User Information

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

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: What possible thing justifies a retcon?  (Read 6899 times)



Ash 937
Feb 26, 2015, 07:06:27 PM
Reply #32 on: Feb 26, 2015, 07:06:27 PM
Q
Just because they will retcon Alien3 and Resurrection doesn't guarantee that Blomkamp's film will be better than the films it's disregarding.  In my opinion, Alien3 is, overall, a better film than Prometheus....and the current plan for Blomkamp's Alien film is that will tie into the Prometheus sequel.  I'm not too comfortable with that.   

Ridley Scott wasn't entirely successful at executing his "big ideas" into his last sci-fi epic and I was glad when he admitted that it was a separate story that only shared the same universe as Alien.  Now that seems to be changing.  Blomkamp said he already imagined this film as a "genetic sequel" to Alien and Aliens.  He may have to defend his vision for that film against the likes of Scott that is still looking for a way to make Prometheus more accepted.  If that happens, I hope that Blomkamp has it in him to fight Scott in a more effective way than Fincher took on Fox. :-/



SpreadEagleBeagle
Feb 26, 2015, 07:12:20 PM
Reply #33 on: Feb 26, 2015, 07:12:20 PM
Q
Just because they will retcon Alien3 and Resurrection doesn't guarantee that Blomkamp's film will be better than the films it's disregarding.  In my opinion, Alien3 is, overall, a better film than Prometheus....and the current plan for Blomkamp's Alien film is that will tie into the Prometheus sequel.  I'm not too comfortable with that.   

Ridley Scott wasn't entirely successful at executing his "big ideas" into his last sci-fi epic and I was glad when he admitted that it was a separate story that only shared the same universe as Alien.  Now that seems to be changing.  Blomkamp said he already imagined this film as a "genetic sequel" to Alien and Aliens.  He may have to defend his vision for that film against the likes of Scott that is still looking for a way to make Prometheus more accepted.  If that happens, I hope that Blomkamp has it in him to fight Scott in a more effective way than Fincher took on Fox. :-/

FOX doesn't give a shit unless it's spelled $hit.

Blomkamp has the kind of cash-grabbing ideas that FOX likes, so I don't think their will be any fighting at all. Hicks, robots, Cannon fodder aliens and explosions = $$$


CainsSon
Feb 26, 2015, 08:04:30 PM
Reply #34 on: Feb 26, 2015, 08:04:30 PM
Q
It is neither succinct or on point.

Yes. It is. You just don't like it;) That's fine. There's nothing wrong with disliking the retcon, but what OZ said is exactly right.



Retcon Aliens. Ripley got back to Earth 9 months after the Nostromo blew and 35 years later she's back in space and heading towards that unknown, unnamed planetoid.

I'd be very interested in seeing where that alternative could take things too.  :)

Creative license could be an excuse for anything. It's not a justification PLOT wise. Which is what I asked for. You are maybe misunderstanding what I designed the thread for.

Why take a crazy, dumb explanation when you can forego that and have a potentially good film that stands on its own?

I suppose it depends on how you look at it.

Just, as an example, look at the sober and mature way Aliens handles Ripley being locked away for over half a century. It reads like it could be potentially outlandish. "Ripley got stuck in space for 57 years, and after returning to Earth she's paired up with spess mahrens to go back and fight HUNDREDS OF ALIEMS!" Ya know? It's all in the way that you execute your bullsh*t.  :laugh:

Exactly and from a plot perspective I don't see the justification. We have cnaisters full of alien DNA mutating people in all kinds of ways, and Engineer gods orchestrating such things and the monsters themselves and all the above... And that's all CANON. If PROMETHEUS is canon - why can't A:R be canon?

Not really - Alien 3 didn't ruin opportunities, Resurrection did that itself with the line "for all intents and purposes, she succeeded". There was far more they could have done after 3 but it was the need to bring Sigourney back that took AR where it went.

And here is an actual answer I was looking for.

A:R proposes that Ripley suceeded. Maybe Prometheus or Prometheus 2, doesn't allow for that and therefore they will have boxed themselves in. Narratively, that would justify, at leats retconning A:R.

Still - I don't find anything in A:R to be out of step with the things in Prometheus. In fact, I still say PROMETHUES made A:R a better entry in the series. As well as ALIEN 3 because it made the subtext in A3 more apparent.

Every film ever is money grabbing -- nothing makes 'retcons' any more guilty of doing that.
.

Exactly and A5 without a retcon could potentially make just as much money.

So what we have here is fan wank and unless there is a good reason for the retcon it will play as a rehash instead of a proper entry. Doesn't anyone else see how cheap that makes the new terminator seem?

Not the story idea, but the obvious attempt to return to what the second film was?

Its done. Just make a new film. Not a film that tries to do what has alreayd been done. THIS IS WHAT MADE ALIENS SO GOOD IN THE FIRST PLACE!

It changed and expanded. And its the one thing that all the Alien films did right.

« Last Edit: Feb 26, 2015, 08:17:45 PM by CainsSon »

Immortan Jonesy
Feb 26, 2015, 08:18:19 PM
Reply #35 on: Feb 26, 2015, 08:18:19 PM
Q
Quote
If PROMETHEUS is canon - why can't A:R be canon?

Because Prometheus is a film by Ridley Scott, and despite past mistakes, some people (maybe even FOX) still see him as a legend.



Magegg
Feb 26, 2015, 09:01:23 PM
Reply #37 on: Feb 26, 2015, 09:01:23 PM
Q
In three points:
- Beloved characters
- Commercial appeal
- Accesibility

Deal with it. It's happening.


SpreadEagleBeagle
Feb 26, 2015, 09:01:32 PM
Reply #38 on: Feb 26, 2015, 09:01:32 PM
Q
$$$$$$$.
In no way a standard sequel would have had that as a reason, eh?
Yes,but imo recons are an even more desperate and cynical attempt at a cash-grab.Revisionism for the sake of keeping a series alive for financial rather than artistic gain.

This!


Xhan
Feb 26, 2015, 09:10:57 PM
Reply #39 on: Feb 26, 2015, 09:10:57 PM
Q
$$$$$$$.
In no way a standard sequel would have had that as a reason, eh?

This franchise has a particular dalliance with said concept, while touting the former "liberty" theme. While Blomkamp is definitely a fan of the first order, the reason this movie is being made probably has more to do with the latter, as well as opening further marketing potential down the line.


Quote
Deal with it.

And therein lies the rub; fans actually don't have to deal with anything they deem less than stellar, should they so choose.

Thank you kindly, and all that.

« Last Edit: Feb 26, 2015, 09:14:50 PM by Xhan »

Magegg
Feb 26, 2015, 09:23:34 PM
Reply #40 on: Feb 26, 2015, 09:23:34 PM
Q
Every film ever is money grabbing -- nothing makes 'retcons' any more guilty of doing that.

Exactly and A5 without a retcon could potentially make just as much money.
Alien 5 without a retcon would end up being more like Terminator: Salvation. A blatant attempt to "advance" the franchise and becoming just a generic pointless movie again.

So what we have here is fan wank and unless there is a good reason for the retcon it will play as a rehash instead of a proper entry. Doesn't anyone else see how cheap that makes the new terminator seem?
The new Terminator looks bad because of entirely different reasons: Cheap production values, and the fact the other movies were just round stories, the continuity itself was looping, throwing down a new tangential timeline that breaks the loop just overcomplicates the thing. It also looks nothing like Terminator 2, it simply looks like a mess.

It changed and expanded. And its the one thing that all the Alien films did right.
Ripley becoming a superhero was not good expansion, it was silly and it was not loyal to the original movies spirit. Just wipe that away.


CainsSon
Feb 26, 2015, 11:39:39 PM
Reply #41 on: Feb 26, 2015, 11:39:39 PM
Q
Quote
If PROMETHEUS is canon - why can't A:R be canon?

Because Prometheus is a film by Ridley Scott, and despite past mistakes, some people (maybe even FOX) still see him as a legend.

So are the directors of the last two films.

Just because they will retcon Alien3 and Resurrection doesn't guarantee that Blomkamp's film will be better than the films it's disregarding.  In my opinion, Alien3 is, overall, a better film than Prometheus....and the current plan for Blomkamp's Alien film is that will tie into the Prometheus sequel.  I'm not too comfortable with that.   

Ridley Scott wasn't entirely successful at executing his "big ideas" into his last sci-fi epic and I was glad when he admitted that it was a separate story that only shared the same universe as Alien.  Now that seems to be changing.  Blomkamp said he already imagined this film as a "genetic sequel" to Alien and Aliens.  He may have to defend his vision for that film against the likes of Scott that is still looking for a way to make Prometheus more accepted.  If that happens, I hope that Blomkamp has it in him to fight Scott in a more effective way than Fincher took on Fox. :-/

^^^THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING PEOPLE ARE NEGLECTING TO REALIZE.

Those in favor of the retcon are ASSUMING this will produce a film that is AS GOOD AS ALIENS or at least ON PAR with ALIEN and ALIENS.
Lets think about this:
We have a good director. Neil Blomkamp.
Alien 3 had David Fincher and fantastic screenwriters. Like 15 of them.
A:R had Jean Piere Jeunet and Josh Whedon!!! Both fantastic directors/writer.
PROMETHEUS had Ridley Scott return and fans hate that film. Many of you are the ones in favor of this Retcon.

So - the mistake you are making is assuming that because Neil Blomkamp may want to ignore A3 and A:R that this will guarantee a better film than A3.
Not how it works. You just don't get a continuation of Aliens that simply makes a great film because they don't kill Hicks.

A3 is evidence as to why a retcon isn't a good idea. Because you can have the greatest people attached and still people will not like the soup they make.

But you want to take that risk, just to see Hicks?

Alien 5 as a retcon does not in any way guarantee a better film than A3. If you hate ALIEN3 and love Prometheus (unlikely in my experience) then maybe I can see why you think so...

For me I'd rate it like this:

Alien - 10
Aliens - 10
Alien 3 - 8
Prometheus - 7
A:R - 6.5

AVP - 4.5
AVP-R - 2.

« Last Edit: Feb 26, 2015, 11:52:17 PM by CainsSon »

aliennaire
Feb 26, 2015, 11:53:01 PM
Reply #42 on: Feb 26, 2015, 11:53:01 PM
Q
Ripley becoming a superhero was not good expansion, it was silly and it was not loyal to the original movies spirit. Just wipe that away.
I guess there was the Universe/film-scape expansion hinted at, and the change of genre. Still, if the character evolves along, why should it be silly?

Turning back to the beginning of the thread, new Alien film director (and Sigourney, as well) insists he is all for giving the Ripley''s story a proper ending. May it be.

I feel I will start appreciating A^3 ans A:R, retconned as bad dreams (for example and more likely), more than I ever gave them credit before.



aliennaire
Feb 27, 2015, 12:02:35 AM
Reply #44 on: Feb 27, 2015, 12:02:35 AM
Q
insists he is all for giving the Ripley''s story a proper ending.

She won in Alien 3 and Ripley 8 also won in A:R.

What other ending do you want?

She was going through the motions most part of the time in 3rd and 4th films and somehow managed to win (quite questionable victory in A^3 though), whereas in 1st and 2nd film she always stroke me as a strong personality. I would love to see that in her again :-)


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed