User Information

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

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Neil Blomkamp Has "Moved On" From Alien 5  (Read 37421 times)

Dill-On
Jan 06, 2018, 07:12:44 PM
Reply #105 on: Jan 06, 2018, 07:12:44 PM
Q
As cool as this could be, can we stop calling it Alien 5? It's Alien 2.5, or really Aliens 2.

No, because it would be the 5th movie about Ellen Ripley..... and we don't need it.

I think we deserve new story, without destroying preovious four movies + it should be something better than AVP and Prometheus.

I'm glad that Blomkamp moved on.

« Last Edit: Jan 06, 2018, 07:15:25 PM by Dill-On »


acrediblesource
Jan 06, 2018, 09:50:05 PM
Reply #107 on: Jan 06, 2018, 09:50:05 PM
Q
AL|ENS ||     
MUST!!!! Its so infinite and unique. Didn't they blow Hadleys hope sky high anyway? Or do we drum it up to bad 80s special effects?


Ash 937
Jan 06, 2018, 10:38:25 PM
Reply #108 on: Jan 06, 2018, 10:38:25 PM
Q
According to FOX, the sequel to Aliens has already been made and it's called Aliens: Colonial Marines.


Alionic
Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
Reply #109 on: Jan 07, 2018, 02:43:43 AM
Q
Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?

Good thing that he wasn't planning on "retconning" Alien 3 then, I guess?

...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.


darkvegett0
Jan 07, 2018, 04:04:32 AM
Reply #110 on: Jan 07, 2018, 04:04:32 AM
Q
"Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?"

Lol and prom had good story telling??.. i guess....

"and I credit a lot of that films success to Peter Jackson's skill as a producer)."
That's exactly how I feel about Ridley Scott s films...and I'm sure
Awful lot of stones in the Ridley nutt riding house


Alionic
Jan 07, 2018, 05:26:51 AM
Reply #111 on: Jan 07, 2018, 05:26:51 AM
Q
"Retconning Alien 3 is lazy, unoriginal, and even—depending on who you ask—creatively bankrupt as shit. I'm sorry you still don't understand this, I guess?"

Lol and prom had good story telling??.. i guess....

"and I credit a lot of that films success to Peter Jackson's skill as a producer)."
That's exactly how I feel about Ridley Scott s films...and I'm sure
Awful lot of stones in the Ridley nutt riding house

k



The Eighth Passenger
Jan 07, 2018, 04:38:50 PM
Reply #113 on: Jan 07, 2018, 04:38:50 PM
Q
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.

Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.

Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?


Alionic
Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
Reply #114 on: Jan 07, 2018, 06:33:39 PM
Q
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.

Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.

Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?

An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.

And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.


DaddyYautja
Jan 07, 2018, 08:15:11 PM
Reply #115 on: Jan 07, 2018, 08:15:11 PM
Q
man, this sucks. He would've brought crazy tech and interesting battles.


BishopShouldGo
Jan 07, 2018, 08:30:25 PM
Reply #116 on: Jan 07, 2018, 08:30:25 PM
Q
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.

Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.

Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?

An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.

And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.

It's an alternate timeline, for the one-thousandth time.

Alien - Aliens - Neill's Movie

Alien - Aliens - Alien 3 - Alien: Resurrection

And everyone loves action. What's wrong with action. What's wrong with shadows, headbites, and gunfire.

Everyone in the civilized world loves Alien and Aliens.

« Last Edit: Jan 07, 2018, 08:32:18 PM by BishopShouldGo »

Huggs
Jan 07, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
Reply #117 on: Jan 07, 2018, 08:50:47 PM
Q
For me it was definitely more along the lines of returning characters, than an action-oriented plot. Let us not forget that for all the action that was in Aliens, Cameron really did a good job delivering some scary moments of his own. And I don't just mean big moments or set pieces. I'd dare say the ping of the motion tracker is one of the scariest sounds I've ever heard in a film. I mean, the distant howl from "an American werewolf in London" was a scary sound effect, but when that motion tracker goes off in Aliens, the nards go tight.

The inclusion of Hicks and Human Ripley in Alien 5, would necessitate the need to retcon Alien 3. Chocking that film up to space dreams, would be a rather poor way to do it, in my opinion. Then you have the whole business of them being much older, and you're basically continuing the "evil company" theme as well. If that happens then the Alien slips swiftly into terminator territory. This is a quality and much beloved franchise. Those characters that are gone should stay gone. In an entire fictional universe, with billions of humans, there must be one interesting character out there in the vast cosmos. The Alien is an unstoppable force of evolutionary evil, it stands to reason that even Ripley was gonna die at some point. To survive these things over and over is simply unrealistic, and if you want the franchise to continue indefinitely, you have to make plans that don't involve using the same actors again and again.

Alien 3 was a very under-appreciated movie for its time. It took the series back to its roots and made Ripley confront the inevitable. I'd say it sealed everything up rather nicely. Retconing Alien 3 and bringing back main characters means one thing, you're having to build the movie around those characters and their motivations/storylines. Consequently, narrative creativity is reduced, and we lose an opportunity to experience something truly original and unique. We'd actually be losing Alien 5, and getting Aliens 1.5


Alionic
Jan 07, 2018, 08:57:04 PM
Reply #118 on: Jan 07, 2018, 08:57:04 PM
Q
...how is bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead not retconning that film? He wants to turn Alien 3 into fake news.

Because he is not bringing Newt and Hicks back from the dead. Alien 3 and A:R will remain completely untouched.

Why is it so difficult for you haters to understand?

An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.

And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.

It's an alternate timeline, for the one-thousandth time.

Alien - Aliens - Neill's Movie
e
Alien - Aliens - Alien 3 - Alien: Resurrection

...and how the hell do you rationalize two alternate timelines with the same character(s) happening at the same time? Storywise, it seems like you want Blomkamp's film to be even more convoluted and nonsensical than Terminator: Genisys. You really want TIME TRAVEL in the Alien series simply because you can't let go of Hicks and Newt? Is it that really hard to make an Alien action film without these characters?

This is just shameful.


The Eighth Passenger
Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Reply #119 on: Jan 07, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
Q
An older Hicks was in his artwork, and Michael Biehn confirmed he was contacted about the film before it was cancelled. I'm all ears if you can rationally explain how bringing back his dead character does not in fact retcon Alien 3.

And I think most of the hate towards Blomkamp's proposed film was about bringing back these dead characters rather than it returning to the action-oriented approach of Aliens.

No need to rationally explain how he's bringing back dead characters if they never died. As Bishop already explained, Blomkamp's film follows an alternative timeline. It's Alien, Aliens and then the timelines diverge. It's two separate universes from then on out that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other anymore.

It would have been a retcon if Blomkamp was going to explain Alien 3 away as a bad dream or through some other daft method such as time-travel or Hicks and Newt clones. His solution is much more elegant, no need for retcons involving time travel, clones or bad dreams.

Fans will now have a choice, they can either stick to the original quadrilogy timeline and version of events or follow the alternative chain of events. It's like those old choose-your-own-adventure books. But it seems certain members on here hate the idea of having a choice?


 

Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed