User Information

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

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: ALIEN DAY: Sigourney Weaver Talks A5 at Aliens Spe...  (Read 22353 times)

The Eighth Passenger
Apr 28, 2016, 09:18:38 PM
Reply #105 on: Apr 28, 2016, 09:18:38 PM
Q
If Bloomhack was a better director/writer he would just do Alien 5, nothing to do with Ripley, new story, new characters, a great opportunity to show your best ideas for the franchise, but no, he just want to favor cheap fan-fiction and delete 2 movies in the process.

That was what he intended all along. Until he met with Weaver and she convinced him to continue Ripley's story. Before he met Weaver he didn't even think she would be interested in starring in another Alien film. He said himself that his original story would have included the events of Alien 3.

Blomkamp also knew that with Sigourney onboard and backing his film proposition, his chances of getting it greenlit would be considerably greater.

So next time do a little basic research before making a fool of yourself on a public forum.

It's so hard for Bloomhack and the half of you Disney Princesses accept that Newt and Hicks are dead and the  Ripley story ends with Alien 3??

You heard the Corporal. Shape-up or ship-out.


Number13
Apr 28, 2016, 10:30:03 PM
Reply #106 on: Apr 28, 2016, 10:30:03 PM
Q
If he can bring back Ripley, Newt, and Hicks in a believable way and still consider Alien3 and Resurrection canon, then it will solve all my problems. How they're gonna do it, I have no idea, I don't know what Blomkamp has up his sleeves. If he can pull it off, that'd be the best magic trick ever.


DaddyYautja
Apr 28, 2016, 11:20:57 PM
Reply #107 on: Apr 28, 2016, 11:20:57 PM
Q
I'm just pointing out that its a very simple way to handle it that makes sense out of what is going on.

But it doesn't make sense.

How would cloning them get them the Alien? No one at the end of Aliens has an Alien in them. If the egg's already on the Sulaco, why bother cloning anyone? Just take the egg and leave the others be. Where did they get these clones anyway? I find it incredibly hard to believe they could make some copies in the days/weeks they had between the two movies, not to mention get those clones all the way out to deep space to make the switch. And why did they have clones of the three people who survived specifically? They couldn't possibly have known Ripley, Newt and Hicks would be the ones to live through it until the three got back to the Sulaco at the very end of Aliens. Did they just have clones of the entire team on standby so they could pick the ones they need? Why would they conceivably do that in advance?

The whole idea you're proposing makes absolutely no logical sense.

The people in Alien 3 are clones that escaped a cloning facility?


whiterabbit
Apr 28, 2016, 11:50:34 PM
Reply #108 on: Apr 28, 2016, 11:50:34 PM
Q
We spend all of this time trying to make up haphazardly excuses to cover the obvious discrepancies in canon that an alternative reality creates... I honestly think it is about time we just accept that, shit happens. Stop trying to fight it and just let this unstoppable force in and see where it goes.


RakaiThwei
Apr 29, 2016, 03:00:36 AM
Reply #109 on: Apr 29, 2016, 03:00:36 AM
Q
We spend all of this time trying to make up haphazardly excuses to cover the obvious discrepancies in canon that an alternative reality creates... I honestly think it is about time we just accept that, shit happens. Stop trying to fight it and just let this unstoppable force in and see where it goes.

I agree.. and the fact that some fans want Covenant to flop just so they can keep Alien 3 and Resurrection is just... petty. I may not like where the franchise is going as far as Prometheus and the Prometheus crossovers are concerned but if we're getting a multiverse out of this, then this is something I can be at peace with and even be happy with what I have as far as the franchises are concerned, and I really, really would hate it if fellow fans decided to just go out of their way and ruin something.


To say that they want Covenant to just fail is just... petty.


PsyKore
Apr 29, 2016, 03:20:59 AM
Reply #110 on: Apr 29, 2016, 03:20:59 AM
Q
I haven't seen anyone want it to fail, unless I missed something. I think fans are just worried of more disappointment, honestly.

I do agree with whiterabbit though. Also, we're lucky the franchise isn't dormant. I thought after the terrible AvP movies that we wouldn't see anything again for a long time.


RakaiThwei
Apr 29, 2016, 04:10:18 AM
Reply #111 on: Apr 29, 2016, 04:10:18 AM
Q
I haven't seen anyone want it to fail, unless I missed something. I think fans are just worried of more disappointment, honestly.

The thing is, Blomkamp isn't undoing Alien 3 and Resurrection, and Weaver's statement explains how he isn't undoing them. And it's an idea which I can get behind because this is something which I've been theorizing for the last couple of years, and now it's been for the most part... confirmed in a sense. We have a multiverse, and I couldn't be happier. And I really don't like that fans seemingly want to ruin that. As for the movie itself, you know, at this point we are given a choice in which path we want to follow in the overall canon-- that even if it does fail, we can go back to them, and we won't be viewed as wrong because they are still there. We can go back to Alien 3 and Resurrection for those who do want to keep them.

Having that said, I do wish Neill Blomkamp the best of luck, and I do wish the cast and crew the best of luck as well. While a lot of the Geek News feeds seemed to have missed that this movie is an AU, knowing that's what it is has given me a sense of peace. It makes me feel as a fan that I don't HAVE to watch it, but that I GET to watch it if I do want to. You get what I'm saying with that?

Everything has a place now. Now it's not about what's canon and what's non-canon.. It's about WHERE it fits in canon. And you know what? I am perfectly happy with that. I am completely at peace with this. It's just... so disappointing that so many don't see it this way.


_kemosh_
Apr 29, 2016, 06:35:17 AM
Reply #112 on: Apr 29, 2016, 06:35:17 AM
Q
I don't know, many just don't know how a 40 year old Newt is justified apart from fan wish fulfillment, killing off Newt and Hicks, while not exactly handled in a satisfactory way, was still consistent with the Lovecraftian nature of the universe and was thus thematically justified. That funeral scene in Alien 3 is among the most powerful moments of the franchise and part of what made it so powerful was precisely due to the attachment to those characters and the emotional through line being cut cruelly short, not to mention Ripley's ultimate sacrifice.
Realising that there will be an alternate film now where they survive will undermine all that and lessen their impact just by virtue of knowing that their exists a film in which they have survived, and it won't matter if I choose it over Blomkamp's, because that original timeline will no longer be the definitive one.

Now Ripley's clone didn't undermine the impact of 3 because it was a clone, not THE Ripley, and if you ask me Blomkamp would have been better starting from Resurrection with a cloned Hicks and Newt for that same reason too but whatever, FOX just see dollar signs, so there's not much point in griping, but I like griping. ;)

Peace.

« Last Edit: Apr 29, 2016, 07:13:17 AM by _kemosh_ »

Anonymous
Apr 29, 2016, 06:35:17 AM
Reply #113 on: Apr 29, 2016, 06:35:17 AM
Q
aww man do we really want to see a 70 year old weaver and hicks hitting on each other?

« Last Edit: Apr 29, 2016, 07:13:17 AM by _kemosh_ »

HuDaFuK
Apr 29, 2016, 07:39:12 AM
Reply #114 on: Apr 29, 2016, 07:39:12 AM
Q
You're not following what I said. I'm saying A3 did happen. That's why they have to clone ripley. How Hicks and Newt are alive or cloned is just up to the writer.

No, you're missing the point. How would cloning Ripley, Hicks and Newt conceivably help them in any way? The three of them don't known anything about the Alien the company doesn't already know by the end of Alien 3, so there's no Need for them to go to huge expense to bring them back to life. It would be utterly pointless and a forced excuse to get them in the film.

Not to mention the cloning Ripely thing was already done in Resurrection.


Russ
Apr 29, 2016, 11:01:41 AM
Reply #115 on: Apr 29, 2016, 11:01:41 AM
Q
I think I read (Hicks?) that hypersleep dreams are pretty much established in the universe - I've always been confident that this is how Blomkamp would handle retconning (whilst still acknowledging) 3 and 4. It's the most expedient way to do it and fits with already established lore... Albeit I know some really hate the idea, it satisfied me from that standpoint.

The truth has been stated on here a few times though - its all about the money. Didn't the one producer say you could have someone weeing against the wall and call it Alien 3 and still make millions of dollars?


Corporal Hicks
Apr 29, 2016, 11:04:39 AM
Reply #116 on: Apr 29, 2016, 11:04:39 AM
Q
I think I read (Hicks?) that hypersleep dreams are pretty much established in the universe - I've always been confident that this is how Blomkamp would handle retconning (whilst still acknowledging) 3 and 4. It's the most expedient way to do it and fits with already established lore... Albeit I know some really hate the idea, it satisfied me from that standpoint.

The Alien novelization had mention of people whose profession was to dream and have those dreams recorded for entertainment purposes. And of course Prometheus has David looking into Shaw's dream. It fits - it's just a terrible way to do it because it still just amounts to the lacklustre "it was all a dream."

Quote
The truth has been stated on here a few times though - its all about the money. Didn't the one producer say you could have someone weeing against the wall and call it Alien 3 and still make millions of dollars?

Yeah, Giler or Hill, I think. Pretty sure it was on the Alien 3 documentary.


Perfect-Organism
Apr 29, 2016, 04:03:26 PM
Reply #117 on: Apr 29, 2016, 04:03:26 PM
Q
Yes, have Ripley say "I had a bad dream I lost my hair" in a tongue in cheek way and be done with it.  One line.  No elaborate justification for the dream sequence.  Go the Marvel / Deadpool route and make a joke of it, and move on.

Corporal Hicks:  Not keen on this idea! Don't need that kind of humour.

Corporal, on principle I agree that Alien 3 and Alien: R should just be ignored, but if they really had to mention it, I would consider the off-handed joke above, which could be a reference to any other jokes Ripley may have had in cryo-sleep, to be the maximum extent of what is needed.  I would prefer if they would just let it go and not mention anything.

But...

I think I have a solution for everything.  I have taken into account mostly what Cainsson said here, though keeping in mind what the skeptical Mr. Huda had said.  To make the story make sense, there would have to be motivation for the cloning.  I think I figured it out in a way that is neither convoluted, nor requires a retcon, and can in fact sync everything up nicely.  So here goes, in point form.

-Firstly, we have to accept the premise that Bishop is operating under conflicting directives.  Firstly, he is unable to harm a human being, but secondly, he has a specific request to secure an  return an alien to company labs.  But would Bishop consider a clone to be a human?  Do you see where I am going with this?

-So how did the eggs get on the Sulaco?  Simply, when Bishop was sent into the tunnels to get the second Dropship from the Sulaco, he went and secured 3 eggs from the egg chamber before the second dropship arrived.  At this time he knew that there were only 3 survivors.  He packed them neatly on the Dropship for return to company labs.  At no time did he intend any malice towards any of the humans though, because since he was a scientific android sent on a scientific mission, he had a lab on board the Sulaco where he could store and secure such organisms.

-Once everyone is sleeping, Bishop wakes up and gets to work.  But he is a bit of a spaz now that he is damaged.  During the weeks of sleep that everyone is under, he clones Ripley, Newt and Hicks for the purpose of incubation.  This does not conflict with his prime directive, because they are not humans.  He could just deliver the eggs whole to the company labs, but he is concerned that they may hatch and screw things up for everyone, so he figures the best bet is to have the eggs get fertilized inside the clones, so that they can be frozen for further study once he arrives back at company labs.

-He successfully impregnates CloneRipley, and while he is delivering the second egg, being a spaz, he falls over, it hatches, and just goes for Clone Hicks on its own but it cracks the glass, hurts itself, and the blood starts the electrical fire that destroys the ship.  This also explains why we have the burn marks inside the capsule from the acid. The clones are jettisoned along with Bishop to Fury 161, along with data on the cloning methods used.  Perhaps Bishop was funneling DNA directly from the originals and that is how memories got included?  I know this bit is a stretch.   So we have a dead facehugger that causes burn marks in the capsule, an impregnated Ripley Clone, Clones of Newt and Hicks, Bishop plus 1 unopened egg in the capsule, + the data.  When Bishop is reactivated in Alien 3, he sees that his Ripley clone is conscious and has all her memories and now that makes him guilty of violating his prime code.  So he asks to be deactivated.  The other egg hatches and impregnates the dog or ox.  Hicks and Newt clones never once had an y consciousness.

-In Alien Resurrection, the marines are still trying to use Bishops original data for cloning purposes.  In fact the previous point explains exactly why they went the cloning route, and how Ripley 8 was able to have memories.  They never bothered to clone Hicks and Newt because they had no Alien DNA associated with them.

-And that leaves the 3 remaining survivors from Aliens who are also jettisoned in their own EEV, but without Bishop.  That will deserve an explanation.  Then they are floating out there until Alien 5.  They are picked up eventually after they age about 30 years in stasis.  Ultimately, the theme of Alien 5 could be about them learning what happened.  Perhaps they could even end up frozen again after Alien 5 so that Ripley meets Ripley 8 eventually..


The Eighth Passenger
Apr 29, 2016, 04:03:40 PM
Reply #118 on: Apr 29, 2016, 04:03:40 PM
Q
To say that they want Covenant to just fail is just... petty.

I haven't seen anyone want it to fail, unless I missed something.

They are out there: http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=52313.msg2111971#msg2111971

Didn't the one producer say you could have someone weeing against the wall and call it Alien 3 and still make millions of dollars?

Yeah, Giler or Hill, I think. Pretty sure it was on the Alien 3 documentary.

They tested out that theory with ACM and guess what? Giler was right.





Xenomorphine
Apr 29, 2016, 05:12:10 PM
Reply #119 on: Apr 29, 2016, 05:12:10 PM
Q
Let's all try to keep in mind that Weaver is the number one person who's defended the third and fourth films to the hilt and, apparently, even made a point of reiterating that love in this speaking engagement. If she's relaxed about how this won't realistically affect them, maybe we should ease off on the worry.

Something will happen and continuity will be preserved intact. That's all there really is to say now.

« Last Edit: Apr 30, 2016, 08:44:13 PM by Xenomorphine »

 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed