Post reply

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

Topic summary

Posted by TWJones
 - Dec 06, 2017, 11:14:27 PM
Quote from: David Weyland on Dec 03, 2017, 02:08:05 PM
Tell me, can anyone list specifically the plot holes created by the Prequels?

Though not necessarily a plot hole, I think that the black goo and what exactly it does has created a lot of confusion. We see it doing so many different things to different organisms that it can be hard to know what to expect from it.

It mutates people, creates embryos, spores, neomorphs, hammerpedes, and vaporizes when it hits air (on Paradise anyway) which leads to a massacre.

I've seen more posts bemoaning the "inconsistencies" of the black goo than anything else. Which is somewhat explained in the "Advent" feature when David talks about the goo being a sort of "primitive AI."
Posted by SM
 - Dec 03, 2017, 10:36:51 PM
I can't think of anything that I'd call a plot hole.  Just unanswered questions like 'where did the Derelict come from?'
Posted by David Weyland
 - Dec 03, 2017, 02:08:05 PM
Tell me, can anyone list specifically the plot holes created by the Prequels?
Posted by trilobite
 - Dec 03, 2017, 08:07:33 AM
Quote from: reecebomb on Dec 02, 2017, 06:25:55 PM
Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 02, 2017, 04:03:51 PM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.
Again, as I've said before, I believe this is largely due to the marketing campaign. They should've marketed the movie as artistic biological weirdo film that it is rather than all the RUN PRAY HIDE crap.

Except the film was more of the latter than the former, so the marketing was actually pretty accurate. Having a villain quoting classic literature in a weak film doesn't change the fact that the film is still weak.


Quote from: acrediblesource on Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.

Brought back the mystery :D :D :D  A lot of peoples impression is the exact opposite, you're kidding yourself if you think Covenant was less dissapointing than the worst sequels. Aliens and to me Alien 3 are great sequels and Resurrection is still a better film than Covenant. Many of us just expected the film to simply be good, the reality didn't meet our expectations. By food analogy Ridley did stir the pot, but by now the result has become a watery fruit salad with fishbones that's probably best left to rot.
Alien cultivated our imagination for decades, that mystery of it all was most likely the most important factor why the film was so highly regarded all these years. The smart subtlety of it was far more stimulating than on the nose philoshophy of Covenant which failed to mask that the film is basically a mediocre space monster flick, it's more of the same done with zero finesse.
Maybe i'm wrong here, but imo this board also used to flourish with fan theories about different aspects the films dark cold universe, the prequels gave us inconsistencies, plotholes and mcguffings to ponder rather some actual mystery.

All this could have been avoided if Ridley just made a all new sci-fi series that took some inspiration from Alien. And as i've said before if the Prometheus sequel had took it's original path something genuinely interesting could have came out of it. I have no idea, how you could fix Covenant.

the mystery aspect of alien isn't the reason it's so highly regarded- sure the mystery is intriguing and cool but alien is so highly regarded because it is still such scary space horror
Posted by Alionic
 - Dec 02, 2017, 09:27:31 PM
I didn't know that. Thanks for bringing me up to speed.
Posted by reecebomb
 - Dec 02, 2017, 09:21:17 PM
Quote from: Alionic on Dec 02, 2017, 09:07:03 PM
Quote from: reecebomb on Dec 02, 2017, 06:25:55 PM
and Resurrection is still a better film than Covenant.

https://media.giphy.com/media/5lXtqw7tJh3eE/giphy.gif

None of the deaths in Covenant were as creative as this one.
Posted by Alionic
 - Dec 02, 2017, 09:07:03 PM
Quote from: reecebomb on Dec 02, 2017, 06:25:55 PM
and Resurrection is still a better film than Covenant.

Posted by Anthony
 - Dec 02, 2017, 07:46:03 PM
I'd be interested in seeing what Drew Goddard, who wrote The Martian for Ridley, could do with Alien.
Posted by reecebomb
 - Dec 02, 2017, 06:25:55 PM
Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 02, 2017, 04:03:51 PM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.
Again, as I've said before, I believe this is largely due to the marketing campaign. They should've marketed the movie as artistic biological weirdo film that it is rather than all the RUN PRAY HIDE crap.

Except the film was more of the latter than the former, so the marketing was actually pretty accurate. Having a villain quoting classic literature in a weak film doesn't change the fact that the film is still weak.


Quote from: acrediblesource on Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.

Brought back the mystery :D :D :D  A lot of peoples impression is the exact opposite, you're kidding yourself if you think Covenant was less dissapointing than the worst sequels. Aliens and to me Alien 3 are great sequels and Resurrection is still a better film than Covenant. Many of us just expected the film to simply be good, the reality didn't meet our expectations. By food analogy Ridley did stir the pot, but by now the result has become a watery fruit salad with fishbones that's probably best left to rot.
Alien cultivated our imagination for decades, that mystery of it all was most likely the most important factor why the film was so highly regarded all these years. The smart subtlety of it was far more stimulating than on the nose philoshophy of Covenant which failed to mask that the film is basically a mediocre space monster flick, it's more of the same done with zero finesse.
Maybe i'm wrong here, but imo this board also used to flourish with fan theories about different aspects the films dark cold universe, the prequels gave us inconsistencies, plotholes and mcguffings to ponder rather some actual mystery.

All this could have been avoided if Ridley just made a all new sci-fi series that took some inspiration from Alien. And as i've said before if the Prometheus sequel had took it's original path something genuinely interesting could have came out of it. I have no idea, how you could fix Covenant. 
Posted by tleilaxu
 - Dec 02, 2017, 04:03:51 PM
Quote from: acrediblesource on Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.
Again, as I've said before, I believe this is largely due to the marketing campaign. They should've marketed the movie as artistic biological weirdo film that it is rather than all the RUN PRAY HIDE crap.
Posted by acrediblesource
 - Dec 02, 2017, 02:19:40 PM
We can only maintain the fact that Ridley Scott brought the Alien franchise back from extinction since all the other sequels made everyone disappointed. He brought back the allure and mystery if not bringing up more questions than giving answers. So not only did he stir the pot, he added veggies and meatballs.But A;Cov, proved that the franchise has a problem of making something that everyone expected , that being NOT MEETING EXPECTATION. ANd thats the problem everytime.
Posted by monkeylove
 - Dec 02, 2017, 07:51:19 AM
The final say generally comes from the franchise owners and investors. If any, that's probably why A:C ended up a mess.
Posted by Highland
 - Dec 02, 2017, 06:50:52 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Dec 02, 2017, 06:29:53 AM
So he gave them f**kin aliens.  He wasn't catering to fanboys who just want marines mowing down dozens of aliens with pulse rifles.  It was still Ridley's vision, despite having to change it to accommodate studio demands.

Posted by Scorpio
 - Dec 02, 2017, 06:29:53 AM
So he gave them f**kin aliens.  He wasn't catering to fanboys who just want marines mowing down dozens of aliens with pulse rifles.  It was still Ridley's vision, despite having to change it to accommodate studio demands.
Posted by Highland
 - Dec 02, 2017, 03:42:51 AM
Quote from: Scorpio on Dec 02, 2017, 03:02:30 AM
Just because he can't do whatever he wants, doesn't mean it isn't his vision.  Every director is ultimately bound to their financiers.  Ridley still has a lot of creative freedom.

Not wanting to have the Alien in your movie then someone telling you they want it is a pretty big change. It's not like changing a few action scenes or cutting the movie shorter.
AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News