User Information

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

Login with username, password and session length

AvPGalaxy News

Statistics

2,344,807 Posts in 36,489 Topics
by 20,498 Members
Latest Member: linferno

Author Topic: Blomkamp’s Alien 5 is “Innovative, Amazing, Perfor...  (Read 51724 times)

windebieste
Jul 25, 2016, 10:41:34 PM
Reply #75 on: Jul 25, 2016, 10:41:34 PM
Q
The chemistry has changed and is irrevocably unrecoverable and a movie featuring actors portraying the return of Ripley, Hicks and Newt woulda been great...

...in 1988.

Back then, yes.  You could have retained the vibrant chemistry needed between these actors to portray 2 adults and a child.  Things have changed since then.  Dramatically changed.  30 years will do that, in case you haven't noticed.  Don't even expect that chemistry between these actors to be the same now.  Each of these actors has aged 30+ years since the movie was made. 

For example, if nigh on 40 year old Rebecca Jorden declares on screen "Call me Newt!" I'll laugh eternally at whoever wrote an adult into an 8 year old's role.  F*ck me if I don't.

You're better off expecting an 'ALIEN 5' from Blomkamp with fresh actors in new roles.  Retain the whole USCM vs Aliens scenario and have them go 'a bug stompin' as much as they like!  I don't think most fans give a shit if Ripley is in it or not when compared to the possibility of A WHOLE NEW 'ALIENS' EXPERIENCE that doesn't rely on soft 'alternate reality' retcon nonsense and tired actor shoe horn to tell a story that is basically bad fan service.

Gimme a fresh spin off 'ALIENS' movie.  Yes.  I'd love that.  Does it need Ripley, Hicks and Newt?  No.   

-Windebieste.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 25, 2016, 10:59:49 PM
Reply #76 on: Jul 25, 2016, 10:59:49 PM
Q
The chemistry has changed and is irrevocably unrecoverable and a movie featuring actors portraying the return of Ripley, Hicks and Newt woulda been great...

...in 1988.

Back then, yes.  You could have retained the vibrant chemistry needed between these actors to portray 2 adults and a child.  Things have changed since then.  Dramatically changed.  30 years will do that, in case you haven't noticed.  Don't even expect that chemistry between these actors to be the same now.  Each of these actors has aged 30+ years since the movie was made. 

For example, if nigh on 40 year old Rebecca Jorden declares on screen "Call me Newt!" I'll laugh eternally at whoever wrote an adult into an 8 year old's role.  F*ck me if I don't.

You're better off expecting an 'ALIEN 5' from Blomkamp with fresh actors in new roles.  Retain the whole USCM vs Aliens scenario and have them go 'a bug stompin' as much as they like!  I don't think most fans give a shit if Ripley is in it or not when compared to the possibility of A WHOLE NEW 'ALIENS' EXPERIENCE that doesn't rely on soft 'alternate reality' retcon nonsense and tired actor shoe horn to tell a story that is basically bad fan service.

Gimme a fresh spin off 'ALIENS' movie.  Yes.  I'd love that.  Does it need Ripley, Hicks and Newt?  No.   

-Windebieste.

I appreciate what you're saying, and I agree that making a film which continues after Aliens 30 years down the road with the characters that survived, is a road that is riddled with potential pitfalls.  But the potential for a positive outcome far outweighs the hazards I think.  It's no bad fan service.  It is actually the best fan service there could be.  Or at least it has the potential for that.

Many of us fans back in the day in 1988 got to read a story that took place 10 years after Aliens.  It may as well have been 30 years later.  It is the same thing.  So that is still the biggest fan expectation.  You see, the most probable thing that would happen to Hicks, Ripley, and Newt after the Aliens film is: NOTHING.  They would probably do their best to disappear from a mad world for up to 30 years.  But then if they found out that the Company or the marines are harvesting the aliens for their "nefarious" purposes, then it is entirely plausible that they would want to act and "go save the world".  That is a plausible story.  Not this egg on the Sulaco nonsense.  It's a Bug Hunt not an Egg Hunt!!


CelticPred97
Jul 25, 2016, 11:32:03 PM
Reply #77 on: Jul 25, 2016, 11:32:03 PM
Q
Windebieste:
Quote
You can say exactly the same thing about all of the 'ALIEN' movies.  Each one of them is 'innovative' and 'amazing' in their own way.  It's the most meaningless phrase ever in the whole History of Meaningless Phrases. lol.

I disagree. I think regarding innovation it's a very valid point. Well, it doesn't mean much coming from people who will gain from the movie's success but I think innovation is important. I say as someone who despises 'Prometheus' (so this is hard), at least it's somewhat innovative. No, that doesn't mean the movie will be good but it'll at least be interesting.

Also, you really want another 'Aliens'?
Don't you think it would probably be considerably worse? Sequels that just try to replicate have no point.

Marreom:
Quote
Yeah, at this point James Cameron's endorsement means nothing. He... stated that AvP was better then Alien 3 and A:R.   What wouldn't he endorse?

I actually think that's a fair comment. I love 'Alien 3' and find 'Alien: Resurrection' interesting while flawed but I also really enjoy 'Alien vs. Predator' and a good argument could be made for that movie being better than the other two. Hmm... well that's difficult actually because there's more to 'Alien 3' but for what 'Alien vs. Predator' is trying to be, it does it very well. It's obviously not the type of movie many fans wanted to see but it is by no means a bad movie. I think it's a particularly good movie again, for what it's trying to be.

BishopShouldGo:
Quote
The key part is that it has everything "that fans want". I wanted WY headquarters. A futuristic Earth. A correct, organic continuation of Aliens' story, just as Aliens continued Alien's story. Big scope, you gotta blow it up a bit each time. You can't go back to self contained.

That is a big problem with Hollywood today; "Just make it bigger". Building up can be good but not always. Particularly as a franchise that started out as horror, it's good to not just keep blowing it up.
Also, personally, I really don't want to see future Earth. The series started in space so I'd rather Earth's current state be left to the imagination.
Showing Weyland Yutani's base of operations also could be a big let down.

Quote
No one wanted a depressing, violent, gory, hopeless movie. Yuck! Alien 3 makes me want to brush my tongue.

- You're aware this is horror, right? And however you describe it, while it has a lot of haters, there are a lot of people that really like how 'Alien 3' turned out.

Xenoboner:
Quote
But I guess alternate timelines are inevitable with every long running franchise now it seems, so, so be it.

No, don't just accept it. There is a problem and it shouldn't be the case. The fact that Hollywood are lazy and keep not bothering to think of original ideas and instead remake and reboot makes it worse.

SiL:
Quote
Performing fan service is what got us AvPR.

There are many films I can think of that concentrate on fan service but AVPR isn't one. Where is the fan service there?

Tusky:
Quote
Bring on an alternative timeline i think it will revitalise the franchise, hell it can not be worse than Resurrection or Requim.

Yeah, it could. Those movies are flawed ('AVPR' is plain bad) but they don't mess with what there already is. 'Prometheus' does as will the sequels and I presume if 'Alien 5' is made it will mess even further. As a general rule, do not mess with the current canon. My point being, that is how it could be worse. If it's bad but doesn't mess with anything it can simply be forgotten but if it changes what there already is, that's those films potentially ruined for you... Not to be all doom and gloom.

Adam802:
Quote
But there's nothing wrong with seeing another way the story could've turned out

In a cruel world where death is final, yes there's something wrong with bringing people back. That goes against the core of the franchise and takes away the effect of death.

The Eighth Passenger:
Quote
It's just entertainment, people. They're not trying to re-write real-life history like the holocaust deniers.

On a film forum particularly, that's a silly argument.  No-one's saying this is the worst thing ever but a lot of people care about certain films (and a lot of people here care about these films).

System Apollo:
Quote
And this idea that the alternate timeline is the problem is beyond me. The premise of the original trilogy was that Ripley purged the species into extinction.

I never took that from the films. I mean it's a fine idea but nothing in the films suggests they are the only xenomorphs (xenomorph/xenomorphs?) in existence. The ones in the films came from one ship. Who knows if there are more out there?

Quote
What are they passing on? Random occasions that our new protagonist is going to run into Aliens ???

That's a fair point but yes, I suppose is the answer.

Kelgaard:
Quote
Why is ageism so acceptable here?

a) It's worrying because older actors can't necessarily act very well any more.
b) It seems somewhat ridiculous to have pensioners fighting aliens/predators.

Perfect-Organism:
Quote
Cameron was the only director and plot writer who was insulted on a deep level in the franchise by having literally everything he built up destroyed.

I don't see why other people see that as build up. The story began, built up and ended in 'Aliens'. What the director after chooses to do is part of their own story. I can imagine being annoyed as a filmmaker if my character was immediately killed off by the person who came after me. But if that's how that filmmaker felt was best for their story, so be it. I probably wouldn't be completely happy with however a character I helped create was handled by someone else but it wouldn't be in my control at that point and I wouldn't have much right to complain. Again and back to the point, 'Aliens' isn't build up to 'Alien 3'. 'Aliens' is a complete of its own as is 'Alien 3'.


System Apollo
Jul 26, 2016, 12:09:56 AM
Reply #78 on: Jul 26, 2016, 12:09:56 AM
Q
Quote
I never took that from the films. I mean it's a fine idea but nothing in the films suggests they are the only xenomorphs (xenomorph/xenomorphs?) in existence. The ones in the films came from one ship. Who knows if there are more out there?

If there is more of them they haven't found them yet. That's why in Alien 3 the company went out of its way to bring an android developer and armed personnel to a prison planet via a transport ship in order to obtain the Alien.

In Resurrection they cloned Ripley and the Alien in order to obtain it.

If the timeline were to have Weyland Yutani finding another derelict craft and Colonial Marines trying to fight off Aliens not only would that retcon Resurrection but also make Ripley's sacrifice pointless.


Nazrel
Jul 26, 2016, 04:25:22 AM
Reply #79 on: Jul 26, 2016, 04:25:22 AM
Q
Ripley is awesome and all but enough is enough. I want to see a completely new cast and characters. I want fox to stop shoehorning Ripley into everything just to sell stuff. Which you dont need. Let Ripleys story be over.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AM
Reply #80 on: Jul 26, 2016, 04:32:28 AM
Q
Ripley is awesome and all but enough is enough. I want to see a completely new cast and characters. I want fox to stop shoehorning Ripley into everything just to sell stuff. Which you dont need. Let Ripleys story be over.

Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.


Kronnang_Dunn
Jul 26, 2016, 06:18:53 AM
Reply #81 on: Jul 26, 2016, 06:18:53 AM
Q
Let's see... Sigourney is 66 (but looks fine), Biehn is 59 (and looks fine) and Carrie Henn is 40 (some exercise and she could look fine). I don't think they are waay too old. Remember The Force Awakens? Now, if the powers that be put the project on hold, then we've got a problem.. they are not getting any younger you know?


windebieste
Jul 26, 2016, 06:25:52 AM
Reply #82 on: Jul 26, 2016, 06:25:52 AM
Q
Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

You're right.  She's just being shoe horned into one movie.  :P

Let's see... Sigourney is 66 (but looks fine), Biehn is 59 (and looks fine) and Carrie Henn is 40 (some exercise and she could look fine). I don't think they are waay too old. Remember The Force Awakens? Now, if the powers that be put the project on hold, then we've got a problem.. they are not getting any younger you know?

So you expect the same chemistry between 2 adults and a child to exist in this proposal?  Because that's what made Ripley, Hicks and Newt's relationship in 'ALIENS' work.

As  for 'The Force Awakens', nobody is campaigning to have deceased Han Solo returned to the series and retcon that movie.  That would just be stupid.

-Windebieste.


Perfect-Organism
Jul 26, 2016, 06:53:17 AM
Reply #83 on: Jul 26, 2016, 06:53:17 AM
Q
Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.  The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

You're right.  She's just being shoe horned into one movie.  :P

Let's see... Sigourney is 66 (but looks fine), Biehn is 59 (and looks fine) and Carrie Henn is 40 (some exercise and she could look fine). I don't think they are waay too old. Remember The Force Awakens? Now, if the powers that be put the project on hold, then we've got a problem.. they are not getting any younger you know?

So you expect the same chemistry between 2 adults and a child to exist in this proposal?  Because that's what made Ripley, Hicks and Newt's relationship in 'ALIENS' work.

As  for 'The Force Awakens', nobody is campaigning to have deceased Han Solo returned to the series and retcon that movie.  That would just be stupid.

-Windebieste.

Nobody is expecting the dynamic between these characters to be the same.  If anything, it would be the audience's biggest curiosity to see how these people evolved and grew up.  Case in point, have you read the original Nelson / Verheiden series back in 1988?  In that book, the relationship between our heroes has completely changed and evolved.  And yet it felt natural.  So I can imagine a Newt (probably Becky by then) living  a life as a total basket case, and then Hicks and / or Ripley pull her out of her own personal hell to bring her into battle against the Aliens and against the corporation.  It works.

Han Solo's death was much more poignant.  He wasn't killed off in the opening credits.  I expect he will come back as a Obi-Wan Kenobi apparition some day.  Maybe he had a little force in him after all...


SM
Jul 26, 2016, 07:46:05 AM
Reply #84 on: Jul 26, 2016, 07:46:05 AM
Q
Ripley and Hicks abandoning Newt to 10 years alone in a mental hospital felt "natural"?


Perfect-Organism
Jul 26, 2016, 07:59:49 AM
Reply #85 on: Jul 26, 2016, 07:59:49 AM
Q
Nope.  The abandonment was where the mystery of Ripley was.  What was natural was the relationship between Hicks and Newt once they reconnected.


SiL
Jul 26, 2016, 08:08:07 AM
Reply #86 on: Jul 26, 2016, 08:08:07 AM
Q
Ripley knowing a lot about a marine BFG a couple of days after first shooting a gun (Female War) sure wasn't natural.


HuDaFuK
Jul 26, 2016, 08:11:28 AM
Reply #87 on: Jul 26, 2016, 08:11:28 AM
Q
Ripley isn't being shoehorned into everything.  We're talking about ONE new film with her in it.

One film or ten films, they're still twisting things just to get her name on the poster. Her story was concluded already.

And it's not like there aren't several other books and stuff where they've done exactly the same thing lately, more often than not to the detriment of the story.

The rest of the new films (of which there may be 3!) will not have Ripley.

Assuming the Ripley's mom rumours about Covenant are horseshit... The fact people are genuinely worried they might conceivably go down that route says a lot about how likely it is the studio might consider it a good idea.

Nope.  The abandonment was where the mystery of Ripley was.

Yeah, it never was explained why she just vanished for so long. Not one word of explanation.


SM
Jul 26, 2016, 08:32:46 AM
Reply #88 on: Jul 26, 2016, 08:32:46 AM
Q
It was explained in the original version of Earth War.
The abandonment of Newt still didn't ring true to either Ripley or Hicks' characters.  It certainly wasn't a natural progression.



 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed