Started by Corporal Hicks, May 06, 2007, 09:22:14 PM
Quote from: steveperry on May 24, 2007, 12:38:29 AMYeah, but at least Scott knows how to make movies. He has a great visual sense.
Quote from: SM on May 22, 2007, 09:19:11 PMQuoteCowardly boogie-men?QuoteShooting at inferior (script considerations aside) prey from long range, with energy weapons, while invisible, always struck me as rather cowardly. Then when they ditch the weapons and go mano-a-mano they get their arses handed to them.Like the Fezzik the giant in Princess Bride when he says, "My way is not very sportsmanlike ..."Human hunters take down Bambi from a distance using weapons, and Bambi can't shoot back at all. At least humans have a chance against Predators, as you have pointed out. Man is the most dangerous local game, and if you have a weapon that'll kill your opponent, he can't get any deader if it's a knife, rifle, or pocket nuke.Besides, being invisible doesn't always help when somebody opens up on the whole forest with an electric minigun ...Let's see: Predators are bigger, stronger, faster, better trained, hard to hurt and kill, but the one-on-one human wins? Only in movies. The smart money bets on the Predators hand-to-hand against a man. Creature can backhand you and knock you twenty feet through the air? Be worse than you in a fight with a six-year-old kid. I wouldn't give any kind of odds on the kid winning. Yeah, Predators are arrogant and they underestimate their opponents, which is always a bad idea. If they believed humans were as good as they were? They'd be a lot more careful and I doubt they'd lose very often. If you prepare for the worst and doesn't happen, it's all gravy.Unless, of course, I am writing it. In which case, I can give my ooman some advantages ...QuoteSiL more or less addressed what I was going to. You're obviously pro-Predator while I'm an Alien geek and ne'er the twain and all that. Actually, I'm not pro one or the other, but for me, it's like the difference between a tiger and a gladiator. Aliens might not be as dumb as fence posts, but until they can work a manual transmission or come up with an FTL spaceship, they can't run with the smart crowd. What they do all seems instinctual, like ants herding aphids, and that's way down the sentience scale compare to people or Predators. Monkeys can use rudimentary tools. Crows drop nuts onto the concrete to open them.None of them are going to set up my DVD player.I like tigers, and admire them. I'd bet the trained gladiator to win against a tiger most of the time. Smart beats fierce, otherwise, we wouldn't be having this conversation ... (quote]ust to back to an earlier question - You set Earth Hive in 2092, yet as far back as 1979, it was established Alien was set in the 22nd century, making the 2092 date about a century too early. Did you come up with th 2092 date or did Dark Horse give you the wrong info (the '92' bit seems about right following Aliens).
QuoteShooting at inferior (script considerations aside) prey from long range, with energy weapons, while invisible, always struck me as rather cowardly. Then when they ditch the weapons and go mano-a-mano they get their arses handed to them.
QuoteSiL more or less addressed what I was going to. You're obviously pro-Predator while I'm an Alien geek and ne'er the twain and all that.
Quote from: SiL on May 24, 2007, 12:51:38 AMQuote from: steveperry on May 24, 2007, 12:38:29 AMYeah, but at least Scott knows how to make movies. He has a great visual sense. Ouch! Fincher also clearly knows how to make a movie - Fight Club and Se7en, anyone? - with one of the best visual styles out there. He just never got the chance to utilize it to its full potential what with the dicking around with the studio (Re-writes, gaps in filming, constantly being denied creative decisions, not being allowed to finish the film...)
Quote from: steveperry on May 24, 2007, 01:21:52 AMscience fiction is a better platform for Aliens, as Cameron and Hurd's film aptly demonstrated. They got it.
Quotebut what matters is the story, and A3 didn't have one. Everybody run around in the prison and kill each other, booga booga ...
QuoteAnd I didn't think Fight Club or Se7ven were the highest examples of the movie makers' art myself. Looked fine, stories didn't move me. Personal taste ...
QuoteI don't recall the specifics -- it's been a decade and a couple years since I wrote it -- but I'm guessing it probably either came from Dark Horse's graphic novel, or, just as likely I mis-read it. It happens.
QuoteThere are folks who know what color the lint was in Ripley's left front pocket last Tuesday
QuoteBut my earlier question seems to have got lost in it all; have you ever read Alan Dean Foster's novel tie-ins?
QuoteI've always been under the impression that Lucasfilm were fairly diligent with with continuity - is there much difference between dealing with them and Fox/ Dark Horse?
QuoteThere's a great episode of The Simpsons in which a bunch of fanboys are asking questions of a writer, and the gist of it is like this: Well, on Monday's episode, when whathisname got hit in the ribs, the tone was a C-sharp, but on Friday when the got hit on the same ribs, the tone was a C-major. So ... which one is right?
QuoteAs to fanboy stuff, I am guilty of it myself. I got action figures in my office. But as a writer, I can't write for the hardcore fanboys -- you can't please them all because they disagree about almost everything, and if make one set happy, another group will be unhappy. Look at the arguments on any online group, and you can't miss what I'm talking about.
Quote from: SM on May 25, 2007, 12:30:04 AMIs there something to be said for keeping hardcore fans away from writing for franchises? I've written a couple of Star Wars fan scripts, and my attempt at writing an Alien V tanked because it was so heavy on details and light on actual story. And I find most other peoples fanfic excrutiating.Both Joss Whedon and Paul Anderson professed to be massive fans of the Alien series (well the first two at any rate) and yet they've turned in arguably the two weakest installments. Is it too simplistic to say you need to be a writer first and a fan second?
QuoteGenerally, if you have a scene in a 75,000 word novel that runs more than four pages?
Quote from: steveperry on May 25, 2007, 11:22:23 PMSome people don't like the stuff at all, but write it. It's never as good. It's missing the heart.
Quote from: SM on May 26, 2007, 10:33:39 AMQuoteGenerally, if you have a scene in a 75,000 word novel that runs more than four pages?I try to stay away from prose. One must know one's limitations.However, to go off on a slightly anal tangent, you use the word 'scene' there. I've used it in the past when talking about books, but always thought it was incorrect, and was more movie lingo. Do you use that word in the industry or would you normally use the word 'passage' or something else?
Quote from: SiL on May 26, 2007, 11:34:43 AMQuote from: steveperry on May 25, 2007, 11:22:23 PMSome people don't like the stuff at all, but write it. It's never as good. It's missing the heart.I think many would disagree when it came to Alien. As Walter Hill said, and on the whole I tend to agree, 'The best thing I'm bringing to this is that I don't like science fiction', or close enough. I like O'Bannon's script, cheese and all, but it really does pale in comparison to the re-writes.But enough of the Aliens -- Why has it taken so long to get to writing a solo Predator novel?
Page created in 0.035 seconds with 14 queries.