AvPGalaxy Forums

We have just uploaded the 58th episode of the Alien vs. Predator Galaxy Podcast (right-click and save as to download)! Our latest podcast is a bit of a reactionary episode, discussing Sir Ridley Scott’s recent comments reaffirming his belief that “the beast has almost run out” and we also talk a little about the news that Disney was looking to acquire some of 20th Century Fox’s entertainment assets.

RidgeTop, Xenomorphine and I talk about Scott’s comment and if we think there’s any truth in that statement. We also throw out a wishlist of other directors we’d like to see take on an Alien film and just we also talk about whether Disney owning Alien and Predator is really such a bad thing?

At one point during this episode, Xenomorphine mentions that Clive Barker was attached to Alien 3 at one point during its production. You can find more information regarding this over on the Official Clive Barker website and on Alien Explorations.

What did you think of our latest episode? Be sure to let us know down below! You can also listen to any of our previous episodes in the Podcast section under the News tab on the main menu. The Alien vs. Predator Galaxy Podcast is also available via iTunes and Stitcher.

Keep a close eye on Alien vs. Predator Galaxy for the latest on Alien and Predator! You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram to get the latest on your social media walls. You can also join in with fellow Alien and Predator fans on our forums!

Link To Post

Some interesting Director choices.I can see where the original persons views,regarding Directorial options go,was thinking though I strongly disagee with his choices. Bigelow,Garland and Duncan Jones are good options.I agree that we need Directors who have stronger interest in making characters,relatable or otherwise.The characters are the strongest aspect of Alien for me,in my opinion,though obviously most priase is aimed towards its original authentic art design.

My Directorial choices:

Cary Fukunaga (Beasts Of No Nation)
Duncan Jones (Moon)
David Lowery (A Ghost Story)
Nicolas Winding Refn (Neon Demon)
Benh Zeitlin (Beasts of the Southern Wild)
Bigelow (Zero Dark Thirty)
Blomkamp (District 9)
And a David Fincher comeback (Zodiac)

Abit of left field thinking might just do the trick.

Another great episode guys. Thanks.

I wish we had these more often. I enjoy the round-table discussions. This actually brought me back to the forum to post. I hadn't been here since right after AC. Just lost the will to talk about it.

The big thing I wanted to address was the stuff about Disney. It's funny how this is being talked about across various different venues. So,in addition to this podcast, I also follow the Weekly Planet, Red Letter Media, CineGods, Comic Book Cast, Midnight's Edge, Georg Rockall-Schmidt and Please Rewind.

Most of them have discussed the Disney - Fox talks. Of course there a lot of different perspectives on it. I cite these sources because I think they are worth listening to about it. Most of these are movie and genre related shows.

I think it's clear that Disney, or rather what it is now, is a large corporation that owns and manages several other smaller companies. A lot of people seem to think that they are very hands on. I don't think that is necessarily the case. They seem to be content to let the sub-companies run things until and unless the sub-companies become unprofitable or show that they are in trouble.

Ridgetop spoke about the problems that Star Wars has had with directors as an example of Disney interference. This is actually an issue with the leadership at Lucasfilm. Disney did not stop Lord and Miller from directing Han Solo. In fact that film was almost done when they were ousted. So that means that Disney at the corporate level had no problem with their hire or at least TRUSTED Lucasfilm to make the right decisions for it's projects. The same is true for Rogue One. The problem lies with Lucasfilm. They chose poorly and had a lack of vision or focus for those projects so that when they were almost to the point of no return that they had to be course corrected to save them. Kathleen Kennedy shoulders all the responsibility as the head of Lucasfilm. They made poor choices and they allowed them to run too long. Disney is content to let Lucasfilm run things UNTIL they prove they can and THEN you will see a leadership change. Lucas film is the one that hired JJ too. If you have a problem with the new trilogy, that's all JJ and Kennedy.

Disney lets Marvel run their own business. They are profitable and they put butts in seats, As long as they can do that Disney will stay out of things. An example is when Kevin Feige reportedly went to Disney to get Ike Pearlmutter moved out of the movie division because he was a problem. Permutter was keeping them from making more money because he stood in the way of various projects and partnerships. The SONY Spiderman collaboration would never have happened under his leadership.

If Disney did buy FOX outright, which is NOT what all this was about, they would likely run all projects that are currently coming out of FOX like Deadpool 2 as FOX release. FOX would essentially operate as a sub company under the Disney flag. As long as they were profitable and were moving forward, they would be left alone. When they don't, Disney would most definitely step in. I suspect they'd make sure teams were in place to manage "franchises" like Alien and Predator where there apparently are none. This might mean bringing people in to form those teams. Be assured they would do so to keep those things moving forward.

The main reason they are having these meetings is for the streaming service they are building. If they purchase pieces of FOX or buy distribution rights to the FOX catalog, they will have more content they can put on there service. They have already singed agreements with a few studios to get their films on the Disney Movies Anywhere App which has been re-branded to MOVIES Anywhere. This is the place where you get digital version of a film when you buy it. That is most certainly a step to the end goal.

Yes, they are probably talking to FOX about the distribution rights to ANH and the Marvel properties that FOX has the rights to. However, the streaming service is far more important to the DISNEY corporation's future goals. They plan the be THE number one service. Incidentally,this is also where I am sure Disney does put pressure on Lucasfilm and Marvel. They need content. So, I am sure they give mandates to all their sub companies to have thngs to put on that service. In this scenario they'd be telling then they need X number of series in development for a 2018 release. They need X number of movies ready. Remember that Disney owns Pixar, Lucasfilm, Marvel, Disney Animation, ABC Television, and ESPN. They are not going to HURT a brand. They want them to be successful and they will do what they need to do to make that happen.

It's not all bout princesses and castles...

I wonder if any of these choices would be good to Direct an Alien film.

Alex Proyas Dark City, The Crow
Juan Carlos Fresnadillo 28 weeks later
Vincenzo Natali Cube, Splice
Darren Aronofsky Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain, Black Swan

How about Danny Boyle ?
Has history with both Science fiction and Horror and is a great actors director and he also knows the difference between a good script and a poor one.
Perfect !

The best AvP podcast l've heard so far.

My first choise is Guillermo del Toro. He's fanboy and true man of passion. He makes monster movies because he loves it. Others are Duncan Jones (cannot wait to see Mute) and Jonathan Glazer (Under the Skin).

I do not know whether take his comments seriously. The  directs his films with a huge thousand dollar cigars either in his mouth,,mostly in his hand, But in end Sir Ridley is a visualist first and director second..

Mickey Mouse buying the " Alien and Predator franchise e.g What Pocahontas vs Alien vs Predator ..What the F#%k are you.

As far as directors go:

1.Fincher - yes again. Alien 3 brought the gritty darkness I love in Fincher's films, and it suited the series well.
2. Alex Proyas - The Crow, Dark City, Knowing
3. Tim Burton - I don't particularly enjoy his films, but he's got a dark streak and it could be interesting to see what he could do with it. Just don't have the ultra cheesy vibe from Batman. Sleepy Hollow was good though.
4.Del Toro - He's got that semi-serious action style with a touch of darkness. Blade 2, Pacific Rim, Hellboy,The Strain Series. The guy makes stuff that's fun to watch. That's the most important thing.
5. Gore Verbinksi - The Ring, A Cure For Wellness - I could really see him doing a movie in this series.
6. Not Christopher Nolan or Michael Bay, For the love of God.
7. See Number 6.
8. John Ford - If he was still alive. The guy could make it happen.
9. Joss Whedon
10. John Carpenter - The Thing. What more do you need? He's got the gift.
11. Sam Mendes - Skyfall
12. John Hillcoat - The Road, Lawless. An honorable mention I suppose.
13. Tarantino - C'mon. Who wouldn't want to see that?
14. Roland Emmerich - The guy destroys the world for a living. He's got serious clout. Resurgence 2 was just a bad idea from the start.
15. Garreth Edwards - Godzilla. Yeah I know, star wars. But I don't like star wars, and I love Godzilla 2014. It was a big movie done right, and the creature was treated with some respect.


If Disney ever takes over anything, we're going to be looking at an AVP reboot. They can make pg13 action creature fests for the teenagers. I don't see a proper Alien or predator film coming out of that situation.

---

I forgot to mention Frank Darabont as well. Shawshank and The mist are two of my favorite films.

Wow he would of made a masterfull alien movie if given free creative control

What's that honey? It smells good. It's a steamed Xeno with lemon and orange seasoning.  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Listened to the podcast and mostly agree with the points brought across.

However, seeing what occurred with Covenant's reception and Scott's true feelings, Fox should just take a leap of faith and risk it. They should just break the franchise let new blood come in and take over the franchise and Scott does his exploration of the universe. For that to occur, Fox should just discard Covenant and do a true Prometheus 2 sequel while 'x' director ventures with a new Alien film.

Fox mentions that Covenant gave them some profit, so they should take the route that Paramount is taking by virtually discarding T: Genysis and all the films after T2. Use that money for a true Prometheus 2 or a new Alien film that finances Scott's Prometheus films.

Give Scott $30-$40 million for his Prometheus 2. Stage the film with David and Shaw finding Paradise already destroyed by the militant engineers that we saw in Prometheus. Have them explore the planet and find survivors who tell them what occurred, and in the same time, Shaw gets the answers she was seeking though at the cost of her and David's safety since the planet is poisoned by the pathogen and threatening organisms attack them and the surviving engineers. Have the film mostly shot on location such as the forest and rivers that we saw on Covenant to save the cost of building sets, do man on suit for the creatures and Engineers. With that it saves them a ton of money.

For the Alien films my choices would be Fincher, Villenueve, Fukunaga, Bigelow, Boyle, Garland, and Blomkamp (with the caveat of not ret-coning Alien3)

Quote from: Bojo on Nov 16, 2017, 08:17:46 PM
How about Danny Boyle ?
Has history with both Science fiction and Horror and is a great actors director and he also knows the difference between a good script and a poor one.
Perfect !

Dilly, dilly!

I don't know if most of these directors mentioned would touch an Alien film.

Jean Pierre Jeunet for Alien 5.  Who better to make a follow up to Alien 4.

That was a really interesting Podcast, I probably lean more towards Hicks views the most.

As for possible future directors, I think Gore Verbinski, Danny Boyle or Frank Darabont would be a good fit. They all have a handle on dark atmosphere and visuals. I do think it needs to have a director with a proven track record at the helm because I'd worry the studio would bully an inexperienced guy and give them less creative control.

I definitely wouldn't want Del Toro. I like a few of his films but think he would make a film closer in tone and style to Resurrection which is the last thing Id want to see.

Good podcast.

Danny Boyle all the way for me.

S. Craig Zahler - Bone Tomahawk and Brawl In Cell Block 99

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 16, 2017, 11:12:45 PM
As far as directors go:

10. John Carpenter - The Thing. What more do you need? He's got the gift.

Hail to the king!

The only other director I'd trust is David Cronenberg.

Good podcast, i mostly agree. I enjoyed covenant but with Scott saying the beast is cooked again it is upsetting. I want to see one more film to end the prequels but i dont think Ridley should be directing anymore.

On another note i have to disagree with Ridgetop regarding Harbinger Down. That movie was aweful in every department. I didnt see any merit in the effects or the direction in that film and i usually enjoy a lot of ADI's work.

It was okay from what I remember but very direct to dvd quality. I wouldn't want ADI as directors. Sure they're fans but so was the Strauses with very little experience in the field.

Quote from: 426Buddy on Nov 19, 2017, 02:35:54 PM
On another note i have to disagree with Ridgetop regarding Harbinger Down. That movie was awful in every department. I didnt see any merit in the effects or the direction in that film and i usually enjoy a lot of ADI's work.

Straight up unintenionally funny.

Wow...great episode..really agree with everything..if I could rant...that's exactly what I'd say. Thanks guys. Xenomorphine hit a home run in tgis one great job.

No I don't believe the beast is cooked but a good alien movie is more than a cast of expendable humans sharing screen time with a big black steel dragon monster.
     I think that fox and to a lesser extent Ridley have absolutely no idea why fans love the franchise. The alien engineers script would have alleviated almost all of the backlash from Prometheus and rumors about what Prometheus 2 were supposed to have originally been before it became covenant show to me that fox a son a studio is responsible for the demise of this franchise. I'm all for disny buying fox, you couldnt do worse than we are currently. David the creator of the alien, I refuse to accept that.

Double posting here, sorry if it's not allowed, my first post was more of see if this works thing...

The problem with the 2 prequel films, from what I've gathered, isn't so much who the director is but more about what mood fox producers and executives are in. Sure Ridley has some batshit ideas but why is it that in interviews he says all the right things about the lore but then come movie time none of it's there? Did he just forget or did someone force his hand? I know lindlelof gets a lot of flak for Prometheus turning out the way it did but it was the fox CEO, not Ridley, from my understanding, that took the xenomorphs from the movie. I blame lindelof and Ridley for making it intentionally vague on plot though.
      What I'm getting at is that if fox is going to override  a well respected director like Ridley  what makes you think they wouldn't reign over a say blomkamp film with an iron fist? Maybe I'm putting too much blame on fox producers here and Ridley does share responsibility for where we currently are but no the beast is not cooked.
      Fox producers are cooked, Ridleys vision Ian cooked,'fans faith in fox and Ridley to salvage this mess are cooked. But no the beast isn't cooked.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 21, 2017, 03:46:28 AM
The alien engineers script would ha

stop right there.

that script was straight trash, son.

@skhellter: I admit the alien engineers had its problems, mainly the unnecessary inclusion of the traditional xenomorph shoe horned in, but why do you think it's "trash"? Do you like the current direction the franchise is going?

---

@skhellter: I admit the alien engineers had its problems, mainly the unnecessary inclusion of the traditional xenomorph shoe horned in, but why do you think it's "trash"? Do you like the current direction the franchise is going?

Quote from: skhellter on Nov 21, 2017, 07:49:23 AM

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 21, 2017, 03:46:28 AM
The alien engineers script would ha

stop right there.

that script was straight trash, son.

Isn't it pretty similar to Prometheus' script?

I had a thought today. Is it possible Ridley purposely undermined the xenomorph in this film to spite the studio for forcing him to change direction and so he can say "haha I was right."? I know that's going out on a very long limb. Idk just a thought.

I believe this franchise is cursed. No matter what they do, it turns to shit. Could you ever  imagine that the director of the first movie would talk like that?? It's like a hater of a franchise is hired to make a movie for it.


Seriously, this guy could die before the next movie is finished and I wouldn't be sad anymore.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 21, 2017, 09:09:02 PM
I had a thought today. Is it possible Ridley purposely undermined the xenomorph in this film to spite the studio for forcing him to change direction and so he can say "haha I was right."? I know that's going out on a very long limb. Idk just a thought.

I get where you're coming from. Always possible but I doubt it, mainly because as Ridley said himself, he is first a businessman, so I can't imagine him doing anything on purpose to hurt his film and chances of maximum profit. As said many times before, Alien was great because it was a team effort of talented people working together, but now nobody questions Ridley on his creative decisions.
On the other hand, we have Fox who doesn't understand the reasons why a film doesn't perform that well, so they meddle and change a movies direction for all the wrong reasons.
What mostly hurts the weaker movies in the franchise is the script. We need good writers who care about the details. If this doesn't change, we get giant logic problems like: How does a 5 second facehug and a fully developed chestburster predate the modern alien without making the Big Chap look inferior? (It's possible to come up with a convoluted solution, but it gets a bit ridiculous when fans jump through hoops to make things fit while the movie gives no hint to an answer.)

Ridley "undermined" the xenomorph?


With David as its creator now we have a character
with the active motivation
to spread these creatures throughout the universe..
as far as he can.
They are no longer just parasites, given David's fixation with sexual reproduction in this film
he pretty much created the xeno's to "f**k" mankind.
I give it a Big Thumbs up due to how f**ked up that is. :D

As far as we know, David might still be alive in a post Alien Resurrection universe)

They are most definitely not just in LV426 anymore... like the 4 Ripley films suggested.

And with the Engineers and Neomorphs filmmakers can now literally point at any far away star in the galaxy,
set an Alien movie there and still have cool creatures and experiments with an infinite variety of shapes...

Prometheus was a bad movie but Covenant was decent and i dug the sadism of David's character.


But i guess the prototype chestburster had arms and legs so everything's ruined now. 
:laugh:

Quote from: skhellter on Nov 22, 2017, 01:17:57 AM

They are no longer just parasites, given David's fixation with sexual reproduction in this film
he pretty much created the xeno's to "f**k" mankind.
I give it a Big Thumbs up due to how f**ked up that is. :D

Agreed.  Much better origin than random space bug.  It also fits with the themes of Alien.  Androids are a big part of the Alien mythos, it's not just about humans vs space bugs.

We've had 2 movies in the prequel franchise so far which adds up to about 4 hours. Within 4 hours of screen time we've yet to learn:
-how the engineers made humans
-why the engineers made humans
-why the engineers wanted to destroy humans
- what is the black goo, where did it come from?
-is the black a natural element or something the engineers made?
-why did David destroy the engineers in the first place?
-why the f**k did dead engineers in Prometheus die from a chest burster if David allegedly ( I refuse to accept this) created the alien?
-how did the eggs get on the derilect ship?

Do you see what I mean, scott has had 4 f**king hours of screen time to answer the two most basic questions of the Alien franchise, where did they come from and why. We're no closer to that unless you're willing to accept the asinine explanation that David created them in a lab, which I don't, nor will accept. Scott had one f**king job, it was easy.
      It could have been fun and thought provoking. Instead it's this convulted mess that needs a third movie to f**king explain the first two and even then we may not get all the answers or the ones we do will so retcon all preconceived lore it may damn near kill an already battered ip.

Quote-how the engineers made humans

Beginning of Prometheus it showed that.

Quote-why the engineers made humans

Theme of creation runs through these movies.

Quote-why the engineers wanted to destroy humans

"Sometimes to create, you must first destroy"

Quote- what is the black goo, where did it come from?

It's advanced A.I./nanotechnology. 

Quote-is the black a natural element or something the engineers made?

The Engineers made it.  Or found it.

Quote-why did David destroy the engineers in the first place?

He learned their ways.

Quote-why the f**k did dead engineers in Prometheus die from a chest burster if David allegedly ( I refuse to accept this) created the alien?

They weren't chestbursted, it was the black goo.

Quote-how did the eggs get on the derilect ship?

We find out in the next one.

Where in any of the films is it explained that the black goo is nanotechnology? HOW did David learn their ways if he killed them? Why would peaceful engineers, presumably, on their home planet have records of this toxic goo, that was on a top secret moon installation as an experiment to begin with??? David bombed a city with black Goo not the whole planet so why would the engineers, on this huge planet all be gathered into one city???

In Prometheus when fiefield and biology bro are looking at the pile of dead engineers one of the explicitly states "it looks like something came out of him." Are you really going to tell me the implication was the black goo made that happen? It was clearly implying a chest burster came out of it. So again, David retcons even Ridleys most precious movie. None of the lore in these films are canon as far as I'm concerned.

Quote-how the engineers made humans

It's in the first 5 minutes of Prometheus.

Quote- what is the black goo, where did it come from?

A highly mutable pathogen.  Where it came from isn't a question that needs answering, but presumably it was created by the Engineers.

Quote-is the black a natural element or something the engineers made?

See above.

Quote-why did David destroy the engineers in the first place?

To display his superiority.

Quote-why the f**k did dead engineers in Prometheus die from a chest burster if David allegedly ( I refuse to accept this) created the alien?

We don't know exactly what the Engineers died of on LV-223.

QuoteWe're no closer to that unless you're willing to accept the asinine explanation that David created them in a lab, which I don't, nor will accept.

Whether you accept it not doesn't change the fact that a question was answered.

:D
Pretty sure the Deacon was a "chestburster" of sorts.
Accelerant gives rise to lots of nasty critters.
Pretty much an infinite variety.
Some of them killed the engineers in LV223
and some even chestbursted out of them.

Out of all the things in Prometheus... this is the easiest one to explain.
The film gives you all the hints.  ::)

And as to why engineers created humans?
Prometheus also gives you that answer.. with David's question:
"why was i created?" "Because we could."

Why did the engineers hated humans?
The film also gives you that answer...
with the Weyland and Vickers relationship
being that of a parent who hates his child,
It's a neat paralell that invites the audience to explore a big piece
of the lore by questioning human relationships.
And then Weyland is killed by his own creator.. while the daughter he hates watches from afar.
A hateful parent killing a child who hates its own child.

I dont think Prometheus is a good film but
it was trying to do some interesting things with its themes. It's a very pretty mess.

Yeah, all those questions are easy to answer, more or less with some minor speculation. I agree that the greatest thing about the prequels are the new opportunities and ideas we have for exploration in the universe. The ending of Covenant was great IMO, not only tonally, but for future exploration of xenomorphs on different planets.
The most dominant theme in these prequels is can be summed up by David himself: Doesn't everyone want there parents dead?
Even though I would've liked to see more of David's lab and his experiments, my only disappointment with him being the creator of the alien is that it's not an ancient creature anymore and it throws out all the novels and comics that reference to the alien as that. It makes the extended universe so much smaller now. We have new opportunities and greater themes, but at the moment with these two prequels, none of those ideas are getting explored enough IMO.

I think we still have great potential where we are now, I just believe someone needs to take care of the franchise so it doesn't get more logically convoluted.

But you know, all could be fixed with time travel...  :laugh: (kidding, I hope they stay far away from that!)

@ still:

Like ridgetop said during the podcast, the current direction makes the alien universe smaller, not larger. I agree with him 1000 percent. I don't see how David creating the alien, which retcons all previous movies before it including Prometheus, opens the univer up in anyway. If anything it diminishes the alien. Killing most of the engineers doesn't open anything up either, it slams doors shut, not opens.
     Instead of being an ancient weapon made by a higher intellect for an unknown reason it's now a science project from a robot that only got to where he was through extraordinary, random circumstances. It's almost as if the alien was an accident instead of an ancient creation.
I just fundamentally disagree that the universe is now larger with the current direction.

Quote from: 426Buddy on Nov 19, 2017, 02:35:54 PM
have to disagree with Ridgetop regarding Harbinger Down. That movie was aweful in every department.

I agree! Harbinger Down is indefensible !

"It's almost as if the alien was an accident instead of an ancient creation."


In the bluray extras, david said that he was sending Wey-yu the data, and basically it was their choice to pursue this avenue (of creating the aliens) or not. Which is why I believe that now is the time to move away from david and the Prometheus storyline. These films have gotten far too philosophical for their own good, and Ridley is just flying by the seat of his britches here. I don't really believe anyone including Ridley had any idea where this was going after Prometheus, regardless of what he/they have said and continue to say about future plans.


Covenant felt like a half-thought and a do-over, and it left even more questions unanswered. Like it was buying time for somebody else to come up with an actual workable script or idea. I think it's all become a jumbled mess and he's losing whatever interest was there. Having someone who doesn't have any enthusiasm for or faith in the creature be the director of the movies is a poor decision. Aliens and (in my opinion) Alien 3 prove that Ridley isn't the only person capable of directing a good alien film. He isn't the only reason why the modern trilogy is doing poorly, but he's not the only reason the original was so good either. It's time to pass the torch. Wey yu has the data, and david moved out. We've got a clean slate now to Segway back into the original framework.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 04:07:54 PM
Like ridgetop said during the podcast, the current direction makes the alien universe smaller, not larger.

How is that?  Before the prequels we knew absolutely nothing about the alien except that the eggs were found in the cargo hold of a derelict ship.  It was just a repeat of the same old formulaic plot in a new setting.

Now we have all this background info that makes the universe bigger, not smaller.  It was small before because the alien was just a monster that showed up and killed people.

The fact that David created one version of the alien (which might have existed before) does not make the universe smaller.  It adds to it, makes it more interesting.

Last thing I'm going to post on this particular subject: Angry joe does a fantastic breakdown of why alien covenant not only ruins the xenomorph but also degrades the entire franchise.

Quotewhich retcons all previous movies before it including Prometheus

How?

QuoteInstead of being an ancient weapon made by a higher intellect for an unknown reason it's now a science project from a robot that only got to where he was through extraordinary, random circumstances. It's almost as if the alien was an accident instead of an ancient creation.

David created it via years of experimentation - didn't seem accidental.

So now it's a more recent weapon made by a higher intellect for known reasons.

They're not obliged to follow through on the way you thought things should happen.
Of course you're not obliged to like what they ultimately did.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 06:24:10 PM
Angry joe does a fantastic bre

Angry Joe is some bottom of the barrel plebeian shit.
That video is some of the cringiest weakest most "manchild"ish shit i've ever seen.
He must have cried into his pillow after recording it.

Quote from: SM on Nov 22, 2017, 07:43:57 PM

Quotewhich retcons all previous movies before it including Prometheus

How?

Via hyperbole and heavy doses of salt.

Genuinely surprised by the amount of alien covenant apologists.

Retcons:
Prometheus- Fiefield and biology bro find pile of dead engineers. Biology bro explicitly states it looks like something came out of him. The implication is a chest burster came out of him.

Alien: Eggs on the derilect ship with a space jockey that also had a chest burster come out of it. If the 2000 crew members on the covenant ship are somehow turned into the eggs on the derilect ship and David is the space jockey, I'm out man.

Aliens- resurrection: see above.

We can argue all day how we feel the franchise is going but based off the tepid response covenant had at the box office, the divisive nature of the film, and the retconning of certain story elements, a large portion of alien fans aren't happy with it either. So much so fox had to re-evaluate the franchise and hopes Ridley will "find" the right direction for the next movie.

So people who like Covenant are now apologists. Good grief   ::)

And people who hate Covenant are now plebs. Good to know  ::)

since it's pretty clear r.s. has no idea what to do with the beast, pass it over to people who have some ideas

Quote from: Still Collating... on Nov 22, 2017, 10:38:31 AM
Yeah, all those questions are easy to answer, more or less with some minor speculation. I agree that the greatest thing about the prequels are the new opportunities and ideas we have for exploration in the universe. The ending of Covenant was great IMO, not only tonally, but for future exploration of xenomorphs on different planets.
The most dominant theme in these prequels is can be summed up by David himself: Doesn't everyone want there parents dead?
Even though I would've liked to see more of David's lab and his experiments, my only disappointment with him being the creator of the alien is that it's not an ancient creature anymore and it throws out all the novels and comics that reference to the alien as that. It makes the extended universe so much smaller now. We have new opportunities and greater themes, but at the moment with these two prequels, none of those ideas are getting explored enough IMO.

I think we still have great potential where we are now, I just believe someone needs to take care of the franchise so it doesn't get more logically convoluted.

But you know, all could be fixed with time travel...  :laugh: (kidding, I hope they stay far away from that!)

Yep you have a good point. Many people here probably grew up with all those comics, video-games, fan-fics etc. and they built up a big head-canon and idea of what the franchise was and then Ridley who is probably not aware of this extended universe at all just comes along and renders them non-canon in a fundamental way. I can see why somebody might get upset over that.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 08:27:59 PM
The implication is a chest burster came out of him.

Watch this scene again:



Ridley Scott explicitly showed us what happens when the black goo gets loose.  You can see forms bursting out from the bodies.  No 'chestbursters'.

Quote from: tleilaxu on Nov 22, 2017, 09:54:21 PM
Yep you have a good point. Many people here probably grew up with all those comics, video-games, fan-fics etc. and they built up a big head-canon and idea of what the franchise was and then Ridley who is probably not aware of this extended universe at all just comes along and renders them non-canon in a fundamental way. I can see why somebody might get upset over that.

Good point.

Quote from: Jonesy1974 on Nov 22, 2017, 08:50:48 PM
So people who like Covenant are now apologists. Good grief   ::)

Haters gonna hate.

:)

Friend, after fiefield and biology bro look at the engineer that's had the assumed chest burster come out of it, the caption of the ship, yanek, or whatever tells them he's getting readings of a life form. At this point us the audiance member is supposed to assume that it should possibly the alien we are familiar with because that's exactly what that scene was implying. It ends up being an engineer but at the time it's supposed to make us think something else. Furthermore, one of the deleted scenes shows fielfield picking up the shed skin on a exonorph.
      Your jumping through hoops or being purposely dense if you genuinely believe Ridley had this black GOo IS the chest burster thought all along. He implied it was a chest burster, somewhere along the line he decided to retcon Prometheus and what we got was convent. It's really not that complicated

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 11:45:45 PM
Friend, after fiefield and biology bro look at the engineer that's had the assumed chest burster come out of it, the caption of the ship, yanek, or whatever tells them he's getting readings of a life form. At this point us the audiance member is supposed to assume that it should possibly the alien we are familiar with because that's exactly what that scene was implying. It ends up being an engineer but at the time it's supposed to make us think something else.

Settle down, kiddo. It was probably neomorphs or deacons which bursted from those Engineers.

Also, Hicks was the classiest person on the podcast.

QuoteGenuinely surprised by the amount of alien covenant apologists.

Why would you be surprised that people on an Alien fansite might like an Alien movie?

QuotePrometheus- Fiefield and biology bro find pile of dead engineers. Biology bro explicitly states it looks like something came out of him. The implication is a chest burster came out of him.

That pile of dead Engineers shows some with hole in their head or no hole in their chest.

QuoteAlien: Eggs on the derilect ship with a space jockey that also had a chest burster come out of it. If the 2000 crew members on the covenant ship are somehow turned into the eggs on the derilect ship and David is the space jockey, I'm out man.

There's no need to pretend that you're not already out.

Quote
We can argue all day how we feel the franchise is going but based off the tepid response covenant had at the box office, the divisive nature of the film, and the retconning of certain story elements, a large portion of alien fans aren't happy with it either.

According the fans of this site, the majority were pretty happy with it.

But don't let that get in the way of a narrative.

QuoteYep you have a good point. Many people here probably grew up with all those comics, video-games, fan-fics etc. and they built up a big head-canon and idea of what the franchise was and then Ridley who is probably not aware of this extended universe at all just comes along and renders them non-canon in a fundamental way. I can see why somebody might get upset over that.

Most of us around when the comics were popular in the 1990s realised they were non-canon 20 years ago.

QuoteYour jumping through hoops or being purposely dense if you genuinely believe Ridley had this black GOo IS the chest burster thought all along. He implied it was a chest burster, somewhere along the line he decided to retcon Prometheus and what we got was convent. It's really not that complicated

It's meant to make us think "chestburster".  It's not intended to be a literal chestburster.

QuoteVia hyperbole and heavy doses of salt.

:laugh:

@ SM:
Believe it or not you can be a fan of something but not love the current direction it's going. I hate the phantom menace but still love Star Wars. I love all the alien movies including Prometheus. Alien covenant is in my opinion an absolute pile of trash. If your fine that David is the creator of the alien retconning 20 plus years of lore, be it extended universe or interviews Ridley himself stated  in the past good for you. I care about the franchise, as I'm sure you do too, so it performing badly at the box office matters. Fans opinions matter because they're the ones who go to the movies. If your happy with with the prequels trajectory good for you. Happy thanksgiving to yours and yours.

QuoteBelieve it or not you can be a fan of something but not love the current direction it's going.

I didn't suggest otherwise.

As I said earlier...

QuoteOf course you're not obliged to like what they ultimately did.

What lore do you believe is being retconned?

And I don't celebrate Thanksgiving, but thanks anyway.

"It was probably neomorphs or deacons which bursted from those Engineers."

Yep. The deacon's cry can be heard as the recording begins, just before the engineer holographs run down the tunnel. The alien events at the base (I might add) would've made a very interesting short story, if anyone from titan reads this. At least we could get a written description of the deacon's methods and power.


" I think we still have great potential where we are now".

I agree, but only if Ridley, the entire writers staff, and the entire prometheus storyline is let go. We're nearing the precipice. I think with these movies fox and ridley have fallen into that rhythm where (like in the NFL) a team has one bad season after another, and instead of making any changes, the coach just keeps saying "well there's a lot I've seen that we can build on, and uh we've seen some things we can work with so we're gonna work on building on that".

Perhaps this just wasn't meant to be a wide universe. It may only be divisive right now, but divisive is still not what you want. And if money talks, the divide is gonna reach the point where fox loses money on one of these movies and the xeno will go dormant. Some movies, you just know what to expect. Jaws, Godzilla or terminator films, they're out to bring a specific experience, and that's okay. Sometimes just letting the monster do its thing is enough. I think we should get back to that with the xenomorph. It can be the trapdoor spider of the universe.

The Derelict in LV426 is gonna be exactly what it looks like...

Some Engineers run into David, David introduces them to his new pets.
Engineers get rekt, escape in their Juggernaut, they send a distress beacon,
a chestburster pops out, kills the pilot and the ship crashes on LV426.
A queen has fun filling the cargo holds full of eggs.

They all lie in wait until the Nostromo picks up the distress signal.

Simples

David still probably out there, somewhere?

Gimme a Ripley 8 vs David 8 movie.  ;D

Quote from: skhellter on Nov 23, 2017, 01:42:59 AM

David still probably out there, somewhere?

Ive even wondered if maybe Ash is actually David. I'm probably way off.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 08:27:59 PM
Genuinely surprised by the amount of alien covenant apologists.

Welcome to the hater camp, brother!

Always nice to have another joiner to our ever growing ranks. Do not despair by the unusual support Covenant gets around here; You're in the equivalent of The Matrix's Zion, and it too shall soon be overrun (possibly sooner than you'd think if Ridley Scott is allowed to keep publicly talking about his prequels).


Hope you enjoy your stay! Here is your complimentary pitchfork and David shaped toilet bowl.

I'll show you the secret handshake later!

QuoteGimme a Ripley 8 vs David 8 movie.

With these guys.

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwiki.tarantino.info%2Fimages%2FCrazy88.jpg&hash=90a181f0ace61b70d0186ba9c0172dc7170ae709)

I do not believe the beast cooked. If it was would we even be having this discussion? Would there be hundreds of books and comics about the creature? Or movies and games? For me the biggest problem is that the direction the prequels took for the origin of the species . I've always felt the alien was an ancient horror found in the furthest reaches of space. Not the creation of an Android(although I do realize the novelized version explains that it was in fact the engineers who made the xenos and David simply copied the recipe) weather or not R.S acknowledges this is another story. He could correct this divide among many of us if he simply says this in AC 2. I felt alien covenant was a decent movie overall. I felt the Xeno was almost an after thought of his. I'm not sure he's passionate about the xeno anymore but that doesn't mean WE aren't.

"With these guys"

Or the crew from the Raid movies. The graceful and fluidic movements of the A.I. versus the lightning fists of Mad Dog!

"David shaped toilet bowl"

I'll take one. But only if it says "that's the spirit", "is that how it's done?"  or my favorite "try harder" when you use it. And it better be the Peter Weyland signature series, not some refurb from the bargain mart.  ;)

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 02:15:51 AM
I've always felt the alien was an ancient horror found in the furthest reaches of space.

Prometheus clearly states that the alien (or it's relative) IS ancient.
They were created by the Engineers instead of evolving naturally.
They do come from the furthest reaches of space.

Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 23, 2017, 02:59:49 AM

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 02:15:51 AM
I've always felt the alien was an ancient horror found in the furthest reaches of space.

Prometheus clearly states that the alien (or it's relative) IS ancient.
They were created by the Engineers instead of evolving naturally.
They do come from the furthest reaches of space.

Where do they say that? About the Deacon?

The Neomorphs/Deacons have the backstory that the fanbase has always wanted for the Alien.
Creations of an ancient alien species. A bioweapon meant to wipe out entire planets.
The means of spreading them throughout a planet turned out to be much smarter than the
slightly comical image of a bomber dropping alien eggs.


In an unexpected twist, the Alien itself turned out to be a recent "offshoot" of a much older bioweapon.
I can live with that.


Here's the thing, though.
David is only an "imitation" of a human being.
He's less human than the Engineers ever where.

I wonder if Ridley will have David abandon his damaged
"human looks" for good in the sequel...

He wont be the Space Jockey in that seat. That makes 0 sense...
But he'll be... different, for sure. Maybe a lot more biomechanical.

I never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

Scott always said the Derilict was a bomber. He's changed his mind more than my wife at a shoe shop. That's what happens when you just make stuff up. Lucas made a lot of stuff up, but at least he had the bones of a story.

Right now there's probably 8 writers pitching Covenant 2.

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 03:16:28 AM

Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 23, 2017, 02:59:49 AM

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 02:15:51 AM
I've always felt the alien was an ancient horror found in the furthest reaches of space.

Prometheus clearly states that the alien (or it's relative) IS ancient.
They were created by the Engineers instead of evolving naturally.
They do come from the furthest reaches of space.

Where do they say that? About the Deacon?

If Planet 4 is their homeworld - that's not very far.

Not sure about the rest.  You could make an argument that the creatures on the mural were 2000 years old.

Or it could be the same as Egyptian depictions of Osiris or Horus - things that don't actually exist.

QuoteI never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

It makes sense if his primary role model for father-child relationships is Weyland and Vickers.  It makes even more sense when you factor in the first scene of Covenant.

The common theme between these 2 films is that children...
tend to be as f**ked up as their parents.

---

Quote from: Highland on Nov 23, 2017, 03:34:29 AM
Right now there's probably 8 writers pitching Covenant 2.

John Logan at the moment.

Maybe Michael Green will take a pass.

Quote from: SM on Nov 23, 2017, 03:37:55 AM

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 03:16:28 AM

Quote from: Scorpio on Nov 23, 2017, 02:59:49 AM

Quote from: GreybackElder on Nov 23, 2017, 02:15:51 AM
I've always felt the alien was an ancient horror found in the furthest reaches of space.

Prometheus clearly states that the alien (or it's relative) IS ancient.
They were created by the Engineers instead of evolving naturally.
They do come from the furthest reaches of space.

Where do they say that? About the Deacon?

If Planet 4 is their homeworld - that's not very far.

Not sure about the rest.  You could make an argument that the creatures on the mural were 2000 years old.

Or it could be the same as Egyptian depictions of Osiris or Horus - things that don't actually exist.

QuoteI never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

It makes sense if his primary role model for father-child relationships is Weyland and Vickers.  It makes even more sense when you factor in the first scene of Covenant.

Well only if you mean that he's not aware that nobody else thinks like that.

Possibly.

Quote from: SM on Nov 23, 2017, 03:37:55 AM


If Planet 4 is their homeworld - that's not very far.

7 light years from Earth is not far, on a cosmic scale, you are right about that.  Assuming the Covenant can travel at the speed of light.

The furthest reach of space would be at the edge of the observable universe.

Quote from: Huggs on Nov 23, 2017, 02:30:49 AM
I'll take one. But only if it says "that's the spirit", "is that how it's done?"  or my favorite "try harder" when you use it. And it better be the Peter Weyland signature series, not some refurb from the bargain mart.  ;)

I was so disappointed that Oram didn't say "It hurts!" when the Chestburster started, only for David to reply: "The trick, William Potter, is not minding it hurts."  :D

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 23, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
@ SM:
Believe it or not you can be a fan of something but not love the current direction it's going. I hate the phantom menace but still love Star Wars. I love all the alien movies including Prometheus. Alien covenant is in my opinion an absolute pile of trash. If your fine that David is the creator of the alien retconning 20 plus years of lore, be it extended universe or interviews Ridley himself stated  in the past good for you. I care about the franchise, as I'm sure you do too, so it performing badly at the box office matters. Fans opinions matter because they're the ones who go to the movies. If your happy with with the prequels trajectory good for you. Happy thanksgiving to yours and yours.

lol

The Alien was always considered to be a bioweapon created by the Space Jockey — now Engineers — since ALIEN 1979. They still pretty much are; David merely modified the Neomorphs/Deacons from the black goo into the classic Alien.

Aliens being a created bioweapon was a single theory.

"I was amazed that no one asked me about this mysterious element of the film, but if you would have asked me in 1978, I would have gladly explained that, in my mind, all this alien ship could be was a battleship...they missed one of the biggest questions of all, which is: who's the big guy? Who's flying the ship, basically? And where are they going? And with what? Why that cargo?"

Read more: http://www.alien-covenant.com/topic/45676#ixzz4zJGsZIKg
Follow us: @Scifiedcom on Twitter | Scifiedcom on Facebook

Quote from: Alionic on Nov 24, 2017, 01:14:49 AM

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 23, 2017, 01:05:33 AM
@ SM:
Believe it or not you can be a fan of something but not love the current direction it's going. I hate the phantom menace but still love Star Wars. I love all the alien movies including Prometheus. Alien covenant is in my opinion an absolute pile of trash. If your fine that David is the creator of the alien retconning 20 plus years of lore, be it extended universe or interviews Ridley himself stated  in the past good for you. I care about the franchise, as I'm sure you do too, so it performing badly at the box office matters. Fans opinions matter because they're the ones who go to the movies. If your happy with with the prequels trajectory good for you. Happy thanksgiving to yours and yours.

lol

The Alien was always considered to be a bioweapon created by the Space Jockey — now Engineers — since ALIEN 1979. They still pretty much are; David merely modified the Neomorphs/Deacons from the black goo into the classic Alien.

Where was it stated that the Alien was 'always' a bioweapon? I've only heard that since the rectonning due to Prometheus. I'd love to hear it from Ridley if you can find a link? It just seems like he makes it up as he goes!

Quote from: skhellter on Nov 23, 2017, 03:26:29 AM
The Neomorphs/Deacons have the backstory that the fanbase has always wanted for the Alien.
Creations of an ancient alien species. A bioweapon meant to wipe out entire planets.
The means of spreading them throughout a planet turned out to be much smarter than the
slightly comical image of a bomber dropping alien eggs.


In an unexpected twist, the Alien itself turned out to be a recent "offshoot" of a much older bioweapon.
I can live with that.


Here's the thing, though.
David is only an "imitation" of a human being.
He's less human than the Engineers ever where.

I wonder if Ridley will have David abandon his damaged
"human looks" for good in the sequel...

He wont be the Space Jockey in that seat. That makes 0 sense...
But he'll be... different, for sure. Maybe a lot more biomechanical.

I have also come to terms with the Alien being an offshoot of a more ancient creature.  It may not be what we always wanted but it still leaves the universe open to more horrors and still leaves the true origin of the "Alien" DNA a mystery.  I'm still a little mad that we didnt get the answers we were looking for but it is also a good thing that Covenant steered away from the themes of Prometheus in order to focus on the Alien.  It answers some questions but will leave the rest shrouded in mystery, which I like.  The beast isn't cooked but could just be handled better which would allow for it to still seem fresh, seeing as Scott wants to foucs more on AI than the alien then it works in our favor as he won't miss handle it further. 

Quote from: Highland on Nov 23, 2017, 03:34:29 AM
I never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

I can't say I sympathies with the idea, of course, but it could make sense in the context of mythology which both prequels rely upon heavily. In numerous ancient mythologies you have old gods being killed buy their children, the new gods.   

Quote from: Still Collating... on Nov 24, 2017, 09:24:51 AM

Quote from: Highland on Nov 23, 2017, 03:34:29 AM
I never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

I can't say I sympathies with the idea, of course, but it could make sense in the context of mythology which both prequels rely upon heavily. In numerous ancient mythologies you have old gods being killed buy their children, the new gods.   

Yeah, like the Titans getting killed by the Olympian Gods etc.

The original line was "Doesn't everyone hate their parents?" But fassbender says: "doesn't every one want their parents dead?" Who knows if that's what  lindlelof wrote or fassbender said the line wrong but either way it makes no damn sense. Weyland apparently really liked David and was very proud of him. Refers to him as a son he never had, talks him up in Prometheus when the Shaw and Holloway are presenting the purpose of the mission.
      He hates his "parents" even though weyland praised him to the hilt. It makes absolutely no damn sense. I could get he hates humans because vickers was mean to him or holloaway was an ass, but him hating weyland? Nah not buying it.
      I'll be glad when The David arch is over and fox has to put out a statement that none the prequels are canon but Ridleys opinions of things. Because if you want the franchise to have any long term viability, that's what's going to have to happen. The parallels between this and the stars Wars prequels is uncanny. Fox seeks out original director of a popular franchise to make prequels. First film comes out and is at best considered divisive among fans. Second film comes out and is probably the lowpoint in the series.
      We've yet to see what episode 3 will be but it can't be worse than 2. And like Lucas, rather than take responsibility for the poor direction of his prequels, scott doubles down and blames the alien by saying the beast is cooked. Wouldn't shock me if scott comes out and attacks fans here shortly for not understanding his vision.
     But alien isn't Star Wars. Star Wars despite disappointing prequels was still immensely popular. Alien as a franchise has lost a lot of mindshare and I fear if scott is not reigned in will do more permanent damage to a franchise that fox may not be willing to invest in to repair. The jedis using midichlorians was dumb and upset fans but didn't retcon all Star Wars lore.
     David creating the xenomorph is a dangerous retcon for this series because the alien is the main draw. It's not what fans wanted and it erases 20 years of fan theory's and expanded universe ideas because it was all predicated on the idea that the engineers/space jockey made the alien, not a damn robot. It's origin should be somewhat ambiguous because it's an alien! It's supposed to be a mystery. Star Wars could shake off small retcons like that because it has so much going on, alien not so much.
     Fox can't be thrilled that guy they gave the key to the kingdom to is out there saying the beast is cooked. My guess is they have blomkamp on speed dial and praying Ridley steps in it again.

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 24, 2017, 03:53:02 PM
I'll be glad when The David arch is over and fox has to put out a statement that none the prequels are canon

oh man this guy has it all figured out

:laugh:

What does that line suggest about David's "sanity" and love for Weyland?

Weyland's brand of "love" is very weird.. considering his relationship with Vickers
and what little we see of David's relationship with him.
David is just a glorified slave. Weyland's pride in him is much like that of Calvin Candie being proud of a prized slave in Django Unchained.

He was never the good "boi" that a good deal of the millenial fanbase somehow thought he was.
Did they really expect to see him develop a healthy friendship with Shaw?  :laugh:

Quote from: Dabaus on Nov 22, 2017, 06:24:10 PM
Last thing I'm going to post on this particular subject: Angry joe does a fantastic breakdown of why alien covenant not only ruins the xenomorph but also degrades the entire franchise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmI2z1vZeCM

these youtubers are so petty like not even entertainingly so  :-\

Quote from: Still Collating... on Nov 24, 2017, 09:24:51 AM

Quote from: Highland on Nov 23, 2017, 03:34:29 AM
I never understood the "doesn't everyone want their parents dead" line. I can't even put myself in somebody else's shoes to understand it either. Just weird.

I can't say I sympathies with the idea, of course, but it could make sense in the context of mythology which both prequels rely upon heavily. In numerous ancient mythologies you have old gods being killed buy their children, the new gods.   

I think it's more along the lines of David simply resenting the authority and power his "parent" holds over him. The original line is simply "Doesn't everyone hate their parents?" but Fassbender's take was probably considered more ominous and they decided to keep it. David, lacking empathy, probably imagines that most others share his intense dislike.

QuoteHe hates his "parents" even though weyland praised him to the hilt. It makes absolutely no damn sense. I could get he hates humans because vickers was mean to him or holloaway was an ass, but him hating weyland? Nah not buying it.

He knows he's superior to his creator.  He's going to "love" Weyland because he said some nice things?  Nah not buying it.

QuoteIt's not what fans wanted and it erases 20 years of fan theory's and expanded universe ideas because it was all predicated on the idea that the engineers/space jockey made the alien, not a damn robot.

No, it wasn't.  I think you might be equating what you want with the way things actually are.

Weyland was never proud of David, he was proud of himself. Weyland is a complete narcissist, he's incapable of loving his own daughter never mind an android.

The line makes perfect sense when the 'family' dynamic is as dysfunctional as Davids.

Enjoyed the podcast very much too, agree with many thing said however the examples who would direct for the next Alien are very miguided, this thread is even worse.
Ridley would still do better than many of the possible directors posted in this thread, might as well give the Strause Brothers a second chance  ::) Some suggestions are on point though.

I'd reckon one these directors working today could possibly pull it off, more or less and in random order:

Matt Reeves
Denis Villeneuve
Ben Safdie, Joshua Safdie
David Cronenberg
Andrew Dominik
Chan-wook Park
Jennifer Kent
Hong-jin Na
Michaël R. Roskam
Jee-woon Kim
Yann Demange
Darren Aronofsky
Dan Gilroy
Kathryn Bigelow
Jonathan Glazer
Jeremy Saulnier
Nicolas Winding Refn
Yann Demange
Joon-ho Bong
Robert Eggers
Alex Garland

From the old timers Danny Boyle could work, would also like Fincher to have another go but i believe this is as close as he gets working with the xenomorph again:


(https://www.cinema5d.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/phfx_jarredFincherProbstXenomorphMindhunterCamDeptD_2-640x480.jpg)

a camera custom made for Fincher on his Netflix's Mindhunter.


Directors that might be obvious choises for some, but in my books should most definitely stay away from doing an actual Alien film:

Gareth Edwards - Pass, has yet to prove his worth.
Neil Blomkamp - alternate Aliens sequel could be fun but his short films fell short for me, meh.
Guillermo Del Tore - his hit or miss, but his style doesn't suit the Alien atmosphere. Still want to see The Shape of Water though.

Quote from: reecebomb on Nov 25, 2017, 03:18:13 AM

Darren Aronofsky

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Quote from: skhellter on Nov 25, 2017, 03:32:10 AM

Quote from: reecebomb on Nov 25, 2017, 03:18:13 AM

Darren Aronofsky

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Not the best example but he's more hit than miss, why do you suggest he wouldn't work?

No, the beast is not cooked. Ridley Scott directing an Alien movie? No, he seems to have completely lost the plot.

The beast isn't cooked, but Scott is. He's gone full George Lucas at this point.

Ridley, it's not the beast itself, it's the way you depicted it in a boring fashion like a typical monster. I still respect Ridley Scott and love his ideas but he handled the adult Alien wrong, IMO. The Alien shouldn't be shown just mindlessly running at things.

Quote from: Jonesy1974 on Nov 24, 2017, 09:08:10 PM
Weyland was never proud of David, he was proud of himself. Weyland is a complete narcissist, he's incapable of loving his own daughter never mind an android.

The line makes perfect sense when the 'family' dynamic is as dysfunctional as Davids.

Only if David is a human.

Why only if he's human?

wut?

there's tons of flaws with the prequel films... 
but some of these criticisms are downright silly.  :D

Quote from: SM on Nov 27, 2017, 11:31:37 PM
Why only if he's human?

Well he's supposed to understand human emotions, but not feel them. So the act of treating him like a pile of dung should have no impact to his thoughts.

Quite.  But as we see in Covenant he knows he's superior to his creator, but has to continually play the servant.

I'm wondering if the thing about not being able to feel is a ruse.  He has a desire to create, but suppresses it just as he suppresses his own superiority.

Just caught up on the pod. Some good suggestions in there, Neil Marshall was someone I didn't think about. Good choice, dunno if he could pull off the characters though, maybe if it was more action orientated.

So I was just reminded about some insider comments we'd heard about Scott and Alien 5. It sounds like there may have been some dick moves from Scott in regards to getting Alienkamp pushed to the side.  :-\

What qualifies as "dick move"?

That he was pushing Fox to ditch Blomkamp's film in favour of his prequels and that Scott wasn't even really pushing forward on his films until he saw all the buzz around Alienkamp. How true this is, I don't know but I'm pretty confident with the source.

Advantages of seniority and a proven track record and awards vs. a guy who made one good movie and two average ones.  He should let the new guy take over just 'cos?

not just cos

just cos HIX AND NUT! That's what the realtrufanswant!1




At least Ridley isnt rushing to make ALIENS2:BATTLE4EARF!1 ::)

That's... Hyperbole.

I don't think Blomkamp intended to make "Aliens 2."

he just had Hix and Nut concept art done to bring
2 James Cameron characters
back from the dead and delete 2 nonjamescameron films out of the canon.

:laugh:

you guys don't mind skhellter, he's still salty about a never-made film that would have retconned MUH ALIEN3 from continuity

I'm surprised the percentage of sodium chloride in his blood hasn't killed him already

(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fww2.kqed.org%2Fpop%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F12%2F2016%2F04%2Fprince-no.gif&hash=6b6cf7ba654bdfcb58d974ed4e9c03f4f14913fb)

Omega is FAKE NEWS.

Quote from: SM on Dec 04, 2017, 11:41:23 AM
Advantages of seniority and a proven track record and awards vs. a guy who made one good movie and two average ones.  He should let the new guy take over just 'cos?

I don't think anyone suggested that Blomkamp was going to "take over". And Scott had been attached as a producer too. I think the expectation was that they would exist in conjunction, which certainly seemed to be the case going forward and likely what most of us may have wanted. While I was hesitant about the whole retcon thing, I'd certainly have loved to have got them both. I'd initially thought that Fox just didn't want to risk bank rolling 2 Alien films at the same time.

Quote from: skhellter on Dec 04, 2017, 11:43:54 AM
not just cos

just cos HIX AND NUT! That's what the realtrufanswant!1




At least Ridley isnt rushing to make ALIENS2:BATTLE4EARF!1 ::)

I'm sick of seeing this attitude towards anyone who was interested in that film. Is it that hard for people to see others povs without resorting to mocking? I wasn't sold on the idea of retconning Alien 3 either but how about you tone down your troll attitude. My patience with you is really wearing thin.

Quote from: SM on Dec 04, 2017, 11:41:23 AM
Advantages of seniority and a proven track record and awards vs. a guy who made one good movie and two average ones.  He should let the new guy take over just 'cos?

From 2010 Scott made mediocre movies like Robin Hood, The Counsellor and Exodus: Gods and Kings. Two so-so/decent, Prometheus and Alien: Covenant and one great, The Martian. Would you call that proven track record?

Alien and Blade Runner were Scott's second and third movies. Why not give a chance to somebody young and passionate about Alien universe?

denis villeneuve would be a dream, his track record is really exciting and i think dune is in good hands
would also like to see what david fincher could do if given another shot.

I doubt that Denis and David would be interested to make Alien film.

-nods- ridley scott making alien films till he's 100 it is, then

Quote from: Ingwar on Dec 04, 2017, 01:31:09 PM

Quote from: SM on Dec 04, 2017, 11:41:23 AM
Advantages of seniority and a proven track record and awards vs. a guy who made one good movie and two average ones.  He should let the new guy take over just 'cos?

From 2010 Scott made mediocre movies like Robin Hood, The Counsellor and Exodus: Gods and Kings. Two so-so/decent, Prometheus and Alien: Covenant and one great, The Martian. Would you call that proven track record?

Alien and Blade Runner were Scott's second and third movies. Why not give a chance to somebody young and passionate about Alien universe?

The three you disingenuously cherry picked while attempting to handwave the preceding 30+ years of the man's career were stronger than Blomkamp's three features.

He's earned the right across that career to say 'I want to continue with this and not have the waters muddied'.

I'd say 'nice try' but it really wasn't.

It didn't say that he didn't earn the right. He did earn it and he ... wasted it with Prometheus and Covenant. Time to pass it to somebody else. It doesn't have to be Neill.

PS Scott himself muddied the waters.

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Dec 04, 2017, 09:35:20 AM
So I was just reminded about some insider comments we'd heard about Scott and Alien 5. It sounds like there may have been some dick moves from Scott in regards to getting Alienkamp pushed to the side.  :-\

Even if that's true it'd still be great news. Blomkamp's best film was literally an Apartheid story with shrimps. No f**king thanks to that in the Alien-verse.

Quote from: trilobite on Dec 04, 2017, 03:50:21 PM
denis villeneuve would be a dream, his track record is really exciting and i think dune is in good hands
would also like to see what david fincher could do if given another shot.

Are you sure about that? After Blade Runner 2049's Hollywoodesque script I'm less certain, and on top of that Brian Herbert, the man dedicated to raping his father's legacy to death, is also collaborating on the movie IIRC. I'm prepared to get disappointed.

Ripley is cooked.   :D

-Windebieste.

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 04, 2017, 09:06:14 PM

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Dec 04, 2017, 09:35:20 AM
So I was just reminded about some insider comments we'd heard about Scott and Alien 5. It sounds like there may have been some dick moves from Scott in regards to getting Alienkamp pushed to the side.  :-\

Even if that's true it'd still be great news. Blomkamp's best film was literally an Apartheid story with shrimps. No f**king thanks to that in the Alien-verse.

Quote from: trilobite on Dec 04, 2017, 03:50:21 PM
denis villeneuve would be a dream, his track record is really exciting and i think dune is in good hands
would also like to see what david fincher could do if given another shot.

Are you sure about that? After Blade Runner 2049's Hollywoodesque script I'm less certain, and on top of that Brian Herbert, the man dedicated to raping his father's legacy to death, is also collaborating on the movie IIRC. I'm prepared to get disappointed.

you didn't like br2049? i'm not sure i'd call it hollywoodesque either, considering the ending

Quote from: windebieste on Dec 04, 2017, 09:18:16 PM
Ripley is cooked.   :D

-Windebieste.

...at the bottom of the iron works on Fury 161

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Quote from: trilobite on Dec 04, 2017, 09:37:48 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 04, 2017, 09:06:14 PM

Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Dec 04, 2017, 09:35:20 AM
So I was just reminded about some insider comments we'd heard about Scott and Alien 5. It sounds like there may have been some dick moves from Scott in regards to getting Alienkamp pushed to the side.  :-\

Even if that's true it'd still be great news. Blomkamp's best film was literally an Apartheid story with shrimps. No f**king thanks to that in the Alien-verse.

Quote from: trilobite on Dec 04, 2017, 03:50:21 PM
denis villeneuve would be a dream, his track record is really exciting and i think dune is in good hands
would also like to see what david fincher could do if given another shot.

Are you sure about that? After Blade Runner 2049's Hollywoodesque script I'm less certain, and on top of that Brian Herbert, the man dedicated to raping his father's legacy to death, is also collaborating on the movie IIRC. I'm prepared to get disappointed.

you didn't like br2049? i'm not sure i'd call it hollywoodesque either, considering the ending

Spoiler

"GUYS WE ARE NOT SLAVES WE ARE HUMANS TOO, AND THE FACT THAT WE CAN HAVE KIDS PROVES IT, ALSO HERE'S HARRISON FORD REUNITING WITH HIS DAUGHTER" this was like, super Hollywoodesque. I got hyped for Niander Wallace, but in the end he's just a guy trying to optimize replicant production. And for some reason they need to take Harrison Ford to space before they can torture him. So many things didn't make sense and felt like Hollywood plot contrivances.
Note, I still liked the movie, just wasn't what I was hoping for.

[close]

i think you should put that in a spoiler, for people who haven't seen the film yet reading that would suck

QuoteIt didn't say that he didn't earn the right. He did earn it and he ... wasted it with Prometheus and Covenant. Time to pass it to somebody else. It doesn't have to be Neill.

The box office and reviews tell us it's wasn't as wasted and you'd like us to think.

Quote from: Ingwar on Dec 04, 2017, 07:59:32 PM
It didn't say that he didn't earn the right. He did earn it and he ... wasted it with Prometheus and Covenant. Time to pass it to somebody else. It doesn't have to be Neill.

PS Scott himself muddied the waters.

Ah, c'mon, Ingwar! How about a more positive use of those words. Perhaps use 'wasted' in a sentence with 'Prometheus' or 'Covenant' to  refer to the level of intoxication one might experience from a drinking game that required a shot every time there was a 'that rat-bastard, David!' moment...;D

Wasted potential.

Geez, dude: you play that one note like Walter without David's fingering. To the open-minded, I'd throw these in the mix: I was talking with someone recently about Special Order 937 and the new SO 931 we hear about in 'Advent.' I always wondered if there are 936 others. Or if it was the 37th in Series 900 orders designed for ET contact situations? That would be an interesting thread to weave in... Also: I hope Dan O'Bannon's love for Lovecraft's 'cosmicism' might've gotten imprinted on Ridley back in '79; the idea that ordinary life is a thin shell separating us from something so alien and abstract that encountering it would damage drive a person insane. That's the kind of 'engineers' I'd like to see... Sort of like SM's idea of the 'nouveau riche' (David) versus the 'vieux riche' (the creators of the alien of ALIEN). I'd say the potential for the prequels to waste the opinions of the naysayers is  v a a a a s t ...

That 'nouveau riche' thing sounds better than my idea.

What kinda buffles me is why Scott easily surrendered his chance on making a Blade Runner sequel when as of late he seems to be immensely fascinated with the whole AI thing (again) and instead trys to push this theme (which obviously is only a side theme in the original picture) through in a franchise where he knows that a lot of the fans and the studio itself are more or less interested in seeing only one thing return: the infamous Alien.

AI stuff and BR way better matches in my eyes. Im glad though cause i think BR2049 turned out infinitely better than Prom and AC.

Scott is such a veteran in his field, he mustve known the chances of a considerable public backlash werent exactly low, and above all else he mustve anticipated that sooner or later FOX would insist on reimplanting the Alien. And that they wont be happy with statements like "the beast is cooked" goes without saying.

Think the chance of a sequel under Ridleys helm are quite slim as of right now.

A little kitchen sink psychology at the end: I think Scott isnt very happy himself with the portrayal of the Alien in AC and is trying to distance himself from that part of the picture by coming out with these public comments on the subject. Im really getting the impression theres a lot of dissens going on between him and the studio bosses and hes getting more and more frustrated seeing his artistic vision getting burried under external influences on his artistic work.

FOX wont do another sequel with yet another Alien cameo and Ridlley prob wont be interested in another Alien focused picture and too old and resigned to compromise again here...

On the other side someone like DV is getting 150mio for a 2:45 R-rated picture and then FOX comes along imposing the Alien on Ridley again, demanding a roughly 2 hours action fest? Whyyyy would he do that-- Then again he seems to be the archetype of a workaholic so theres that.

I think there maybe more than just it being about AI, he's probably taken with David as a character and with Fassbender as an actor. And I can't blame him.

Wow, this podcast is just too spot on perfect! A much needed and perfect rant! Haha Xenomorphine love this guy! You guys sure are right 500% on everything said in this awesome podcast, think I'm going to listen to it for the 3rd time. Someone wake up Scott! Send him this podcast and make sure he listens to it over and over again!

Couldn't agree more

Agreed, very good podcast, but the director suggestions are very questionable to put it lightly.

I really like that (I forget who) brought up Pandorum. Thought that was a super underrated sci fi thriller, and if anyone bothers to watch it please do. Ignore all the reviews and critics, it scores pretty low there, but overall I thought the story was great and it was pretty suspenseful.

I thought Pandorum was just ok, not as bad as it's reputation (actually it's reputation isn't too bad these days)
but nowhere near the quality of the original Alien films. I'd say it's on par with Covenant, but Alien film standard should be way higher than that or it's just not worth it. We can always have the AvP for the run in the mill stuff.

That's only if you compare it to Alien, though. I think the film really did great for what it was trying to do. Still had it's fair share of sub par moments, too.
Like one of the first few scenes...

Spoiler

https://youtu.be/rj8m1GtEDMk (https://youtu.be/rj8m1GtEDMk)

[close]

...if I recall correctly there was a good build up to that point.

Quote from: DerelictShip on Dec 08, 2017, 06:44:18 PM
That's only if you compare it to Alien, though. I think the film really did great for what it was trying to do. Still had it's fair share of sub par moments, too.
Like one of the first few scenes...

Spoiler

https://youtu.be/rj8m1GtEDMk (https://youtu.be/rj8m1GtEDMk)

[close]

...if I recall correctly there was a good build up to that point.

It's way below the quality of the original Alien trilogy or The Thing, sadly not many great sci-fi horror films made out there. Pandorum is certainly one of the better ones made in the last decade, which isn't saying much. I remember liking it, it was a very watchable low budget space horror with some good moments and like you've said a fair shair of sub par moments. But that's not something Alien franchise really needs. I was really surprised to find out that Pandorum is nowadays actually better regarded by the audience than Covenant. IMDB 6.8 vs 6.5 for Covenant, Letterboxd score for both. is 3.0 and Covenant seems to be dropping fast.
Pandorums metacritic score is 28, the score i feel Covenant really deserves.

All in all, definitely still a recommended film by me. Not many films, like you said, execute the sci fi horror in the last decade like this one.

Quote from: DerelictShip on Dec 09, 2017, 02:10:28 AM
All in all, definitely still a recommended film by me. Not many films, like you said, execute the sci fi horror in the last decade like this one.

For anybody interested in space horror i would definitely recommend it, the rest can skip it.

(https://i.gyazo.com/858e0240762df3adac53f0de6d38cde4.png)

:O

@skhellter

Hopefully.

FOX is just too incompetent to make good decisions after Alien3  and even this movie isn't beyond controversy.

Whatever Disney is going to do with this franchise, they will have a plan, because they are competent.

Hopefully by burying Scott's trilogy, but unfortunately that won't happen.

Here's what should be buried:
1. Aliens 2. If you want le pulse rifle marine XD vs le buggy xeno version 2 you should just go play videogames instead.
2. Any notion of Neill Blomhack/Hackkamp ever directing an alien movie. The guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.
3. People like you making guest accounts to spam the same thing in every thread. I'm 99% certain you are Dabau.

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM
Here's what should be buried:
1. Aliens 2. If you want le pulse rifle marine XD vs le buggy xeno version 2 you should just go play videogames instead.
2. Any notion of Neill Blomhack/Hackkamp ever directing an alien movie. The guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.
3. People like you making guest accounts to spam the same thing in every thread. I'm 99% certain you are Dabau.

4. This kind of elementary schoolyard behavior.

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM
Here's what should be buried:
1. Aliens 2. If you want le pulse rifle marine XD vs le buggy xeno version 2 you should just go play videogames instead.
2. Any notion of Neill Blomhack/Hackkamp ever directing an alien movie. The guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.
3. People like you making guest accounts to spam the same thing in every thread. I'm 99% certain you are Dabau.

4. This kind of elementary schoolyard behavior.

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Not shit. But NB is mediocre. Ridley Scott is a way better director than him. It's weird that you and lot of people in this forum don't accept that fact.

I only accept objective facts.

Quote from: PierreVW on Dec 09, 2017, 06:25:17 PM
Not shit. But NB is mediocre. Ridley Scott is a way better director than him. It's weird that you and lot of people in this forum don't accept that fact.

I'd say NB is a mediocre writer, but his visual directing skills are far above average.

Blomkamp is a formulaic writer. He writes the same style of story every time.

His direction on the other hand is fantastic.

Quote4. This kind of elementary schoolyard behavior.

:laugh:

Quite.

Quote from: PierreVW on Dec 09, 2017, 06:25:17 PM
Not shit. But NB is mediocre. Ridley Scott is a way better director than him. It's weird that you and lot of people in this forum don't accept that fact.

I'm not debating about who's the better director.  It's about these incessant dumbf*ck schoolyard style "Batman is better than Superman" style arguments on these boards. And hyperbolic statements like "Neel Bloomhack is teh shitty directer cause he wants to retconz mah alienz 3". Or "Riply Scot is senile cause he doesn't want to make teh kind of alienz movie I wants". Or the "fact" that anyone who doesn't like the direction Scott is taking the franchise is automatically an Aliens fanboy who just wants pulse rifles and Queens.

Grow up for f*ck's sake!

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 09:35:23 PM
Quite.

Quote from: PierreVW on Dec 09, 2017, 06:25:17 PM
Not shit. But NB is mediocre. Ridley Scott is a way better director than him. It's weird that you and lot of people in this forum don't accept that fact.

I'm not debating about who's the better director.  It's about these incessant dumbf*ck schoolyard style "Batman is better than Superman" style arguments on these boards. And hyperbolic statements like "Neel Bloomhack is teh shitty directer cause he wants to retconz mah alienz 3". Or "Riply Scot is senile cause he doesn't want to make teh kind of alienz movie I wants". Or the "fact" that anyone who doesn't like the direction Scott is taking the franchise is automatically an Aliens fanboy who just wants pulse rifles and Queens.

Grow up for f*ck's sake!

Maybe you're the one who needs to grow up if you can't address other people's opinions without resorting to "dumbf**k schoolyard" and telling people to "grow up".

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM
Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

As if awards and gross are an automatic indicator of quality.

Quote from: Kurai on Dec 09, 2017, 07:06:47 PM

Quote from: PierreVW on Dec 09, 2017, 06:25:17 PM
Not shit. But NB is mediocre. Ridley Scott is a way better director than him. It's weird that you and lot of people in this forum don't accept that fact.

I'd say NB is a mediocre writer, but his visual directing skills are far above average.

Aight I might have to contradict myself here. His visuals are actually pretty good.

Lol if awards and gross aren't indicators of quality then what are. Obviously you won't like every film that does well but come on.

QuoteMaybe you're the one who needs to grow up if you can't address other people's opinions without resorting to "dumbf**k schoolyard" and telling people to "grow up".

Nah, it's not him.

Quote from: BishopShouldGo on Dec 09, 2017, 11:51:18 PM
Lol if awards and gross aren't indicators of quality then what are. Obviously you won't like every film that does well but come on.

They aren't AUTOMATIC indicators. Obviously, this gets quite subjective, but I think most people with a decent taste, i. e. people who are not absolute plebeians, can agree that most superhero movies suck, even though those movies rack in quite a lot of money and probably awards too.

Quote from: SM on Dec 09, 2017, 11:57:50 PM

QuoteMaybe you're the one who needs to grow up if you can't address other people's opinions without resorting to "dumbf**k schoolyard" and telling people to "grow up".

Nah, it's not him.

Nice passive aggressive one-liner you got there. I guess it's not a "dumbf**k schoolyard" without a few people ganging up on one poster. I wasn't sure whether to reply but you're practically baiting me.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be passive.

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 10, 2017, 12:24:07 AM
They aren't AUTOMATIC indicators. Obviously, this gets quite subjective, but I think most people with a decent taste, i. e. people who are not absolute plebeians, can agree that most superhero movies suck, even though those movies rack in quite a lot of money and probably awards too.

People with taste and who understand what makes good films -- rather than plebians trying to chest-thump online -- don't think that most super hero movies suck (at least, not these days). Their issue is usually that they're cookie-cutter, generic, risk-free fair that ticks all the boxes of basic filmmaking competence, but are ultimately disposable and offer nothing substantial to viewers after the first viewing.

From there the issue isn't even that this is a bad thing in itself; it's just that it pervades an entire genre, and we're getting inundated with these things. The occasional $200+ superhero beat-em-up would be fine, but we're getting close on two a year from Marvel and one a year from DC, and they're sucking the attention and money from other movies.

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

Blomkamp - let him do some AvP films. If the result turns out to be awesome beyond the visuals, he can try to do that with a proper Alien film and then some. He obviously has talent and I loved District 9 but he needs to prove himself with another strong feature film, i'm not convinced by the Oats Studio shorts.

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 01:20:20 AM

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

He said Elysium wasn't executed as well as the idea he had in his head.  Saying both films were bad sounds like an exaggeration.

Quote from: SM on Dec 10, 2017, 06:23:21 AM

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 01:20:20 AM

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

He said Elysium wasn't executed as well as the idea he had in his head.

Which is usually the mark of a perfectionist, not someone who hates all his work.

Quote from: reecebomb on Dec 10, 2017, 04:01:46 AM
Blomkamp - let him do some AvP films.

He should only do AVP films.

Quote from: PsyKore on Dec 10, 2017, 09:04:59 AM

Quote from: SM on Dec 10, 2017, 06:23:21 AM

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 01:20:20 AM

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

He said Elysium wasn't executed as well as the idea he had in his head.

Which is usually the mark of a perfectionist, not someone who hates all his work.

A perfectionist would have gotten it right the first time.

So when did he say both films were "bad"?

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 01:20:20 AM

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

Personally, I find someone having the ability to acknowledge his own flaws and want to work on them is reassuring.

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 07:14:12 PM

Quote from: PsyKore on Dec 10, 2017, 09:04:59 AM

Quote from: SM on Dec 10, 2017, 06:23:21 AM

Quote from: Alionic on Dec 10, 2017, 01:20:20 AM

Quote from: The Eighth Passenger on Dec 09, 2017, 05:49:27 PM

Quote from: tleilaxu on Dec 09, 2017, 05:16:00 PM

QuoteThe guy is a shit director, this is objective fact.

Lets see, District 9... 4 Academy Award nominations including best picture and best screenplay for "Blomhack". Made back more than x7 it's production budget at the box office. Yep, shit director and that's an "objective fact".

Blomkamp admitted Elysium and Chappie were bad (publicly saying this is so stupid if you want studios to take you seriously for work). I don't think he has the competence to make an Alien movie. He might if somebody else writes it.

He said Elysium wasn't executed as well as the idea he had in his head.

Which is usually the mark of a perfectionist, not someone who hates all his work.

A perfectionist would have gotten it right the first time.

That's not how it works.