Alien film/reboot? - Neill Blomkamp [Archive]

MinionZombie

19-Feb-2015, 04:27 PM

I wasn't super sold on Elysium, but afterwards I hear that neither was Neil Blomkamp. Allegedly the studio interference was tremendous.

Oh really? Interesting ... any more info, or is it kind of under wraps as to what went on behind the scenes?

Yup. That's why I loathe 3 so much. One of the worst movie viewing experiences I ever had, right up there with Highlander 2. Sat there in the theater fuming the entire movie & hating every second of it. :rant:

Alien 3 is a decent movie - enraging deaths of Hicks and Newt aside - and has excellent direction from David Fincher (even if he had a shite time on the job), but the assembly cut is decidedly superior to the theatrical cut, which is a bit of a botch job. However, when compared to the first two movies it pales in comparison ... but it kicks seven shades of shite out of the fourth movie, ugh.

bassman

19-Feb-2015, 06:33 PM

As MZ says, the Assembly Cut of Alien 3 is actually a damn fine film. Of course the killing of Hicks and Newt still stings a bit, but if you over look that it's a good horror/suspense film.

As for this new Alien film......Blomkamp posted art work of Weaver and Beihn reprising their roles, but with Ridley Scott directing Prometheus 2 and producing the following Alien film, I'm wondering if that idea will be scrapped in favor of an entirely new cast of characters. As much as I liked the character of Ripley, I think it's past time to just let her go. Even if they were to treat all four films as canon and say that her clone is living on Earth, as seen at the end of Resurrection, I still wouldn't really care to see her return. I certainly wouldn't be against it, but I don't want it to feel forced just because they feel like they have to get established characters in. I also have a hard time seeing Scott being okay with some sort of strange alternate reality or picking up after Aliens where Ripley and Hicks are alive. It seems like too much of a gimmick for Scott's usual work, anyway.

MinionZombie

19-Feb-2015, 06:45 PM

Ideally, what I want is a follow-up to Aliens - many years in the future - which ignores the events of Alien 3 and 4.

I want Ripley and Hicks back together again, dang it! :)

Considering that's what we've been teased with, it'd be a right old bummer to not get that ... in my view at least.

I don't see why Prometheus 2 and NB's Alien film need to be connected ... are they connected, or is the only link Ridley Scott's production company being on board to make it?

Really looking forward to a second Prometheus movie as well!

There's all sorts of "alt universe" stories in comics and novels, so I don't see why we can't have that in movies as well. There's some Aliens books that essentially ignore the events of Alien 3 and create an alternative storyline in which Ripley, Newt, and Hicks survive ... although IIRC they might be under alternative names (but it's clearly who they're meant to be). Hicks becomes "Wilks" and Newt becomes "Billie", but their back stories are practically identical to to their movie counterparts (e.g. Wilks is the lone colonial marine survivor from an incursion on the xeno's planet, and has half his face burned with acid) ... they made a few tweaks after Alien 3 fucked those two characters, but that's ostensibly who they are in near enough all but name.

shootemindehead

19-Feb-2015, 07:10 PM

The death of Hicks and Newt has never bothered me in the slightest, people die all the time and I have to say and I always thought that 'Alien 3' was a decent film. Certainly not as good as the first two, but as sequels go, it was a fair whack.

I think the Aliens franchise (like 'The Terminator') is buggered though and should just be left to die itself at this stage. Film wise, nothing good is going to come of it anymore.

EvilNed

19-Feb-2015, 07:16 PM

Oh really? Interesting ... any more info, or is it kind of under wraps as to what went on behind the scenes?

I can dig some tomorrow. But essentially, Blomkamp said in an interview I read that he was very hesitant about making another film - at all - because after his move to Hollywood (post District 9) he did not enjoy himself in the studio system and apparently making Elysium was a bad experience for him. He didn't go any deeper into it than that.

The article also said that the seed of the Alien film was sparked on the set of Chappie, as Neil and Sigourney had talked about different ideas for a sequel there. So she's most likely gonna be in it, even if she hasn't signed or anything... It's gonna be a Ripley movie, I'm pretty sure of that. (could it be anything else...?)

Neil

20-Feb-2015, 08:38 AM

I'm sure a stand alone film would be a wiser move than trying to shoehorn characters in from previous films.

I have fond memories of Earth Hive - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliens:_Earth_Hive

MinionZombie

20-Feb-2015, 09:19 AM

Ned - thanks for the info - that makes sense by the sounds of it. Well hopefully "Chappie" will turn out to be a good flick (all signs are so far pointing towards it being good, I'd say).

I'm sure a stand alone film would be a wiser move than trying to shoehorn characters in from previous films.

I have fond memories of Earth Hive - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliens:_Earth_Hive

However, the novel was released as a tie-in with Alien 3 (1992) which took the story off in another direction. To avoid any confusion that might arise, the characters' names were changed, so Hicks and Newt became Wilks and Billie, respectively. Other minor characters were also renamed.

When Book One was 'remastered' in 1996 and re-released as Outbreak the panels were colored and, to bring it in line with the revised story as presented in Earth Hive, the characters were renamed and references to LV-426 were changed to the colony world of Rim.

I've not read "Earth Hive", and this was back in the day before Wikipedia and easy access to knowledge about these things, so I had no idea it was the first in a series. I just picked whatever book happened to be on the shelf in WHSmith that I hadn't already read. The three that I did read were "Rogue", "Nightmare Asylum", and "Female War". I read them when I was just into High School, so that was a time when I rarely did any reading at all (aside from homework - so at that time reading was always a chore, something I had to do, in my mind, so it never presented itself as something to be enjoyed by choice) ... however, I absolutely stormed through "Rogue" and "Nightmare Asylum" and enjoyed them immensely ... but I did have a nasty habit during my teenage years of starting a book and then losing steam mid-way through and abandoning things, which is what I did with "Female War". However, once I'd left school and reading became something I could choose to do for enjoyment, I went back and read several books that I'd abandoned (including "Female War").

...

Anyway, back to the film - I think that, considering the concept art features Ripley and Hicks, and that much of the attention-grabbing this proposed new Alien film has garnered has been centered on the Ripley/Hicks comeback, to not have them in the film would be a major slap in the face to fans I'd think. They've essentially said "this is the sort of film we're gonna make with these two characters returning", so to then not do that would unleash a barrage of hatred.

Anything they can do to retcon away the arse-wash that was Resurrection would be a blessing! I'd love for it to be an 'alt timeline' that skews from Aliens and avoids Alien 3. The movie industry can do remakes and reboots and reimaginings at the drop of a hat, so why not alternative universes? Like I've said before, comics and novels do that all the time, so why not movies?

MoonSylver

20-Feb-2015, 03:53 PM

The death of Hicks and Newt has never bothered me in the slightest, people die all the time

Well of course not, because you're a miserable old git. :lol: Seriously though, it bugged me for two reasons: 1) of course the attachment to the characters from the previous film & 2) the casual & callous way the characters are just tossed aside.

"Alien 3" takes the piss on "Aliens" the same way "Terminator 3" did on "Terminator 2" : "Oh, all the good faith we established with you as an audience in the first film? Yeah, let me piss on that for ya..." :annoyed:

I get that they were trying to go "dark & gritty" & take the tone a different direction after the 2nd one, but I think the angle of attack was all wrong.

I think the Aliens franchise (like 'The Terminator') is buggered though and should just be left to die itself at this stage. Film wise, nothing good is going to come of it anymore.

That, I will agree with. :thumbsup:

MinionZombie

20-Feb-2015, 04:31 PM

Moon - ugh, don't get me started on Terminator 3 ... as you say, it curled out a big steaming turd on the face of T2 and sprinkled glitter on top for good measure ... T3 ... what a shit film. :mad:

MoonSylver

20-Feb-2015, 04:54 PM

Moon - ugh, don't get me started on Terminator 3 ... as you say, it curled out a big steaming turd on the face of T2 and sprinkled glitter on top for good measure ... T3 ... what a shit film. :mad:

It, "Alien 3", "Highlander 2", all gold standards in my book, of "ways to piss off & alienate your core audience when making a sequel". :lol:

shootemindehead

20-Feb-2015, 05:21 PM

Well of course not, because you're a miserable old git. :lol:

YEH...they should have killed them ALLLLLL and ended with a big Xenomorph disco.

Seriously though, it bugged me for two reasons: 1) of course the attachment to the characters from the previous film & 2) the casual & callous way the characters are just tossed aside.

Hicks is and always was a pretty minor support character though. There's a bit of a Boba Fett fanboi thing going on with him to be honest. He has no history and was never anything other than someone to use to progress Ripley's story along. Even Hudson has more to do in 'Aliens'. Don't get me wrong though, I like Michael Biehn, he's a decent character actor. But I certainly didn't miss him in 'Alien 3'. That said, he was hard done by, by the producers, even if he was paid handsomely for a role for a film he wasn't even in.

Getting rid of the kid was a daring move by the producers though and that autopsy scene in 'Alien 3' was one of the strongest scenes in any of the films.

I think a lot of the ire about killing off the surviving support characters from 'Aliens' came from Cameron in the first place. I don't think there were too many people who gave a crap. But, it was certainly a thing that grew. But that was mainly because the film didn't meet a lot of people's expectations. If the film had been a masterpiece, nobody who have given Hicks or Rebecca a second thought.

The more I think about it though, having Hicks and Newt survive with Ripley could have been a disaster of epic proportions and may have ended up being a "space family" film. 'Alien 3' might have turned out to be like the Jetsons with Xenomorphs. :barf:

"Alien 3" takes the piss on "Aliens" the same way "Terminator 3" did on "Terminator 2" : "Oh, all the good faith we established with you as an audience in the first film? Yeah, let me piss on that for ya..." :annoyed:

I get that they were trying to go "dark & gritty" & take the tone a different direction after the 2nd one, but I think the angle of attack was all wrong.[/quote]

Never liked 'Terminator 2'.

:p

To me, 'Alien 3' is just another episode in the Alien series and I've never felt the disappointment with it that some have. Unfortunately, it's the last decent thing that's been done and the truly awful 'Alien Resurrection' makes it look like the greatest film ever made. If they had played their cards right, left Ripley dead (like they did Hicks and Newt) and NOT hired Jeunet for the fourth film, the series would probably still be going.

That, I will agree with. :thumbsup:

OH YEAH! WELL I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU....

Oh wait, you agree...

MoonSylver

20-Feb-2015, 08:45 PM

Hicks is and always was a pretty minor support character though. There's a bit of a Boba Fett fanboi thing going on with him to be honest. He has no history and was never anything other than someone to use to progress Ripley's story along. Even Hudson has more to do in 'Aliens'. Don't get me wrong though, I like Michael Biehn, he's a decent character actor. But I certainly didn't miss him in 'Alien 3'. That said, he was hard done by, by the producers, even if he was paid handsomely for a role for a film he wasn't even in.

Yeah, I'll concede a bit on the "Boba Fett" thing. But I'll also say I think all the actors in that flick did a great job of making (some of) us get attached to them with what little bit they had to work with. Between the performances, some great dialog, & a scenario that really causes us to attach to & feel for & root for the heroes, I'm still bummed every time I watch "Aliens" & Hudson dies, or Vasquez & Gorman die.

I think a lot of the ire about killing off the surviving support characters from 'Aliens' came from Cameron in the first place. I don't think there were too many people who gave a crap. But, it was certainly a thing that grew. But that was mainly because the film didn't meet a lot of people's expectations. If the film had been a masterpiece, nobody who have given Hicks or Rebecca a second thought.

Don't completely agree there. The general public & casual fans probably didn't care, but there were a fair number of folks who really dug the 2nd film that weren't happy besides Cameron. TBH I didn't even know his feelings at the time.

The more I think about it though, having Hicks and Newt survive with Ripley could have been a disaster of epic proportions and may have ended up being a "space family" film. 'Alien 3' might have turned out to be like the Jetsons with Xenomorphs. :barf:

Eh, If they'd kept them alive, I'd really wanted a much different scenario. TBH they could have kept them alive & written them out of the story & I'd have been cool with THAT. But to take these characters that struggle so hard to survive & succeed, that we get emotionally invested in, & discard them so casually, feels very disrespectful of the prior film, the characters, & the audience themselves, IMO.

Never liked 'Terminator 2'.

:p

I can understand that. Would have been a time that boggled my mind, but I can see now there are two camps on The Terminator: those who only embrace the darker original with its message of "the end is nigh" & those who are on board with the brighter message of the second "we can control our fate".

For those who are on board with the 2nd, T3 is a slap in the face, as again, it invalidates everything the characters went through in the second & basically says: "sorry, all your efforts are for naught". (which TBH I might have been ok with in a darker, edgier film, as I'm all for nihilistic moves, but seeing how it was couched in such a shit film to boot...)

Of course w/ the Terminator, you have the fact that there are infinite time streams, that Skynet sent back X# who knows of Terminators, & all of these are splitting off into alternate timelines from what I understand, so that takes the sting off some...:|

OH YEAH! WELL I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU....

Oh wait, you agree...

I suspect you & I agree more than you think...just not always on the same things...:lol:

shootemindehead

21-Feb-2015, 10:15 AM

Yeah, I'll concede a bit on the "Boba Fett" thing. But I'll also say I think all the actors in that flick did a great job of making (some of) us get attached to them with what little bit they had to work with. Between the performances, some great dialog, & a scenario that really causes us to attach to & feel for & root for the heroes, I'm still bummed every time I watch "Aliens" & Hudson dies, or Vasquez & Gorman die.

Absolutely and I think Bill Paxton did a great job with Hudson, who started out as, let's be honest, a big war movie coward cliche and turned into a guy you could rely on...

...and he had all the best lines.

Eh, If they'd kept them alive, I'd really wanted a much different scenario. TBH they could have kept them alive & written them out of the story & I'd have been cool with THAT. But to take these characters that struggle so hard to survive & succeed, that we get emotionally invested in, & discard them so casually, feels very disrespectful of the prior film, the characters, & the audience themselves, IMO.

I think keeping them alive and trying to write them out would have been difficult to do though. If they're alive on Fury XYZ (or whatever the hell it was called), they'd have to be involved some way. It's just too small a setting for them to be relegated to sitting in the canteen or something, while Ripley and baldies play with the alien.

I think the deaths of both Hicks and Newt was handled as well as could have been given the circumstances involved. People who survive traumatic events can still die in relatively simple ways. It sad, awful and yes a kick in the balls...but so is life.

I suppose I just wasn't that invested in their characters. I wasn't even too pushed when they knocked off Ripley.

I was certainly pissed off when they brought her back to life though.

:rolleyes:

I can understand that. Would have been a time that boggled my mind, but I can see now there are two camps on The Terminator: those who only embrace the darker original with its message of "the end is nigh" & those who are on board with the brighter message of the second "we can control our fate".

For those who are on board with the 2nd, T3 is a slap in the face, as again, it invalidates everything the characters went through in the second & basically says: "sorry, all your efforts are for naught". (which TBH I might have been ok with in a darker, edgier film, as I'm all for nihilistic moves, but seeing how it was couched in such a shit film to boot...)

Of course w/ the Terminator, you have the fact that there are infinite time streams, that Skynet sent back X# who knows of Terminators, & all of these are splitting off into alternate timelines from what I understand, so that takes the sting off some...:|

You know 'Terminator 2' just never grabbed me in the same place as 'The Terminator'. For all its brash spectacle, it lacks the qualities that made the first effort great. The concept of the T-1000 is just silly and never works for me either.

I certainly understand why fans of the series would hate 'Terminator 3' though. I saw that picture once and I cannot remember a single thing about it, other than John Connor bares no resemblance to his previous outing and they end up in a fallout shelter at the end. It's a film I have no desire to ever see again.

Anyway, as I've said before, the Terminator franchise begins and ends with 'The Terminator' for me. It's a fine film with a grand story that I have no need to be expanded on. Especially in the way it was actually expanded on.

I suspect you & I agree more than you think...just not always on the same things...:lol:

Ah sure, I know. I'm only kidding.

bassman

21-Feb-2015, 03:12 PM

Looking through Blomkamp's concept art again.....I forgot that there's a drawing of Ripley wearing an alien/space jokey costume. That's a bit troublesome. It reminds me of her intimate relationship with the aliens in Resurrection. Ruh roh....

MoonSylver

21-Feb-2015, 04:04 PM

Absolutely and I think Bill Paxton did a great job with Hudson, who started out as, let's be honest, a big war movie coward cliche and turned into a guy you could rely on...

...and he had all the best lines.

I have nothing to add here, but this deserved to be quoted. :D

I think keeping them alive and trying to write them out would have been difficult to do though. If they're alive on Fury XYZ (or whatever the hell it was called), they'd have to be involved some way. It's just too small a setting for them to be relegated to sitting in the canteen or something, while Ripley and baldies play with the alien.

Well yeah, like I said, if you keep them alive, &/or write them out, you really need a whole new scenario. Which I would be ok with anyway, since the one we got I wasn't overly fond of anyway. :|

I think the deaths of both Hicks and Newt was handled as well as could have been given the circumstances involved. People who survive traumatic events can still die in relatively simple ways. It sad, awful and yes a kick in the balls...but so is life.

Understood. But there are some movies I watch for that "life like kick in the balls" & some I don't. I guess at the end of the day, one of the things they wanted was to make a type of movie that delivers that kick. But after the second one, I suspect there was a large portion of the audience that wasn't braced for that kick in the balls, delivered in the way it was delivered, or the abrupt shift in tone (to depart from the metaphor for the moment). Plus #3 just kicks you, & kicks you, & kicks you, & kicks you, &...

A relentlessly dour Debbie Downer of a movie...you should have loved it. :nana:

I suppose I just wasn't that invested in their characters. I wasn't even too pushed when they knocked off Ripley.

You know, I was so miserable after having sat through the damn thing, I wasn't either. I just wanted it to be over so I could go home. :(

I was certainly pissed off when they brought her back to life though.

:rolleyes:

:lol: I never even got around to watching #4. Everyone says I'm not missing much, but the premise sounded interesting enough to me.

You know 'Terminator 2' just never grabbed me in the same place as 'The Terminator'. For all its brash spectacle, it lacks the qualities that made the first effort great. The concept of the T-1000 is just silly and never works for me either.

Yeah, T2 is a very different beast than the 1st one. Again, an abrupt tonal shift that some folks apparently didn't embrace. I was ok with it though. Rather than a continuation of the 1st one, it felt like a bookend to me. A nice companion piece. Which is probably why they should have left it there.

Having said THAT, in some ways it might have been cool if they'd never made it. The ending of the original was powerful & worked mightily on my teen age imagination back in the day. Same way as the ending of "Dawn of the Dead".

Will partially agree on the T-1000. Wasn't totally sold on it, but was ok enough to roll with it. From the rumors I heard back in the day, one of the concepts that was thrown around was basically the Terminator we ended up with in T3, which was a more believable one & would have been a better fit in T2 IMO. Matter of fact, she was about the only good thing about that flick. :yuck:

Ah sure, I know. I'm only kidding.

I know. I just had to kid your kidding. :clown:

MinionZombie

21-Feb-2015, 04:31 PM

In terms of how they could have written out Hicks and Newt - but kept them alive - would have been some sort of thing along the lines of:

* Ripley gets attacked by a face hugger - an alarm triggers on her pod alone, and it gets shunted off automatically to some sort of ejection port.
* However, Weyland Yutani - somehow - know that she's got an alien lifeform gestating inside her, so the pod isn't ejected to be trashed, it's going to be swept up by W-Y.
* BUT it ends up crash landing on the prison planet, and then it continues on from there pretty much as-is.

That way the fans wouldn't have been slapped in the face.

I still want them to do an alt-universe tangent that ignores Alien 3 and 4 and picks up many years after #2 (perhaps near enough the amount of time that's passed in real life).

On the topic of Hicks - he's a reliable guy, strong-willed but intelligent (but not overly intelligent) and open to orders and suggestions from others. He's capable and loyal, but he's no fool and doesn't take shit - he's a good dude all round basically. So often we end up with dreadfully flawed/inept military commanders (although to be fair Gorman kind of filled that sort of role - but even he became capable and died a hero's death), so it's nice to have someone like Hicks who's on the ball.

Cameron did intend to have a 'family of sorts' vibe form between Ripley/Hicks/Newt - particularly in that shot of the three of them in the medical bay after the double-teaming face hugger attack staged by Burke where Ripley's hugging Newt and coughing up "Burke! It was Burke!" as Hicks holds them both ... not in a lollipops and roses kind of way, but just as a sort of subtle hint of it. IIRC JC's spoken of it before specifically, I think on the extra features for the movie.

Also - despite being shite - Aliens: Colonial Marines brings back Hicks, so they ignored Alien 3. Just a shame they messed up the whole project!

...

As for Terminator - I love both T1 and T2. I enjoy the different tones and approaches - you get more of what you want, but you also get something different from each flick.

T3 and T4 can go eff themselves though. Seriously. Also - nothing from T3 would have worked in T2 ... don't even theorise such sacrilege, Moon! :shifty:

MoonSylver

21-Feb-2015, 04:53 PM

T3 and T4 can go eff themselves though. Seriously. Also - nothing from T3 would have worked in T2 ... don't even theorise such sacrilege, Moon! :shifty:

Sorry dude. Jus' sayin', The T-X was a more believable Terminator than the T-1000, just in that it felt like a more natural progression in technology, rather than this quantum leap light years ahead from the T-800 to the T-1000. The T-1000 is way more "sci-fi". Almost too much so.

Plus...

http://www.tribute.ca/tribute_objects/images/movies/t3/t3_27.jpg

http://geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2009/03/2009-03-03-t-1000.jpg

I know which one I prefer. :lol:

MinionZombie

21-Feb-2015, 06:37 PM

Yes, Kristanna Loken is sexier than Robert Patrick - I think most heterosexual males would agree with that ;) - but the "Terminatrix" *gags* was shite.

The T-1000 makes sense - it is what it is - just like with the T-800 ... but both technologies together in some half-arsed bodge 'em together job? No, it doesn't make enough sense - if anything that's the more out there idea than the T-1000. The T-800 is solid and the T-1000 is fluid. Both of them together? No...

The TX was crap ... crap crappity crap crap crap. Fact. :lol::D:lol:

shootemindehead

21-Feb-2015, 07:34 PM

Well yeah, like I said, if you keep them alive, &/or write them out, you really need a whole new scenario. Which I would be ok with anyway, since the one we got I wasn't overly fond of anyway. :|

True. But, I don't know what that scenario would be though. However, the alien franchise, is really a simple "find the monster and then run away from it" schtick, so chances are it would have involved the ready-made space family of Hicks, Ripley and their surrogate daughter hiding from xenomorphs, while trying to find a way to escape in some fashion.

Understood. But there are some movies I watch for that "life like kick in the balls" & some I don't. I guess at the end of the day, one of the things they wanted was to make a type of movie that delivers that kick. But after the second one, I suspect there was a large portion of the audience that wasn't braced for that kick in the balls, delivered in the way it was delivered, or the abrupt shift in tone (to depart from the metaphor for the moment). Plus #3 just kicks you, & kicks you, & kicks you, & kicks you, &...

A relentlessly dour Debbie Downer of a movie...you should have loved it. :nana:

:lol:

If I made an alien film...

Seriously, there's a lot wrong with 'Alien 3', no doubt and these days I just cannot watch the theatrical cut. But, there's things wrong with all three films (I don't count 4 as existing). 'Aliens' gets away with being the most streamlined film. I still prefer the original 'Alien' out of all the films though.

:lol: I never even got around to watching #4. Everyone says I'm not missing much, but the premise sounded interesting enough to me.

It's wretched. Do yourself a favour, Moonie and don't even try. If you disliked 'Alien 3', you'll melt the interwebs with your hate over 4. :D

The premise is fine, even if it is still just a "find the monster and run away" story. The execution, however, is simply awful. It's incredible just how terrible it is.

Yeah, T2 is a very different beast than the 1st one. Again, an abrupt tonal shift that some folks apparently didn't embrace. I was ok with it though. Rather than a continuation of the 1st one, it felt like a bookend to me. A nice companion piece. Which is probably why they should have left it there.

Having said THAT, in some ways it might have been cool if they'd never made it. The ending of the original was powerful & worked mightily on my teen age imagination back in the day. Same way as the ending of "Dawn of the Dead".

Will partially agree on the T-1000. Wasn't totally sold on it, but was ok enough to roll with it. From the rumors I heard back in the day, one of the concepts that was thrown around was basically the Terminator we ended up with in T3, which was a more believable one & would have been a better fit in T2 IMO. Matter of fact, she was about the only good thing about that flick. :yuck:

There's just too many efforts at "kewl" in 'Terminator 2' for me, signed of with an absolutely lame, cringing, thumbs up at the end. The worst, of course, is the T-1000, whose ability to completely imitate every human it comes into contact with would put the Thing to shame. Having something so powerful like that ruins suspense. Its advantages are so immense that it ends up being silly. In addition, 'The Terminator' clearly states that the time machine cannot transport anything but living tissue, so the T-1000 wouldn't be able to go back in time as it's compose entirely of liquid metal. Oooops. But, we'll let that go. In any case, why didn't Skynet just switch all the factory lines to T-1000 standard and flood its enemies with them. Bingo...job done. Human beings wouldn't stand a chance. Or just send back an army of them to whack John Connor? Or back to the 80's again and do his mum. In the mortal sense, not the boomchickawawa way. That's a whole other film.

[spoiler]BTW, I've read that the T-1000 is making a comeback in the next film.[/quote]

'Terminator 2' is big, brash, loud and kind of stupid, but completely empty and you have to turn your brain off. It is enjoyable for a film of its type though. The original film is slower, cheaper and allows for more thoughts to go through the viewers head. 'Terminator 2' doesn't even give you time to think.

Plus Edward Furlong.

MoonSylver

21-Feb-2015, 08:19 PM

Yes, Kristanna Loken is sexier than Robert Patrick - I think most heterosexual males would agree with that ;) - but the "Terminatrix" *thumbs up* was ok.

The T-1000 doesn't make sense... but both technologies together designed to not only terminate humans but also rogue Terminators reprogrammed by the Resistance, as an "anti-terminator terminator" as stated by John Connor. It is a composite of the T-800 and T-1000, a solid endoskeleton covered with a liquid metal "mimetic polyalloy", allowing it to take the shape of any humanoid it touches, makes a little more sense - if anything that's not as far out there as T-1000. The T-800 is solid and, so is the TX, but the T-1000 is fluid? No...

The TX was *pretty cool*. *OPINION*. :lol::D:lol:

*Redacted by Skynet* :lol:

Sorry, TX just "felt" more like an actual machine/Terminator to me than the T-1000 "goo-bot". I think it might have been a better idea than the T-1000. Not that I'm super opposed to him, but he just always felt a little "off" to me, a little too implausible.

The worst, of course, is the T-1000, whose ability to completely imitate every human it comes into contact with would put the Thing to shame. Having something so powerful like that ruins suspense. Its advantages are so immense that it ends up being silly. In addition, 'The Terminator' clearly states that the time machine cannot transport anything but living tissue, so the T-1000 wouldn't be able to go back in time as it's compose entirely of liquid metal. Oooops. But, we'll let that go. In any case, why didn't Skynet just switch all the factory lines to T-1000 standard and flood its enemies with them. Bingo...job done. Human beings wouldn't stand a chance. Or just send back an army of them to whack John Connor?

IIRC he was a prototype, one-of-a-kind. Still doesn't explain how they were able to time travel, though I did find this on the Terminator Wiki:

Skynet is able to send Series 1000 Terminators back through time — but as they do not possess living tissue, it is unclear how they can be transported.

* One theory states that the T-1000 is capable of generating a synthetic bioelectric field.

*Another concludes that Skynet grows a synthetic flesh pod, or cocoon, around the T-1000 specifically to send it through time. Once through, the T-1000 would rip out of this cocoon and begin its mission. However, no evidence of such a pod was shown when the TDE was used to transport the T-1000 and the T-X, an endoskeletal unit contained in a mimetic polyalloy infiltration sheath.

*It is also possible that the T-1000 simulates the structure of living cells for the duration that is required for the time displacement to occur.

*There is another explanation that the TDE is able to transport the mimetic polyalloy in addition to the living tissue.

In the pilot episode of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, a T-888 head is transported through time along with Sarah, John and Cameron. According to Josh Friedmann, immediately before the time travel, the head was covered in tissue that was then burnt off during time travel. This could possibly be the way Skynet is able to send the T-1000 prototype and the T-X back in time without traces of cocoons being seen following time travel — a thin layer of skin covering the T-1000 is burnt off during time travel.

Or back to the 80's again and do his mum. In the mortal sense, not the boomchickawawa way. That's a whole other film.

Again, I'll take the TX for that fim as well. :lol:

MinionZombie

22-Feb-2015, 09:57 AM

*Redacted by Skynet* :lol:

Ruddy Skynet! *shakes fist in the air*

http://www.austintechnologylawblog.com/uploads/image/grandpa-simpson-shakes-fist-at-cloud.jpg

MoonSylver

22-Feb-2015, 03:44 PM

Ruddy Skynet! *shakes fist in the air*

http://www.austintechnologylawblog.com/uploads/image/grandpa-simpson-shakes-fist-at-cloud.jpg

:lol:

http://s.quickmeme.com/img/11/1193f6ec8e1372da99c633370872d09d901b5c17670ff813e7 d50a0bd2cb8573.jpg

bassman

24-Feb-2015, 02:24 PM

To me, the TX felt how I feel about the new Ghostbusters film. If the female character had progressed naturally from the story, that would be fantastic. Instead, like the new GB, it only came about because they needed something different from the previous entries and when they couldn't come up with something that flowed naturally, they fell back on "we haven't seen a woman terminator and we can make her hot so that'll put more men in the seats!". If the TX had spawned from more of a plot progression it could've been great. Instead of servicing the story first and foremost, they started with a gimmick and then molded everything else around that.

Bring on the sexist accusations....

MinionZombie

24-Feb-2015, 04:04 PM

The TX always felt gimmicky to me, too ... the bit where the TX 'inflates' her chest to sucker a cop flagged up the real intentions and thought process of the filmmakers. Plus, the whole mish-mash of T-800 and T-1000 tech smacked of a cobbled together middle ground birthed from an idiotic lack of vision or invention.

After all, it was the same movie where the T-800 was reduced to the embarrassing spectacle of putting on star-shaped sunglasses and saying "talk to the hand" ... ugh ... just, just, just ... ugh ... :hurl:

MoonSylver

24-Feb-2015, 05:06 PM

I'm pretty much all T-X'ed out at this point, but as I said earlier, Cameron actually was tossing around the idea for a T-X like, among others, Terminator FIRST, before he came up with the "better" idea of the T-1000.

Among other rejected idea that sounded kinda interesting: Another T-800 like Arnold (so Arnold vs Arnold) & a Skynet Terminator with an outer skin grown from cells of Kyle Reese as the bad guy vs Arnold's reprogrammed T-800 "good" Terminator.

EvilNed

24-Feb-2015, 07:49 PM

There's been two good terminator films, two bad ones and one bad TV-series.

Ok, I won't say that Part 3 was complete bullshit, but it was (for me, at least) nothing more than an average action film. And since Terminator 2 was so much more than an average action film, I just couldn't find it in me to enjoy T3 that much.

In any case, the franchise is kinda dead to me... I don't care...

Wait, isn't this an Alien thread?

Oh my, let me just state that I completely disagree with MZ's idea of ignoring Alien 3 and 4. I watched those films and I actually enjoy part 3 very much, in some aspects even more than Aliens (calm down, I'm not saying it's a better film), so to ignore that would just make me not want to go and see the new alien film. Seems like such a copout...

I enjoyed Alien 4, too, for what it's worth. The extended edition of that is total crap tho. But the theatrical version works. And I really enjoyed the sexual vibe they introduced between Ripley and the Aliens. Grosse thing to say, but I think it plays well with Giger's design.

RichW

24-Feb-2015, 07:55 PM

1368

Question is, do we really need an alien reboot??
The first one is iconic enough still!!

- - - Updated - - -

Damn Ned ... you beat me to it!! grr :D

Neil

24-Feb-2015, 08:47 PM

1368

Question is, do we really need an alien reboot??
The first one is iconic enough still!!

- - - Updated - - -

Damn Ned ... you beat me to it!! grr :D
Got a feeling it may not be a reboot, but a continuation?

bassman

24-Feb-2015, 08:56 PM

Got a feeling it may not be a reboot, but a continuation?

It appears to be more of a continuation, but you know they're also looking at it as a reboot in the sense that it will spawn another series of films. Something along the lines of the Star Trek films. They want the best of both worlds.

As I said earlier in the thread, now that it's official and Ridley Scott is on board, I've got a feeling it'll steer further away from being a sequel to the Ripley films and be more of a continuation from Prometheus 2....

bassman

26-Feb-2015, 01:03 AM

Blomkamp and Weaver recently spoke some more about the film, including saying that it will indeed follow Aliens and the Ripley character: http://m.joblo.com/joblo/news/60067

“I want this film to feel like it is literally the genetic sibling of Aliens, so it’s Alien, Aliens and then this film.”
“It’s a Freudian nightmare. That element to me is what is so appealing; to put the audience on the edge of their seat the whole time in a traditional, monster-stalking-you, dark-corridor-way. I love that. And then when you mix in all of the design elements and the life cycle of the alien, it’s a powder keg of creativity for me.”

“I would love to take Ripley out of sort of orbiting around in space and give a proper finish to what was such an excellent story. So when someone like Neill Blomkamp said, ‘Well, I’m interested in finishing the story,’ my little ears perked up… I think it’s a great series. It deserves a proper ending—I know the fans would love that.”

EvilNed

26-Feb-2015, 08:24 AM

According to this,

http://www.nerdist.com/2015/02/neill-blomkamps-new-alien-movie-officially-has-sigourney-weaver-on-board-will-ignore-last-2-movies/

It's going to ignore Alien 3 and 4.

Well, I'm out. Lost interest right there.

MinionZombie

26-Feb-2015, 09:33 AM

“I want this film to feel like it is literally the genetic sibling of Aliens, so it’s Alien, Aliens and then this film.”
“It’s a Freudian nightmare. That element to me is what is so appealing; to put the audience on the edge of their seat the whole time in a traditional, monster-stalking-you, dark-corridor-way. I love that. And then when you mix in all of the design elements and the life cycle of the alien, it’s a powder keg of creativity for me.”

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=HN.608037330867651414&pid=15.1&P=0

:hyper::hyper::hyper:

I am soooooooooo excited about this now!!! That's exactly what I wanted - ignore 3 and 4, pick up after 2 - bring back Ripley and Hicks. HOORAAAAAAAAAAY!!!! :cool::thumbsup::cool:

So stoked about this because, let's be honest, Alien Resurrection was like the Rocky 5 of the Alien franchise. Here's hoping NB's new flick will be the Rocky 6 of the franchise. *fingers crossed* Good lord I'm excited!!!

...

Also, this meme from that Nerdist article is brilliant:
http://www.nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/MwGdY4o.png

:lol::lol::lol:

EvilNed

26-Feb-2015, 09:45 AM

Alien 3 was good tho. To just ignore the canon just puts me off. That prison planet was awesome.

The same goes for Alien 4, while it wasn't as good a movie, it's still "canon". Fuck all these reboots and their lazy attitude toward rebooting.

shootemindehead

26-Feb-2015, 09:49 AM

MinionZombie

26-Feb-2015, 04:24 PM

While not done regularly, there have been movies that have ignored movies in the series beyond a certain point.

Alien 3 won't stop existing - it is a decent flick (particularly in its assembly cut form which shits all over the theatrical version) - but Alien Resurrection was complete wank (there are a few nice touches here and there, but essentially it's a load of toilet).

Better to just ignore 3 and 4 and do what you'd want to do, than force some incomprehensible work around into the story.

"PAH!" I say to you naysayers ... :D ... I'm totally pumped for the new movie (and Prometheus 2 for that matter). :thumbsup:

EvilNed

27-Feb-2015, 11:15 AM

Tbh, I just lose respect in the movie franchise if they do that.

shootemindehead

27-Feb-2015, 04:38 PM

I agree. But I've long since lost respect for the Alien franchise.

You know, they can make another Alien film, without Sigorney Weaver!!! What crazy idea!

If ever there was a franchise that didn't need a central star in every film, it's this one.

Neil

02-Mar-2015, 07:25 AM

Michael Biehn could be in - http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Alien-5-Bring-Back-Michael-Biehn-Here-What-He-Said-70072.html

MinionZombie

02-Mar-2015, 09:12 AM

Michael Biehn could be in - http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Alien-5-Bring-Back-Michael-Biehn-Here-What-He-Said-70072.html

:hyper::hyper::hyper:

Sounds like he's playing his cards pretty close to his chest with a little nod and a wink. :)

Although that article seems to be completely oblivious to the news that said they're going to ignore Alien 3 and 4 - where have CinemaBlend been? :rockbrow:

bassman

02-Mar-2015, 03:56 PM

Just say that Hicks was actually alive and concealed by Wayland-Yutani so he hadnt died at the beginning of Alien 3. Forget Ripley, her story is beyond finished.Keep Beihn as the main character, give him a Liam Neeson-style resurgence as a leading action man. He's done tons of great roles, but never really got the spotlight to himself and they also don't have to ignore the last two films.

shootemindehead

03-Mar-2015, 10:35 AM

Whatever they do with Hicks, one thing is for sure, Carrie Henn won't be making an appearance.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20141025225029/avp/images/e/e2/Carrie_Henn.jpg

Neil

03-Mar-2015, 11:02 AM

Weaver was on the Jonathan Ross chat show last night, and they mentioned the possibility of the film happening. She seemed fairly open about it & up for it.

MoonSylver

03-Mar-2015, 03:49 PM

Whatever they do with Hicks, one thing is for sure, Carrie Henn won't be making an appearance.

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20141025225029/avp/images/e/e2/Carrie_Henn.jpg

Who's that broad & what has she done w/ Newt?!?! :rockbrow::sneaky:

bassman

06-Mar-2015, 07:30 PM

Tom Woodruff Jr., who fans will recognize as the lead performer of the alien since the second film and the head effects supervisor, and his son have created makeup tests based on Blomkamp's concept art of the acid-scarred Hicks: http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/make-up-test-images-for-neill-blomkamps-alien-featuring-a-disfigured-hicks-976

http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/alien-image-1-3-6.jpg
http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/alien-image-2-3-6.jpg

This is likely just something done for kicks, but I suppose there is always the possibility that Woodruff is testing the water seeing as how he'll very likely get the call to create the effects for the film....

RichW

06-Mar-2015, 08:36 PM

Weaver was on the Jonathan Ross chat show last night, and they mentioned the possibility of the film happening. She seemed fairly open about it & up for it.

Yep Weaver was on BBC breakfast this morning too, wouldn't give too much away but said she was up for it
and said " I don't see how they can do another without me! " - or words to that effect.

Seems like its happening and the publicity hype is starting already ....
Buckle up boys, it's gonna be a bumpy ride!!

shootemindehead

06-Mar-2015, 08:55 PM

Yep Weaver was on BBC breakfast this morning too, wouldn't give too much away but said she was up for it
and said " I don't see how they can do another without me! " - or words to that effect.

This, from the woman who wanted, desperately, to get away from the franchise in the 90's.

:/

Neil

11-Mar-2015, 02:34 PM

Two or more films? - http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Wait-How-Many-Alien-Films-Does-Neill-Blomkamp-Want-Make-70236.html

MinionZombie

05-May-2015, 09:22 AM

I have fond memories of Earth Hive - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliens:_Earth_Hive

Bit of thread resurrection, but I just got a copy of "Earth Hive". I had read the 2nd and 3rd entries in that series many years ago, back before the proliferation of the Internet and easy-to-find info on which books were in which series and in what order ... so I'll give it a going over to, at long last, complete the series ... albeit in an arse-about-tit order. :p

Neil

06-May-2015, 05:25 PM

Bit of thread resurrection, but I just got a copy of "Earth Hive". I had read the 2nd and 3rd entries in that series many years ago, back before the proliferation of the Internet and easy-to-find info on which books were in which series and in what order ... so I'll give it a going over to, at long last, complete the series ... albeit in an arse-about-tit order. :p

Be interested to hear what you think. When I was a teenager I really enjoyed it, so will be interesting to see how it holds up in a more modern era, to an older reader ;)

MinionZombie

07-May-2015, 09:19 AM

Be interested to hear what you think. When I was a teenager I really enjoyed it, so will be interesting to see how it holds up in a more modern era, to an older reader ;)

Well, already a few chapters in, it is clearly aimed at a more 'late teenage/early adult' audience, and given that I've recently been into the likes of James Ellroy, "Earth Hive" is a breeze. It is interesting to read it knowing that it was originally intended for Wilks to be Hicks and Billie to be Newt and Rim to be LV-426, until Alien 3 came out and Fox or Dark Horse or somebody told Steve Perry to re-jig it a smidge - but you can still tell who's supposed to be who, so I've always thought of the characters as who they were originally intended to be.

Partly reading it for completion's sake - in Perry's trilogy I had already read the 2nd and 3rd books, so I am coming to "Earth Hive" rather arse-about-face (and many years down the line - likewise, the other Aliens books I read was when I was a teenager).

bassman

30-Oct-2015, 04:09 PM

This has been put on hold in favor of Ridley Scott's sequel to Prometheus, Alien: Paradise Lost.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/neill-blomkamps-alien-project-has-been-put-on-hold-295

Neil

30-Oct-2015, 10:10 PM

This has been put on hold in favor of Ridley Scott's sequel to Prometheus, Alien: Paradise Lost.

http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/neill-blomkamps-alien-project-has-been-put-on-hold-295

*groan*

I hope it's better than Prometheus... It was of course OK, but not befitting Alien/Aliens IMHO.

MinionZombie

31-Oct-2015, 11:57 AM

*groan*

I hope it's better than Prometheus... It was of course OK, but not befitting Alien/Aliens IMHO.

I watched Prometheus again a few weeks ago and I still dig it. I don't understand the moaning about it.

As for Alien 5 ... bugger ... but I can understand why. The studio will want to focus on making and advertising Prometheus 2, or whatever it's going to be called, without confusing people with Alien 5, which isn't really 5, but kind of a new tangential sequel to Aliens. Probably best to leave that until later and let the script stew a bit (apparently they already tweaked the script to make it fit in a bit better with Prometheus 2 plans), but they can't wait too long as Weaver and Biehn aren't getting any younger. They've still got plenty of good years left in them, but you can't wait forever.

shootemindehead

31-Oct-2015, 03:59 PM

I have to say that this is good news.

I think Alien: Blomkamp would have been a terrible idea and as stupid as 'Prometheus' was, Scott is a better man to push the Alien series along. Even though I think that the series has been so abused over the years that there's no real hope for it.

Blomkamp's idea to ignore everything after 'Aliens' is just awful and the whole thing smacks more of fanboi wish fulfillment, than anything else. Hicks and Newt are dead, get over it.

bassman

24-Nov-2016, 01:27 AM

Official poster for Scott's Alien: Covenant.

1407

There's no longer any question as to how much this prequel ties into the classic xenomorphs. Looks like they'll be a large part of it. Obviously much more so than Prometheus...

EvilNed

24-Nov-2016, 08:20 AM

Of course I'm intrigued, but Prometheus wasn't very good at all. Ridley Scott has lost much of his umph since delivering his masterpiece Gladiator in 2000. Everything after that has been kind of meh. Including, but not limited to, Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood, Body of Lies, Prometheus...

I have not seen Exodus: Of Gods and Men, but it looks thoroughly uninteresting. I also haven't seen The Martian which many say was good.

shootemindehead

24-Nov-2016, 09:05 AM

'Kingdom of Heaven' as a directors cut has something to offer though. Entertaining enough. But, by far and away the worst thing about it is Dark haired Legolas. One of the worst pieces of casting for a film of that type I've seen.

Still not pushed about a new Alien film, xenomorph poster or not.

MinionZombie

24-Nov-2016, 09:20 AM

EvilNed

24-Nov-2016, 09:30 AM

Well I'm excited about it. I dug Prometheus. :)

Scott's work in recent years has been up and down and I've not watched all of them, but Gladiator was excellent, as was Black Hawk Down, as was The Martian. There was also American Gangster which was a pretty good flick, albeit beholden to the usual tropes of the 'rise and fall of a drugs kingpin' story.

Yeah, but Gladiator was 15 years ago and he hasn't matched it since. I blame Prometheus mostly on Damon Lindelof tho, what a shitty writer. I'm just irked by the fact that Scott went along with such a terrible script.

Agreed regarding Orlando Bloom too. Kingdom of Heaven is a fine film except in one regard: Protagonist, who is supposed to be relateable and drive the plot forward, is boring and dull to a degree which ought to be a crime. It certainly is a crime for a veteran filmmaker like Scott.