Scott: I think the Beast is almost run out, personally.

[Jonesy1974]

I just think there's not the appetite for sci-fi horror films right now.  Back in the early 1980s there were Alien clones out the wazoo.  When did a film like that kill at the box office and critically recently though?  Science fiction in general has been very hit and miss.

Life didn't do terribly well, The Thing tanked a few years back.  Films more 'reality' based without monsters like The Martian and Interstellar have fared better.  Passengers was probably helped by two bankable stars, but didn't do well with critics.  Avatar was more in the mold of Star Wars with it's more fantastical elements.

They just don't seem to be making alien monster movies much anymore, perhaps because no one is interested.  Earth based horror movies (eg. IT) seem to do a lot better.

Agreed. I think people think it will just be more of the same and seen it all before. In most case they are probably right as well.

[Corporal Hicks]

Its not the Xenomorphs fault at all,   its the way it has been handled since Alien ressurection thats the problem.  Lazy directors and poor choices in design and how its portrayed on screen.

So if anyone is to blame its you Ridley.

Alien 3 shouldn't be let off the hook quite so easily. In terms of giving the audience something new, interesting and exciting, an alien that runs around on all fours doesn't really cut it.

The first realization of the DNA reflex, acid spitting, some behavioural stuff when it sensed another Alien (granted, I wish we'd have seen the Alien taking Ripley and the others back as potential hosts) but there was more going for the Alien in 3 than just running around on all fours.

And to be fair, Resurrection had some interesting stuff in it too.

[Rudiger]

The first realization of the DNA reflex, acid spitting, some behavioural stuff when it sensed another Alien (granted, I wish we'd have seen the Alien taking Ripley and the others back as potential hosts) but there was more going for the Alien in 3 than just running around on all fours.

And to be fair, Resurrection had some interesting stuff in it too.

Hardly what you would call spectacle, and incredibly disappointing after the highs of Aliens; particularly the introduction of the queen. For it to have worked the plot needed to have been an absolute belter and played out by a cast of characters that were sympathetic and not paper thin.

[Corporal Hicks]

You hadn't mentioned anything about spectacle. Could Alien 3 have been a better movie? Yes. Did it do anything significantly new with the Alien. It sure did.

[KiramidHead]

Yeah, we learned that the alien's vision is oddly similar to a fish eye lense.

[Corporal Hicks]

Just one of a few things. 

[Rudiger]

You hadn't mentioned anything about spectacle. Could Alien 3 have been a better movie? Yes. Did it do anything significantly new with the Alien. It sure did.

But nowhere near enough. After Aliens, which presented the familiar in a different way and gave the audience something new (the queen), Alien 3 takes a backwards step. There's nothing new or exciting. Add to that the terribly pedestrian plot and cannon-fodder cast, it's dullsville. There's barely a lick of imagination present.

[Denton Smalls]

You guys made good points before. It's insane how illogical and unpredictable box office returns can be.

Movies like Blade Runner 2 which I thought was going to destroy at the box office due to the top shelf director who also did The Arrival, Sicario, and the phenomenal Prisoners, literally 2 of the most famous male actors of today in Ryan Gosling and Jared Leto, 1 of the most famous male actors of all time in Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott producing, the original writer returning, etc. but for reasons I'll never fully comprehend, its underperforming.

Then you have movies like Bad Moms that break $100 million domestically, fast-tracking a sequel also for reasons I'll never fully comprehend.

Even the returns on IT, which I loved and saw twice, surprised me because although it is very scary, it is very obscure especially if you're familiar with the novel, compared to more easily digested mindless jump-scare spookers and slashers.

It seems to be a roll of the dice with sci-fi horror/thrillers. Prometheus and Gravity did well, while Life, Passengers, Covenant, and Independence Day 2 did not, although the former were both released 5 and 4 years ago respectively.

What would it take to reinvigorate the genre?

*Edit: You might think audience appetite for sci-fi stuff would only grow parallel to the rise in real world technology.

[Rudiger]

You guys made good points before. It's insane how illogical and unpredictable box office returns can be.

Movies like Blade Runner 2 which I thought was going to destroy at the box office due to the top shelf director who also did The Arrival, Sicario, and the phenomenal Prisoners, literally 2 of the most famous male actors of today in Ryan Gosling and Jared Leto, 1 of the most famous male actors of all time in Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott producing, the original writer returning, etc. but for reasons I'll never fully comprehend, its underperforming.

Then you have movies like Bad Moms that break $100 million domestically, fast-tracking a sequel also for reasons I'll never fully comprehend.

Even the returns on IT, which I loved and saw twice, surprised me because although it is very scary, it is very obscure especially if you're familiar with the novel, compared to more easily digested mindless jump-scare spookers and slashers.

It seems to be a roll of the dice with sci-fi horror/thrillers. Prometheus and Gravity did well, while Life, Passengers, Covenant, and Independence Day 2 did not, although the former were both released 5 and 4 years ago respectively.

What would it take to reinvigorate the genre?

*Edit: You might think audience appetite for sci-fi stuff would only grow parallel to the rise in real world technology.

Blade Runner 2049 might be a fantastic piece of film making, but it doesn't have mass market appeal. But there's nothing wrong with that. Not everything should be mass market.

Kudos to the guys that got it made, and who sadly might go out of business as a result.

[adambeyoncelowe]

Personally, throwing all these new variants into tin mix is part of the problem. We don't need a new cloned cyborg-pred-alien-Engineer-salami-parrot hybrid. It makes the whole thing unbelievable. Likewise with the constantly shape-shifting forms from the black goo. They actually become less surprising the more attempted surprises that are thrown at us.

Just give me a decent 'pure' Alien film and I'll be happy. I think audiences would be too. The first three Aliens comic book series, for instance, plus some of those that had novelisations, set a good precedent for the kinds of story you can tell well with the alien. Genocide and Rogue would be amazing (alright, both of these include alien variants, but it doesn't feel like one-up-manship). I'd love Outbreak/Earth Hive too, and Music of the Spears is absolutely bonkers but might just work too.

[PierreVW]

You guys made good points before. It's insane how illogical and unpredictable box office returns can be.

Movies like Blade Runner 2 which I thought was going to destroy at the box office due to the top shelf director who also did The Arrival, Sicario, and the phenomenal Prisoners, literally 2 of the most famous male actors of today in Ryan Gosling and Jared Leto, 1 of the most famous male actors of all time in Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott producing, the original writer returning, etc. but for reasons I'll never fully comprehend, its underperforming.

Then you have movies like Bad Moms that break $100 million domestically, fast-tracking a sequel also for reasons I'll never fully comprehend.

Even the returns on IT, which I loved and saw twice, surprised me because although it is very scary, it is very obscure especially if you're familiar with the novel, compared to more easily digested mindless jump-scare spookers and slashers.

It seems to be a roll of the dice with sci-fi horror/thrillers. Prometheus and Gravity did well, while Life, Passengers, Covenant, and Independence Day 2 did not, although the former were both released 5 and 4 years ago respectively.

What would it take to reinvigorate the genre?

*Edit: You might think audience appetite for sci-fi stuff would only grow parallel to the rise in real world technology.

Blade Runner 2049 might be a fantastic piece of film making, but it doesn't have mass market appeal. But there's nothing wrong with that. Not everything should be mass market.

Kudos to the guys that got it made, and who sadly might go out of business as a result.

Blade Runner 2049 is too boring, long and slow for modern moviegoers. It's easy to see why it was a flop at the box office.

[tleilaxu]

One notable point about Lovecraft is raised here:

"Lovecraftian Lies: Why Video Games Cannot be 'Lovecraftian'"

http://onlysp.com/lovecraftian-analysis/

but also applies to various movies and TV shows described as "Lovecraftian."

That is, the main premise in Lovecraft's stories is that the cosmic universe is bleak and neutral, or as the article puts it, a "cosmo-centric universe where humans are utterly insignificant." This ironically works against seeing the stories or works that may be inspired by it (like the Alien films) as entertaining because those seeking entertainment are part of the same human race that is seen as worthless.

Only Lovecraft can do Lovecraft.  The term 'Lovecraftian' gets bandied about, like the term 'Giger-esque'. 

Alien might be called 'Lovecraftian', in a sense, but none of the sequels to Alien have anything to do with Lovecraft.

Aliens is a love letter to Starship Troopers (the 1959 novel).  Has nothing to do with Lovecraft.  Neither does any of the others.

Anderson's AVP and Prometheus is probably more 'Lovecraftian' than any of the others, being loosely based on At the Mountains of Madness.

So don't know where all this fanboy whingeing comes from (no offense).  The Alien series was never really 'Lovecraftian' in the first place.

Yeah, these movies might be the most Lovecraftian in a sense but they're the last movies any of these "Alien lost its Lovecraftian feel" bandwagoners would call Lovecraftian 
In the end it just ends up meaning something like "dark + ancient things that I like" or "big tentacle-stuff".

You guys made good points before. It's insane how illogical and unpredictable box office returns can be.

Movies like Blade Runner 2 which I thought was going to destroy at the box office due to the top shelf director who also did The Arrival, Sicario, and the phenomenal Prisoners, literally 2 of the most famous male actors of today in Ryan Gosling and Jared Leto, 1 of the most famous male actors of all time in Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott producing, the original writer returning, etc. but for reasons I'll never fully comprehend, its underperforming.

Then you have movies like Bad Moms that break $100 million domestically, fast-tracking a sequel also for reasons I'll never fully comprehend.

Even the returns on IT, which I loved and saw twice, surprised me because although it is very scary, it is very obscure especially if you're familiar with the novel, compared to more easily digested mindless jump-scare spookers and slashers.

It seems to be a roll of the dice with sci-fi horror/thrillers. Prometheus and Gravity did well, while Life, Passengers, Covenant, and Independence Day 2 did not, although the former were both released 5 and 4 years ago respectively.

What would it take to reinvigorate the genre?

*Edit: You might think audience appetite for sci-fi stuff would only grow parallel to the rise in real world technology.

Blade Runner 2049 might be a fantastic piece of film making, but it doesn't have mass market appeal. But there's nothing wrong with that. Not everything should be mass market.

Kudos to the guys that got it made, and who sadly might go out of business as a result.

Blade Runner 2049 is too boring, long and slow for modern moviegoers. It's easy to see why it was a flop at the box office.

No it's not easy to see. The movie was well received (despite the Neill Blomkamp-esque script), people, millenials in particular, just didn't go see it.

[PierreVW]

One notable point about Lovecraft is raised here:

"Lovecraftian Lies: Why Video Games Cannot be 'Lovecraftian'"

http://onlysp.com/lovecraftian-analysis/

but also applies to various movies and TV shows described as "Lovecraftian."

That is, the main premise in Lovecraft's stories is that the cosmic universe is bleak and neutral, or as the article puts it, a "cosmo-centric universe where humans are utterly insignificant." This ironically works against seeing the stories or works that may be inspired by it (like the Alien films) as entertaining because those seeking entertainment are part of the same human race that is seen as worthless.

Only Lovecraft can do Lovecraft.  The term 'Lovecraftian' gets bandied about, like the term 'Giger-esque'. 

Alien might be called 'Lovecraftian', in a sense, but none of the sequels to Alien have anything to do with Lovecraft.

Aliens is a love letter to Starship Troopers (the 1959 novel).  Has nothing to do with Lovecraft.  Neither does any of the others.

Anderson's AVP and Prometheus is probably more 'Lovecraftian' than any of the others, being loosely based on At the Mountains of Madness.

So don't know where all this fanboy whingeing comes from (no offense).  The Alien series was never really 'Lovecraftian' in the first place.

Yeah, these movies might be the most Lovecraftian in a sense but they're the last movies any of these "Alien lost its Lovecraftian feel" bandwagoners would call Lovecraftian 
In the end it just ends up meaning something like "dark + ancient things that I like" or "big tentacle-stuff".

You guys made good points before. It's insane how illogical and unpredictable box office returns can be.

Movies like Blade Runner 2 which I thought was going to destroy at the box office due to the top shelf director who also did The Arrival, Sicario, and the phenomenal Prisoners, literally 2 of the most famous male actors of today in Ryan Gosling and Jared Leto, 1 of the most famous male actors of all time in Harrison Ford, Ridley Scott producing, the original writer returning, etc. but for reasons I'll never fully comprehend, its underperforming.

Then you have movies like Bad Moms that break $100 million domestically, fast-tracking a sequel also for reasons I'll never fully comprehend.

Even the returns on IT, which I loved and saw twice, surprised me because although it is very scary, it is very obscure especially if you're familiar with the novel, compared to more easily digested mindless jump-scare spookers and slashers.

It seems to be a roll of the dice with sci-fi horror/thrillers. Prometheus and Gravity did well, while Life, Passengers, Covenant, and Independence Day 2 did not, although the former were both released 5 and 4 years ago respectively.

What would it take to reinvigorate the genre?

*Edit: You might think audience appetite for sci-fi stuff would only grow parallel to the rise in real world technology.

Blade Runner 2049 might be a fantastic piece of film making, but it doesn't have mass market appeal. But there's nothing wrong with that. Not everything should be mass market.

Kudos to the guys that got it made, and who sadly might go out of business as a result.

Blade Runner 2049 is too boring, long and slow for modern moviegoers. It's easy to see why it was a flop at the box office.

No it's not easy to see. The movie was well received (despite the Neill Blomkamp-esque script), people, millenials in particular, just didn't go see it.

I remembered one thing:

Guillermo Del Toro loved and hated PROMETHEUS(3D). Loved it because Guillermo is a huge fan of Ridley Scott but hated it because in his own words, "it was too similar to AT THE MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS".

Guillermo Del Toro tried to do a AT THE MOUNTAINS OF MADNESS blockbuster during 20 years. Guillermo wanted Tom Cruise as his main star and James Cameron as the main Producer.

[Denton Smalls]

As it was mentioned a few posts ago, I too would love to see an EU adaptation in the near future. There's so much good stories for FOX to work with, but personally I'd die happy if they made a Bezerker adaptation or an unapologetic NC-17 adaptation of Labyrinth, which may be the most disgusting and disturbing piece of sci-fi I've ever encountered.

[Huggs]

Bad writing and ideas will do that. Taking something that should be simple, and creating some large philosophical diatribe out of it isn't always the best thing to do. I personally call it, "The Nolan Effect". The beast itself is far from dead, Alien Isolation, unused movie scripts and several of the novels are proof of that. I'm of the personal belief that the narrative needs to move in a different direction immediately; even if it means not finishing the trilogy on film. Let David and his ship become the Space Titanic, (though obviously somewhat different) the mystery ship with thousands of people who fell victim to an accident and vanished into the dark depths of space.


Regardless, It's not the beasts fault. The Prometheus storyline has never really been about the Xenomorph, and when they were used, they were used exceptionally poorly. It's just my opinion, but what's needed now is an "Aliens " type movie. See if Cameron will come back, he's talked about doing another terminator for heaven's sake. Do something with action and alittle spectacle to draw in the younger crowd and therefore the money. Establish new interest and a financial base to take off from. When the choice is transformers or Alien Covenant, people are going to see the explosions and gunfire, not Shakespeare on Mars. An Alien queen being blasted by a colonial Marine will attract more attention than David in his "Little white Onesie".  The Alien universe can handle a good action movie, look at the second film, or better yet, Gibson's Alien 3 script. Or just do like the saw movies, repeated formula (minus any connection to any other film). Random crew on random ship or base encounters an Alien or Aliens and fights to survive. Smaller budget with a consistent offering, and give different people the opportunity to direct each one.


Either way, I don't think it's the beast that's "cooked" or "run out", but I'm starting to think Ridley is. If he has no faith in,  or passion for the beast, he shouldn't be directing the films they're in.