User Information

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Alien 5 to be “Genetic Sibling” to Alien & Aliens  (Read 51403 times)

Xenomrph
Mar 02, 2015, 01:22:14 AM
Reply #420 on: Mar 02, 2015, 01:22:14 AM
Q
So, until then, the game features a retcon - but people generally like it. :) That's why I say the same will apply to this project if it goes the same way.

Whilst we don't know the full details about Alienkamp and how it'll return Ripley and Hicks, one of the options is to just ignore lien 3 and Resurrection. This is slightly different to Isolation as that doesn't effectively erase anything the current continuity.

No, you're correct- it simply created two continuities.
Interesting use of past-tense.

Guys these are films made for our entertainment. Believe whatever the f*** you want to believe.

Well, the reason I care is that sequels revive the movie prior to it and continues building on what already had been built. Ignoring movies is the same as undoing them in the long run, especially if the new retcon sequels are successful. A3 will be fade away, which is a pity it's an amazing movie that deserves better than that. I also hate retcons, reboots and remakes in general because they are ALWAYS cheap. It's the laziest thing one can do movie-wise, especially retcons. I don't want my favorite sci-fi movie franchise to go that sad route.
I wouldn't say "ALWAYS" cheap. I can name several remakes/reboots that ended up being very solid - John Carpenter's 'The Thing' is a remake and it's completely fantastic, the Star Trek reboot is great, Casino Royale is great, the Nolan Batman movies are reboots and they're arguably better than the Schumacher ones, The Amazing Spider-Man is pretty great, the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Halloween remakes are pretty great, the Thomas Jane 'Punisher' is worlds better than the Dolph Lundgren one, 'The Ring' US remake is fantastic, and that's off the top of my head.

Remakes and reboots can be bad, but they're not universally, categorically bad.

Also any movie sequel ends up having retcons in it. It's the nature of continuing a story that otherwise had "an ending". Literally every sequel in any medium since the dawn of mankind has had "retcons" in them to varying degrees.


SpreadEagleBeagle
Mar 02, 2015, 01:26:59 AM
Reply #421 on: Mar 02, 2015, 01:26:59 AM
Q
So, until then, the game features a retcon - but people generally like it. :) That's why I say the same will apply to this project if it goes the same way.

Whilst we don't know the full details about Alienkamp and how it'll return Ripley and Hicks, one of the options is to just ignore lien 3 and Resurrection. This is slightly different to Isolation as that doesn't effectively erase anything the current continuity.

No, you're correct- it simply created two continuities.
Interesting use of past-tense.

Guys these are films made for our entertainment. Believe whatever the f*** you want to believe.

Well, the reason I care is that sequels revive the movie prior to it and continues building on what already had been built. Ignoring movies is the same as undoing them in the long run, especially if the new retcon sequels are successful. A3 will be fade away, which is a pity it's an amazing movie that deserves better than that. I also hate retcons, reboots and remakes in general because they are ALWAYS cheap. It's the laziest thing one can do movie-wise, especially retcons. I don't want my favorite sci-fi movie franchise to go that sad route.
I wouldn't say "ALWAYS" cheap. I can name several remakes/reboots that ended up being very solid - John Carpenter's 'The Thing' is a remake and it's completely fantastic, the Star Trek reboot is great, Casino Royale is great, the Nolan Batman movies are reboots and they're arguably better than the Schumacher ones, The Amazing Spider-Man is pretty great, the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Halloween remakes are pretty great, the Thomas Jane 'Punisher' is worlds better than the Dolph Lundgren one, 'The Ring' US remake is fantastic, and that's off the top of my head.

Remakes and reboots can be bad, but they're not universally, categorically bad.

Also any movie sequel ends up having retcons in it. It's the nature of continuing a story that otherwise had "an ending". Literally every sequel in any medium since the dawn of mankind has had "retcons" in them to varying degrees.

Ok, the new "The Punisher" is better, but they're both proper crap movies to me.

Retconning TWO entire movies is not the same as changing around minor things and details.


Xenomrph
Mar 02, 2015, 02:07:01 AM
Reply #422 on: Mar 02, 2015, 02:07:01 AM
Q
I don't disagree there, and I'm very much against retconning Alien3 out of existence (partly on principle, and partly because I like the movie quite a bit). I was more of making the point that retcons aren't necessarily bad things when they're handled right. Like you, I don't think this is one of those times though. :P


Son Of Kane
Mar 02, 2015, 02:08:40 AM
Reply #423 on: Mar 02, 2015, 02:08:40 AM
Q
It won't be "undone" that's one statement we know is true, no matter what happens one will not invalidate the other.


SpreadEagleBeagle
Mar 02, 2015, 02:44:38 AM
Reply #424 on: Mar 02, 2015, 02:44:38 AM
Q
I don't disagree there, and I'm very much against retconning Alien3 out of existence (partly on principle, and partly because I like the movie quite a bit). I was more of making the point that retcons aren't necessarily bad things when they're handled right. Like you, I don't think this is one of those times though. :P

I just can't stand anything re____ . I just don't see the point of it. Total waste of money.


Xenomrph
Mar 02, 2015, 02:51:06 AM
Reply #425 on: Mar 02, 2015, 02:51:06 AM
Q
Sometimes, they don't get it right the first time. :P

Serious question: Have you seen John Carpenter's 'The Thing'?



Xenomrph
Mar 02, 2015, 03:17:04 AM
Reply #427 on: Mar 02, 2015, 03:17:04 AM
Q
Follow-up question: What did you think of it?



SpreadEagleBeagle
Mar 02, 2015, 03:34:37 AM
Reply #429 on: Mar 02, 2015, 03:34:37 AM
Q
Follow-up question: What did you think of it?

Very gory and b-movie like in a scary and perfectly disturbing kind of way and the The Thing From Another World (1951) I've always been a sucker for and is quite different from Carpenter's interpretation. They're on par for me. The difference here is that The Thing is based on a novel which makes the whole remake thing of a different nature and doesn't really compare to an actual retcon, reboot or remake.


Gash
Mar 02, 2015, 03:40:29 AM
Reply #430 on: Mar 02, 2015, 03:40:29 AM
Q
The Thing 82 is much less a remake of the Thing From Another World than it is a return to the source material, only really borrowing the title sequence. The Thing 2010 on the other hand is practically a beat for beat remake of The Thing 82. And that was pretending to be a prequel. Why it couldn't have been an amalgum of The Thing from Another World and the expanded elements of Dean Fosters 82 novelisation is anyone's guess - then at least it might have had some new variations to show off.


Xenomrph
Mar 02, 2015, 03:42:54 AM
Reply #431 on: Mar 02, 2015, 03:42:54 AM
Q
Fair enough. :) I don't quite agree on the "not quite a remake" but I get where you're coming from since it's more true to the source material than the 1951 movie was.

The Thing 82 is much less a remake of the Thing From Another World than it is a return to the source material, only really borrowing the title sequence. The Thing 2010 on the other hand is practically a beat for beat remake of The Thing 82. And that was pretending to be a prequel. Why it couldn't have been an amalgum of The Thing from Another World and the expanded elements of Dean Fosters 82 novelisation is anyone's guess - then at least it might have had some new variations to show off.
Strongly disagree that the prequel is a remake of the Carpenter movie. Pretty much every place it could be different, it was different.


Nightmare Asylum
Mar 02, 2015, 03:43:51 AM
Reply #432 on: Mar 02, 2015, 03:43:51 AM
Q
Follow-up question: What did you think of it?

Very gory and b-movie like in a scary and perfectly disturbing kind of way and the The Thing From Another World (1951) I've always been a sucker for and is quite different from Carpenter's interpretation. They're on par for me. The difference here is that The Thing is based on a novel which makes the whole remake thing of a different nature and doesn't really compare to an actual retcon, reboot or remake.

readaptation


Xhan
Mar 02, 2015, 04:16:47 AM
Reply #433 on: Mar 02, 2015, 04:16:47 AM
Q
Alien Isolation - to my knowledge... Just expanded on her daughter's story. Was there something else added that contradicts anything in the Alien films? Apart from the idea of the Company lying to ripley about her daughter. Cause that's not the same thing as a retcon.

Burke had no reason to lie - and Ripley had every reason to look up her daughter's life details from non-company sources. She would have been at her utmost paranoid about trusting the company at that point. Finding out Amanda went off in search of her voice recorder to somewhere which came to grief, Nostromo-style, would have been a big red flag.

And the fact nobody's heard about anything remotely like the Alien... Nobody mentoning that the woman's daughter mentioned encountering something similar, at Ellen's own hearing? Not plausible.

And if the company was nefarious and evil, having a reason for covering it up, then they would have also had every reason to go and seek out LV-426 and actively scour it before Ellen returned. They didn't. It's just another colony to them. One which they never bothered putting any real dedicated bio-warfare personnel or facilities on.

The game's really well presented and worthy of being praised, but even its own writers copped out of providing an explanation for Amanda's inclusion. :)

So, again, if people can take that gaming experience to heart, they can enjoy a movie which retcons the third/fourth movie, too. 'Isolation' proved that, so well as something is done well, people just won't care.
To be fair, all of those "continuity" issues you bring up can all be explained away really, really easily.

Amanda's fate in the game and her fate in 'Aliens' don't line up, but the game ends on a massive cliffhanger so there's obviously more story to tell, and dozens of ways to tie it all together.

W-Y didn't scour LV-426 for Alien stuff because they didn't know it was there - you shut off the Derelict's beacon in Isolation, and all other data from the Nostromo incident was destroyed (or floating in the Narcissus, awaiting pickup decades later). Even the crew files in the inquest in 'Aliens' mention the Nostromo case had been closed years after Isolation is supposed to take place - W-Y had simply stopped searching. It was obviously getting to be cost prohibitive - they'd lost the Nostromo, and 15 years later they lost an entire space station, all with absolutely nothing to show for it.

I mean we're not talking Colonial Marines degrees of continuity speedbumps here.


No, they can't; unless you're the kind of mouthbreather par excellence that thinks Big Show really does hate Dolph Ziggler for taking his lunchmoney because it's all so, so very real. A:I shits all over Ripley's characterization and you can't say otherwise unless you're an apologist. Ripley was always ahead of the curve and that's why she and anyone else survived Acheron in the first place.


razeak
Mar 02, 2015, 04:28:38 AM
Reply #434 on: Mar 02, 2015, 04:28:38 AM
Q
When people encounter extraordinary things, the feel a desire to tell others about it when they've reached safety.

She'd also be a key witness as to what happened to the station and Weyland-Yutani personnel who were travelling with her. Plus, it would have cleared her mother's name of any suspicion of blame, whatsoever; providing a solution to that old mystery was clearly something she felt very strongly about.

I think you may be thinking in absolutes. Many people would do exactly that, but not all.


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed