way to setup a multiverse or alternate realities. Completely unsuitable for the tone of the Alien films.
Here's how you do it:
Either make a film that doesn't write off any of the existing movies, or do it and get on with it. Trying to shoe-horn in some "they still happened!" excuse will just be contrived and almost certainly ridiculous.
Quote from: RakaiThwei on May 20, 2016, 05:02:04 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
That's what should be being done. Obviously, this wasn't Blomkamp's original intent (that came as a result of talking to Sigourney Weaver) and I would have preferred to have seen that.
Wait... the whole idea of it being a direct sequel to Aliens, ignoring Alien 3 and Resurrection was not his idea but Weaver's?
Here you go. Not said explicitly -
QuoteOver the years, I came up with a story for a film in that universe that I wanted to make. And then when I talked to her about her experience making those films and what she thought about Ripley and everything else, it informed and changed the film I wanted to make into something different.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2015/02/25/neill-blomkamp-talks-alien/
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=52362.0
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 20, 2016, 07:47:07 AM
Suits me just fine. The films don't need to go out their way to setup a multiverse or alternate realities. Completely unsuitable for the tone of the Alien films.
Personally, I would have to disagree with that. But that's not a discussion for here.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 20, 2016, 11:33:09 AM
Here you go. Not said explicitly -
QuoteOver the years, I came up with a story for a film in that universe that I wanted to make. And then when I talked to her about her experience making those films and what she thought about Ripley and everything else, it informed and changed the film I wanted to make into something different.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2015/02/25/neill-blomkamp-talks-alien/
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=52362.0
Well, I suppose we learn something new everyday.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 20, 2016, 11:33:09 AM
Quote from: RakaiThwei on May 20, 2016, 05:02:04 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 19, 2016, 09:01:13 AM
That's what should be being done. Obviously, this wasn't Blomkamp's original intent (that came as a result of talking to Sigourney Weaver) and I would have preferred to have seen that.
Wait... the whole idea of it being a direct sequel to Aliens, ignoring Alien 3 and Resurrection was not his idea but Weaver's?
Here you go. Not said explicitly -
QuoteOver the years, I came up with a story for a film in that universe that I wanted to make. And then when I talked to her about her experience making those films and what she thought about Ripley and everything else, it informed and changed the film I wanted to make into something different.
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2015/02/25/neill-blomkamp-talks-alien/
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=52362.0
Here he says it explicitly:
QuoteMy apprehension with Alien was that I had never worked with someone else's material. And not even someone else – at this point it was like... I'm going to count Fincher in with the third one, even though the third one I don't like as much as the first two. But they're all three awesome filmmakers. So it's not about living up to it and being nervous about it, I just don't want other people to tell me what to do. Which is a different thing. 'Well we think in this film this should happen because it happened in that one.' That kind of scared me a little bit so then I was like 'I'm just not going to do it, I'm just going to put it out.' But then I spoke to Sigourney [Weaver].
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig (http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig)
Don't want any kind of multiverse crap, doesn't fit the series at all. Just flat out ignore the last two abortions and I'll be happy...
While I am totally ok with that approach, to me that's the very definition of a multiverse.
Not really. It would be retcon.
It still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 20, 2016, 04:30:13 PM
Here he says it explicitly:
QuoteMy apprehension with Alien was that I had never worked with someone else's material. And not even someone else – at this point it was like... I'm going to count Fincher in with the third one, even though the third one I don't like as much as the first two. But they're all three awesome filmmakers. So it's not about living up to it and being nervous about it, I just don't want other people to tell me what to do. Which is a different thing. 'Well we think in this film this should happen because it happened in that one.' That kind of scared me a little bit so then I was like 'I'm just not going to do it, I'm just going to put it out.' But then I spoke to Sigourney [Weaver].
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig (http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig)
Brilliant, thank you! Knew I'd seen it somewhere.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 06:35:17 PM
It still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
And add the fact that Weaver more or less said that Alien 3 and Resurrection happened in parallel universes, not to mention Blomkamp has stated that it was not his intention to more or less undo or retcon the third or fourth film. To me, the only ones who know ANYTHING are Weaver and Blomkamp. I'm all for the whole multiverse angle, it's not like they have to address it or show it on film-- a few franchises I know do this, and some really don't have a multiverse but their property owners do consider all entries, regardless of conflictions-- as canon.
But right now, as much as I want a multiverse, and as much as I was happy to hear Weaver's statement... Well... right now everything is up in the air. We don't know how Blomkamp's film will turn out. And that's the killer.
Ok, this is all great, but does anyone actually want to venture any ideas of how it might work to make Blomkamp's film work with A3 and AR? That's the premise of this thread. We already know that there are many disparate opinions on the subject, but if it were to work, how would you make that happen in the least convoluted way? I can't think of anything other than cloning, but I feel there are better writers than myself here.
And C Hicks, Burke knew there was something on LV 426. Who knows what sort of equipment he had installed on the Sulaco?
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 06:35:17 PMIt still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
It doesn't though, because I'd bet vital parts of my anatomy on the fact they'll never touch the old stuff again.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 08:04:37 PMOk, this is all great, but does anyone actually want to venture any ideas of how it might work to make Blomkamp's film work with A3 and AR? That's the premise of this thread. We already know that there are many disparate opinions on the subject, but if it were to work, how would you make that happen in the least convoluted way?
There simply isn't a way that isn't either ridiculous or just outright stupid. If Ripley and Hicks are in it, just scrap the old films. It'll be a lot less silly all round.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 06:35:17 PMIt still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
It doesn't though, because I'd bet vital parts of my anatomy on the fact they'll never touch the old stuff again.
Unless Blomkamp's film is a real stinker. Then they'll happily do a 180 degree turn again.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 08:04:37 PMOk, this is all great, but does anyone actually want to venture any ideas of how it might work to make Blomkamp's film work with A3 and AR? That's the premise of this thread. We already know that there are many disparate opinions on the subject, but if it were to work, how would you make that happen in the least convoluted way?
There simply isn't a way that isn't either ridiculous or just outright stupid. If Ripley and Hicks are in it, just scrap the old films. It'll be a lot less silly all round.
Quite. Only way to go is to ignore Alien 3 and A:R completely.
All this cloning nonsense is not only contrived but all it will serve to do is to make Alien 3 an even worse film. What point is there in watching a film about Ripley, Hicks and Newt clones? Clone Ripley's™ sacrifice will be completely pointless in Alien 3 when Real Ripley™ encounters the Xenomorphs again a few years later in Blomkamps film. And no-one will give a fig about Clone Hicks™ and Clone Newt's™ deaths in Alien 3 anymore. It just completely neuters the film's emotional impact.
Alien 3 should be left as is, no retconing. Leave it be as an alternate sequel to Alien and Aliens because Blomkamp's film will not be everybody's cup of tea no matter how well it turns out.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 21, 2016, 09:25:22 PMUnless Blomkamp's film is a real stinker. Then they'll happily do a 180 degree turn again.
Even then, I'd be pretty surprised if they went back. That'd be the studio admitting they were wrong, and they don't tend to do that.
More likely they'd just let it lie for a while, and concentrate on Riddles' prequels.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 21, 2016, 09:25:22 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 06:35:17 PMIt still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
It doesn't though, because I'd bet vital parts of my anatomy on the fact they'll never touch the old stuff again.
Unless Blomkamp's film is a real stinker. Then they'll happily do a 180 degree turn again.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 08:04:37 PMOk, this is all great, but does anyone actually want to venture any ideas of how it might work to make Blomkamp's film work with A3 and AR? That's the premise of this thread. We already know that there are many disparate opinions on the subject, but if it were to work, how would you make that happen in the least convoluted way?
There simply isn't a way that isn't either ridiculous or just outright stupid. If Ripley and Hicks are in it, just scrap the old films. It'll be a lot less silly all round.
Quite. Only way to go is to ignore Alien 3 and A:R completely.
All this cloning nonsense is not only contrived but all it will serve to do is to make Alien 3 an even worse film. What point is there in watching a film about Ripley, Hicks and Newt clones? Clone Ripley's™ sacrifice will be completely pointless in Alien 3 when Real Ripley™ encounters the Xenomorphs again a few years later in Blomkamps film. And no-one will give a fig about Clone Hicks™ and Clone Newt's™ deaths in Alien 3 anymore. It just completely neuters the film's emotional impact.
Alien 3 should be left as is, no retconing. Leave it be as an alternate sequel to Alien and Aliens because Blomkamp's film will not be everybody's cup of tea no matter how well it turns out.
Nailed it...
Multiverse insanity with an Alien 5 (Aliens 2) then combined along with what Prometheus done with its ridiculous Star Trek-esque fantasy crap about human origins would just completely murder the legitimacy of the franchise once and for all. There would be no going back.
What made the first three films so good is that they were sci-fi but yet believable. It had a gritty reality to it with the characters, actions and settings.
I've said it before; Alien 3 was a perfect ending to the Ripley story arc. Her journey was doomed from the very minute they picked up that signal on LV-426. Even the production problems that film went through add a kind of poetic hopelessnes to the story arc. By having the Heroic Trio in a big battle with the xenomorphs and living happily ever after would just cheaping what was built in the first two flims. It's not what Alien is about. Darkness, misfortune and dispair is what was discovered in isolated deep space; not cliche endings and happy families.
For sure. At that point, Fox should just sell the whole broken franchise to Disney for $2b. and be done with it.
Disney can then add 'ALIEN' to the Greater Marvel Universe. Ripley can have a new cape emblazoned with the Big R and possess Super Powers; among them, the ability to self-resurrect and change the future.
Of course, pulse rifles, pulse rifles, pulse rifles and more pulse rifles will be needed. Captain America toting a pulse rifle. Now, who doesn't want to see that? Then for further brain dead spectacle to keep the bubblegum Saturday night appeased for 2 hours we will need Iron Man fighting xenos while The Hulk tackles The Queen.
On the other hand, when it's a foregone conclusion, why would you even bother?
BWAHAHAHAAAAAA! and ROFL.
-Windebieste.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 21, 2016, 09:25:22 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 06:35:17 PMIt still leaves you with two branched universes. Each having its own EU. Understandably, the old EU may never continue again, but you never know. You can't deny there will be 2 resulting branches.
It doesn't though, because I'd bet vital parts of my anatomy on the fact they'll never touch the old stuff again.
Unless Blomkamp's film is a real stinker. Then they'll happily do a 180 degree turn again.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 21, 2016, 09:54:14 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 20, 2016, 08:04:37 PMOk, this is all great, but does anyone actually want to venture any ideas of how it might work to make Blomkamp's film work with A3 and AR? That's the premise of this thread. We already know that there are many disparate opinions on the subject, but if it were to work, how would you make that happen in the least convoluted way?
There simply isn't a way that isn't either ridiculous or just outright stupid. If Ripley and Hicks are in it, just scrap the old films. It'll be a lot less silly all round.
Quite. Only way to go is to ignore Alien 3 and A:R completely.
All this cloning nonsense is not only contrived but all it will serve to do is to make Alien 3 an even worse film. What point is there in watching a film about Ripley, Hicks and Newt clones? Clone Ripley's™ sacrifice will be completely pointless in Alien 3 when Real Ripley™ encounters the Xenomorphs again a few years later in Blomkamps film. And no-one will give a fig about Clone Hicks™ and Clone Newt's™ deaths in Alien 3 anymore. It just completely neuters the film's emotional impact.
Alien 3 should be left as is, no retconing. Leave it be as an alternate sequel to Alien and Aliens because Blomkamp's film will not be everybody's cup of tea no matter how well it turns out.
Well, when you put it that way, I find it difficult not to agree. To make the characters in Alien 3 clones, would indeed neuter the film's emotional impact. And on that note, I raise the white flag and agree with you that it makes no sense to make Blomkamp's film work with Alien 3 and AR. Even if it could be made to work logically, seamlessly, and unconvolutedly, Alien 3 would still be diminished. So on that note... Bring on the retcon!
All the problems here are solved if fans just accept Ripley, Hicks and Newt are dead.
Make a new 'ALIENS' film that runs parallel to 'ALIEN 3' with fresh characters = Win/Win for everyone.
But no...
The Boo-Hoo Brigade want The Invincible Trio to go gung-ho across the Galaxy, in the knowledge that Ripley and Co will always defeat an ever diminishing menace.
Here's an idea for you...
Maybe 'ALIENS' should be targeted for retconning. Maybe the Boo-Hoo Brigade should find out what it feels like to be a fan of a movie that's under threat of being removed (or at least reduced in significance). Maybe Hicks and company should be excised from the series completely. How does that sound, Mr. Boo Hoo?
How does that feel to know that some people WANT to see YOUR MOVIE ditched either partially or whole? ...they do exist.
HOW DOES IT FEEL???
Do you ever consider asking fans of 'ALIEN 3' or 'ALIEN: Resurrection' how it feels to have their movies of preference bullied into oblivion?
You should try wearing that shoe for once. You won't, because it hurts and pain avoidance is your big crutch.
Some fans are such cry babies. I hope Blomkamp gives this whole retcon nonsense a good swift kick out the door. It's doing nothing but damaging the series.
-Windebieste.
Quote from: windebieste on May 27, 2016, 01:59:13 AM
All the problems here are solved if fans just accept Ripley, Hicks and Newt are dead.
Make a new 'ALIENS' film that runs parallel to 'ALIEN 3' with fresh characters = Win/Win for everyone.
But no...
The Boo-Hoo Brigade want The Invincible Trio to go gung-ho across the Galaxy, in the knowledge that Ripley and Co will always defeat an ever diminishing menace.
Here's an idea for you...
Maybe 'ALIENS' should be targeted for retconning. Maybe the Boo-Hoo Brigade should find out what it feels like to be a fan of a movie that's under threat of being removed (or at least reduced in significance). Maybe Hicks and company should be excised from the series completely. How does that sound, Mr. Boo Hoo?
How does that feel to know that some people WANT to see YOUR MOVIE ditched either partially or whole? ...they do exist.
HOW DOES IT FEEL???
Do you ever consider asking fans of 'ALIEN 3' or 'ALIEN: Resurrection' how it feels to have their movies of preference bullied into oblivion?
You should try wearing that shoe for once. You won't, because it hurts and pain avoidance is your big crutch.
Some fans are such cry babies. I hope Blomkamp gives this whole retcon nonsense a good swift kick out the door. It's doing nothing but damaging the series.
-Windebieste.
Can I get you a tissue Winde?
An Aliens film that does not fix the continuity is not a win / win for everyone. Firstly, the Aliens film carried the franchise for decades. It was often considered the superior film to the original, which was an amazing feat in and of itself. The difference between Aliens and Alien 3 is that Aliens did not go in and butcher what the preceding film accomplished. It respectfully built on that, whereas Alien 3 came in and literally pissed on Aliens. It was like some sort of cheap thrill after James Cameron's magnum opus.
Moreover, nobody will ever come over to your house and take away your precious copies of A3 and AR. You get to keep those coasters.
Simply put, Alien 3 was an illogical, cheap, jarring, and inappropriate continuation of what Aliens set up. The studio wouldn't put in the money to do a "homeworld", so they literally ran the series into the ground. The technology is there now, and the interest in the franchise is hot, so let's see what an alternate take on an Aliens sequel would be like. Face it, the whole premise of Alien 3 is f--ked. If Bishop didn't put those eggs there, then how did they get there? When will you stop justifying and glorifying a film which is cheap unresolved science fiction?
I know in a few years you will be on here saying how much you love Blomkamp's film. Resistance is futile. But boy will your face be red when that happens...
All I hear from you right now is Boo-hoo, boo-hoo, boo-hoo-hoo. Save the Kleenex. You need it more.
Ripley and Hicks are DEAD and have been dead for a QUARTER OF A CENTURY and the Blomkamp Boo-Hoo Brigade is just a bunch of noisy whiners.
Ditch Rippers, Hixxorz and Noot already. Long live 'ALIEN 3' (despite its problems. I never denied them) and Long Live 'ALIEN: Resurrection', too, (despite the fact it's a janky effort; at least I respect other peoples' love for it.) These movies are part of the core Story Arc and have been for 2 decades now.
'ALIEN 5' could just as easily be a tangential movie. A spin off without any characters from the main story arc and still be worthwhile. Many of the comics and games take this path. You'd be happy with that, I'm sure. 'Rogue One - A Star Wars Story' is already paving a way as a template for this to be done in a credible manner.
...but no. Space Family Ripley must be front and center, always, with the entire story shoe horned around aging actors that haven't played these roles in decades. It's a Fool's errand.
Most people don't really care if Rippers and Co. are in Blomkamp's movie or not. They just want a good follow up film featuring the USCM conflicting with xenos. In which case it aint too much of a stretch to make that movie with fresh characters and completely do away with the need for a retcon.
This way, Blomkamp's movie and 'ALIEN3' (and by extension 'A:R') can all exist in the same Universe without introducing more inconsistencies than we already have.
Believe me, everyone would be happy with that. Even you. Except maybe an overtly reliance of nostalgia is cramping an ability to appreciate something a little more than reducing the series to unsatisfying Saturday morning cartoons. Which is what this series will become when Rippers and Co. become Untouchable Bastions against which Xenos have become completely useless.
Bah! If that happens, then the Blomkamp Boo-Hoo Brigade will be the death of this series.
-Windebieste.
You know why Hicks, Ripley, and Newt aren't dead? BECAUSE IT'S A WORK OF FICTION! Moreover, there is no blueprint to it. If there was some sort of grand design to the whole thing, I would understand your rant, but what you're hoping for is to cancel the last opportunity to continue the series in the same vibe as the Aliens film with some of the key original actors. For Pete's sake, you're getting a tonne of new material that doesn't include Ripley and company. We have 3 sequels to Prometheus coming out. Surely one film with some excellent established characters isn't too much to ask for. Nobody is saying that the triumvirate of Aliens survivors has to live forever, but at least the story could go in a direction that makes more sense and is more true to what most people would have preferred as a sequel to Aliens.
Open up a fresh storyline with new characters involving the continued struggles between the USCM and Aliens in a credible parallel storyline. It's not that hard to accept without a retcon. Really.
Then Rippers, Hixxorz and Noot can then be left to Rest in Peace, the way they should. Heroes lost for a worthy cause in a fight against an enemy that they cannot win against alone.
-Windebieste.
Winde, OMG, our entire fascination with the series is based on a nostalgia of one sort or another. Who's to say that a nostalgia for Ripley, (the actual human character in the film) is more or less valid than the nostalgia for the alien (basically just an animal at the end of the day)? If you want a really fresh story, go for one that is not franchise driven. It's the only way to be sure. It's actually very mature for Fox to realize and say, "oops, we did bad. We painted ourselves into a corner, and killed off our main character(s). Let's go back and fix it."
The idea that continuing the story with Alien 3 and AR left in the sequence is somehow fresh is as absurd as saying that the new Rogue One Star Wars film is fresh. It's old hat! All of it. At least doing the retcon is an honest way of acknowledging the nostalgia and diving straight for that brilliant moment we all felt 30 years ago, and not pretending that keeping the last 2 films in canon will somehow give us something "fresh". Keeping those last 2 duds in there is indefensible. They're dragging the whole series down. It's common knowledge, even to the casual fans, and non-fans.
I still love your trading cards Bro! Lol
Personally I'm a big fan of 1, 2, & 3. Even though I don't really care much for A:R I dont have any desire to see it retconned. Especially when there is no need to, you could tell a lot of stories involving thd alien between 3 & 4. Ripley, Hicks, & Newt should stay dead. Their demise never really bothered me much.
On another note I don't blame fans who prefer Aliens more than the other films for what Blomkamp and weaver have come up with. I also think alien 3 has grown a pretty decent following over the years, enough to call it a cult classic even.
QuoteI've said it before; Alien 3 was a perfect ending to the Ripley story arc. Her journey was doomed from the very minute they picked up that signal on LV-426.
QuoteSimply put, Alien 3 was an illogical, cheap, jarring, and inappropriate continuation of what Aliens set up.
I agree with both these polar opposites. I think that 3 was really poorly set up: film is about character and people were invested in those characters. To kill them off before the film starts is just bad writing. Kill them off during the film - give them a
satisfying ending. Or something else. But as I say, I think a lot of the grief 3 gets is down to this. (and the magic eggs).
But - it
was a good arc for the character. Even if
the beginning is cheap and jarring.
I really think that the dream thing is what they're going to go with. I know that most hate the idea - the "cheap" accusation could be leveled at that angle. But its not jarring - I think Hicks reminded me on another thread that there were professional dreamers for entertainment set up in the novels and/or comics. Prometheus sets up lucid, third person hyperspace dreams.
So that's in the continuity. It's not even fan theory or "just from the novels" any more. It's up there, its been set up. In all the threads on this, the clones (as good as POs idea is) and all the rest is just jumping through hoops.
I can't see them ignoring the 3 and the (horrid) Resurrection entirely (indeed, he said he will acknowledge them IIRC) - so I'd put money on the dream sequence conveniently hand-waving those movies.
3/4 (even outside of here in the real world *loll) are divisive movies. Aliens isn't. Everyone loved it. Everyone wanted "the same but different." They didn't get it and nothing that isn't "the same but different" that has been served up since 86 has been looked at barely half-way decent. Most loathe AvP and AvP:R. Most where "meh" on Prometheus (sure it made money, but it came and went - in terms of impact, it was a pebble compared to the meteor of Aliens).
So. If you have a plot device (hand-wave... cop out... shitty terrible idea... call it what you will) that has been set up in that Universe's past (David/Prometheus) and you have a problem that you don't want totally ignore canon but you don't want to use it... what are you going to do?
Use the plot device would be my guess. It solves all the problems and you could handle it in a few shots like they did at the beginning of Alien3 with the mystery egg and all that. A few flashes... a cgi-youngered Sigourney's face twitching.... a few more flashes.
Bingo. We get what's gone on - it
was all a dream and now all is right with the Alien-verse (for many people at least). Then again - I bet they'll kill Ripley and Hicks off at the end of it, but that's another story.
As was said - the best way is have this a parallel to 3... but that won't happen. We know Weaver and Biehn are on board (pretty much) we've seen that Rippers is a big part of the movie... so I think the only
neat way to do it is by using what the audience already knows.
Let's keep the disagreements respectful lads and ladies. No need to be having digs at each other.
The Boo Hoo Brigade, eh? Once again the anti-retconners are trying to provoke people with inflammatory language. You know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott. The same guy you think is taking this series to bold new places, despite knowing nothing about Covenant. He's producing Alien 5 . He approved the script, made changes, said it's good. He thinks it's a good idea, as well as a bunch of people over at Fox. And let's not forget Sigourney Weaver. You see, it's not just us crybabies who like this, but accomplished lifelong professionals. Consider that.
You want something fresh? As others have rightfully pointed out, introducing new characters will mean spending the first half of the film bringing them up to speed on what the audience has already known for decades. Ripley and Hicks will take initiative, drive the plot forward, instead of waiting for things to happen to them. THAT will be refreshing.
You're upset over losing A3? I can sympathize. It stings when a movie you love is rendered void. That's how we felt when A3 virtually retconned the end of Aliens. You want to yell at us HOW DOES IT FEEL!? Now you know.
Alien 3 is not a film that has endured on it's own merits. It's only remembered by it's association with the previous films. It has made no impression on the culture. It actually hurts the films that came before it. THAT'S why the film is under threat of retcon, not because fanboys can't "get over it".
My advice would be to do what I do when faced with a movie I don't like. Ignore it. Stay away from the A5 sub-forum. Focus your enthusiasm on Covenant. There's no need to keep spewing the same tired condemnations every time a new thread pops up. Stop satirizing, exaggerating, and misrepresenting what Aliens fans want. The name calling is childish. The arguments are toxic.
And please, stop talking about how this is going ruin the series. Remember AVP:R? New films are being made despite that travesty. The worst is behind us.
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 12:09:22 PMYou know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott.
Last time I checked, Scott was the man responsible for putting this retcon "on hold". Beyond that, I don't think he's ever expressed any explicit desire to write off any of the existing
Alien films or resurrect Hicks and Newt.
Why am I not surprised that Weaver is only too happy to throw her own movies under the bus just to have her vehicle back? :D
It's no surprise that Scott would put his film first. It's taken four years to develop so far.
As for Weaver, we can speculate about her motivations in whatever way suits us.
What about those of us who like both Aliens
and Alien 3? Well, I as one of those people can say Blomkamp's movie sounds like absolute shit. :)
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 01:20:29 PM
As for Weaver, we can speculate about her motivations in whatever way suits us.
No need to speculate; both her and Ridley have track records of saying whatever sells at the time.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 29, 2016, 12:48:03 PM
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 12:09:22 PMYou know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott.
Last time I checked, Scott was the man responsible for putting this retcon "on hold". Beyond that, I don't think he's ever expressed any explicit desire to write off any of the existing Alien films or resurrect Hicks and Newt.
He put a film on hold that he ultimately supports and wants to produce. He didn't have it cancelled. It's just sequencing in a neat organized fashion.
Can't wait till Scott decides he's going to make much needed changes to 'ALIEN 5'. He does that, y'know. He makes changes. Just look at how many title changes alone his current movie has undergone without even considering what's been done with the content. ...and this is a movie that's currently in production.
In which case I wouldn't consider any content in 'ALIEN 5' to be concrete at this point in time. The movie isn't even in production. There is plenty of time for much needed changes to take place.
I'm all for a Blomkamp directed version of 'ALIEN 5'. It's too bad Blomkamp wasn't around 3 decades ago. I would have been more than enthused to see his proposal if it was made in 1988. It's now 2016. Shackling it to characters whose use-by dates has expired, however, isn't the best path to take.
-Windebieste.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on May 30, 2016, 04:58:11 AMHe put a film on hold that he ultimately supports and wants to produce. He didn't have it cancelled.
I never said he did. But as winde says, Scott does have a habit of tinkering with films and he clearly wants to focus on his own series for now.
Quote from: windebieste on May 30, 2016, 10:07:39 AM
Can't wait till Scott decides he's going to make much needed changes to 'ALIEN 5'. He does that, y'know. He makes changes. Just look at how many title changes alone his current movie has undergone without even considering what's been done with the content. ...and this is a movie that's currently in production.
In which case I wouldn't consider any content in 'ALIEN 5' to be concrete at this point in time. The movie isn't even in production. There is plenty of time for much needed changes to take place.
He's already made a small change to the script according to Blomkamp.
Safe to say, Ripley and Hicks will stay which is the film's main selling point after all.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 30, 2016, 08:11:25 PM
Quote from: windebieste on May 30, 2016, 10:07:39 AM
Can't wait till Scott decides he's going to make much needed changes to 'ALIEN 5'. He does that, y'know. He makes changes. Just look at how many title changes alone his current movie has undergone without even considering what's been done with the content. ...and this is a movie that's currently in production.
In which case I wouldn't consider any content in 'ALIEN 5' to be concrete at this point in time. The movie isn't even in production. There is plenty of time for much needed changes to take place.
He's already made a small change to the script according to Blomkamp.
Safe to say, Ripley and Hicks will stay which is the film's main selling point after all.
Yes, I don't think Scott has an issue with the Alien series getting back Hicks and Ripley. I think he recognizes that the series went off the rails after Aliens. He might have very well told a different story instead of James Cameron's too, but I don't think he has the clout to retcon Aliens. It would be a dumb move anyway that would bring too much public backlash.
Quote from: PsyKore on May 30, 2016, 02:15:01 AM
What about those of us who like both Aliens and Alien 3? Well, I as one of those people can say Blomkamp's movie sounds like absolute shit. :)
You can form a club with the fans of Superman III and IV and gnash your teeth in impotent rage. :D
That said, I'm not a huge fan of Blumpkin's work. Too bad a better director isn't interested in making this movie.
Blomkamp's a fine director. He's just not an especially brilliant script writer. Two out of the three films he's written have had horrendously uneven scripts.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on May 31, 2016, 10:27:27 AM
Blomkamp's a fine director. He's just not an especially brilliant script writer. Two out of the three films he's written have had horrendously uneven scripts.
Something he shares in common with Ridley Scott. It's really important that they have people around them playing to their strengths, to have a well put together team. I have nothing wrong with stories originating from Scott or Blomkamp but they need actual writers to put it all together and make a good story and for them not to exert too much pressure on the writers.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on May 20, 2016, 06:56:30 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on May 20, 2016, 04:30:13 PM
Here he says it explicitly:
QuoteMy apprehension with Alien was that I had never worked with someone else's material. And not even someone else – at this point it was like... I'm going to count Fincher in with the third one, even though the third one I don't like as much as the first two. But they're all three awesome filmmakers. So it's not about living up to it and being nervous about it, I just don't want other people to tell me what to do. Which is a different thing. 'Well we think in this film this should happen because it happened in that one.' That kind of scared me a little bit so then I was like 'I'm just not going to do it, I'm just going to put it out.' But then I spoke to Sigourney [Weaver].
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig (http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/how-district-9-director-neill-blomkamp-got-the-alien-gig)
Brilliant, thank you! Knew I'd seen it somewhere.
He also said something to the effect of "...Then I realized there was the potential for another film with Ripley. Maybe even more..."
Another possibility here is that they just largely ignore the age difference or even reverse age Ripley some, say nothing of it and then just leave it up to fans to decide whether ALIEN 3 follows from BLOMKAMP'S film. As strange as that sounds, it's really not THAT difficult for them to do that. *Concept art of Newt and aged Ripley and Hicks aside. You never know how things progress from concept to screen.
Plus maybe he is just saying - I don't give a f**k. Im making a sequel to Aliens that fixes the problems with A3 and I don't want people to tell me not to because the age of Ripley won't look right. I want to do it anyway.
We all seem to have ignored that possibility. Maybe its just a midquel and, you know "To hell with it why not!" Blomkamp thinks?
The fact is we only know enough to assume what many of us don't want. At the end of the day, it will end up coming down to having a good, well executed story, to justify its existence. No matter which scenario we get - this is all that really matters when it concerns the film's existence. What I want LESS THAN ANYTHING is for this to be the next Terminator:Genysis .
WINDE does make a good point about A3 and AR. Its kinda contradictory to dismiss his feelings of distaste over A3 when you feel that way about A3 to begin with. I like A3 equally as much, if not more so than ALIENS, so I think the message stands: How would you react if they announced a retcon of Aliens? It means as much to me to see A3 go, as it would to just make Alien 2 and scratch everything that came after. Like it or not, being all for retconing it just because you dislike the death of Hicks and Newt is a pretty tell-tale, butt-hurt, boo-hoo-type scenario (to use your terminology) , before it is one, to cry over the retcon.
Quote from: CainsSon on Jun 02, 2016, 03:24:01 AM
He also said something to the effect of "...Then I realized there was the potential for another film with Ripley. Maybe even more..."
That was
after he spoke to Sigourney.
Here is an idea, let's retcon Alien. :P
That'll leave us with... gasp... Prometheus! :o
Then the only way to save the franchise is to force feed it some Black Goo and hope it mutates into something cool. :o
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 03, 2016, 02:15:40 AM
Then the only way to save the franchise is to force feed it some Black Goo and hope it mutates into something cool. :o
Isn't that what's kind of already happening?
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 02, 2016, 07:22:38 PM
Here is an idea, let's retcon Alien. :P
'ALIENS' works as a stand alone movie to the extent that all the critical plot points of the first film are more or less recounted in Ripley's inquest on Gateway Station. Just by paying attention to those details you don't need to see the first movie at all. The whole scene is a very well put together retelling of the events for anyone who hasn't seen 'ALIEN'.
Then, you could theoretically ignore the first movie altogether. Some fans appear to do so, anyway; and are wont to tell you it's the 'ALIENS' series and not the 'ALIEN' series. As if the 1st movie is somehow more dependent upon the 2nd movie instead of the other way around. :P
-Windebieste.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 03, 2016, 05:07:10 AM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 02, 2016, 07:22:38 PM
Here is an idea, let's retcon Alien. :P
'ALIENS' works as a stand alone movie to the extent that all the critical plot points of the first film are more or less recounted in Ripley's inquest on Gateway Station. Just by paying attention to those details you don't need to see the first movie at all. The whole scene is a very well put together retelling of the events for anyone who hasn't seen 'ALIEN'.
Then, you could theoretically ignore the first movie altogether. Some fans appear to do so, anyway; and are wont to tell you it's the 'ALIENS' series and not the 'ALIEN' series. As if the 1st movie is somehow more dependent upon the 2nd movie instead of the other way around. :P
-Windebieste.
That's actually how it happened for me. I saw Aliens first. Around 87. Then I saw Alien a while later. Around that time, Alien seemed like an inferior cousin to Aliens. I only got to appreciate its nuances years later. It keeps getting better as a film...
I saw Aliens first too. Can't say I was ever lost. After Aliens I saw Alien 3. I didn't see Alien for another year or so until I finally caught it and taped it off Sky Movie Classics. I can't say I was lost at all watching Aliens. It just meant I was looking out for Ash in Alien. :P
I think I'd cry if they ever did remake Alien though. A soft reboot/remake with a similar situation but new characters I could stomach. Just as a way to kick off a new story angle.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 03, 2016, 05:07:10 AM'ALIENS' works as a stand alone movie to the extent that all the critical plot points of the first film are more or less recounted in Ripley's inquest on Gateway Station. Just by paying attention to those details you don't need to see the first movie at all. The whole scene is a very well put together retelling of the events for anyone who hasn't seen 'ALIEN'.
Cameron has a knack for that, it's the same with
Terminator 2. You might get more out of it if you've seen the first, but you don't
need to to understand and enjoy the film.
I started with
Alien 3 and I'd argue you don't really need to have seen the preceding films to understand that either. You get more out of it if you know who everyone is and where they've come from, but it's hardly essential to make sense of what's going on. (In fact,
not seeing the previous films arguably makes the mystery detective bits at the start a little more reasonable, because you don't really know what you're dealing with either. Not seeing one and two also helps the whole egg situation... :P)
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 03, 2016, 08:56:29 AM
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 03, 2016, 05:07:10 AM'ALIENS' works as a stand alone movie to the extent that all the critical plot points of the first film are more or less recounted in Ripley's inquest on Gateway Station. Just by paying attention to those details you don't need to see the first movie at all. The whole scene is a very well put together retelling of the events for anyone who hasn't seen 'ALIEN'.
Cameron has a knack for that, it's the same with Terminator 2. You might get more out of it if you've seen the first, but you don't need to to understand and enjoy the film.
I started with Alien 3 and I'd argue you don't really need to have seen the preceding films to understand that either. You get more out of it if you know who everyone is and where they've come from, but it's hardly essential to make sense of what's going on. (In fact, not seeing the previous films arguably makes the mystery detective bits at the start a little more reasonable, because you don't really know what you're dealing with either. Not seeing one and two also helps the whole egg situation... :P)
I can appreciate what you're saying. Starting with Alien 3 you also didn't get to see the bond develop between Newt and Ripley so you as a viewer are not that emotionally invested in the child's character. It likely doesn't seem out of place as a premise for the film to start it the way it does..
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 03, 2016, 04:28:43 PMIt likely doesn't seem out of place as a premise for the film to start it the way it does..
It doesn't seem out of place even if you have watched the preceding films... It's just not what you wanted.
Do we all at least agree that nobody really cares about Alien Resurrection being retconned?
Alien 3 on the other hand is just too controversial. We need Middle East peace talks levels of discussion to resolve this.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 04, 2016, 12:31:44 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 03, 2016, 04:28:43 PMIt likely doesn't seem out of place as a premise for the film to start it the way it does..
It doesn't seem out of place even if you have watched the preceding films... It's just not what you wanted.
No, I don't agree with that. The premise wouldn't seem out of place only if you started watching the series with Alien 3. If you saw the previous films first, most people think that Alien 3 is just too out of place and they wouldn't have wanted it to be that way. It's not just what I didn't want. It's what the public overwhelmingly didn't want. But I understand, you started the series at Alien 3, arguably at the nadir. You have my sympathies...
Quote from: irn on Jun 04, 2016, 05:04:27 PM
Do we all at least agree that nobody really cares about Alien Resurrection being retconned?
Alien 3 on the other hand is just too controversial. We need Middle East peace talks levels of discussion to resolve this.
'ALIEN: Resurrection' has a surprising number of fans. They'll disagree with this idea. They may not openly object; but they do exist.
A retcon is just not necessary. Rather than bring back these characters and damaging the series
even further, Blomkamp would be wise to make an holistic 'ALIENS' movie that regards all the entries to date as legitimate and doesn't step on anyone's toes. It can be done. Making Ripley, Hicks and Newt's return the major point of the movie clearly isn't the way to go about it.
It's bad enough that those 3 characters were killed in the third movie; but the spiteful path of vengeance that Blomkamp's proposal is pushing us towards can't be considered a fair compromise by any means.
I'd love a new 'ALIENS' movie. I think Blomkamp is a good choice to do it. I can also see problem after problem after problem easily avoided by removing these 3 characters from his proposal and taking on a completely fresh cast from the outset. I want to see another Great 'ALIENS' movie - not one that's divisive, damaging and shackled to fickle fan service.
-Windebieste.
Well said windebieste, totally agree.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 04, 2016, 07:57:32 PMNo, I don't agree with that. The premise wouldn't seem out of place only if you started watching the series with Alien 3. If you saw the previous films first, most people think that Alien 3 is just too out of place and they wouldn't have wanted it to be that way.
Not being what you wanted doesn't equal out of place. Tonally, the whole idea of Ripley losing everything she holds dear yet again is absolutely
in place with the overriding theme of the heartless, bleak universe that the series has.
Just because you don't like it, that doesn't mean it's a sudden narrative u-turn, because that's just not the case.
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 05, 2016, 03:14:43 AMWell said windebieste, totally agree.
Likewise. A retcon is pointless and unnecessary, regardless of how good/bad the perceived film(s) you're retconning are.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 05, 2016, 09:33:29 AM
Tonally, the whole idea of Ripley losing everything she holds dear yet again is absolutely in place with the overriding theme of the heartless, bleak universe that the series has.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 04, 2016, 11:55:36 PM
I'd love a new 'ALIENS' movie. I think Blomkamp is a good choice to do it. I can also see problem after problem after problem easily avoided by removing these 3 characters from his proposal and taking on a completely fresh cast from the outset. I want to see another Great 'ALIENS' movie - not one that's divisive, damaging and shackled to fickle fan service.
I totally agree windebieste and HuDaFuK. It would be better to keep the integrity of the series rather than break off into chaotic timelines like it's some comic-book movie franchise. I honestly think a retcon would be the end of it. Fans would just be divided and passionately bicker and casual viewers just be confused and not know what the hell is going on with the stories. It would be an absolute cluster.
Dragging up Ripley and Hicks to satisfy childhood nostalgia seems nice but in reality it would be virtually guaranteed to disappoint anyway. It wont be Aliens 2 because that era is gone. Let's just leave Aliens as the near perfect film it was. Alien, Aliens and Alien3 was a fantastic story arc. AR too if you're that way inclined. Job done. Let's move on to new characters and new stories. The Alien universe is so vast and ripe for interesting tales.
I couldn't agree more with Irn, Huda, and Winde. I'm down for new stories in the alien universe, hopefully covenant will be scary and exciting in all the ways Prometheus wasn't while still keeping what did. work in Prometheus.
As for Blomkamp, I would love to see him tackle an AvP film.
One aspect I like about the series is its overarching dark tone. Also, it's more akin to real life in that anybody, right or wrong, unforgivably, can die. This is something I feel is lost on people when Alien 3 comes around; that this series for a long time before has been heartless and killed off many innocent and sometimes central characters. I will admit that Alien 3 accentuates it more; Hicks and Newt's death is jarring, but that's what life is like, and it is still very much in line with the ruthless nature of the prior films.
However, when you think about it, ALIENS is actually the darkest of them all, when you consider the amount of families that died at Hadley's Hope. I mean, it would have been a massacre, and no other film in the series has come close to depicting that brutality.
QuoteAlien, Aliens and Alien3 was a fantastic story arc.
That's right, it is. But the problem with that story arc is that Ripley wiped-out the Xenomorphs with her sacrifice. Where do you go after that?
It's highly unlikely that Fox will ever make a sequel to the rather unpopular Alien: Resurrection. And trying to shoe-horn-in another film between A3 and A:R with new characters and Aliens is just going to mess with the whole point of Alien 3 even more. At least Alien: Resurrection had the good grace to take place 200 years after Ripley's sacrifice even though it still weakens the previous entry to an extent. And Ridley Scott already has the prequel arena covered with new characters and aliens.
Ripley and Hicks are the two most popular characters in the franchise by far and both star in the series' most popular entry. Fox are in the business of making money from their films so from a financial perspective it makes perfect sense to bring those two characters back. Fox and their shareholders are simply not interested in investing north of a hundred-million-dollars in making films for a tiny hardcore fanbase in a small corner of the internet. No matter how loudly those fans may rant and rave or vehemently agree with each other.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jun 06, 2016, 03:18:49 PM
QuoteAlien, Aliens and Alien3 was a fantastic story arc.
That's right, it is. But the problem with that story arc is that Ripley wiped-out the Xenomorphs with her sacrifice. Where do you go after that?
It's highly unlikely that Fox will ever make a sequel to the rather unpopular Alien: Resurrection. And trying to shoe-horn-in another film between A3 and A:R with new characters and Aliens is just going to mess with the whole point of Alien 3 even more. At least Alien: Resurrection had the good grace to take place 200 years after Ripley's sacrifice even though it still weakens the previous entry to an extent. And Ridley Scott already has the prequel arena covered with new characters and aliens.
Ripley and Hicks are the two most popular characters in the franchise by far and both star in the series' most popular entry. Fox are in the business of making money from their films so from a financial perspective it makes perfect sense to bring those two characters back. Fox and their shareholders are simply not interested in investing north of a hundred-million-dollars in making films for a tiny hardcore fanbase in a small corner of the internet. No matter how loudly those fans may rant and rave or vehemently agree with each other.
Well said Eighth Passenger. I understand what the Alien 3 fanboys are saying but in truth Alien 3 was far fetched from the get-go. Nobody would be so stupid to leave eggs on the dropship unchecked before going to hypersleep. Blomlamp's approach works not as fan service, but as the most logical way to continue the story. This is from a continuity sense and financial sense.
There are infinite ways to bring the alien back after Alien3 that would be much better than retconning that whole film imo.
I don't think the Derelict was the only place in the universe that had alien eggs, unless Ridley's films specifically indicate otherwise.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 03:40:53 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jun 06, 2016, 03:18:49 PM
QuoteAlien, Aliens and Alien3 was a fantastic story arc.
That's right, it is. But the problem with that story arc is that Ripley wiped-out the Xenomorphs with her sacrifice. Where do you go after that?
It's highly unlikely that Fox will ever make a sequel to the rather unpopular Alien: Resurrection. And trying to shoe-horn-in another film between A3 and A:R with new characters and Aliens is just going to mess with the whole point of Alien 3 even more. At least Alien: Resurrection had the good grace to take place 200 years after Ripley's sacrifice even though it still weakens the previous entry to an extent. And Ridley Scott already has the prequel arena covered with new characters and aliens.
Ripley and Hicks are the two most popular characters in the franchise by far and both star in the series' most popular entry. Fox are in the business of making money from their films so from a financial perspective it makes perfect sense to bring those two characters back. Fox and their shareholders are simply not interested in investing north of a hundred-million-dollars in making films for a tiny hardcore fanbase in a small corner of the internet. No matter how loudly those fans may rant and rave or vehemently agree with each other.
Well said Eighth Passenger. I understand what the Alien 3 fanboys are saying but in truth Alien 3 was far fetched from the get-go. Nobody would be so stupid to leave eggs on the dropship unchecked before going to hypersleep. Blomlamp's approach works not as fan service, but as the most logical way to continue the story. This is from a continuity sense and financial sense.
Yeah just those
Alien3 fanboys that dont get it. ::) [/sarcasm]
I think a lot of those opposed to the retcon are fans of the franchise in general, not just the 3rd film and their opinions matter as much as anyone elses here, fanboy or otherwise.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 03:40:53 PMBlomlamp's approach works not as fan service, but as the most logical way to continue the story.
Considering we have
absolutely no idea how he actually intends to continue the story, that's a pretty big assumption.
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 06, 2016, 03:54:53 PM
There are infinite ways to bring the alien back after Alien3 that would be much better than retconning that whole film imo.
I don't think the Derelict was the only place in the universe that had alien eggs, unless Ridley's films specifically indicate otherwise.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 03:40:53 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jun 06, 2016, 03:18:49 PM
QuoteAlien, Aliens and Alien3 was a fantastic story arc.
That's right, it is. But the problem with that story arc is that Ripley wiped-out the Xenomorphs with her sacrifice. Where do you go after that?
It's highly unlikely that Fox will ever make a sequel to the rather unpopular Alien: Resurrection. And trying to shoe-horn-in another film between A3 and A:R with new characters and Aliens is just going to mess with the whole point of Alien 3 even more. At least Alien: Resurrection had the good grace to take place 200 years after Ripley's sacrifice even though it still weakens the previous entry to an extent. And Ridley Scott already has the prequel arena covered with new characters and aliens.
Ripley and Hicks are the two most popular characters in the franchise by far and both star in the series' most popular entry. Fox are in the business of making money from their films so from a financial perspective it makes perfect sense to bring those two characters back. Fox and their shareholders are simply not interested in investing north of a hundred-million-dollars in making films for a tiny hardcore fanbase in a small corner of the internet. No matter how loudly those fans may rant and rave or vehemently agree with each other.
Well said Eighth Passenger. I understand what the Alien 3 fanboys are saying but in truth Alien 3 was far fetched from the get-go. Nobody would be so stupid to leave eggs on the dropship unchecked before going to hypersleep. Blomlamp's approach works not as fan service, but as the most logical way to continue the story. This is from a continuity sense and financial sense.
Yeah just those Alien3 fanboys that dont get it. ::) [/sarcasm]
I think a lot of those opposed to the retcon are fans of the franchise in general, not just the 3rd film and their opinions matter as much as anyone elses here, fanboy or otherwise.
In truth, we're all fanboys and fangirls here. That's not meant as a slight, and I don't know why everybody treats the term like an insult these days. I honestly think that everybody's opinion here is valid. People have valid reasons for why Alien 3 should not be retconned. I have valid reasons for why it should be and that is my choice. We all get tho choose our adventure...
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 06, 2016, 04:02:00 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 03:40:53 PMBlomlamp's approach works not as fan service, but as the most logical way to continue the story.
Considering we have absolutely no idea how he actually intends to continue the story, that's a pretty big assumption.
I am working on the assumption that the basic premise involves disregarding Alien 3 and continuing with the main characters of Hicks, Ripley, and Newt. That is what has been proposed thus far, and that is a premise that I am a proponent of. I think it is a more logical continuation of the Aliens film. Now can that basic premise be screwed up? Absolutely. I think it is in fact easier to screw up than to make a success of it. But I am 100% open to the idea of trying. There is more to gain then there is to lose. It is my perspective and that is all. I understand yours, and while I don't agree with it, I respect your right to hold it.
Hey guys I have a idea that
"should" make most of you totally happy...
What if Alien 5 retcons
it's self at the end of the movie like say Total Recall? the film ends with a flash hinting that the whole thing was a dream Ripley 8 was having while she was in the tube but like Total Recall it's ambiguous and it's up to the Audience to decide what happened ehh, ehh ehh? :)
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 12:09:22 PM
The Boo Hoo Brigade, eh? Once again the anti-retconners are trying to provoke people with inflammatory language. You know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott. The same guy you think is taking this series to bold new places, despite knowing nothing about Covenant. He's producing Alien 5 . He approved the script, made changes, said it's good. He thinks it's a good idea, as well as a bunch of people over at Fox. And let's not forget Sigourney Weaver. You see, it's not just us crybabies who like this, but accomplished lifelong professionals. Consider that.
To be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
QuoteYou're upset over losing A3? I can sympathize. It stings when a movie you love is rendered void. That's how we felt when A3 virtually retconned the end of Aliens. You want to yell at us HOW DOES IT FEEL!? Now you know.
That really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
Quote from: g2vd on Jun 06, 2016, 06:17:30 PM
Hey guys I have a idea that "should" make most of you totally happy...
What if Alien 5 retcons it's self at the end of the movie like say Total Recall? the film ends with a flash hinting that the whole thing was a dream Ripley 8 was having while she was in the tube but like Total Recall it's ambiguous and it's up to the Audience to decide what happened ehh, ehh ehh? :)
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 12:09:22 PM
The Boo Hoo Brigade, eh? Once again the anti-retconners are trying to provoke people with inflammatory language. You know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott. The same guy you think is taking this series to bold new places, despite knowing nothing about Covenant. He's producing Alien 5 . He approved the script, made changes, said it's good. He thinks it's a good idea, as well as a bunch of people over at Fox. And let's not forget Sigourney Weaver. You see, it's not just us crybabies who like this, but accomplished lifelong professionals. Consider that.
To be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
QuoteYou're upset over losing A3? I can sympathize. It stings when a movie you love is rendered void. That's how we felt when A3 virtually retconned the end of Aliens. You want to yell at us HOW DOES IT FEEL!? Now you know.
That really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
I think your Total Recall idea could be pretty cool if done right. If the audience comes out of it asking itself what is real then the job would be well done. But does that leave things open for additional sequels?
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:42:06 PMBut does that leave things open for additional sequels?
While it almost inevitably will be, that kind of thinking should
never be what drives the development of a movie. It should be a great film in and of itself, first any foremost.
That's true. I can't argue with that, but I think that one of the reasons why they are doing this film is to get out of that corner that they painted themselves into. I expect that the studio will want to have a vehicle that they can drive in new open ended directions that will get a lot of mileage. This is Fox's Star Wars. I'm a bit torn about that though. If they leave things in a way which allows for more films then we may have some cliff-hangers, but by George we will keep getting more movies.
It intrinsically makes sense to continue off of Aliens in a different direction, but things can still go wrong...
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:56:58 PMThat's true. I can't argue with that, but I think that one of the reasons why they are doing this film is to get out of that corner that they painted themselves into.
What corner? The idea that there's no possible way to continue after the fourth film, or do a side story, or do literally any one of a hundred things that doesn't involve arbitrarily scrapping one or more of the existing movies, is asinine. They haven't painted themselves into a corner in any way, shape or form. There's a whole
universe left to explore.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 06, 2016, 07:16:25 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:56:58 PMThat's true. I can't argue with that, but I think that one of the reasons why they are doing this film is to get out of that corner that they painted themselves into.
What corner? The idea that there's no possible way to continue after the fourth film, or do a side story, or do literally any one of a hundred things that doesn't involve arbitrarily scrapping one or more of the existing movies, is asinine. They haven't painted themselves into a corner in any way, shape or form. There's a whole universe left to explore.
Yeah in the 200 years between Alien3 and Res, there could be some great stories of ships and crews running into another derelict or Jockey facility. Only reason they dont know in Resurrection is because no one lived to tell the story.
I felt the story was open to go in any direction after Alien3, even with Ressurection its still pretty wide open.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 06, 2016, 07:16:25 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:56:58 PMThat's true. I can't argue with that, but I think that one of the reasons why they are doing this film is to get out of that corner that they painted themselves into.
What corner? The idea that there's no possible way to continue after the fourth film, or do a side story, or do literally any one of a hundred things that doesn't involve arbitrarily scrapping one or more of the existing movies, is asinine. They haven't painted themselves into a corner in any way, shape or form. There's a whole universe left to explore.
I think you're wrong. You're looking at it from a hardcore fan's narrow point of view. You and I may enjoy any Alien film that comes out which doesn't tie into anything, but to the vast majority of people out there it isn't entirely about the creatures. People connect with other people... with characters. The Aliens are very exotic animals, but they are animals nonetheless. So people want more of Ripley's story basically. Alien 3 felt cheap and improbable. That's not just me talking, that would be the vast majority of fans and even more so casual fans of the series. The Aliens series is about Ripley's story fundamentally. Hicks and especially Newt have become an intrinsic part of that story. This is the story that most people are interested in and going back to that as the focus will get the series out of the corner that it was painted into.
I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Take a look at Starship Troopers. Does the vast majority of people remember parts 2 and 3? No they don't. The hardcore fans might enjoy those films, but the vast majority of the people connected with the original cast of characters. In ignoring that human connection, the whole series got derailed. Huda, you keep saying that I did not get what I want. That's true. The vast majority of people did not get what they want. That is why the franchise has limped along since 1993 rather than being something on par with Star Wars. Now Fox realizes how to get back into that of stratosphere and they should be applauded.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 08:51:53 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 06, 2016, 07:16:25 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:56:58 PMThat's true. I can't argue with that, but I think that one of the reasons why they are doing this film is to get out of that corner that they painted themselves into.
What corner? The idea that there's no possible way to continue after the fourth film, or do a side story, or do literally any one of a hundred things that doesn't involve arbitrarily scrapping one or more of the existing movies, is asinine. They haven't painted themselves into a corner in any way, shape or form. There's a whole universe left to explore.
I think you're wrong. You're looking at it from a hardcore fan's narrow point of view. You and I may enjoy any Alien film that comes out which doesn't tie into anything, but to the vast majority of people out there it isn't entirely about the creatures. People connect with other people... with characters. The Aliens are very exotic animals, but they are animals nonetheless. So people want more of Ripley's story basically. Alien 3 felt cheap and improbable. That's not just me talking, that would be the vast majority of fans and even more so casual fans of the series. The Aliens series is about Ripley's story fundamentally. Hicks and especially Newt have become an intrinsic part of that story. This is the story that most people are interested in and going back to that as the focus will get the series out of the corner that it was painted into.
I don't get how this is so hard to understand. Take a look at Starship Troopers. Does the vast majority of people remember parts 2 and 3? No they don't. The hardcore fans might enjoy those films, but the vast majority of the people connected with the original cast of characters. In ignoring that human connection, the whole series got derailed. Huda, you keep saying that I did not get what I want. That's true. The vast majority of people did not get what they want. That is why the franchise has limped along since 1993 rather than being something on par with Star Wars. Now Fox realizes how to get back into that of stratosphere and they should be applauded.
Totally disagree, if there was no interest in Alien other than its former human characters then we wouldn't have Prometheus or Alien: Covenant being made.
Also Casper Van Dian (SP?) did show up for Starship Troopers 3, and it wasn't any better for it. I know I didnt really care about the characters in Starship Troopers and I like that film.
Well, ultimately these are all just opinions. Fair enough.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 08:51:53 PMI think you're wrong. You're looking at it from a hardcore fan's narrow point of view.
A narrow point of view? Says the guy who's apparently adamant the
only Alien sequel story that can
possibly be told in the future is one that undoes the death of two characters that were killed 25 years ago.
That is narrow-minded to the point of being obtuse. There are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 08:51:53 PMTake a look at Starship Troopers. Does the vast majority of people remember parts 2 and 3? No they don't. The hardcore fans might enjoy those films, but the vast majority of the people connected with the original cast of characters.
Casper Van Dien was in part 3 as Johnny Rico. His return was the big selling point of the film. It was still a shit movie no one cared about.
I am glad to see how many people are thinking exactly like myself here.
Huda and Winde are saying things I said before but in some cases they are being much more eloquent than I.
P-O, Huda is right, it is ironic of you to say A:3 fans are narrow minded and yet hold such a narrow view that this film should overwrite the last two. Disregarding that previous films which brought back beloved actors were not always succesful nor liked. You treat this like some holy grail without considering just what if it truly sucks?
This is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.
The audience are pissed that beloved main characters perished... job done, emotional reaction has been incited. Audience are impacted and fantasize for a happier ending but still love the film and wouldn't change it.
I watched Eden Lake and the ending pissed me off sooooooo much but in the best ways possible. It was not a bad ending, it just ended in a way that made me fantasize going into that world and undoing all the wrongs that happen to the poor people in there while I punish the villains.
Alien is the exact same type of universe as Eden Lake... an uncaring one where even plot shields tremble and disintegrate at its brutality.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 06, 2016, 06:42:06 PM
Quote from: g2vd on Jun 06, 2016, 06:17:30 PM
Hey guys I have a idea that "should" make most of you totally happy...
What if Alien 5 retcons it's self at the end of the movie like say Total Recall? the film ends with a flash hinting that the whole thing was a dream Ripley 8 was having while she was in the tube but like Total Recall it's ambiguous and it's up to the Audience to decide what happened ehh, ehh ehh? :)
Quote from: Kelgaard on May 29, 2016, 12:09:22 PM
The Boo Hoo Brigade, eh? Once again the anti-retconners are trying to provoke people with inflammatory language. You know who one of the top members of that brigade is, right? Your boy, Sir Ridley Scott. The same guy you think is taking this series to bold new places, despite knowing nothing about Covenant. He's producing Alien 5 . He approved the script, made changes, said it's good. He thinks it's a good idea, as well as a bunch of people over at Fox. And let's not forget Sigourney Weaver. You see, it's not just us crybabies who like this, but accomplished lifelong professionals. Consider that.
To be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
QuoteYou're upset over losing A3? I can sympathize. It stings when a movie you love is rendered void. That's how we felt when A3 virtually retconned the end of Aliens. You want to yell at us HOW DOES IT FEEL!? Now you know.
That really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
I think your Total Recall idea could be pretty cool if done right. If the audience comes out of it asking itself what is real then the job would be well done. But does that leave things open for additional sequels?
I mean the more I think about it the better it seems. it would be able to please both fans such as fans of Aliens will be happy to see a direct sequel to Aliens that continues in the same direction, and the fans that dislike A3 and AR will be happy to no longer have them be "canon".
Where as fans of A3 and AR will be happy to see a new Alien story, but still have A3 and AR canon and the impact and significance of those movies untarnished.
It could actually work.
QuoteTo be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
Their opinions are pretty important if they're the ones making the movie, but that's not the point I was making.
I'm saying it's possible that the majority of fans who support A5 are mature intelligent folks who don't deserve to be dismissed as whiners and trolled with all this obnoxious ranting.
For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb. If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.
QuoteThat really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
Aliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film. Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus. A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor. It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless.
So when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's
their turn. We should be the ones asking them how it feels.
And on that point: What a rigged question! Naturally, we wouldn't like it; our love for Aliens is why we want the retcon in the first place. So what? You've proven nothing, Alien 3 Defense Force. To answer it though, I'd deal with it. If someone thinks they can make a better movie than one of the best sequels of all time, then I say go for it. I'm sure I'd find their efforts adorable.
QuoteThis is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.
Disney Princesses? Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.
You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence. Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.
QuoteThere are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.
And in 30 years all they've come up with is crap. The retcon is due.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 07, 2016, 04:48:44 AM
QuoteThis is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.
Disney Princesses? Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.
You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence. Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.
I was not talking down on him, that is your perception and it is misunderstood.
I was making a jest on how it is comparable to happy Disney cartoons which it essentially is.
All films have their flaws and A 3 is not perfect. But it does not deserve to be uncreatively retconned.
At least Shane Black sees the potential to explore the rich lore established by older stuff instead of erasing good ideas out of existence.
Blomkamp nearly went down this route too... sigh, what could have been.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 07, 2016, 04:48:44 AM
For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb. If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.
I think after Prometheus, Scott isn't the man any more. He's got some making up to do himself.
QuoteAnd in 30 years all they've come up with is crap. The retcon is due.
I disagree here. Just because the last entries were bad, doesn't necessitate a retcon. They could go and tell a story about Ripley 8 - she's an interesting character - but that also has the same issues Alien 3.2 is going to have and that's Sigourney getting older. I think she looks pretty damn good but its going to get to a point where she doesn't look like she should be fighting Aliens.
Like has been said, there's space after Resurrection for sequels. There's actually space after 3 and before Resurrection for sequels but the problem there is it undermines Ripley's sacrifice at the end of the film. This is presumption on my part but it does sound like this is just an attempt to return to the "golden age" of Colonial Marines, Pulse Rifles and the original Ripley and then go from there.
It's what Fox thinks is what everyone wants. You can see it in most of the recent rebooted EU. I really expect to this to be a setup for a new main character going forward.
I just hope it's good.
Responding to the OP: the Bishop cloning idea just wouldn't work, but this idea could:
Have Ripley 8 find the Sulaco, obtain blood samples of Hicks and Newt and clone them (it's not unfeasible that the Sulaco would have blood samples if they have medical facilities onboard). Cut to 20 years later and you have the events of Neil Blomkamp's Alien 5.
No need to retcon Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection at all.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jun 07, 2016, 09:22:55 AM
Responding to the OP: the Bishop cloning idea just wouldn't work, but this idea could:
Have Ripley 8 find the Sulaco, obtain blood samples of Hicks and Newt and clone them (it's not unfeasible that the Sulaco would have blood samples if they have medical facilities onboard). Cut to 20 years later and you have the events of Neil Blomkamp's Alien 5.
No need to retcon Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection at all.
That actually is brilliant...
It would make sense too. Ripley 8 grew sentimental and lonely, so she tracked down the samples. Maybe on the Sulaco, or maybe on Fury.
I still feel it may be stretching it, but I am loving this idea as it explorea Ripley clone as a character and her connection to the old Rips.
Quote from: Scorpio on Jun 07, 2016, 09:22:55 AMHave Ripley 8 find the Sulaco, obtain blood samples of Hicks and Newt and clone them (it's not unfeasible that the Sulaco would have blood samples if they have medical facilities onboard). Cut to 20 years later and you have the events of Neil Blomkamp's Alien 5.
So the Sulaco's just been floating through space for the last 200 years...?
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 07, 2016, 09:36:19 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Jun 07, 2016, 09:22:55 AMHave Ripley 8 find the Sulaco, obtain blood samples of Hicks and Newt and clone them (it's not unfeasible that the Sulaco would have blood samples if they have medical facilities onboard). Cut to 20 years later and you have the events of Neil Blomkamp's Alien 5.
So the Sulaco's just been floating through space for the last 200 years...?
Space is big. :P
But seriously no matter how hard we all try, putting Ripley and co in this creates all manner of logic holes which is why they should put in new characters and save us all the headache of trying to make sense of it all.
There is literally so much to explore and so many new characters to cultivate and grow.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 07, 2016, 09:42:04 AMThere is literally so much to explore and so many new characters to cultivate and grow.
This is what annoys me about Blomkamp's proposal more than anything. With
Alien 5 they have a chance to do something new and outside the box with the series after four films that all focussed on Ripley, but instead they want to make the universe far smaller by removing half of its stories and regressing to using actors who are rapidly approaching old age to play characters we've already seen done before. It's a step backwards, not forwards.
The recent trend in big franchise sequels to rely almost exclusively on the nostalgia crowd in favour of actually doing new and interesting things really isn't doing these movies any favours. Films like
Jurassic World and
The Force Awakens are just incredibly bland and forgettable once you scratch off the flashy franchise veneer.
My hope, if they do continue down this road which I fully expect, is this retcon will serve the purpose of actually being a springboard for other, original sequels after it.
STUDIO LOGIC:
An Alien sequel without Sigourney Weaver won't make any money.
Unless it's directed by Ridley Scott..
But the "springboard" idea could work, but they still need to bring Sigourney back for one more..
Exactly HuDa, I couldn't have said it better myself...
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 07, 2016, 04:48:44 AM
QuoteTo be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
Their opinions are pretty important if they're the ones making the movie, but that's not the point I was making.
I'm saying it's possible that the majority of fans who support A5 are mature intelligent folks who don't deserve to be dismissed as whiners and trolled with all this obnoxious ranting.
For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb. If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.
QuoteThat really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
Aliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film. Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus. A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor. It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless.
So when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's their turn. We should be the ones asking them how it feels.
And on that point: What a rigged question! Naturally, we wouldn't like it; our love for Aliens is why we want the retcon in the first place. So what? You've proven nothing, Alien 3 Defense Force. To answer it though, I'd deal with it. If someone thinks they can make a better movie than one of the best sequels of all time, then I say go for it. I'm sure I'd find their efforts adorable.
QuoteThis is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.
Disney Princesses? Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.
You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence. Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.
QuoteThere are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.
And in 30 years all they've come up with is crap. The retcon is due.
Well said Kelgaard. I've been of the opinion that a retcon should happen for years now. I've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here. There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with. I bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...
I do not advocate the insulting of others and staff will challenge that behaviour. However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with disagreeing with people and discussing those reasons.
No matter how you slice it Alien3 doesn't retcon anything about Aliens. You can make a lot of arguments about the quality of the film or the magic egg but it doesn't actually retcon anything shown in Aliens. It's just not what a retcon is and thats a fact.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 01:47:20 PM
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 07, 2016, 04:48:44 AM
QuoteTo be perfectly honest it isn't like their opinions are worth anymore than anybody else's opinion just because they are Actors and Directors.
Something also to note is that Sigourney was the one at the time that wanted Ripley to die in Alien 3 and is the reason the character died in the first place. so if we go by the idea that their opinions are worth more than you're opinion does that mean you are wrong?
Their opinions are pretty important if they're the ones making the movie, but that's not the point I was making.
I'm saying it's possible that the majority of fans who support A5 are mature intelligent folks who don't deserve to be dismissed as whiners and trolled with all this obnoxious ranting.
For now, Ridley Scott is in our camp, and I use him as an example because everyone thinks he's da bomb. If he's cool with Blomkamp's idea, then maybe everyone should take a chill pill.
QuoteThat really doesn't make any sense..if Aliens originally flashed forward to show the Sulaco nearing Earth Orbit, than yes you would have a point and Alien 3 would have "Virtually Retconned" Aliens completely. but the movies ending just had them getting into the Pods and preparing for the long journey home, all Alien 3 did was it continued the story and it took it into a new direction that is subjective and debatable as to whether or not that was the right direction to go, so really it didn't do any of this "Virtual Retconning" you are talking about. and even then if Alien 3 never happened than a sequel on principle would do the exact same thing which means a different sequel would have just "Virtually Retconned Everything" like Alien 3 did and made Aliens null and void so I kinda don't understand where you are going with this.
And if we go by that does this not mean Aliens "Virtually Retconned" Alien and made it null and void? does this not mean Aliens ruined Alien on the principle of it?
Aliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film. Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus. A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor. It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless.
So when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's their turn. We should be the ones asking them how it feels.
And on that point: What a rigged question! Naturally, we wouldn't like it; our love for Aliens is why we want the retcon in the first place. So what? You've proven nothing, Alien 3 Defense Force. To answer it though, I'd deal with it. If someone thinks they can make a better movie than one of the best sequels of all time, then I say go for it. I'm sure I'd find their efforts adorable.
QuoteThis is not a Disney Princesa cartoon with happy endings mate, it's Alien. Bad things happen in this franchise to good people. Trust me, that can be just as impactful.
Disney Princesses? Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.
You know, there could be something to be found inside the wide gulf that's between a fairy tale ending and the cheap trick pulled by A3's opening sequence. Like something that doesn't involve magic eggs or a crash that conveniently kills everyone but the lead actress. If they want to kill characters, fine, but at least make it plausible. Or just retcon that bitch. That's all we ask.
QuoteThere are an infinite number of possibilities beyond a Hicks and Newt tale.
And in 30 years all they've come up with is crap. The retcon is due.
Well said Kelgaard. I've been of the opinion that a retcon should happen for years now. I've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here. There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with. I bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...
You are getting "flak" because people have noticed a hole in your proposal and are pointing it out.
That and Ripley is a huge debilitating chain which shackles this franchise. It will never be free until it tries something bold and new like Prometheus and Covenant are at least trying and those I am excited for because they will likely expand the lore.
The only promising thing about Alien 5 is that concept art for the monolith and the derelict plus anything else Engineer related. Also that cool Marine suit that looked more armoured compared to the rest.
But Ripley, Hicks, Newt.... been there, done that, seen it before. We already know these characters pretty well. Ripley 8 still has a lot to be explored about.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 01:47:20 PMI've tried to come up with a solution that factors on A3 and AR, and all I get is flak for the effort on here. There are some people on here that resort to insults and talking down to people when it comes to ideas that they don't agree with.
No one's belittling you or insulting you, we're just pointing out that trying to develop some ridiculous workaround enabling Hicks and Newt to be alive in Blompkamp's film whilst still keeping the third and fourth films canon is an inherently flawed process. Because the work around will inevitably be clumsy at best, ridiculous at worst.
It'll be a hypersleep dream handwave.
I've said this loads - its the only way they can acknowledge 3 and 4 (which NB has said he would do) but conveniently drop them. I know some of you hate the idea, but having read pages and pages and pages of solutions, I still can't come up with a better one that has now been established as part of the continuity thanks to the sequence in Prometheus.
It's the only way to be sure.
Or - colour me flabbergasted if they didn't do it. It just seems so easy to me. You could do it a few shots - everyone would get it... and then on with the movie.
Quote from: Russ on Jun 07, 2016, 02:58:22 PM
It'll be a hypersleep dream handwave.
I've said this loads - its the only way they can acknowledge 3 and 4 (which NB has said he would do) but conveniently drop them. I know some of you hate the idea, but having read pages and pages and pages of solutions, I still can't come up with a better one that has now been established as part of the continuity thanks to the sequence in Prometheus.
It's the only way to be sure.
Or - colour me flabbergasted if they didn't do it. It just seems so easy to me. You could do it a few shots - everyone would get it... and then on with the movie.
As cheap as the dream idea sounds, if you have to retcon its the easiest and most plausible solution.
It fits perfectly within the lore. There is absolutely no denying that. Especially, as pointed out, with Prometheus doing the whole dream perving. It's just such a horrid mechanic. :laugh:
They could be Bishop's dreams. That would explain why they're so cinematicly detailed. His brain could be running through scenarios.
QuoteI bet they will be the same folks who will love the Blomkamp film when it happens...
I don't expect anyone to change their opinions; if the movie is good, they'll grudgingly acknowledge it, but maintain their stance on the retcon angle. That's fine. By then, I won't care. I'll have the sequel I've always wanted, and they can keep theirs.
@Hicks I think it would be if they hadn't set it up. But it really works for me and doesn't insult us as much as the magic egg in 3. That was cheap - we're always searching for reasons for that on here, but out of the insane world of AvP Fandom, I remember sitting in the cinema (having seen Aliens a brazilion times at the movies and on video) thinking "WTF" - there was absolutely no logic to that.
You know, I've attacked 3 for treating the characters poorly - but Hicks and Newt aside - even I accept its a great arc for Ripley. But its undone in the first shot by having something that was not established. There wasn't even a flashback to a reprogrammed Bishop resorting to his primary directive or something like that. Or he didn't even say "Look, about the egg..." when he was part head part milky groundsheet (or if he did, I can't remember... traumatic amnesia or something).
It was just "there must have been an egg on there." NO! There wasn't *lol*.
The dream handwave is small beer compared to that leap of over the chasm of bollocks excuses in my book.
It's not great, but if they're going to acknowledge the others... it works just fine for me. And I think the vast majority of casual fans will get it too?
I think it would be hilarious if the film starts with Ripley falling into the vat of molten lead and then it transitions to a Working Joe watching her having this dream and deciding to wake her from her nightmare...
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 07, 2016, 09:58:37 AM
The recent trend in big franchise sequels to rely almost exclusively on the nostalgia crowd in favour of actually doing new and interesting things really isn't doing these movies any favours. Films like Jurassic World and The Force Awakens are just incredibly bland and forgettable once you scratch off the flashy franchise veneer.
But they made big money and that's all that maters in Hollywood these days. Fox knows the big selling point for Blomkamp's film will be the return of Hicks, Ripley and Newt. Just like the return of Han, Leia and Luke was a big selling point for TFA.
Prometheus was an attempt at something new and fresh in the Alien universe. But it didn't really excel at the box office, it certainly never came close to TFA and Jurassic World's returns. So it makes sense for Fox to play it safe this time and return to the Alien brand for the very loose Prometheus sequel and to follow Disney's recipe with regards to Blomkamp's new Alien film.
It would make absolutely no sense for Fox to drop Hicks and Ripley just so they can stay in canon to two films which the majority of casual fans dislike.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jun 07, 2016, 04:08:32 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 07, 2016, 09:58:37 AM
The recent trend in big franchise sequels to rely almost exclusively on the nostalgia crowd in favour of actually doing new and interesting things really isn't doing these movies any favours. Films like Jurassic World and The Force Awakens are just incredibly bland and forgettable once you scratch off the flashy franchise veneer.
But they made big money and that's all that maters in Hollywood these days. Fox knows the big selling point for Blomkamp's film will be the return of Hicks, Ripley and Newt. Just like the return of Han, Leia and Luke was a big selling point for TFA.
Prometheus was an attempt at something new and fresh in the Alien universe. But it didn't really excel at the box office, it certainly never came close to TFA and Jurassic World's returns. So it makes sense for Fox to play it safe this time and return to the Alien brand for the very loose Prometheus sequel and to follow Disney's recipe with regards to Blomkamp's new Alien film.
It would make absolutely no sense for Fox to drop Hicks and Ripley just so they can stay in canon to two films which the majority of casual fans dislike.
Doesn't matter what fox does or doesn't do, this franchise is never going to make TFA level money.
I know movie making is a business, but that type of reasoning isn't going to produce an actual good film regardless of the box office return. As a fan of this franchise I just want a good film, that doesnt destroy whats come before, even if no one at Fox would look at from that POV.
And i'll add that if Fox is actually trying to achieve the success of starwars or JW by copying that formula then I would prefer no new film at all.
QuoteDoesn't matter what fox does or doesn't do, this franchise is never going to make TFA level money.
It won't. Not if it's R-Rated.
But they would still want to maximize profits by appealing to the very large nostalgia crowd.
QuoteI know movie making is a business, but that type of reasoning isn't going to produce an actual good film regardless of the box office return.
And that's why good original films are such a rarity these days.
A retcon film could still benefit Alien 3, perhaps even more than a straight follow up. As new fans are drawn in, people who never cared before may suddenly find themselves intrigued by these original sequels and check them out. Some will undoubtedly like them more. Controversy sells.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jun 07, 2016, 04:22:11 PM
QuoteDoesn't matter what fox does or doesn't do, this franchise is never going to make TFA level money.
It won't. Not if it's R-Rated.
If they're lucky, it could make Deadpool level money.
Quote from: Russ on Jun 07, 2016, 02:58:22 PMIt'll be a hypersleep dream handwave.
Such an awful, childish way of doing it.
QuoteAliens didn't change anything that happened in the first film. Ripley wasn't killed by previously nonexistent aliens aboard the Narcissus. A3, on the other hand, completely wiped away the resolution of it's predecessor. It's not a retcon, no, but it may as well be because it made the events of that film meaningless.
To be entirely true it's not Alien 3's "Fault" per say but simply the sequel principle, any sequel to Aliens would reduce the significance of the sacrifices made by everybody in Aliens. even Alien 5 if it disregards Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection..it will still do the same thing on principle, I mean no matter what way you cut it any sequel would and will do the same thing.
QuoteSo when someone wants to ask, yet again, how we would feel about Aliens being retconned, it's important to know that we've basically already experienced that feeling. Now it's their turn. We should be the ones asking them how it feels.
That's a bit overly dramatic.
QuoteDisney Princesses? Someone else once mentioned kittens and teacups. This is just another way of talking down to people.
He was using that as a analogy he wasn't talking down to anybody from what I can tell.
What if they go the cloning route, but never actually say it until by the end it becomes apparent that that is what happened? So this way the real Ripley would be shocked to discover what happened.
I don't really care if they try to reconcile the return of Hicks and Newt with the existing continuity. After a lot of careful consideration, they just retcon those 2 last films and not even try to mention them. But if Blomkamp felt compelled to keep those films in perhaps it would be interesting to see how 30 years later we have Hicks, Newt, and Ripley still trying to figure out how the Sulaco burned down and how they were saved so fortuitously by a passing W-Y ship. This way, the notion of whether Alien 3 happened or not becomes an actual mystery device for the film. It becomes the focus of the film, and not just a nuisance continuity matter to be disposed of in the opening act...
If they must make this Alien 5 movie I would rather them keep it separate and not make the others into bad hyperspace dreams. Personally I think that bringing back the same characters will hold back this franchise. The first three Alien movies are excellent films that deal with Ripley and her struggle with the Alien (and indirectly the Company) even Resurrection focuses on Ripley, the franchise should really move on from these dead characters. I think that new characters should be introduced, and I fear this film will appeal mainly towards nostalgia and fan service rather than making a good Alien movie. I'm not saying this just because I like Alien 3 (a lot of people now like Alien 3) but rather to expand the franchise in a new direction, we have seen these characters story already so just move on. We saw them bring Ripley back and we got Resurrection, they brought back Hicks and we got Colonial Marines. From what we've heard we already know that Newt will live for sure and it is highly unlikely that Ripley or Hicks will die either so there is no threat of death for these characters and we haven't even seen the movie, also why are old people going to fight Aliens?, and on top of that why would these characters go back to fight the Alien again? (are they bored and wanna relive the good old times), and what is the point of making this movie, why is there another encounter with the Aliens with the same characters doesn't this also undo the "happy ending" of Aliens that so many fans were mad at Alien 3 for undoing? Also what will this movie achieve for these franchise, Alien 3 beautifully closed the story and struggle of Ripley in a thoughtful and meaningful way and through her actions saved the universe, what will this movie do that will be so meaningful to the franchise? Canon is what you decide to make canon, I want the movie to be good but from what I've heard and seen I think it will be a rather bland version of what we have seen before that will focus more on fan service (and making a profit) rather than making a good Alien movie.
Also about the comment about the magic egg in Alien 3 what about Ripley's magic arm in Aliens able to overcome the pull of the Alien Queen and the vacuum of space, if anything they all should have died when Ripley opened the airlock.
There must have been 2 magic eggs in Alien 3. Didn't anybody count the aliens in that film?
I think the general consensus was that the hugger was carrying 2 embryos, one queen and one warrior.
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 07, 2016, 10:34:48 PM
I think the general consensus was that the hugger was carrying 2 embryos, one queen and one warrior.
Whaaaaat?
It was a queen facehugger it carries one queen embro and one regular embro as a protector for the queen
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 10:40:35 PM
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 07, 2016, 10:34:48 PM
I think the general consensus was that the hugger was carrying 2 embryos, one queen and one warrior.
Whaaaaat?
That's just a common (and old) fan theory, there is no real answer.
You know what the real answer was?
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 05:45:32 PMWhat if they go the cloning route, but never actually say it until by the end it becomes apparent that that is what happened?
But
why would anyone
want to clone them?
The cloning in
Resurrection at least made sense because they got the Alien out of it. There's no logical reason to go to the vast expense and effort of cloning Ripley, Hicks and Newt. What would you gain? Sod all.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 08, 2016, 10:29:29 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 05:45:32 PMWhat if they go the cloning route, but never actually say it until by the end it becomes apparent that that is what happened?
But why would anyone want to clone them?
The cloning in Resurrection at least made sense because they got the Alien out of it. There's no logical reason to go to the vast expense and effort of cloning Ripley, Hicks and Newt. What would you gain? Sod all.
Exactly
Also why would the Sulaco have cloning equipment laying around (how convenient), also this takes a lot of emotion out of Ripley's sacrifice in Alien 3 if she is now just a clone and the real Ripley is in hyper sleep for another 30 years. This could also turn the Alien series into self parody, if there is no threat of death for the major characters than why would I ever have to get worried whenever they encounter an Alien, also what kind of life (and luck) is it to wake up and continue fighting Aliens. Eventually it needs to end for characters, it can't last forever as that is both very unrealistic (remember the Alien is the deadliest creature in the universe) and it is a disservice to characters to continue to fight them without end, they either need to retire or die.
A few other concerns about the story that is proposed: how would bishop be able to get up and move around he just got ripped in half by the Queen, and why would Ripley, Hicks, and Newt age in cyro, between Alien and Aliens Ripley was out there for 57 years and there were no real sign of any aging (note that this was the record for longest hyper sleep), how long would the life support systems last for them to age 30 years in cyro?
I have an old theory that the company intentionally diverted the Sulaco to Fury 161 to isolate Ripley and the alien on a planet exclusively under their control and presumably outside the jurisdiction of Colonial Administration. They would also have certain "liberties" with the condemned inmates of the prison that they wouldn't otherwise have with innocent colonists.
By that rationale, it's possible that the company was able to intercept the Sulaco and contain the survivors to prevent them from blowing the whistle about what really happened on LV-426. Alien 3 and Resurrection could be explained as drug-induced nightmares or hallucinations that Ripley suffered while in captivity. It could be something like Sarah Connor's situation in T2.
There's an anime I really like, Gurren Lagann, which perfectly sums up why I hate the idea of bringing Hicks and Newt back. And it's actually nothing to do with maintaining Alien3 in continuity. I love A3, but f**k it, this is how movies are these days: Don't like it? Reboot it. But my problem with it is this: we shouldn't bring back old, dead characters just because we can. It's counterproductive. These characters had their shot, and they left their mark. Let the next generation have its chance to shine.
Imagine if Aliens had dragged back Parker, Dallas, Ash, etc. Imagine if that film had been burdened by needing to resurrect, justify, and nurture characters that were already dead. Would it be the powerhouse it is today? Of course not. Would fans of Alien even be happy to see those characters' corpses dug up from the grave? f**k, no. They died trying to do something.
The strength of Aliens lies in its ability to move onwards and upwards from where we were left off. It works because it didn't try to suck Alien's cock and preserve every ounce of its precious memory. Why we feel the need to do just that for Aliens is beyond me.
It might well be awful for many that these characters died unceremonious deaths, but for God's sake -- they died, let other characters have their moment! We've gone decades without them. We don't need them. Give us new characters we can root for, instead of banking on us still giving a flying f**k about characters that died 24 years ago.
Yea, stick a fork in it already. Throw us some new meat.
QuoteImagine if Aliens had dragged back Parker, Dallas, Ash, etc.
It's not like we want characters like Hudson or Vasquez, we just want the characters who were
still alive at the end of the movie. Big difference.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jun 08, 2016, 12:45:59 PMAlien 3 and Resurrection could be explained as drug-induced nightmares or hallucinations that Ripley suffered while in captivity.
The dream thing will never work because there's too much that happens in the later films that in no way involves Ripley.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 08, 2016, 01:18:55 PMIt's not like we want characters like Hudson or Vasquez, we just want the characters who were still alive at the end of the movie. Big difference.
It's no different. People who are still so bitter about it after all this time should really get over themselves and realise there's a hell of a lot more potential to the series than simply backtracking to resurrect a couple of people several decades after the fact.
This is already causing a big divide in the fans and it's not even official yet.
Please, FOX, just go the route of new characters. Just have Michael Beihn play Hicks father looking for justice for the death of his Marine son fighting a corporations battles if you need to just have that little bit of fanservice.
Quote from: SiL on Jun 08, 2016, 12:49:13 PMBut my problem with it is this: we shouldn't bring back old, dead characters just because we can. It's counterproductive. These characters had their shot, and they left their mark. Let the next generation have its chance to shine.
Agreed, but apparently Weaver needs a new pair of shoes.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 08, 2016, 01:55:03 PM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jun 08, 2016, 12:45:59 PMAlien 3 and Resurrection could be explained as drug-induced nightmares or hallucinations that Ripley suffered while in captivity.
The dream thing will never work because there's too much that happens in the later films that in no way involves Ripley.
When has that ever stopped hack writers before?
QuoteIt's no different. People who are still so bitter about it after all this time should really get over themselves and realise there's a hell of a lot more potential to the series than simply backtracking to resurrect a couple of people several decades after the fact.
It is different. We're not pulling characters at random, just the ones Aliens told us survived. Frost or Lambert would require an explanation because they died in-story. But with Newt, just scrap A3 and you're all set. Get it? She's not resurrected because she was never dead in the first place. As intended. No explanation required.
Quote
This is already causing a big divide in the fans and it's not even official yet.
Fans are divided over everything. Always have been.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 08, 2016, 10:29:29 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 07, 2016, 05:45:32 PMWhat if they go the cloning route, but never actually say it until by the end it becomes apparent that that is what happened?
But why would anyone want to clone them?
The cloning in Resurrection at least made sense because they got the Alien out of it. There's no logical reason to go to the vast expense and effort of cloning Ripley, Hicks and Newt. What would you gain? Sod all.
The premise why anyone would want to clone them is as described in the first few posts here. They were cloned just to have some warm bodies to impregnate. Bishop had conflicting requests made of him in Aliens. He was supposed to not harm or by omission of action allow to be harmed another person. But he was also instructed to bring hoe some Aliens. One way he could do that, is to make some dumb clones of the people on board the Sulaco and impregnate them with eggs he brought on board. That's the only reason that so far seems to make sense as to why they would be cloned, and it's not too much of a stretch, and it's also consistent with some of the themes of the films.
What the new proposal is, is to not explain any of this at the beginning of the new film, but rather have it be implied by the end of the movie. That could be kind of clever.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 08, 2016, 07:47:40 PMThe premise why anyone would want to clone them is as described in the first few posts here. They were cloned just to have some warm bodies to impregnate.
But that's still no explanation. If all they want is someone to be the host for an Alien, why wouldn't they just get someone who already exists - a hobo, a convict, anybody - rather than pointlessly spending millions of dollars on cloning those three in particular?
Whichever way you cut it, the cloning idea just doesn't stand up to any kind of logical scrutiny.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 08, 2016, 07:34:42 PM
QuoteIt's no different. People who are still so bitter about it after all this time should really get over themselves and realise there's a hell of a lot more potential to the series than simply backtracking to resurrect a couple of people several decades after the fact.
It is different. We're not pulling characters at random, just the ones Aliens told us survived. Frost or Lambert would require an explanation because they died in-story. But with Newt, just scrap A3 and you're all set. Get it? She's not resurrected because she was never dead in the first place. As intended. No explanation required.
Quote
This is already causing a big divide in the fans and it's not even official yet.
Fans are divided over everything. Always have been.
Yes it is natural for fans to be divided about this issue. It is normal and I think it is ok. But there is a caveat with that...
While not agreeing with many of the people on this forum, I am respectfully disagreeing. There are valuable opinions on both sides of the subject and it serves no purpose for anyone to attack anybody else over their opinions about what is ultimately just a work of fiction. I propose that the polemic be taken elsewhere on this forum. There were some active topics on the subject already. I created this thread for the purpose of trying to make Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection WORK with the underlying assumptions that have been made about Blomkamp's film. This thread wasn't made to debate the validity of Blomkamp's film, but to see if as fans, we can come up with a logical solution to make Blomkamp's ideas work with A3 and AR. Can we stick to that? It's all in good fun boys and girls...
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 08, 2016, 07:51:35 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 08, 2016, 07:47:40 PMThe premise why anyone would want to clone them is as described in the first few posts here. They were cloned just to have some warm bodies to impregnate.
But that's still no explanation. If all they want is someone to be the host for an Alien, why wouldn't they just get someone who already exists - a hobo, a convict, anybody - rather than pointlessly spending millions of dollars on cloning those three in particular?
Whichever way you cut it, the cloning idea just doesn't stand up to any kind of logical scrutiny.
I am not proposing some magical "them" but rather Bishop. People can read other people's dreams in this future. Who is to say that cloning is a multi-million dollar expense at the time of the films. Perhaps Bishop just throws a switch and the bodies are automatically cloned within a few weeks or days on the Sulaco. Who is to say that equipment like that doesn't exist on a military vessel. What if somebody loses an arm in combat? Clone it once they get back to the ship. It's reasonable.
The premise is that Bishop brought a few eggs onto the ship and it is more probable than a few eggs magically appearing on the Sulaco as per Alien 3. Bishop was simply in a rush to impregnate some bodies on the ship so that no actual people get harmed. The idea is to impregnate and then put back in stasis...
Cloning appeared to be a major hurdle for the scientists in resurrection. I guess that doesn't matter if its being written out of existence though.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 08, 2016, 07:54:18 PMPerhaps Bishop just throws a switch and the bodies are automatically cloned within a few weeks or days on the Sulaco.
That would completely contradict the more realistic technological world displayed in the series. The idea that every Marine starship is equipped with some magical machine that can spew out clones at the drop of a hat is a pretty ridiculous one. That's
Star Trek deus ex machina stuff.
The idea that Bishop is somehow behind it would also totally undermine the very essence of his character in
Aliens, as well as his character arc in that film.
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 08, 2016, 08:35:52 PM
Cloning appeared to be a major hurdle for the scientisst in resurrection.
And that was 200 years into the future.
Although to be fair, I think they only had a drop of old, dried-up blood to work with.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Jun 08, 2016, 07:54:18 PM
Who is to say that cloning is a multi-million dollar expense at the time of the films. Perhaps Bishop just throws a switch and the bodies are automatically cloned within a few weeks or days on the Sulaco. Who is to say that equipment like that doesn't exist on a military vessel. What if somebody loses an arm in combat? Clone it once they get back to the ship. It's reasonable.
Could come in handy when you're running short on manpower as a result of attrition. Oi Sarge! We need another 50 Hudson's and let's say another 27 Hickses. Better cook up another batch of 15 Vasquez's as well just in case.
Why should they recton Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection just because some people don't like them? Believe it or not but some people don't like Aliens because they think it differs too much from Alien. There are even people who don't like the original Alien. Should we recton those movies as well just because some people don't like them?
If they find a logical way to include these characters without recton (which will be nearly impossible) then be my guest, but don't go around changing movies just because some people don't like it.Technically Colonial Marines is canon but not many people take it as such. If this movie comes out not everybody will like it . What if the movie sucks then what are we stuck with?
I just wish the Alien franchise could move on, for example imagine a movie with Aliens, Colonial Marines, and the UPP you don't need these old characters and still make a good movie that everybody can enjoy without changing the past movies.
I think fox no longer considers Aliens CM canon if I remember right.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 08, 2016, 07:34:42 PM
It is different. We're not pulling characters at random, just the ones Aliens told us survived. Frost or Lambert would require an explanation because they died in-story. But with Newt, just scrap A3 and you're all set. Get it? She's not resurrected because she was never dead in the first place. As intended. No explanation required.
It's not different. The story that has been told previously, in total, includes the fact Hicks and Newt died. We can easily bring back Lambert if we start our movie before the Alien attacks her: we can easily bring back Frost if we start our new movie before the Marines enter the hive.
Just because there was a neat chapter break doesn't mean you're doing any less backflips to bring these people back.
Backflips would be trying to explain it away, which people on both sides agree is worse than ignoring it. That neat chapter break makes it all too easy.
Quote from: colonialmarine9 on Jun 08, 2016, 09:56:22 PM
Why should they recton Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection just because some people don't like them? Believe it or not but some people don't like Aliens because they think it differs too much from Alien. There are even people who don't like the original Alien. Should we recton those movies as well just because some people don't like them?
If they find a logical way to include these characters without recton (which will be nearly impossible) then be my guest, but don't go around changing movies just because some people don't like it.Technically Colonial Marines is canon but not many people take it as such. If this movie comes out not everybody will like it . What if the movie sucks then what are we stuck with?
I just wish the Alien franchise could move on, for example imagine a movie with Aliens, Colonial Marines, and the UPP you don't need these old characters and still make a good movie that everybody can enjoy without changing the past movies.
^ This!
It literally boils down to "the last two films suck so therefore retcon".
Might as well reboot the entire franchise starting with Alien instead of cherry picking some films and disregarding others.
That would piss off everyone rather than a select group. ;D
CONSPIRACY THEORY TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!
Alien Resurrection was a CONSPIRACY.
:o
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 09, 2016, 03:50:58 AM
^ This!
It literally boils down to "the last two films suck so therefore retcon".
Might as well reboot the entire franchise starting with Alien instead of cherry picking some films and disregarding others.
That would piss off everyone rather than a select group. ;D
I would love to see the public's response if the studio decided to do this. :laugh:
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 08, 2016, 10:15:49 PM
I think fox no longer considers Aliens CM canon if I remember right.
I think you are right, Fox has abandoned it so they won't care if people consider it canon or not.
http://reflectionsonfilmandtelevision.blogspot.com/2015/03/dont-be-afraid-im-part-of-family-how.html
I think this article sums up why it is not a very good idea to bring back the old characters.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Jun 09, 2016, 03:44:08 AM
Backflips would be trying to explain it away, which people on both sides agree is worse than ignoring it. That neat chapter break makes it all too easy.
You wouldn't need to explain restarting halfway through a movie if you didn't want to.
That would be fine if EVERYONE agreed that the last 2 films suck. That's just not the case, though. You won't get everyone to agree to that. Both the 3rd and 4rth movie have their fans, and they are legion.*
Personally, this is what I want to see:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi613.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt211%2Fwindebieste%2FNo%2520movies%2520retconned.jpg&hash=6bd79ea50465fe9501844a1015c594dedc114ee1)
Within this scenario, the currently long established main extant story arc is not interfered with. 'ALIEN' through 'ALIEN: Resurrection' and beyond is possible. Also present is another branching series based off of 'ALIENS'.
Presented this way, it's clear there's room for 2 entire series happening here, co-existing side by side. Fresh characters and situations in the 'ALIENS' time line and a 5th movie taking place after 'ALIEN: Resurrection' would be highly desirable. Just about everyone would be happy with that.
...but no, Blomkamp offers this scenario:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi613.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt211%2Fwindebieste%2Fmovies%2520retconned.jpg&hash=baac38169c328aa71eccf47434ef4e924075a279)
Where resurrecting deceased characters not only wipes out half of the extant series, but also diminishes the potential for future stories based on the current time line.
This eradication is out to reduce the capabilities of this Universe supporting multiple valid story arcs. All this for the sake of reintroducing 3 deceased characters to be played by actors that haven't played these roles in decades. It's almost a form of bigotry to pursue this path.
Characters die in these movies. It's what makes them valuable. Conversely, it's what makes the Aliens such a threat. If we lose the diversity that this series has established over the past decades, then we start investing in mediocrity with banal overwrought heroes that really should be dead. Ripley, Hicks and Newt shouldn't be exempt. They will become meaningless as characters. It's not like other characters aren't permitted to be developed within a branching story line.
I'm all for an 'ALIENS' spin off story - and an entire 'ALIENS' themed series to stem from that. As far as I am concerned, if Blomkamp were to embrace this philosophy, I'd be ecstatic! I'd much rather see that happen than lose the diversity this series has established for itself.
-Windebieste.
*Unlike 'A:CM'. No one will give a shit if that was retconned. Fox wants to, anyway, from what I understand. That's just about granted.
Winde for director 2019. Someone please give this man a small loan of a million dollars, I believe he can pull it off better than what Blomkamp has proposed.
I don't get why people are so against having someone else take a crack at making a Ripley/Newt alien movie. I mean shit it's just story telling. All this canon shit is just an illusion. I mean really people.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 09, 2016, 10:22:59 AM
That would be fine if EVERYONE agreed that the last 2 films suck. That's just not the case, though. You won't get everyone to agree to that. Both the 3rd and 4rth movie have their fans, and they are legion.*
Personally, this is what I want to see:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi613.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt211%2Fwindebieste%2FNo%2520movies%2520retconned.jpg&hash=6bd79ea50465fe9501844a1015c594dedc114ee1)
Within this scenario, the currently long established main extant story arc is not interfered with. 'ALIEN' through 'ALIEN: Resurrection' and beyond is possible. Also present is another branching series based off of 'ALIENS'.
Presented this way, it's clear there's room for 2 entire series happening here, co-existing side by side. Fresh characters and situations in the 'ALIENS' time line and a 5th movie taking place after 'ALIEN: Resurrection' would be highly desirable. Just about everyone would be happy with that.
...but no, Blomkamp offers this scenario:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi613.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt211%2Fwindebieste%2Fmovies%2520retconned.jpg&hash=baac38169c328aa71eccf47434ef4e924075a279)
Where resurrecting deceased characters not only wipes out half of the extant series, but also diminishes the potential for future stories based on the current time line.
This eradication is out to reduce the capabilities of this Universe supporting multiple valid story arcs. All this for the sake of reintroducing 3 deceased characters to be played by actors that haven't played these roles in decades. It's almost a form of bigotry to pursue this path.
Characters die in these movies. It's what makes them valuable. Conversely, it's what makes the Aliens such a threat. If we lose the diversity that this series has established over the past decades, then we start investing in mediocrity with banal overwrought heroes that really should be dead. Ripley, Hicks and Newt shouldn't be exempt. They will become meaningless as characters. It's not like other characters aren't permitted to be developed within a branching story line.
I'm all for an 'ALIENS' spin off story - and an entire 'ALIENS' themed series to stem from that. As far as I am concerned, if Blomkamp were to embrace this philosophy, I'd be ecstatic! I'd much rather see that happen than lose the diversity this series has established for itself.
-Windebieste.
*Unlike 'A:CM'. No one will give a shit if that was retconned. Fox wants to, anyway, from what I understand. That's just about granted.
What if
Alien Resurrection - the plot, setting, everything - was a massive government cover-up? It's simple, no hamfisted explanation as to how Newt and Hicks are back (Hicks can be an android, and the girl in the cryo-tube in
Alien 3 can simply be someone else) or how the Colonial Marines and the Company are back.
If you recall, only Call mentions '200 years ago' in the entire film.
She's also "Way too trusting". Perhaps she was working for whomever Perez was working for, and she was sent in to 'clean up' per se. Why is Call so interested in Ripley? Also, if you recall, Ripley wasn't even supposed to exist. They brought her back for the sole purpose of getting the embryonic Queen inside her.
So, basically:
1) Call is either fed misinformation, or is given orders to misconstrue the facts as much as possible (maybe it wasn't 200 years ago, maybe it was only 30. Maybe she wasn't sent there to kill the Aliens in the first place. Maybe she was sent there to kill Ripley. To bring Ripley back to Weyland-Yutani. The possibilities are endless.) and gain her trust.
2) The
Auriga was a controlled experiment, one that the crew of the
Betty (Except Call) and Ripley were not in on.
3) The events in
Alien Resurrection take place a few decades after
Aliens and
Alien 3 4) Plus, if you add up the 57 years in cryo, plus 30, you get
87 years. That's
almost a century. Perhaps Call even thought it was 100 years MORE than what it was. Perhaps government/corporate propaganda. An experiment with Call/Ripley, etc. Maybe the mainstream media thinks she died with the
Nostromo? Maybe the events in
Aliens and
Alien 3 were ALSO part of the experiment? THE POSSIBILITIES ARE ENDLESS.
Simply pretending
Resurrection and
Alien 3 never happened is one of the laziest, most idiotic things the director for the Fifth Film can do.
In fact, it is so lazy and idiotic it is painful to think about.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 09, 2016, 10:58:53 AM
Winde for director 2019. Someone please give this man a small loan of a million dollars, I believe he can pull it off better than what Blomkamp has proposed.
I AGREE! (Btw, nice Trump jab xD)
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 09, 2016, 10:58:53 AM
Winde for director 2019. Someone please give this man a small loan of a million dollars, I believe he can pull it off better than what Blomkamp has proposed.
Goodness gracious NO! Can you imagine an Alien movie with nothing but Kenner Aliens? :P
Quote from: 426Buddy on Jun 08, 2016, 10:15:49 PM
I think fox no longer considers Aliens CM canon if I remember right.
Is there a website or something where Fox proclaims what is currently considered canon and what not?
Quote from: colonialmarine9 on Jun 09, 2016, 07:40:56 AM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Jun 09, 2016, 03:50:58 AM
It literally boils down to "the last two films suck so therefore retcon".
Might as well reboot the entire franchise starting with Alien instead of cherry picking some films and disregarding others.
That would piss off everyone rather than a select group. ;D
I would love to see the public's response if the studio decided to do this. :laugh:
Yeah, it wouldn't go down well would it? Unlike the current situation in which the majority of casual fans are
applauding the idea of A3 and A:R being written-off.
LOL now I wanna see Winde make a movie on Kenner Aliens. ;D
Wait until Winde introduces the full Kenner Alien range to the canon, then you're going to hear bitching on these boards. ;)
How about Ripley and Hicks in Alien 5 are androids? Made to cover up the Hadleys Hope disaster and toe the company line about what happened. They learn about what happened, causes a conflict of interest, etc. etc. Just todays brainfart :D
Got your interest? [CHECK!]
Got Kenner Aliens? [CHECK!]
Got the services of a Professional and qualified Intellectual Property Consultant required to appease the high demands and satisfy Fox requirements without receiving cease and desist order that WILL result in being comprehensively shut down in a moments notice? [CHECK!]
OK! We're set... Off to KickStarter we go! We can do this! :laugh:
-Windebieste.
Quote from: irn on Jun 09, 2016, 10:33:49 PM
How about Ripley and Hicks in Alien 5 are androids? Made to cover up the Hadleys Hope disaster and toe the company line about what happened. They learn about what happened, causes a conflict of interest, etc. etc. Just todays brainfart :D
I think any such ideas are constructive and consistent with the principle of this thread.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 09, 2016, 11:59:40 PM
Got your interest? [CHECK!]
Got Kenner Aliens? [CHECK!]
Got the services of a Professional and qualified Intellectual Property Consultant required to appease the high demands and satisfy Fox requirements without receiving cease and desist order that WILL result in being comprehensively shut down in a moments notice? [CHECK!]
OK! We're set... Off to KickStarter we go! We can do this! :laugh:
-Windebieste.
I always had a soft spot for these fanfilms.
I have kind of been holding off my opinions of this film for a while seeing as I haven't seen it when it's actually finished and I am able to form a more accurate critique of it.
Not mentioning the last two films is the most pragmatic approach thus the best way to do it.
Blomkamp would be able to spend less time explaining the silly convoluted retcon story and more time actually explaining the general plot instead. :laugh:
pull a Shyamalan and have them be androids programmed with their memories made by the company to help get the aliens; wasn't there something similar in the female war?
that's what Id so anyway
Alien 3's direction was a disappointment even if the movie is fine (fine not great), Resurrection was juvenile, then what? The AVP movies? Screw it. Toss the canon. There's no argument to be made... especially years down the line. It's better not to convolute things any further considering that Prometheus can't be ignored.
I remember what my 12 year old self felt when I saw Alien 3. Throw it in the trash like they did Bishop.
Quote from: swarm87 on Jul 26, 2016, 02:33:40 AM
pull a Shyamalan and have them be androids programmed with their memories made by the company to help get the aliens; wasn't there something similar in the female war?
that's what Id so anyway
Sure, it's a much better proposal than what they are currently planning.
And I know there will be people saying "this doesn't make sense."
I'd honestly rather have that which makes little sense, instead of full on nonsense that is currently on hold pending a better upcoming film that actually plans to expand and contribute something to the story instead of fan-jerking us with nostalgia.
Or we can make this a quick flash before Ripley's eyes of what her life could've been if she had survived... as she is falling into the furnace. We get a glimpse on what actually goes on in her mind during that scene in Alien: 3.
Quote from: swarm87 on Jul 26, 2016, 02:33:40 AMpull a Shyamalan and have them be androids programmed with their memories made by the company to help get the aliens; wasn't there something similar in the female war?
Every time someone suggests an idea this dumb and illogical I die a little inside.
Quote from: swarm87 on Jul 26, 2016, 02:33:40 AM
pull a Shyamalan and have them be androids programmed with their memories made by the company to help get the aliens; wasn't there something similar in the female war?
The novelization of Female War had Ripley become a synth but absolutely no reason is given for it. Personally, that kind of thing would just be worse for me. There's really no need for it. Nor the means in which they could "download" their memories. It's cleaner (in some regards) to just try to avoid some contrived explanation and just go alternate timeline.
Hey I told you guys, the corpses dumped into the fire in Alien³ were jello-molds. Aaron in hindsight changed his mind and had the bodies frozen and replaced with jello. Which is the real reason he was offed so early on. Why there is no record of this in A|R? No one cares. All that matters is that we now have dna from all of them and can finally have the Clone Wars we've all been desiring for so long. Oh and no problems with them being so old... we'll just have the movie take place 30 years after WY clones them.
That's not bad bullshit if I do say so myself. We can also save A|R, we'll blame it on the big deletion and walmart merger by adding in that cut scene permanently. That way in alien 6 we can have a Ripley vs Ripley battle. It'll be like BvS, only much more even. Oh who am I kidding, they'll start to make out half way though.
:laugh: :-X :'(
This movie isn't happening guys, and that's great cause it sound like a Giant clusterf**k.
Quote from: windebieste on Jun 09, 2016, 10:22:59 AM
That would be fine if EVERYONE agreed that the last 2 films suck. That's just not the case, though. You won't get everyone to agree to that. Both the 3rd and 4rth movie have their fans, and they are legion.*
Personally, this is what I want to see:
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi613.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt211%2Fwindebieste%2FNo%2520movies%2520retconned.jpg&hash=6bd79ea50465fe9501844a1015c594dedc114ee1)
This! Idea of more Colonial Marines comming to LV-426 in serch of Sulaco is still great. Just not the way A:CM did this.
Retcon of any films from existing canon is bad idea and will end up with Alien remake, sooner then later.
Long live A3 and A:R!
I've started to suspect more and more that we are going to be handed time travelling or some weird quantum mechanics in either A:C (Alien: Covenant) or in the sequel to that one, which will enable these parallel story lines and universes, and to not make it cheesy they will have to implement a lot of Engineer fluff in A2 (Blomkapf's Alien movie) to not make it seem too hoaky and lame.
I'm not a fan of this concept, at all. But if they're gonna be morons and make an Aliens fanboy story with Hicks, Newt and Ripley, they better treat the series with respect. Retconning stuff is not respectful, especially since A3 now has a considerable fan-base that is steadily growing, and people in general are softening up more and more to A:R.
The best solution in the end would be just to continue where A:R ended or around that same time frame. There is so much stuff to work with there. I even have an idea on how to have a Hicks or/and Newt droid or clone in there to make the story "work" without being too cringe-worthy - that is if you necessarily need to have Hix & Noot in the story...
Wasn't there a whole scene cut from the final footage of Alien3 involving the graphic autopsy of Newt?
I don't know about a whole scene, but rumour is it had to be toned down quite a lot.
Also the recent books have been carrying on from the A:R timeline. Not to mention the W-Y Report.
They considered not mentioning A:R in Sea of Sorrows but decided to anyway.
Fox seems to be making an effort to keep the timeline consistent now. So this gives me some small hope that they'd either ditch Blomkamp's film, or force him to change things in his script like getting rid of Rips, Hicks n' Noot or set it after A:R and keep Rips-8 for the Sigourney fans. In this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 08:53:03 PMIn this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
I wouldn't go that far... :P I don't think studio meddling has
ever benefited a film.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 30, 2016, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 08:53:03 PMIn this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
I wouldn't go that far... :P I don't think studio meddling has ever benefited a film.
True, maybe this is one of the rare occasions where it might. :laugh:
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 09:00:29 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 30, 2016, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 08:53:03 PMIn this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
I wouldn't go that far... :P I don't think studio meddling has ever benefited a film.
True, maybe this is one of the rare occasions where it might. :laugh:
No, Huda is right. Let them make Blomkamp's film as he sees it. It's the right thing to do.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:30:32 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 09:00:29 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 30, 2016, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 08:53:03 PMIn this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
I wouldn't go that far... :P I don't think studio meddling has ever benefited a film.
P.S. Alien 5... I say we take off and nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure...
True, maybe this is one of the rare occasions where it might. :laugh:
No, Huda is right. Let them make Blomkamp's film as he sees it. It's the right thing to do.
I agree, Huda is most definitely right especially with his last point, I don't know how I missed it on my first read. :P :laugh: ;D
All jokes aside, I know that studio meddling does mostly bring harm... mostly...
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 09:30:32 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 09:00:29 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 30, 2016, 08:54:41 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 30, 2016, 08:53:03 PMIn this case, I say God bless corporate meddling.
I wouldn't go that far... :P I don't think studio meddling has ever benefited a film.
True, maybe this is one of the rare occasions where it might. :laugh:
No, Huda is right. Let them make Blomkamp's film as he sees it. It's the right thing to do.
The right thing to do would be for Fox to take Disney's example and make a Story Group for the Aliens franchise like they did with Star Wars to insure that all their properties actually make sense. Have a guy who would have picked up the script and be like "Ummm... Hey Mr Fincher, about this egg on the Sulaco... Did you think it through?" or "Mr Blomkamp, your script includes characters that are dead, please have a look at our "holocron" and get your facts straight."
And yeah, some directors will be like "Well f**k you Fox!", they want to make their own vision of a film. That's all fine and dandy, but you're working with a franchise. Yeah, your vision might be great, but it might also be Super Mario Bros the movie or Batman vs Superman. Canon exists for a reason.
In general, I agree that there should be a canonmaster who guides the franchise so that everything is consistent, but I'd also be up for having some alternate stories told. Also, if we are too rigorous with what the stories are, then some star directors will pass on the opportunity to do a film. Because of AVP, we didn't get Cameron / Scott coming back together to the franchise. Those boys had a vision, and who could really tell them that they are wrong?
A Canonmaster should also be cognizant of where the series took a wrong turn, and if possible, fix it.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 10:17:03 PMA Canonmaster should also be cognizant of where the series took a wrong turn, and if possible, fix it.
Or alternatively, he could stop dwelling in the past just get on with making the franchise better going forwards.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
but I'd also be up for having some alternate stories told.
And that's what we have Dark Horse for. :D
Really, try reading Fire and Stone and Life to Death back to back. Individually they may be flawed but they make a brilliant whole. :D
Then don't get me started on Defiance, we need more Isolation inspired stuff.
All of those don't include Ripley, Hicks or Newt at all, heck Fire and Stone is pretty much an Aliens sequel itself.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
Also, if we are too rigorous with what the stories are, then some star directors will pass on the opportunity to do a film. Because of AVP, we didn't get Cameron / Scott coming back together to the franchise. Those boys had a vision, and who could really tell them that they are wrong?
This is a thing I personally view as a fallacy, but I'm also a comic book fan so it probably stems from that. New blood can lead to something terrible or something great but old blood can't keep a franchise afloat forever.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 10:17:03 PM
A Canonmaster should also be cognizant of where the series took a wrong turn, and if possible, fix it.
Eh, when something is canon, retcons just do more damage than good without full reboot from the start, this can be seen in NUMEROUS franchises, look at DC for example, or the Marvel comics for that matter. Individual stories in Marvel comics can be great but the convolutedness of the canon and all the retcons and the little boy overlord puppetmaster explanation and ugh....
Rather than fix problems, the canon workgroup's purpose should be to avoid continuity snarls in the first place.
If Fox thinks there's money to be made out of a proposition, they'll retcon anything. They're as financially opportunistic as any other major company (and, really, are perfectly within their rights to be).
Heck, just look at the new 'Predator' novel synopsis...
Well, a dispensable novel is different. That's not either franchises primary form. The compendium of video games, novels and comics are minutiae.
But Fox would still have no problem retconning A3 and A4. Ripley's back, "From the Director of District 9", a hot young A-lister in the Newt role, building off the two beloved entries? Are you kidding me? Gangbusters.
Similar reasons as to why Alien: Covenant will do so well. The trailers are going to sell it for what it is: the return of the classic Alien life cycle, "From the Director of Alien and The Martian", beloved David character returning x2, using the Alien name. Gangbusters. Fox's lofty investment will be rewarded I feel, despite the movie being called "dark", "bleak" and "macabre" by the cast and crew.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 30, 2016, 11:30:36 PM
Well, a dispensable novel is different. That's not either franchises primary form. The compendium of video games, novels and comics are minutiae.
But Fox would still have no problem retconning A3 and A4. Ripley's back, "From the Director of District 9", a hot young A-lister in the Newt role, building off the two beloved entries? Are you kidding me? Gangbusters.
Similar reasons as to why Alien: Covenant will do so well. The trailers are going to sell it for what it is: the return of the classic Alien life cycle, "From the Director of Alien and The Martian", beloved David character returning x2, using the Alien name. Gangbusters. Fox's lofty investment will be rewarded I feel, despite the movie being called "dark", "bleak" and "macabre" by the cast and crew.
You get it man! High 5! Blomkamp's Aliens sequel will do wonders for the series.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 11:34:48 PM
You get it man! High 5! Blomkamp's Aliens sequel will do wonders for the series.
It actually amazes me how different people see things differently. I was just chuckling to myself thinking he was talking sarcastically about the shallow nature of modern cinema. :P
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 11:34:48 PM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 30, 2016, 11:30:36 PM
Well, a dispensable novel is different. That's not either franchises primary form. The compendium of video games, novels and comics are minutiae.
But Fox would still have no problem retconning A3 and A4. Ripley's back, "From the Director of District 9", a hot young A-lister in the Newt role, building off the two beloved entries? Are you kidding me? Gangbusters.
Similar reasons as to why Alien: Covenant will do so well. The trailers are going to sell it for what it is: the return of the classic Alien life cycle, "From the Director of Alien and The Martian", beloved David character returning x2, using the Alien name. Gangbusters. Fox's lofty investment will be rewarded I feel, despite the movie being called "dark", "bleak" and "macabre" by the cast and crew.
You get it man! High 5! Blomkamp's Aliens sequel will do wonders for the series.
Absolutely. He has a lot to offer this universe. His concept art for WY headquarters and Ripley's xeno suit in particular have me excited.
Don't get me wrong - I do like Blomkapf's conceptual art and visual ideas and designs. That stuff looks very promising indeed. It's the story concept and premise of the movie that falls really short. It's a great piece of fanon materiel and would make up for a decent Aliens comic, but as a movie - no way.
As it looks right now I think there will be some major changes, especially since A:C (Alien: Covenant) and it's sequel will throw a bunch of new restrictions and limitations for Blomkapf to work with.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 02:51:44 AM
Don't get me wrong - I do like Blomkapf's conceptual art and visual ideas and designs. That stuff looks very promising indeed. It's the story concept and premise of the movie that falls really short. It's a great piece of fanon materiel and would make up for a decent Aliens comic, but as a movie - no way.
As it looks right now I think there will be some major changes, especially since A:C (Alien: Covenant) and it's sequel will throw a bunch of new restrictions and limitations for Blomkapf to work with.
OMG! This gave me a good chuckle...
It was one letter away from "Blomkampf"... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
I agree, there were some very interesting stuff in the concept art. I love the look of that Marine in a more armoured suit, he had a really cool looking helmet on. Also that mutated dude on a wall. Plus this monolith like structure and that Derelict in a W-Y warehouse. Some very nice artwork.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:08:43 AM
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 02:51:44 AM
Don't get me wrong - I do like Blomkapf's conceptual art and visual ideas and designs. That stuff looks very promising indeed. It's the story concept and premise of the movie that falls really short. It's a great piece of fanon materiel and would make up for a decent Aliens comic, but as a movie - no way.
As it looks right now I think there will be some major changes, especially since A:C (Alien: Covenant) and it's sequel will throw a bunch of new restrictions and limitations for Blomkapf to work with.
OMG! This gave me a good chuckle...
It was one letter away from "Blomkampf"... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
I agree, there were some very interesting stuff in the concept art. I love the look of that Marine in a more armoured suit, he had a really cool looking helmet on. Also that mutated dude on a wall. Plus this monolith like structure and that Derelict in a W-Y warehouse. Some very nice artwork.
It's my phone's stupid autocorrect. For some reason it insists on spelling it that way. I have to wrestle the phone and still it ends up with something not quite right. I've stopped bothering, haha. Maybe my phone isnt a big fan of Mr. B directing this movie either.
I've said before but it deserves repeating, I'm not at all a fan of Ripley in that alien suit. It looks too much like a Halloween outfit and a bad one to boot. It's got some strange cosplay superheroine Catwoman vibe to it,
That being said, I'm not entirely against the idea of human (even specifically Ripley if the story really calls for it) interaction or merging with alien tech. Just not the way it was presented. I mean, make Ripley go bald and get a look like an Engineer, and that could work. Maybe post-Covenant, that will be a change in direction. But overall, the premise of going after a grander story with Ripley and Hicks is an epic coup d'etat. I love that premise.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 11:34:48 PMBlomkamp's Aliens sequel will do wonders for the series.
That's a pretty massive assumption given that we don't know if the film will be great or shite...
It's not like everything Blomkamp touches is a masterpiece. He's made one excellent movie and two very mediocre, patchy ones.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 03:16:46 AM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:08:43 AM
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Aug 31, 2016, 02:51:44 AM
Don't get me wrong - I do like Blomkapf's conceptual art and visual ideas and designs. That stuff looks very promising indeed. It's the story concept and premise of the movie that falls really short. It's a great piece of fanon materiel and would make up for a decent Aliens comic, but as a movie - no way.
As it looks right now I think there will be some major changes, especially since A:C (Alien: Covenant) and it's sequel will throw a bunch of new restrictions and limitations for Blomkapf to work with.
OMG! This gave me a good chuckle...
It was one letter away from "Blomkampf"... :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
I agree, there were some very interesting stuff in the concept art. I love the look of that Marine in a more armoured suit, he had a really cool looking helmet on. Also that mutated dude on a wall. Plus this monolith like structure and that Derelict in a W-Y warehouse. Some very nice artwork.
It's my phone's stupid autocorrect. For some reason it insists on spelling it that way. I have to wrestle the phone and still it ends up with something not quite right. I've stopped bothering, haha. Maybe my phone isnt a big fan of Mr. B directing this movie either.
Haha, I know the struggle man, autocorrect can be such a ducking struggle! :laugh:
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 31, 2016, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 30, 2016, 11:34:48 PMBlomkamp's Aliens sequel will do wonders for the series.
That's a pretty massive assumption given that we don't know if the film will be great or shite...
It's not like everything Blomkamp touches is a masterpiece. He's made one excellent movie and two very mediocre, patchy ones.
That's absolutely true, people need to remember that nothing is set in stone. This movie can either make or break the franchise. It might turn out better than all the films so far, or it might turn out so shite that the franchise takes a decades long break from shame.
Bad with Hic and Nuts? Impossible :P
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:15:26 PM
This movie can either make or break the franchise. It might turn out better than all the films so far, or it might turn out so shite that the franchise takes a decades long break from shame.
I doubt it would top Alien and Aliens. But it's unlikely to sink as low as AVP:R either. Blomkamp is certainly a cut above those two dudes who directed that abomination.
One thing is for certain, he's going to have his work cut out to top Alien 3.
I don't think there's pressure. I don't think it's a matter of topping Alien 3.
It is. Because if they go through with this daft retcon, only to make a film that's not as good as Alien 3, what was even the point?
There should be pressure. If he doesn't feel it, he's be mistaken. If he doesn't feel up to it, he shouldn't bother. I am very stoked by his level of confidence and hopefully his last 2 duds will help him rise to the occasion.
Never mind Alien 3. If anything, he should feel pressure to make something as good as Alien and Aliens. Why couldn't he, and why shouldn't he strive for that? District 9 is in that wheelhouse of quality and with Ridley's input, he should be able to knock it out of the park.
His art reflects what's in his mind and further cements that he's the correct guy for the movie: http://dailydead.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Alien-Blomkamp-concept-art-05.jpg, http://cdn1-www.comingsoon.net/assets/uploads/gallery/neill-blomkamps-alien-sequel/10903691_1527947634150588_295305742_n.jpg
Stuff that looks cool and blue and big and a natural progression, like the first two movies. Who wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction? I don't recall Zemeckis and Gale throwing us a f**k-you curveball with Back to the Future III. They gave us something unexpected yet something we wanted.
I'm pumped and a half.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PM
Never mind Alien 3. If anything, he should feel pressure to make something as good as Alien and Aliens. Why couldn't he, and why shouldn't he strive for that? District 9 is in that wheelhouse of quality and with Ridley's input, he should be able to knock it out of the park.
His art reflects what's in his mind and further cements that he's the correct guy for the movie: http://dailydead.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Alien-Blomkamp-concept-art-05.jpg, http://cdn1-www.comingsoon.net/assets/uploads/gallery/neill-blomkamps-alien-sequel/10903691_1527947634150588_295305742_n.jpg
Stuff that looks cool and blue and big and a natural progression, like the first two movies. Who wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction? I don't recall Zemeckis and Gale throwing us a f**k-you curveball with Back to the Future III. They gave us something unexpected yet something we wanted.
I'm pumped and a half.
Well said. He should aim for the stars and try to make the best sci-fi film ever. I don't mean that to take what was done and copy it times 10. I mean he should use the characters he has to work with and really come up with something original that would be a worthy sequel to Alien and Aliens. He will succeed only if even the most die-hard Alien 3 fans are converted. I think he has what it takes. As long as he has good story writers work with him, it should be epic.
He does have what it takes, but he doesn't need to "convert" Alien 3 fans to succeed. If none of the ardent Alien 3 fans showed up, the box office would maybe be down a couple thousand bucks. If even that.
Ultimately you have to make these movies for the masses; for the people that don't go on websites like these. We are a minute percentage of the actual moviegoers. "Hardcore fans" are already built into the "mass audience" and will see any entry no matter what, but the "mass audience" doesn't consist of only "hardcore fans".
Ultimately, just make a good movie. So simple.
True. I'm not implying that the movie should be targeted at fans of Alien 3, but what I do mean is that if he makes a film that is so good that even the Alien 3 hardcore fans prefer it over Alien 3, then I think we would really have something good.
Exactly. 8)
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PMWho wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction?
Alien and
Aliens consist almost entirely of locations that are grimy and dirty. The only place that
doesn't look dirty is Gateway.
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:15:26 PM
This movie can either make or break the franchise. It might turn out better than all the films so far, or it might turn out so shite that the franchise takes a decades long break from shame.
Exactly. The risk of 'ALIENS 2' by Blomkamp is just far too high. Odds are that it will be an average film at very best. There's just too much stacked up against it. It's potential to ruin a franchise of which its integrity is already very fragile is just too much.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 31, 2016, 08:11:18 PM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PMWho wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction?
Alien and Aliens consist almost entirely of locations that are grimy and dirty. The only place that doesn't look dirty is Gateway.
But they're beautifully grimy, not grimy grimy.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PM
Stuff that looks cool and blue and big and a natural progression, like the first two movies. Who wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction?
I love stuff that's cool and big but that doesn't mean
everything has to be like that this is
Science Fiction be different go extreme! if not than it's boring. after all some of my favorite Alien (1979) concept art are some of the concept designs of the Nostromo, where you have these big hallways that are all completely rusted and brown and just look so different and just look awesome.
Man, I would love to see a Alien story set on a Derelict Space-Ship floating in space that looks like that.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Aug 31, 2016, 07:54:05 PM
True. I'm not implying that the movie should be targeted at fans of Alien 3, but what I do mean is that if he makes a film that is so good that even the Alien 3 hardcore fans prefer it over Alien 3, then I think we would really have something good.
A great Alien movie is always welcome, and if it is better than any of the original three movies I will be pleasantly surprised. Now, the Alien franchise fan base is quite divided. I think the only movie all of us like evenly is ALIEN, which means that if Blomkamp wants to make a really good movie liked by all fans, he better try to do something similar to ALIEN, which means limited gun play, lots of suspense and survival and always trying to stay within the realm of what is accepted as realistic. The characters can't be easily digestible Hollywood cutouts as in ALIENS just as they can't largely unlikable rejects as in A3.
Lol that logic. Alien and Aliens are neck and neck casual moviegoer-wise and fan-wise. Aliens and Alien 3 are not in competition with each other on any level by any stretch. Neill is a fanboy himself but he will fail the check-writers(20th Century Fox) if he tries to make a movie liked by the fans, it has to be liked by general moviegoers.
Limited gun play is just out of the question. Neill already posted a pulse rifle picture. Ultimately give us great story and great characters. Guns, explosions, gore, suspense and corridors are all tertiary to story and characters.
But let's stop acting like a movie can't have both big action and quiet suspense. Cut.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 08:53:11 PM
Lol that logic. Alien and Aliens are neck and neck casual moviegoer-wise and fan-wise. Aliens and Alien 3 are not in competition with each other on any level by any stretch. Neill is a fanboy himself but he will fail the check-writers(20th Century Fox) if he tries to make a movie liked by the fans, it has to be liked by general moviegoers.
Limited gun play is just out of the question. Neill already posted a pulse rifle picture. Ultimately give us great story and great characters. Guns, explosions, gore, suspense and corridors are all tertiary to story and characters.
But let's stop acting like a movie can't have both big action and quiet suspense. Cut.
That sounds all good.....if you're an Aliens fan and/or FPS gamer and/or a lover of sci-fi action movies. "Unfortunately" the Alien franchise has a way more varied fanbase than that.
The fanbase doesn't matter; the casual audience does. The fanbase for the lesser loved entries especially doesn't matter.
Alien, Aliens.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 08:17:37 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 31, 2016, 08:11:18 PM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PMWho wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction?
Alien and Aliens consist almost entirely of locations that are grimy and dirty. The only place that doesn't look dirty is Gateway.
But they're beautifully grimy, not grimy grimy.
And what's the problem with Grimy, Grimy?
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 08:17:37 PM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 31, 2016, 08:11:18 PM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 07:26:58 PMWho wants to look at muddy, dirty corridors that don't invoke the best side of science fiction?
Alien and Aliens consist almost entirely of locations that are grimy and dirty. The only place that doesn't look dirty is Gateway.
But they're beautifully grimy, not grimy grimy.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I like all the film's beautiful grimes.
Quote from: irn on Aug 31, 2016, 08:12:01 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:15:26 PM
This movie can either make or break the franchise. It might turn out better than all the films so far, or it might turn out so shite that the franchise takes a decades long break from shame.
Exactly. The risk of 'ALIENS 2' by Blomkamp is just far too high. Odds are that it will be an average film at very best. There's just too much stacked up against it. It's potential to ruin a franchise of which its integrity is already very fragile is just too much.
Exactly, the franchise is quite famous and big, but it's no Star Trek or Star Wars. It hasn't exactly got a huge company like Disney behind it who can afford to take massive risks.
A few wrong moves and that's it, Alien could become the next Beast from 20,000 Fathoms... a pop culture memory but never something renewed until much later when we're all in our 80's LOL!
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Aug 31, 2016, 06:51:32 PM
I don't think there's pressure. I don't think it's a matter of topping Alien 3.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Aug 31, 2016, 06:57:11 PM
It is. Because if they go through with this daft retcon, only to make a film that's not as good as Alien 3, what was even the point?
The whole concept of the retcon sounds like "we can do it better than Alien 3!" That's the real crux of if this movie was worth it - is it better than the film it's trying to replace. Of course, there's more to it than that - it wasn't originally intended as a retcon, it was Weaver's involvement that pushed it in that direction, not Blomkamp's and I'm sure more behind the scenes happenings that we don't know about yet - but that's the real measure it needs to beat. Is it better than Alien 3.
I've no doubt Alien 3.2 will look good. Blomkamp is a great visual director and very technological. However, Alien 3 also looks great. Probably my favourite of the films in terms of visual style. But Alien 3 suffered from the script and Blomkamp's not exactly strong in the scripting department either.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 07:20:19 AM
But Alien 3 suffered from the script and Blomkamp's not exactly strong in the scripting department either.
Therein lies the crux - it must take balls of steel to be a director. Everything...
everything ultimately rests on your shoulders. I imagine that with those balls come a prodigious sense of self-confidence and this is worrying in the case of 3.2 because the populist opinion is that NB isn't a top script writer. And that's what Alien and Aliens had (add the concept to Alien... say what you will but O'Bannon and to be fair, Giler and Hill, smashed it) but 3.2 may not have.
The question that will remain unanswered for a good while yet is "is NB big enough to give this over to a great writer to do a pass?"
My guess is no - his concept, his idea, his script... I doubt "fresh eyes" will get a look in in this case.
What I do love about Blomkamp is he acknowledged that! He said writing wasn't his best area and he endeavoured to get help with it. His wife (I think?) is working on the script with him but she also worked on Chappie and while I did love that film, it had issues with the script.
Who worked with him on District 9? That's by far the tightest script he's ever been involved in.
Same person actually, Terri Tatchell.
Quote from: irn on Aug 31, 2016, 08:12:01 PM
Quote from: The Alien Predator on Aug 31, 2016, 03:15:26 PM
This movie can either make or break the franchise. It might turn out better than all the films so far, or it might turn out so shite that the franchise takes a decades long break from shame.
Exactly. The risk of 'ALIENS 2' by Blomkamp is just far too high. Odds are that it will be an average film at very best. There's just too much stacked up against it. It's potential to ruin a franchise of which its integrity is already very fragile is just too much.
Personally I disagree. Aliens 2 is a very safe bet with the popcorn crowd which could very well revitalize the series and bring it to the attention of the casual viewers. As much as I hate the idea of a retcon, it is a safe bet in terms of business.
No doubt. It's an obvious decision for them considering the mass positive response that came following Blomkamp posting the concepts.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 09:12:09 AM
What I do love about Blomkamp is he acknowledged that! He said writing wasn't his best area and he endeavoured to get help with it. His wife (I think?) is working on the script with him but she also worked on Chappie and while I did love that film, it had issues with the script.
I did not know that! Wow - well - great, that's awesome. I've not seen Chappie, so can't comment, but I thought the concept was a bit ropey - but as I say, that's probably unfair.
Honestly, I'm thrilled that he knows his strengths, though... that's really positive news in terms of the script.
Quote from: Russ on Sep 01, 2016, 11:30:41 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 09:12:09 AM
What I do love about Blomkamp is he acknowledged that! He said writing wasn't his best area and he endeavoured to get help with it. His wife (I think?) is working on the script with him but she also worked on Chappie and while I did love that film, it had issues with the script.
I did not know that! Wow - well - great, that's awesome. I've not seen Chappie, so can't comment, but I thought the concept was a bit ropey - but as I say, that's probably unfair.
Honestly, I'm thrilled that he knows his strengths, though... that's really positive news in terms of the script.
Hopefully she will make him understand how silly and childish this retcon idea is, and even if that's not the case they will have to take A:C and Paradise Lost (?) in account anyways. There is a good chance that Ridley's prequels might indirectly nullify the entire concept of Blomkamp's A2, forcing Blomkamp to go a different direction.
But, as I mentioned before, I have this feeling that either A:C or its sequel will introduce some kind of Engineer enabled quantum warping time/space traveling, which will open up for parallel timelines and/or universes where both A2 and A3 can exist at the same time. From FOX's point of view that's a win-win situation as they can churn out whatever they want from that point, making more money on the franchise than ever before.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 02:45:35 AM
Hopefully she will make him understand how silly and childish this retcon idea is, and even if that's not the case they will have to take A:C and Paradise Lost (?) in account anyways. There is a good chance that Ridley's prequels might indirectly nullify the entire concept of Blomkamp's A2, forcing Blomkamp to go a different direction.
This is something that I've been thinking about for a while now. Ridley's prequel project doesn't end with Covenant. It would be a bit of a business blunder to do Blomkamp's idea before all of Ridley's prequels are out of the way. If we consider there to be at least one more prequel, and it takes two years to develop, that's at least late 2019 before Blomkamp can get going on his own Alien movie and none of that is taking into account his own projects.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 02:45:35 AM
Quote from: Russ on Sep 01, 2016, 11:30:41 AM
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 01, 2016, 09:12:09 AM
What I do love about Blomkamp is he acknowledged that! He said writing wasn't his best area and he endeavoured to get help with it. His wife (I think?) is working on the script with him but she also worked on Chappie and while I did love that film, it had issues with the script.
I did not know that! Wow - well - great, that's awesome. I've not seen Chappie, so can't comment, but I thought the concept was a bit ropey - but as I say, that's probably unfair.
Honestly, I'm thrilled that he knows his strengths, though... that's really positive news in terms of the script.
Hopefully she will make him understand how silly and childish this retcon idea is, and even if that's not the case they will have to take A:C and Paradise Lost (?) in account anyways. There is a good chance that Ridley's prequels might indirectly nullify the entire concept of Blomkamp's A2, forcing Blomkamp to go a different direction.
But, as I mentioned before, I have this feeling that either A:C or its sequel will introduce some kind of Engineer enabled quantum warping time/space traveling, which will open up for parallel timelines and/or universes where both A2 and A3 can exist at the same time. From FOX's point of view that's a win-win situation as they can churn out whatever they want from that point, making more money on the franchise than ever before.
NOOOO!!!! Don't give them any ideas, Beagle! :laugh:
Make it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen. Those clones grew to adulthood normally etc. They meet Ripley learn of their former lives via Call but have no memory of them.
You can touch on whether destiny is genetic, coupled with the religious aspect of Ripley ('For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.' Jeremiah 29:11), as well as shooting monsters.
I like that idea, SM.
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AM
Make it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen. Those clones grew to adulthood normally etc. They meet Ripley learn of their former lives via Call but have no memory of them.
You can touch on whether destiny is genetic, coupled with the religious aspect of Ripley ('For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.' Jeremiah 29:11), as well as shooting monsters.
That sounds pretty much perfect.
Does anyone know what Winona Ryder's opinions on the movie is? On the franchise as a whole for that matter?
Yeah that's a good way to smooth it over. I feel it wouldn't work for most people though. I personally want the real trio. If you're going to give us Ripley, Hicks and Newt, then give us thee Ripley, Hicks and Newt. Gotta go all in.
Quote from: Kurai on Sep 02, 2016, 05:53:30 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AM
Make it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen. Those clones grew to adulthood normally etc. They meet Ripley learn of their former lives via Call but have no memory of them.
You can touch on whether destiny is genetic, coupled with the religious aspect of Ripley ('For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.' Jeremiah 29:11), as well as shooting monsters.
That sounds pretty much perfect.
Does anyone know what Winona Ryder's opinions on the movie is? On the franchise as a whole for that matter?
She thinks the movie is a cool, artsy French movie, although doesn't view herself favorably. She was disappointed she never got to do another one.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 02:45:35 AM
Hopefully she will make him understand how silly and childish this retcon idea is, and even if that's not the case they will have to take A:C and Paradise Lost (?) in account anyways. There is a good chance that Ridley's prequels might indirectly nullify the entire concept of Blomkamp's A2, forcing Blomkamp to go a different direction.
Blomkamp has already spoke about meeting with Ridley about the project and having had to change some elements of the film to fit in with the prequels. That's not to say that Ridley couldn't do something down the line to complicate matters even more but as he is serving as EP on both, I'd imagine that they'd be working together when Alien 3.2 gets back into swing.
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AMMake it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen.
Blood samples from Fiori 16 on ice, I presume?
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 05:54:16 AM
She thinks the movie is a cool, artsy French movie, although doesn't view herself favorably. She was disappointed she never got to do another one.
That's the thing. Michael Biehn was never an A-lister. Winona Ryder was in the 90s, and she still gets roles in big movies (like the Star Trek reboot). Makes more sense to bring her back than Biehn.
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AM
Make it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen. Those clones grew to adulthood normally etc. They meet Ripley learn of their former lives via Call but have no memory of them.
You can touch on whether destiny is genetic, coupled with the religious aspect of Ripley ('For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.' Jeremiah 29:11), as well as shooting monsters.
It's a grand idea, but I still think it'll be hypersleep dream all the way. Even as Beagle says above with the quantum time mechanics stuff being introduced, I'm just thinking how they'd get that across without all sorts of exposition. Whereas with the hypersleep dream, they literally could do a few cuts of the old movies interspersed with "the current scenario." And we know that these dreams are visceral cos Fassbender is watching Rapace's dreams in "Prometheus."
I don't think they'd have them drift in hypersleep for centuries and have that as why they've aged (cos that would mean Newt is a twelve year old with an adult body and that'd be daft. Unless they "downloaded the experiences" from another hypersleep dream so she's all growed up).
As Corporal Hicks says - its a shitty way to handle it, but it is the most expedient. Everyone knows "hypersleep" and "cryofreeze" etc, but I'm not sure how many people will remember the UCM from Resurrection and all that.
So in a way... this doesn't retcon those movies in the effect that it acknowledges those experiences - just that those experiences were not real.
Quote from: Russ on Sep 02, 2016, 09:30:36 AMIt's a grand idea, but I still think it'll be hypersleep dream all the way.
If they do this... the retcon really will be a complete joke.
If you're gonna scrap the films, scrap them. Don't come up with pathetic work-arounds.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 09:38:08 AM
If they do this... the retcon really will be a complete joke.
If you're gonna scrap the films, scrap them. Don't come up with pathetic work-arounds.
It's just a theory - didn't they say that they're acknowledging the other movies? I'm sure I read that, and if they are doing that, I can't think of a neater way to explain it all away without clones and all sorts of stuff. Just technically - I mean, it'll be be what... two/two and half hours... it'll take a while to go into the whole "well, we were cloned" stuff.
Then again, the setups in Alien and Aliens were very lengthy, weren't they, but I'm not sure that "modern audiences" would sit still for an hour build up - even if Fox let NB do that in the first place.
As I say, its only my guess that they'd go down that road cos its established in the canon for one and for another, as I say, most people will "get" cryosleep/hypersleep - its almost a trope now. Whereas the deep mythos stuff may not be as accessible to Joe Public.
Conversely, we have the "performs fan service" quote and we know that NB is a huge fan - maybe he would want to get into the deep myth stuff and get it out there?
That'd be ace - but my gut reckons the freezerino dream will be the "acknowledgement."
Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 02, 2016, 08:49:05 AM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 05:54:16 AM
She thinks the movie is a cool, artsy French movie, although doesn't view herself favorably. She was disappointed she never got to do another one.
That's the thing. Michael Biehn was never an A-lister. Winona Ryder was in the 90s, and she still gets roles in big movies (like the Star Trek reboot). Makes more sense to bring her back than Biehn.
Lol you just hire an A-lister to play Newt or to fill in some other role. You don't need Winona or Michael actually. You just need Sigourney and one A-lister.
Quote from: Russ on Sep 02, 2016, 10:28:52 AM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 09:38:08 AM
If they do this... the retcon really will be a complete joke.
If you're gonna scrap the films, scrap them. Don't come up with pathetic work-arounds.
It's just a theory - didn't they say that they're acknowledging the other movies? I'm sure I read that, and if they are doing that, I can't think of a neater way to explain it all away without clones and all sorts of stuff. Just technically - I mean, it'll be be what... two/two and half hours... it'll take a while to go into the whole "well, we were cloned" stuff.
Then again, the setups in Alien and Aliens were very lengthy, weren't they, but I'm not sure that "modern audiences" would sit still for an hour build up - even if Fox let NB do that in the first place.
As I say, its only my guess that they'd go down that road cos its established in the canon for one and for another, as I say, most people will "get" cryosleep/hypersleep - its almost a trope now. Whereas the deep mythos stuff may not be as accessible to Joe Public.
Conversely, we have the "performs fan service" quote and we know that NB is a huge fan - maybe he would want to get into the deep myth stuff and get it out there?
That'd be ace - but my gut reckons the freezerino dream will be the "acknowledgement."
Back to the old freezerinos. ;)
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AM
Make it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen. Those clones grew to adulthood normally etc. They meet Ripley learn of their former lives via Call but have no memory of them.
You can touch on whether destiny is genetic, coupled with the religious aspect of Ripley ('For I know the plans that I have for you,' declares the LORD, 'plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.' Jeremiah 29:11), as well as shooting monsters.
That's not a bad scenario at all if you necessarily have to bring back Hicks and Newt. Good job, SM!
Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 02, 2016, 08:00:04 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 02, 2016, 05:31:01 AMMake it so the USM, having insufficient data years prior to Resurrection, cloned Newt and Hicks hoping they carried the Alien Queen.
Blood samples from Fiori 16 on ice, I presume?
Definitely from Fiori 16.
Quote from: Russ on Sep 02, 2016, 10:28:52 AM
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 02, 2016, 09:38:08 AM
If they do this... the retcon really will be a complete joke.
If you're gonna scrap the films, scrap them. Don't come up with pathetic work-arounds.
It's just a theory - didn't they say that they're acknowledging the other movies? I'm sure I read that, and if they are doing that, I can't think of a neater way to explain it all away without clones and all sorts of stuff. Just technically - I mean, it'll be be what... two/two and half hours... it'll take a while to go into the whole "well, we were cloned" stuff.
Then again, the setups in Alien and Aliens were very lengthy, weren't they, but I'm not sure that "modern audiences" would sit still for an hour build up - even if Fox let NB do that in the first place.
As I say, its only my guess that they'd go down that road cos its established in the canon for one and for another, as I say, most people will "get" cryosleep/hypersleep - its almost a trope now. Whereas the deep mythos stuff may not be as accessible to Joe Public.
Conversely, we have the "performs fan service" quote and we know that NB is a huge fan - maybe he would want to get into the deep myth stuff and get it out there?
That'd be ace - but my gut reckons the freezerino dream will be the "acknowledgement."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs)
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 02:36:17 PM
Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 02, 2016, 08:49:05 AM
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 02, 2016, 05:54:16 AM
She thinks the movie is a cool, artsy French movie, although doesn't view herself favorably. She was disappointed she never got to do another one.
That's the thing. Michael Biehn was never an A-lister. Winona Ryder was in the 90s, and she still gets roles in big movies (like the Star Trek reboot). Makes more sense to bring her back than Biehn.
Lol you just hire an A-lister to play Newt or to fill in some other role. You don't need Winona or Michael actually. You just need Sigourney and one A-lister.
You don't really need an A-list besides Sigourney. The A-list is the brand name. Like the new Star Wars movie, they just needed Harrison Ford to come back to make 2 billion.
Besides, they've already had a movie with two A-list actors (Sigourney and Winona). Did people see Alien in 1979 because it had that guy from M.A.S.H. in it? :P
Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 03, 2016, 08:12:45 AMYou don't really need an A-list besides Sigourney. The A-list is the brand name.
No one in the first
Alien film was A-list. Most of them were pretty much unknown. I'd actually quite like them to go down that route again. Seems
Covenant is sort of doing it.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 03, 2016, 08:49:26 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 03, 2016, 08:12:45 AMYou don't really need an A-list besides Sigourney. The A-list is the brand name.
No one in the first Alien film was A-list. Most of them were pretty much unknown. I'd actually quite like them to go down that route again. Seems Covenant is sort of doing it.
Yeah, that was part of my point. It was an ensemble piece, nobody had their name selling it but people saw it anyway. Maybe it had to do with the huge appetite created by Star Wars.
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Viewers, today, don't understand how much of a table-flip that was. Audiences expected him to be the one to survive, not just because he was a male and in charge of the ship, but because of the actor. When he died, effectively all bets were off.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 04, 2016, 02:25:06 AM
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Viewers, today, don't understand how much of a table-flip that was. Audiences expected him to be the one to survive, not just because he was a male and in charge of the ship, but because of the actor. When he died, effectively all bets were off.
You're absolutely right. Having Dallas killed 3rd immediately sends a chiver down your spine since he's the captain and main lead, and main leads aren't supposed to be killed off. Your survival instincts tell you these guys are in one hell hole right about now. I also think that's why they wanted a lady to remain last, on her own, which is scarier even than if it were a man...especially in those years where women were seen as much more lady like and more delicate. How the heck is a lady going to kill the Alien on her own? What a brilliant movie.
The hero and leader should always die in an Alien movie and leave the least excpected one to survive to deal with the rest...not this Ripley hero crap...tired of it...ripley was never meant to be the face of the franchise or anything as important...take a hint already weaver lol..you died in some lava sh!t, remember?
Here's why I don't believe Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection will be 'undone' by Alien 5.
This is just little pieces that I have picked up from the recent books :
1) Listening to the latest AVP Galaxy Podcast, one of the guys mentions that The Weyland-Yutani Report book mentions the events of Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection. Why mention these events in current canon if you are trying to establish a new one when you could have simply discarded these events?
2) The Blomkamp concept pictures of Alien 5. One of them shows Ripley with some kind of explosive vest around her stomach. Presumably, I'm guessing she's already impregnated like in Alien 3 and ready to press the button if the baby xenomorph bursts through. Sure, this could be a red herring and mean nothing. But I'm guessing another mind-wipe and back to cryosleep chamber like Alien : Out of the Shadows perhaps?
DISCLAIMER : I'm hope I am wrong. As much as I hate that Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection (I believe they took everything established and Ripley worked so hard for in Aliens and threw it out the window in the first 15 minutes), I don't think they'll retcon them.
Quote from: hawkangel on Sep 04, 2016, 10:11:24 AM
Here's why I don't believe Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection will be 'undone' by Alien 5.
This is just little pieces that I have picked up from the recent books :
1) Listening to the latest AVP Galaxy Podcast, one of the guys mentions that The Weyland-Yutani Report book mentions the events of Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection. Why mention these events in current canon if you are trying to establish a new one when you could have simply discarded these events?
It's more than just mentioned, they even have their own individual chapters. But the Weyland-Yutani report was written before Blomkamp's project was revealed.
QuoteI'm hope I am wrong. As much as I hate that Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection (I believe they took everything established and Ripley worked so hard for in Aliens and threw it out the window in the first 15 minutes), I don't think they'll retcon them.
Blomkamp and Weaver has already explicitly stated that his film will ignore Alien 3 and A:R.
"Blomkamp and Weaver has already explicitly stated that his film will ignore Alien 3 and A:R."
It really is as simple as this. That this has even been a debate for a year and a half is wholly puzzling.
Does your super secret source confirms it?
Common sense does, bud.
Seriously mate, this one won't happen. My common sense tell this much.
It actually happening and the story ignoring Alien 3 and 4 are two totally different things. ;)
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 04, 2016, 07:36:36 PM
It actually happening and the story ignoring Alien 3 and 4 are two totally different things. ;)
For once we're in agreement. I'm absolutely sure there will be a sequel, whether it's some kind of A3 retcon sequel to ALIENS or an indirect sequel to A:R can only be speculated about at this point as it all depends on what happens and is established in the upcoming Ridley Scott directed prequels to ALIEN, aka PROM sequels. The only reason A5/A2 won't happen is if A:C (and its sequel really), really flops hard, which I doubt is going to happen.
I'm not saying sequel isn't made. I'm saying I don't see it, this whole true sequel retcon thingy.
Quote from: Master on Sep 04, 2016, 08:26:47 PM
I'm not saying sequel isn't made. I'm saying I don't see it, this whole true sequel retcon thingy.
Nothing is really true. It's all fiction. It comes down to fan preference. If as a fan you prefer the A3 and A:R storyline, you can enjoy that. If Blomkamp makes an alternate story and it turns out to be better, you can enjoy that instead. Or both. In truth it makes no difference whatsoever in the overall scheme of things.
Quote from: Master on Sep 04, 2016, 08:26:47 PM
I'm not saying sequel isn't made. I'm saying I don't see it, this whole true sequel retcon thingy.
Ah, ok, I see. Sorry about that.
For some it won't, for some it will. That's a matter of perspective. Time will tell but, as I said, I don't see it.
Quote from: hawkangel on Sep 04, 2016, 10:11:24 AM1) Listening to the latest AVP Galaxy Podcast, one of the guys mentions that The Weyland-Yutani Report book mentions the events of Alien 3 and Alien : Resurrection. Why mention these events in current canon if you are trying to establish a new one when you could have simply discarded these events?
That's hardly proof of anything.
Firstly, the book was in development long before Fox learned of Blomkamp's ideas. The effort and money had already gone into developing it, so it would've made no sense to scrap it once they learned what he wanted to do.
Secondly, as should now be pretty obvious, if Blomkamp's film ever does get made, it won't be any time soon, so again there would be no sense in ditching the book.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 04, 2016, 06:37:44 PM"Blomkamp and Weaver has already explicitly stated that his film will ignore Alien 3 and A:R."
It really is as simple as this. That this has even been a debate for a year and a half is wholly puzzling.
And yet Blomkamp has also appeared to categorically state he
won't be undoing the third and fourth films.
Undoing is not the same thing as ignoring.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 04, 2016, 08:54:15 PM
Undoing is not the same thing as ignoring.
Well, it kind of is unless they establish some kind of parallel realities or timelines, or time traveling or weird quantum crap ON SCREEN. Off screen doesn't count.
Just flat out ignoring that A3 and A:R didn't happen is indirectly undoing those movies.
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 04, 2016, 02:25:06 AM
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Veronica Cartwright had also just made Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It wouldn't surprise me if audiences were supposed to think that Dallas and then Lambert were going to end up being the survivor in Alien too, while that "uptight bitch" played by the unknown Sigourney Weaver got her comeuppance for being such a pain in the ass for the rest of the crew.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 04, 2016, 10:25:00 PM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 04, 2016, 02:25:06 AM
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Veronica Cartwright had also just made Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It wouldn't surprise me if audiences were supposed to think that Dallas and then Lambert were going to end up being the survivor in Alien too, while that "uptight bitch" played by the unknown Sigourney Weaver got her comeuppance for being such a pain in the ass for the rest of the crew.
Veronica Cartwright was originally going to play Ripley.
Quote from: Scorpio on Sep 05, 2016, 01:27:54 AM
Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 04, 2016, 10:25:00 PM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 04, 2016, 02:25:06 AM
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Veronica Cartwright had also just made Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It wouldn't surprise me if audiences were supposed to think that Dallas and then Lambert were going to end up being the survivor in Alien too, while that "uptight bitch" played by the unknown Sigourney Weaver got her comeuppance for being such a pain in the ass for the rest of the crew.
Veronica Cartwright was originally going to play Ripley.
I think I remember hearing something like this. I also think Dallas was originally meant to be the lead character or something but lots of roles ended up being switched around. I recall reading these on TV Tropes.
Dallas is the lead right up until the point when he's not.
Ripley was always the survivor even back when she was a man called Roby.
Quote from: Local Trouble on Sep 04, 2016, 10:25:00 PM
Quote from: Xenomorphine on Sep 04, 2016, 02:25:06 AM
Skerritt was actually the one who had the better profile recognition among mainstream audiences at the time, yeah (not nearly so much now, but back then). That was part of the genius in killing Dallas off so early.
Veronica Cartwright had also just made Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It wouldn't surprise me if audiences were supposed to think that Dallas and then Lambert were going to end up being the survivor in Alien too, while that "uptight bitch" played by the unknown Sigourney Weaver got her comeuppance for being such a pain in the ass for the rest of the crew.
The thing was, Ash was already acting creepy (and Brits were mostly hired by Hollywood to occupy the role of villains), while having an action heroine or black guy kill the beast and/or somehow survive that situation was practically unheard of, back then.
Ash, Ripley, Lambert and Parker would have all been seen as equally unlikely to win the day.
I'd say that actually goes double for Lambert, because she was clearly not going to be in any fit mental state to vanquish anything.
Put yourself in the mindset of the 1970s and Dallas' death has a lot more psychological impact than it would do now. The audience would have pretty much been primed to think, "Well, everyone's screwed now!"
Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 04, 2016, 02:35:22 AM
The hero and leader should always die in an Alien movie and leave the least excpected one to survive to deal with the rest...not this Ripley hero crap...tired of it...ripley was never meant to be the face of the franchise or anything as important...take a hint already weaver lol..you died in some lava sh!t, remember?
We talked about this in one of the recent podcasts. I think it's become a dull trope for Alien films. We expect the not quite the boss female main character to survive and she generally does. It's predictable now. They need to turn that on its head now.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 04, 2016, 08:36:43 PM
And yet Blomkamp has also appeared to categorically state he won't be undoing the third and fourth films.
What Blomkamp meant with that statement is that he is not going to mess with the third and fourth films. He is not going to undermine or castrate them in order to shoehorn his film into the existing continuity.
"Undoing" would for example be if his film opens showing that Alien 3 was all just a dream. Or opening with a flashback scene which shows Turk (played by Daniel Day- Lewis) accidentally falling into Hicks' cryotube, being ejected and subsequently killed in the EEV crash.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Sep 05, 2016, 04:25:39 PM
"Undoing" would for example be if his film opens showing that Alien 3 was all just a dream. Or opening with a flashback scene which shows Turk (played by Daniel Day- Lewis) accidentally falling into Hicks' cryotube, being ejected and subsequently killed in the EEV crash.
:laugh:
http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=52058.msg2032317#msg2032317
:laugh: Ah yeah well, I do concede that your suggestion was better than mine!
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 05, 2016, 08:03:42 AM
Quote from: Nostromo on Sep 04, 2016, 02:35:22 AM
The hero and leader should always die in an Alien movie and leave the least excpected one to survive to deal with the rest...not this Ripley hero crap...tired of it...ripley was never meant to be the face of the franchise or anything as important...take a hint already weaver lol..you died in some lava sh!t, remember?
We talked about this in one of the recent podcasts. I think it's become a dull trope for Alien films. We expect the not quite the boss female main character to survive and she generally does. It's predictable now. They need to turn that on its head now.
That's the thing. These films are now prisoners of their own tropes. Even when we don't get Ripley, we still get Ripley. Absolutely it's time to flip this thing on its head. IMO, the best way to do it is to give back the original Ripley in Blomkamp's film so that all other films can be set free.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 05, 2016, 04:41:00 PMEven when we don't get Ripley, we still get Ripley. Absolutely it's time to flip this thing on its head.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 05, 2016, 04:41:00 PMIMO, the best way to do it is to give back the original Ripley in Blomkamp's film.
:laugh: ???
So you want to buck the trend... by following the trend.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 05, 2016, 04:50:23 PM
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 05, 2016, 04:41:00 PMEven when we don't get Ripley, we still get Ripley. Absolutely it's time to flip this thing on its head.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 05, 2016, 04:41:00 PMIMO, the best way to do it is to give back the original Ripley in Blomkamp's film.
:laugh: ???
So you want to buck the trend... by following the trend.
Yes and no. I want the real deal. Instead of coming up with an endless array of Ripley-Wanna-be's. Just do a film with the real Ripley, and then let all the other pre-quels, side-quels, under-quels, sequels do their own thing without having to knock-off the Ripley character. Ain't nothing like the real thing baby!
Hardly flipping anything on it's head. It's just pandering to the name again.
Ditch Ripley entirely.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 05, 2016, 06:27:02 PM
Hardly flipping anything on it's head. It's just pandering to the name again.
Ditch Ripley entirely.
How about Ripley's nephew?
How about we all just accept that we have differing opinions and let it go?
Accepting opinions? Nah, it's against the rules of the Internet.
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 05, 2016, 07:36:06 PM
How about we all just accept that we have differing opinions and let it go?
LOL, didn't think so. Let the bickering continue. Release the Cracken!
"Welease the Kwaken, Wipley!"
-Windebieste.
Quote from: windebieste on Sep 05, 2016, 09:21:18 PM
"Welease the Kwaken, Wipley!"
-Windebieste.
Don't you
dare get "Quipley" with me!
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Sep 04, 2016, 08:36:43 PM
That's hardly proof of anything.
Obviously. I'm not saying it's some kind of smoking gun, I was saying "here's why I don't think so." (i.e. take it into consideration).
But you've given good points as to why it isn't, so time to move on.
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Sep 04, 2016, 06:37:44 PM"Blomkamp and Weaver has already explicitly stated that his film will ignore Alien 3 and A:R."
It really is as simple as this. That this has even been a debate for a year and a half is wholly puzzling.
Well, there ya go. If he said that, I have nothing further to say on the matter.
Except that the movie is currently not in production. At all. It exists only as a proposal; and proposals DO change. Weaver and Blomkamp have done their best to deliver rhetoric that currently amounts to, well, not much at this point.
Right now, the current proposal has about as may dissenters as it has supporters. Some people want it... others don't. You'll find that it's evenly distributed, depending on people you talk to. Even polls here and elsewhere hover around the 50% mark.
Blomkamp would be best to make a new 'ALIENS' movie with a fresh batch of characters and ditch the whole retcon thing just to bring back Ripley. He'd win people like myself over in an instant.
-Windebieste.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GibiNy4d4gc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GibiNy4d4gc)
...Yeah, I'm outa here
Quote from: windebieste on Sep 06, 2016, 01:21:28 AM
Except that the movie is currently not in production. At all. It exists only as a proposal; and proposals DO change.
Wasn't it in pre-production at one point until Ridley stepped in.
I have nothing against this movie, btw, and I don't care if it gets made. I'll watch it, but if I had the choice, I'd rather have a sequel to Alien Resurrection.
Quote from: windebieste on Sep 06, 2016, 01:21:28 AM
Except that the movie is currently not in production. At all. It exists only as a proposal; and proposals DO change. Weaver and Blomkamp have done their best to deliver rhetoric that currently amounts to, well, not much at this point.
Right now, the current proposal has about as may dissenters as it has supporters. Some people want it... others don't. You'll find that it's evenly distributed, depending on people you talk to. Even polls here and elsewhere hover around the 50% mark.
Blomkamp would be best to make a new 'ALIENS' movie with a fresh batch of characters and ditch the whole retcon thing just to bring back Ripley. He'd win people like myself over in an instant.
-Windebieste.
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flizapalmer.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F10%2Faragorn.jpg&hash=5c74ad1e5c3f62a25a1cc906c8cde28a0f757449)
Quote from: windebieste on Sep 06, 2016, 01:21:28 AM
Except that the movie is currently not in production. At all. It exists only as a proposal; and proposals DO change. Weaver and Blomkamp have done their best to deliver rhetoric that currently amounts to, well, not much at this point.
Right now, the current proposal has about as may dissenters as it has supporters. Some people want it... others don't. You'll find that it's evenly distributed, depending on people you talk to. Even polls here and elsewhere hover around the 50% mark.
Blomkamp would be best to make a new 'ALIENS' movie with a fresh batch of characters and ditch the whole retcon thing just to bring back Ripley. He'd win people like myself over in an instant.
-Windebieste.
No. The project has officially been green-lit and the first draft of the script has already been completed and delivered. It has a prominent producer attached and at least two confirmed actors. It's a bit more than a mere "proposal" at this stage.
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Sep 06, 2016, 04:11:57 PMIt has a prominent producer attached and at least two confirmed actors.
Have any actors actually been officially confirmed? Obviously Weaver's keen and Blomkamp apparently wants her, but the only person saying Biehn will be in it seems to be Biehn.
Officially Fox hasn't said much other than confirm to the media that the project has indeed been given the go-ahead.
But seeing as the main selling point of the film is about the return of Ripley and Hicks it's probably safe to assume Biehn and Weaver will star in it. I'm also pretty sure Weaver will also be an executive producer on this and Blomkamp has already met and discussed the film with Biehn so it's obvious he wants him as well.
Oh man, I wish they just make the damn movie already with Ripley, Hicks, Newt, half a Bishop and the cat if they bump into it so we never have to talk about them again lol. Make it already!
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/64463752.jpg)
I believe Weaver has also spoken about Hicks coming back as well. Might have been during the Alien Day stuff.
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Sep 06, 2016, 07:56:43 PM
I believe Weaver has also spoken about Hicks coming back as well. Might have been during the Alien Day stuff.
Yes, but boy did Biehn get off on a rambling tangent during that interview. I thought he was going to fall off the wagon right there and then. He's a brilliant actor. I know he will do well if he's given the chance, but I was on the edge of my seat listening to him talk..
I have a feeling that Biehn is going to disappoint me unless the director gets a stellar performance out of him. Then again, I felt the same way about seeing Harrison Ford as Han Solo again.
Biehn will give it everything he has. His entire career hinges on this film.
lol
Biehn's been working consistently for years.
Tell Rupert Murdoch that I want Hicks to be at least a staff sergeant by now if he stayed in the Corps.
Quote from: SM on Sep 06, 2016, 11:07:57 PM
lol
Biehn's been working consistently for years.
What I meant to say by that, is that he can remain in relative obscurity as a character in the background of many films or he can really use this opportunity to propel himself into the limelight again. I am aware of his ongoing string of films that keep being produced. This is an opportunity to change his career completely. It will either be a defining moment for him, or not. (Or it just won't happen. Let's hope it does.)
Fella owns a production company and has played quite a few main characters in many movies over the years. Might not be big A-list movies and he might not be the go-to action man for Cameron like in the 80s but he doesn't want for work, nor does he just take on any old background role in big movies. He's not desperate.
Quote from: SpreadEagleBeagle on Sep 02, 2016, 07:17:57 PM
That'd be ace - but my gut reckons the freezerino dream will be the "acknowledgement."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCEjeTb1rrs)
[/quote]
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Frs918.pbsrc.com%2Falbums%2Fad28%2Fkelgaard%2Fe8f6562f-b19d-43ff-be1c-f60f2cea1544_zpsakqpw15v.jpg%3Fw%3D480%26amp%3Bh%3D480%26amp%3Bfit%3Dclip&hash=9cd1c39a2cdf4736328f211347c50fd5f7e6eab3)
Good morning!
My biggest problem is making a parallel film that works. Yes, you can ditch the events of Alien 3 and Alien R but how do you make Alien 2.5 work?
Do you return to LV-426?
As far as I'm concerned that is the only place people know of these alien eggs (post reactor explosion as well)
Or does another crew just HAPPEN to run into an Alien planet and hence more eggs?
Very difficult situation.
>:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
It's not too difficult. We know the film will adhere to Prometheus continuity because Blomkamp had to tweak his story to avoid any contradictions, in accordance with producer's Ridley Scott's wishes. Ridley's movies are establishing an Engineer presence on multiple worlds. That makes it not so unlikely that another Derilect ship could be discovered. Going by the concept art, that has indeed happened.
Yeah, it's a wonder the Company went to all the trouble of trying to get Ripley when they could have gone to LV-223 or Paradise.
Quote from: Kelgaard on Nov 03, 2016, 02:07:07 AM
It's not too difficult. We know the film will adhere to Prometheus continuity because Blomkamp had to tweak his story to avoid any contradictions, in accordance with producer's Ridley Scott's wishes. Ridley's movies are establishing an Engineer presence on multiple worlds. That makes it not so unlikely that another Derilect ship could be discovered. Going by the concept art, that has indeed happened.
That would be a direction I'd like to see them go. They're actively searching for another Jockey or Engineer (if they retcon the distinction between them) facility to find a source of the eggs. I think it'd work and that seems quite likely given the Derelict concept art. I'd be just as happy with them returning to the actual Derelict and retrieving that though.
Wouldn't be a terrible way to set up an AvP idea, either, if they're going for some sort of inevitable cinematic universe -- go looking for Engineers, find Predators.
All of this riff raff could've been avoided had Ridley just banged out a prequel trilogy in '12, '14, and '16. Thanks Ridley, you strands of Alien-DNA dork.
I would love to see a Star Wars type universe for Aliens and Predators (Multiple planets, species, space crafts, etc.) don't get me wrong. But there is no way I can think of to make it work without losing the mysteriousness of the species or the fear factor they would present. Rather it would almost become adventurous and more action packed (which is okay but the others are key elements). You also can't keep spitting out the same story line which is my biggest fear for Aliens because it 'has' to begin with an egg or random facehugger and associate with Wey-Yu. How could you break those chains without reshaping the franchise ideal? It would be brilliant because it would finally move us into an expansive universe!
P.S hope everyone is doing well tonight, cheers!
Quote from: Perfect-Organism on Sep 07, 2016, 01:35:40 AM
Quote from: SM on Sep 06, 2016, 11:07:57 PM
lol
Biehn's been working consistently for years.
What I meant to say by that, is that he can remain in relative obscurity as a character in the background of many films or he can really use this opportunity to propel himself into the limelight again. I am aware of his ongoing string of films that keep being produced. This is an opportunity to change his career completely. It will either be a defining moment for him, or not. (Or it just won't happen. Let's hope it does.)
His networth is 8 million dollars according to google. He can pretty much pick and choose when he wants to work. Might not be weaver or brad pitt style money, but that is enough to live a couple lifetimes comfortably.
Quote from: DerelictShip on Nov 04, 2016, 12:51:32 AM
I would love to see a Star Wars type universe for Aliens and Predators (Multiple planets, species, space crafts, etc.) don't get me wrong. But there is no way I can think of to make it work without losing the mysteriousness of the species or the fear factor they would present. Rather it would almost become adventurous and more action packed (which is okay but the others are key elements). You also can't keep spitting out the same story line which is my biggest fear for Aliens because it 'has' to begin with an egg or random facehugger and associate with Wey-Yu. How could you break those chains without reshaping the franchise ideal? It would be brilliant because it would finally move us into an expansive universe!
P.S hope everyone is doing well tonight, cheers!
Me too, Prometheus seems to be heading this franchise in that direction slowly. The old comics and novels showed us some species here and there, such as Aliens: Reapers, Alien: Aliens and Alien: Taste to list a few.
The new comics brought in some more species that you see a Predator hunt in Fire and Stone.
The new novels introduce a new species and mentioned that humans have met many civilizations with Arcturians being the first. River of Pain says Weyland-Yutani has been trading with Arcturians and that by the time of Aliens, we've already encountered several races some of them were friendly while others were hostile and Colonial Marines have had to face them in combat.
In fact, I'd recommend you read the Rage War trilogy, it's got all the things you'll probably like - far future setting, space battles, Aliens, Predators and hints of another race.
In terms of other species, I hope they're alien and unique. I don't mind humanoid shapes (Predators and Engineers are humanoid), but I'd hope for alien characteristics rather than just a funny forehead. I'd like them to have their own language (like Predators and Engineers do) and make weird alien noises (like Predators and the River Ghost) and have a strange biology.
Like the Arcturians for instance, they must be humanoid and attractive because Frost porked one of them. But they're alien enough because we can't tell the genders and Frost is teased for being with a male Arcturian.
The Predators are also really alien looking.
Engineers are the only race that we've seen similar enough to us. They're the good excuse we'll have for other humanoid races because humans can't be the only creations of the Engineers (assuming we were created by them and not being their sibling race as Weyland-Yutani Report hints at, although that could just be speculation on Weyland-Yutani's side).
You're right about them telling the same stories over and over. It's something I also thought for a long time. Alien stories are always either one sneaky Alien killing people in enclosed spaces or a huge infestation in a colony whereas Predator stories are always a hunt taking place in various places.
This is why I liked the Rage War books so much, they were such a refreshing take on the two monsters because the cycle was broken. And this is why I liked Prometheus too, for that same reason, it was completely new and inspired a much more detailed universe within the EU for me.
I briefly got a chance to read some of the comics, I do like some of their concepts.
I'm starting to think that they could almost do multiple stories in one like the star wars series (How they're always cutting from place to place).
Maybe showing us some unique planets that have been terraframed (Or whatever the process was known as in ALIENS) but also cutting across to all of these different space ships that serve different purposes.
I don't know my brain is free roaming now....
I'd also love to see more of Predators hunting on alien worlds. In Fire and Stone, we see a really nice looking alien world with cool plants and animals that they stalked and killed before departing on their ships.
And yeah, the process you mentioned was called terraforming.
My thoughts for Alien 5, would be as follows. It would be set around 5 years after events of aliens 2. Now the sulaco that hicks, ripley, newt and bishop were on clearly is going back to earth or nearest human space station etc. So I think once they have returned and woken up they are tried and sentenced in prison or military prison for damage to colony, disobeying orders etc. You won't see this bit but will be refrence to it. So in the future instead of going to a jail for tens of years, costing massive sums of money, prisoners are put into hypersleeps in which you are given drugs to encourage tormented dreams and also age more quickly. So for instance 3 years maybe 15 years of aging to the body. This saves prison services huge cause costs and discourages crime as they are not simply asleep they have bad/stressful dreams etc. This explains the age difference of biehn and weaver and also may provide explanation for 3/resurrection as dreams.
By looks of it those teaser pics looks as though remains of Colony and egineer ship have placed either in a large warehouse on lv-426 or onto a large ship, for recovery and analysis. Whatever the case once served prison time hicks and Ripley, are forced to go back as advisors to help with operation or threatened with further prison time etc. Wherever it's set, all hell breaks lose and down to those two to save the day.
If that was your first post, its a great one. I love that idea of stealing years, its really cool!
Putting people into hypersleep for a dozen years, monitoring them, giving them drugs to give them nightmares and make them age doesn't sound cheap. Why not just put them on a prison planet? Somewhere they can't escape, has water, they can grow their own food, etc.
Thanks for reply. However with regard to the years, what I meant is for example 2/3 years, would be the equivalent of say 10 years ageing to the body. So the cost of 10 years general prison - food, shelter, operational cost, problems with inmates causing violence etc vs plugging in a crio-tube for much less time, to effectively steal years from them as punishment - to me would be less cost. The drugs would be administered by the tube itself to bring on the aging process more quickly effectively damaging the body more quickly. The whole dream thing, drugs could be used to bring on bad dreams as kind of punishment or the story could just be that the tubes are designed so you dream heavily to keep the mind stable and active for long periods of time. Thus possibly explaining the events of last two films as vivid dreams.
Just an idea I had few years ago, realise won't be for everyone. I think given there has been suggestion they won't discount the other two films may not work. But would be a way you could introduce and older Ripley, Hicks, as their current characters if that's the direction they take.
Quote from: Ultimate badass on Dec 15, 2016, 08:31:41 PM
My thoughts for Alien 5, would be as follows. It would be set around 5 years after events of aliens 2. Now the sulaco that hicks, ripley, newt and bishop were on clearly is going back to earth or nearest human space station etc. So I think once they have returned and woken up they are tried and sentenced in prison or military prison for damage to colony, disobeying orders etc. You won't see this bit but will be refrence to it. So in the future instead of going to a jail for tens of years, costing massive sums of money, prisoners are put into hypersleeps in which you are given drugs to encourage tormented dreams and also age more quickly. So for instance 3 years maybe 15 years of aging to the body. This saves prison services huge cause costs and discourages crime as they are not simply asleep they have bad/stressful dreams etc. This explains the age difference of biehn and weaver and also may provide explanation for 3/resurrection as dreams.
By looks of it those teaser pics looks as though remains of Colony and egineer ship have placed either in a large warehouse on lv-426 or onto a large ship, for recovery and analysis. Whatever the case once served prison time hicks and Ripley, are forced to go back as advisors to help with operation or threatened with further prison time etc. Wherever it's set, all hell breaks lose and down to those two to save the day.
But why all this hypersleep prison stuff? Why not just let the film take place 30 years after the events of Aliens?
And Ripley previously deliberately blew up an M-Class star freighter (a rather expensive piece of hardware) without having criminal charges filed against her. Why would she now be held liable for the accidental destruction of a colony? Hicks can't really be held responsible either.
Quote from: Ultimate badass on Dec 16, 2016, 01:03:38 PM
Thanks for reply. However with regard to the years, what I meant is for example 2/3 years, would be the equivalent of say 10 years ageing to the body. So the cost of 10 years general prison - food, shelter, operational cost, problems with inmates causing violence etc vs plugging in a crio-tube for much less time, to effectively steal years from them as punishment - to me would be less cost. The drugs would be administered by the tube itself to bring on the aging process more quickly effectively damaging the body more quickly. The whole dream thing, drugs could be used to bring on bad dreams as kind of punishment or the story could just be that the tubes are designed so you dream heavily to keep the mind stable and active for long periods of time. Thus possibly explaining the events of last two films as vivid dreams.
Just an idea I had few years ago, realise won't be for everyone. I think given there has been suggestion they won't discount the other two films may not work. But would be a way you could introduce and older Ripley, Hicks, as their current characters if that's the direction they take.
The movie doesn't have to begin with them waking up from hypersleep. Lol.
Regardless, the idea of sentencing means that you are biologically aged a certain number of years is an awesome one. I love it.
My thoughts would be given WY/company know that the derelict space craft still exists, as that was along way away from the blast, damage would have been minor if any. Therefore If they are so desperate to get hold of an egg, plus investigate what happened to Hadleys hope they would likely send a team to investigate pretty quickly. Cannot see them waiting 30 years. On the teaser pics looks as though the derelict ship is in some sort of warehouse or possibly salvage ship. Which makes me thinks events must be in the relative short term after Aliens. Obviously there could be a delay of 5 years or so and travel time etc. I could well be completely wrong but was just a thought I had.
I think the criminal charges would be combination of all the damage ripley has left in her wake and could be a corrupt way by the company of not letting them talk, as they want to keep this all hush hush but don't want to kill them both due to the knowledge/experience they posses etc. Ripley/Hicks know the company wants to use the creatures in their bio weapons division, as per actions of Burke, so I think there would be repercussions for the two once back at Earth. So hence theory of hypersleep prison and no talking until called back into action.
I don't really buy the whole induced age thing; it doesn't seem very grounded to me. But I do like the idea of WY wanting to hush them up and perhaps even painting them as criminals to cover up the whole thing.
I don't buy it either. It reeks of shoehorning old 9and deceased) characters into the movie just to accommodate the Cult of American Celebrity Worship rather than concentrating on a good story.
-Windebieste.
I probably think far too much inside the box however cannot get my head around how couldn't be set in near future after events of Aliens, as surely WY would just go back to the derelict ship and that's that. Teaser pics seem to suggest that. But obviously the age difference of characters in near future is always the snag. Sure the plot will be probably something totally unexpected and cannot wait ;D
I've yet to hear a single idea for making this work with the existing films that isn't stupid.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Dec 22, 2016, 09:55:19 AM
I've yet to hear a single idea for making this work with the existing films that isn't stupid.
lol dude. I don't think such an idea exists.
The only idea that I will remotely buy into is the dream thing, which is a cop out.
Prologue scene shows them asleep. Being woken up and Ripley makes a comment about awful dreams of death and things she can't fathom now she is awake.
Digitally de age her for this prologue and then jump 30 years.
Still a fanfic idea but it would at least be simple and then the film could move on.
Ideally just have blomkamp make a 5th movie, based after 3 and feature new characters and a new story. Don't shoe horn in dead characters.
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Dec 22, 2016, 09:55:19 AM
I've yet to hear a single idea for making this work with the existing films that isn't stupid.
Winde already said, make an alien film with
new characters.
Which I would agree to, the only reason I am even half on board for the retcon is because it will eliminate Resurrection and the magic egg thing in Alien 3, and restore the realistic tone that Resurrection toppled.
Other than that I enjoy both films, I don't mind that Hicks and Newt are dead, it sets the tone, and resurrection, I enjoy it as a parody, I don't take it as a true Alien film.
I think we could all agree (or perhaps the majority) that AVP films does
need retconning, especially the second film.
I feel like the best way to make it work is to simply not acknowledge 3 & Res at all. Do a new story with Ripley & co that picks up 30 years after Aliens.
Fans of the original timeline can choose if they like the new version better. If not, A3 & Res still exist. Simple.
My dream is that one day there will be a box set, 'The Canonical Alien', that will include a recut of Prometheus, the prequels, Alien, Aliens, & Blomkamp's film.
There is one semi-clever idea I just had with regards to Resurrection.
At one point Ripley says something about when she wakes up it's always worse...
Quote from: Lonely Universe on Jan 01, 2017, 06:35:32 PM
I feel like the best way to make it work is to simply not acknowledge 3 & Res at all. Do a new story with Ripley & co that picks up 30 years after Aliens.
Fans of the original timeline can choose if they like the new version better. If not, A3 & Res still exist. Simple.
My dream is that one day there will be a box set, 'The Canonical Alien', that will include a recut of Prometheus, the prequels, Alien, Aliens, & Blomkamp's film.
That is still just a retcon...
Quote from: Lonely Universe on Jan 01, 2017, 06:35:32 PMMy dream is that one day there will be a box set, 'The Canonical Alien', that will include a recut of Prometheus, the prequels, Alien, Aliens, & Blomkamp's film.
I'd suggest the chances of them binning 3 and 4 like that - and thereby throwing away the chance to make any more money on them - is slim to none.
A3 happened. A:R happened. Because we don't like something (for me A3 is a great movie) doesn't mean you should ignore it. They're part of canon wherever we like it or not. The End.
Well said Ingnar, Though I am half on board for a Retcon because of Resurrection, not Alien 3. I actually enjoy both films for what they are. Alien 3 for its realistic approach which is that of an indifferent universe where there is no plot armor, and I enjoyed resurrection as a Parody of Alien but official its a part of main continuity and that comedic and non-realistic tone is a bit of a stain on the franchise that was known for being realistc and authentic.
So just to restore the original tone and get rid of superheroes like Ripley 8, I am 50/50 on a retcon but 100 percent behind a new Alien film with new characters.
Quote from: Ingwar on Jan 08, 2017, 12:54:24 PM
A3 happened. A:R happened. Because we don't like something (for me A3 is a great movie) doesn't mean you should ignore it. They're part of canon wherever we like it or not. The End.
They're just movies, it never happened for real. It's Fox's IP, they decide what is canon and what is not whether you like it or not.
They'll do whatever brings in the most profit. The End.
Unfortunately that is so true, their meddling played a part in crippling the franchise in the first place.
Yup, their meddling in alien 3 ensured the franchise wouldn't recover until 25 years later. After resurrection, there wouldn't be another traditional Alien film until 20 years later.
Alien 3 was the ultimate log-jam.
Arguable, their meddling was bad on alien 3 and it did ruin the film from what it could have been but resurrection was on Fox too, and we all know the result of the AVPs and prometheus.
Yeah but this is all a3's fault
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 08, 2017, 05:10:18 PM
Quote from: Ingwar on Jan 08, 2017, 12:54:24 PM
A3 happened. A:R happened. Because we don't like something (for me A3 is a great movie) doesn't mean you should ignore it. They're part of canon wherever we like it or not. The End.
They're just movies, it never happened for real. It's Fox's IP, they decide what is canon and what is not whether you like it or not.
They'll do whatever brings in the most profit. The End.
Fox will decide that A3 (especially A3) and A:R aren't part of canon? I doubt that.
Gosh you guys. The filmmakers have clearly said this is an ALTERNATE timeline. Not a timeline that would retcon the other movies. ALTERNATE
Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Jan 08, 2017, 06:32:17 PM
Gosh you guys. The filmmakers have clearly said this is an ALTERNATE timeline. Not a timeline that would retcon the other movies. ALTERNATE
I know that :) But it still sounds cheesy. Alternate? Come on!
Quote from: Ingwar on Jan 08, 2017, 06:22:42 PM
Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Jan 08, 2017, 05:10:18 PM
Quote from: Ingwar on Jan 08, 2017, 12:54:24 PM
A3 happened. A:R happened. Because we don't like something (for me A3 is a great movie) doesn't mean you should ignore it. They're part of canon wherever we like it or not. The End.
They're just movies, it never happened for real. It's Fox's IP, they decide what is canon and what is not whether you like it or not.
They'll do whatever brings in the most profit. The End.
Fox will decide that A3 (especially A3) and A:R aren't part of canon? I doubt that.
If Blomkamp's film goes ahead, there's a good chance they'll be an alternative timeline at the very least.
I think that regardless of what direction they go, it should not be a major part of the film. Go ahead with Hicks as the male lead, have a female lead that could
possibly be Newt. The main focus of the film should be the plot, the story, the tale of survival against a nigh-indestructible force of nature that is dead-set on wiping out the crew. Surviving on an alien world. Discovering the deepest, darkest secrets of the universe and what a cruel mistress mother nature truly is. That we are not alone in the universe, and this very simple discovery boasts forth the single most destructive and terrifying events humanity has ever experienced.
If Ripley must come back for one more
Alien, let it be as a plot point specifically to explain the presence of Hicks (or not, I mean, we've got
Colonial Marines if all else fails), or to recount the horrors she faced at the mercy of experiments for Weyland-Yutani's bio-weapons division (thereby explaining
Alien 3 and
Resurrection). Nothing more. A few lines of dialogue towards the end. Nothing more. I also liked the idea one member pointed out earlier about the
Sulaco being re-routed to Fiorina-161 by the Company as part of said (theoretical) experiment (Local Trouble or SM I think it was).
Above all, it must not only fit with Ridley's prequel series, it must also build upon it. It needs to be a definitive climax for the entire franchise, and while it does not have to explain everything, it must reinforce all preexisting installments by bringing its own contribution into it. It can truly be a renown work of art, much in the way
Alien is in the Congressional Library of Arts. It doesn't have to suck. Period.
Edit:
Quote from: Local Trouble on Jun 08, 2016, 12:45:59 PM
I have an old theory that the company intentionally diverted the Sulaco to Fury 161 to isolate Ripley and the alien on a planet exclusively under their control and presumably outside the jurisdiction of Colonial Administration.
By that rationale, it's possible that the company was able to intercept the Sulaco and contain the survivors to prevent them from blowing the whistle about what really happened on LV-426.
Quote from: LCpl. D. Grant on Feb 01, 2017, 03:08:54 AMI also liked the idea one member pointed out earlier about the Sulaco being re-routed to Fiorina-161 by the Company as part of said (theoretical) experiment (Local Trouble or SM I think it was).
Sounds like something SM would come up with.
Not me.
As much as I dislike Resurrection and don't mind it being non-canon, it is set so far into the future that it wouldn't really be affected.