User Information

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

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Katherine Waterston Channels Her Inner Ripley in N...  (Read 14856 times)

HuDaFuK
Dec 22, 2016, 09:46:46 AM
Reply #90 on: Dec 22, 2016, 09:46:46 AM


I'm sorry guys but the moment I saw that image I thought it was that one dude from Deep Rising, the dude in the middle with the gun... just to be super obvious.

Holy shit, that's one of my favourite movies ever and no one else has ever heard of it!


whiterabbit
Dec 22, 2016, 10:33:41 AM
Reply #91 on: Dec 22, 2016, 10:33:41 AM


I'm sorry guys but the moment I saw that image I thought it was that one dude from Deep Rising, the dude in the middle with the gun... just to be super obvious.

Holy shit, that's one of my favourite movies ever and no one else has ever heard of it!
Tons of other people have heard of it, there was like a thread not too long ago where we all agreed it was an awesome movie. :P


HuDaFuK
Dec 22, 2016, 12:59:21 PM
Reply #92 on: Dec 22, 2016, 12:59:21 PM
Obviously I totally missed that :laugh:


JokersWarPig
Dec 22, 2016, 01:38:05 PM
Reply #93 on: Dec 22, 2016, 01:38:05 PM

It's not that I'm hard to please, it's that it comes off as lazy and I'm afraid that means the whole production will seem "lazy" when I finally do see it.


I don't think it "means" much of anything at this point, except that you might be jumping the gun, so to speak. So if you think the guns are "lazy" then everything will be? That's like saying that you don't like Aragorn's sword, ergo you think every other production aspect of LOTR will be just as "bad." That's a tad extreme, especially since guns might not be the focus of the film, even if some people want them to be.

Have you seen any of the other stills thus far? They don't exactly scream lazy to me, even if what's-her-face looks like Ripley and is holding a modified Steyr. I'm not willing to discount everything good that I've seen thus far on account that the firearm isn't decorated enough. To be honest, I'd rather have it look like a real gun than a silly toy. It looks like a gun that shoots bullets. Beats whatever the hell guns they had in Alien: Resurrection. Hell, just play Alien: Isolation. The shotgun in that game is based off a real gun. God forbid. Does that make the production "lazy" as a whole? Of course not.

It's not an extreme view at all. The behind the scenes stills we've seen of creatures look great, that kind of care should be put into every part of the film. This still and the security force still show us that the same amount of attention to detail isn't being put into everything, other wise we'd see these weapons dressed up.


Hell, in Alien 3 Fincher repainted the Pulse Rifles in order to keep things cohesive (and that production wasn't the best to begin with).
This was even floating around when Prometheus was the big Aliens topic, so at some point in Ridley's prequels we were supposed to see predecessors to the pulse rifle.


I never said it was going to be a bad movie because of this, I never said I hate the movie because of this. I said it seems lazy and it makes me worry other aspects of production are being treated the same way.



HuDaFuK
Dec 22, 2016, 01:46:12 PM
Reply #94 on: Dec 22, 2016, 01:46:12 PM
This was even floating around when Prometheus was the big Aliens topic, so at some point in Ridley's prequels we were supposed to see predecessors to the pulse rifle.

That thing was just a stupid kitbash knocked up for the marketing. It looks crap and its supposed functionality is ridiculously far-fetched.

It much rather see something more grounded, especially as this isn't a military ship.


NickisSmart
Dec 23, 2016, 04:08:22 AM
Reply #95 on: Dec 23, 2016, 04:08:22 AM

I never said it was going to be a bad movie because of this, I never said I hate the movie because of this. I said it seems lazy and it makes me worry other aspects of production are being treated the same way.


Why? Maybe they simply aren't interested in reinventing the wheel for the guns. Furthermore, you say "the behind the scenes stills we've seen of creatures look great, that kind of care should be put into every part of the film." So clearly you have nothing to worry about as far as the creatures go (or the sets, for that matter, which all look fine, as we've been shown thus far:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
). In fact, based on what we've seen thus far, the guns seem to be the only thing to gripe about, if being lackluster in the sense that they aren't disguised as "futuristic" guns is something to lament.

However, I will say District 9 was a lot of fun with the alien weaponry and so on, but there were plenty of normal, conventional, modern, human firearms, too, in that film. So, just because you see one Steyr in a production pic doesn't for a second mean that's all we're going to get. Also, the production stills for movies, including Alien, show actors holding props that they don't actually use in the film, so perhaps we'll see something else in the arms of our new heroine?

Also, the comment of the pulse rifles in Alien 3 doesn't compute, for me. Covenant predates Aliens; how do you know when those weapons came into service? Scott isn't obligated to put them into the film (though I'd be perfectly happy if he did). There can be plenty of explanations for the visual differences in the different films (such as the sleek, futuristic look of the Prometheus versus the Nostromo, despite the latter existing after the Prometheus). For me, it'd seem strange if every person with a gun used all the same kind of gun. That's not how it works, on Earth, now, even. Cohesiveness or lack thereof doesn't necessarily translate to laziness if that lack can be explained.

Furthermore, this is Ridley Scott. Are you really worried about his visual style being lazy? If anything, the script or story is to be worried about, but how would you get that from them using a Steyr in a production still?

« Last Edit: Dec 23, 2016, 04:14:55 AM by NickisSmart »

Necronomicon II
Dec 23, 2016, 04:26:03 AM
Reply #96 on: Dec 23, 2016, 04:26:03 AM
More grounded, stock weapons on a Colony ship is the right decision logically, and it follows from the more tactile, grounded instruments that will feature in the ship as well (granted, there is a compromise between the design in Prometheus and the grungy, utilitarian design seen on the Nostromo), this is not a "state of the badass art" military ship. As Nick said, the weapons in Isolation were not stylised in any way; the weapons being understated makes the fear and vulnerability more palpable.

« Last Edit: Dec 23, 2016, 07:58:49 AM by Necronomicon II »

NickisSmart
Dec 23, 2016, 05:43:02 AM
Reply #97 on: Dec 23, 2016, 05:43:02 AM
Well, furthermore, those weapons were totally useless against the alien, itself. Yes, they're guns, but all they really give you is a false sense of security. I suspect in Covenant, it will be more akin to Aliens, with the guns being potentially able to at least wound the beasts; but being in outer space, the last thing you'd want to do on board a space ship is start a firefight. Doesn't, at one point
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It makes me thing they'll be using the guns more on the surface of the planet, or as a last, desperate defense.

On the planet, I think the beasts will be different than the xenos of the past that we've seen, so I'm not sure how effective the weapons will be. Obviously they can't be very effective or there'd be no threat--unless Ridley pulls an Aliens:

In Aliens, Cameron's approach was to make the guns lethal to the aliens, but even then, they were ineffective against the hive, as a whole (ergo, Ripley's suggestion to take off and nuke the site from orbit); furthermore, Cameron even made the weapons' leathality a disadvantage to the marines, with the potential damaging of the cooling system of the atmospheric processor potentially resulting in a thermonuclear explosion. Adios, muchachos. He essentially said, in an old interview, that Zulu Dawn can be just as exciting as a slasher film with one guy running around the house, chasing someone with a knife. For all intents and purposes, his approach worked. Yes, those guns were effective against the aliens, individually, but even then, it wasn't safe to kill them--just ask Drake or Hicks. The weapons, even with their lethal effectiveness, still reaffirmed Parker's statement in Alien: "It's got a wonderful defense mechanism; you don't dare kill it." On top of that, in Aliens, even if you did kill a few of the beasts (or even most of them) the surviving members of the hive would do you in, assuming you didn't die from injuries sustained in the battle (acid, or, in Frost's case,  friendly fire--pun intended).





Necronomicon II
Dec 23, 2016, 07:09:25 AM
Reply #98 on: Dec 23, 2016, 07:09:25 AM
"You don't dare kill it" would be a great subtitle! And yeah, agreed, I do hope however that the weapons are useless on the big chaps.


HuDaFuK
Dec 24, 2016, 10:35:14 AM
Reply #99 on: Dec 24, 2016, 10:35:14 AM
However, I will say District 9 was a lot of fun with the alien weaponry and so on, but there were plenty of normal, conventional, modern, human firearms, too, in that film.

District 9 was set in the present day.


NickisSmart
Dec 24, 2016, 10:53:12 AM
Reply #100 on: Dec 24, 2016, 10:53:12 AM
Your point? Plenty of "modern" weapons have been in use for 50+60 years. What do you want? Ray guns?

Furthermore, notice the weapons by the rebels being AK-47s and the like. AKs were first mass-produced in 1948. That gun is nearly seven years old.

The Steyr was produced in 1978, give or take. So in 70 years past that date, it'd still be in use in 2048.

In 2103, Covenant begins. That's another 53 years. I'd bet money people like the rebels in District 9 will still be using AKs in another 53 years, from now. It doesn't seem far-fetched for me to see the Steyr being used for another 53, past the initial 70 years, provided it is modified. Hell, if you think about it, the pulse rifle is essentially a modified WW2 Thompson sub-machine gun.

In other words, people are complaining about superficial details. I can't imagine firearms changing radically in the next 87 years, short of ray guns or something equally hyperbolic.


HuDaFuK
Dec 24, 2016, 11:01:59 AM
Reply #101 on: Dec 24, 2016, 11:01:59 AM
Your point? Plenty of "modern" weapons have been in use for 50+60 years. What do you want? Ray guns?

No, I was just pointing out you wouldn't expect to see any futuristic human tech in that film.


NickisSmart
Dec 24, 2016, 11:39:40 AM
Reply #102 on: Dec 24, 2016, 11:39:40 AM
No, though that's not why I mentioned it. The point of that film is the contrast between the human guns and the alien guns, and the radically-advanced nature of the alien tech revealed through its juxtaposition with our modern weaponry. In Covenant, however, I expect the alien weaponry to be the xenos, themselves.



Astronoë
Jan 16, 2017, 04:12:59 PM
Reply #104 on: Jan 16, 2017, 04:12:59 PM


I'm sorry guys but the moment I saw that image I thought it was that one dude from Deep Rising, the dude in the middle with the gun... just to be super obvious.

Holy shit, that's one of my favourite movies ever and no one else has ever heard of it!
Tons of other people have heard of it, there was like a thread not too long ago where we all agreed it was an awesome movie. :P

Those guns were insane...

Loved that movie! :) and that island at the end was like skull island n the water around an extension of that...shame they didn't do a follow-up..


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed