Quote from: Highland on Apr 11, 2010, 05:15:49 AM
So he had very little to do with it, and wanted it in the movie? which is it?.
This isn't one of those "one or the other" arguments.
He wanted it in the movie, but he had little to do with its creation. O'Bannon dreamt it up, Giger designed it. Scott made sure it stayed in.
Quotehe made the jockey what it is today for Alien fans.
Only by virtue of being the one who ensured it made it into the picture. Its mysterious aspect was the work of the script, its lasting visual impression is the work of Giger.
QuoteFor me, he has the power to do what he likes with it.
Certainly does. But that doesn't mean he's the sole person, or even the most responsible, for it being what it is.
QuoteIts just pure hypocrisy that fans don't want the jockey, yet will run out and buy the Quadrilogy ... and then listen to 500+ minutes of commentary to see what they missed.
Pure wank.
It's apples and oranges.
They listen to the commentary for the behind the scenes stuff, not to have every mystery explained to them. I don't listen to Ridley's commentary on the 20th anniversary DVD to hear his ten seconds of postulation regarding the Jockey at the very end of the movie; I listen because it's a really interesting insight into the creation of the movie and its creative processes. I listen to the Quad features to hear the opinions of the people who made it, regarding the production of the picture and the final product itself.
There's a huge difference - to the point of there being no comparison - between wanting to know how the movie was made, and wanting to know the entire life-story of the Space Jockeys.