ALIEN Franchise

fire_and_ice

The first Alien film I watched on the big screen was Alien3 it certainly was not what I expected, I was probably kind to the film initially though I much prefer the alternate cut that appeared years later.

Shardlake

Creasy47 wrote: »

@DarthDimi, glad you had an excellent time, that's one of my favorite movies and I would love to catch it in theaters some day. A local cinema has a 'Heat' 4K remaster showing in theaters in a few days, and I would kill to go and see it. If I didn't walk out of the theater afterward completely deaf due to the bank heist sequence, then I'd be disappointed.

I saw the 4K version at The Leeds Film Festival last November here in the UK, as someone who caught it on original release and the seeing it on home formats for the last 20 years it was like seeing for the first time again and the gun battle is something to experience on the big screen, if you get a chance and are a big fan of the film like me then I wouldn't let up the opportunity.

Well jealous @DarthDimi you seeing Alien on the big screen like you it's one of my all time favourites and would love to see it in it's big screen glory, still not sure about Covenant but these reports are making me warm to idea more though.

bondsum

DarthDimi wrote: »

I went to see ALIEN in my local theatre last Wednesday. After the screening, Ridley Scott himself (on screen, mind) delivered us some footage from ALIEN COVENTANT which, according to him, hadn't been officially released yet. So I guess I should take his word on that. Either way, I saw

a "backburster" resembling our familiar xenomorph but not quite there yet

.

I definitely want to watch the movie! May 17 is when I'll be there.

What a wonderful experience that must have been, @DarthDimi. I still recall the very first time I saw Alien at the Odeon Leicester Square, blown up to a 70mm print with Dolby stereo audio (when many local cinemas were still stuck with mono). It opened to the public on Thursday, September 6th and the only cinema you could see it in was the one in Leicester Square for its first few weeks, before it went nationwide. I had a ticket for September 6th, and it was the very first showing of the day. The great thing was the cinema wasn't busy, pretty empty for the first showing, in fact. I still have the cinema brochure and a few other merchandising odds and sods I bought in the foyer. I also rushed out and bought the US and UK posters from a vintage movie shop immediately afterwards. Then I made my way to Bourne and Hollingsworth, a large department store on the corner of Oxford Street, which had given over an entire floor to Alien with the actual props, models and parts of the set used in the actual film, plus there was the real life-sized Alien monster suit in all its glory. I think you'd be right to call me the UK's first Alien fanatic; I bought so many Alien tie-in publications, even the Alien Movie Photo-Novel with over 1,000 colour shot-by-shot photos. Foto-novel paperbacks were all the rage at the time, filled with frame blow-ups that told the story like a comic book. See below for what it looked like. It's second on the left...



I bought all three of these great books, apart from the later Aliens Movie Book. To be honest, I never really warmed to Cameron's sequel as much as I did Ridley Scott's first film.

Anyway, I'm glad you enjoyed the cinematic showing of Alien as much as I did on it's first day of release. This movie still holds a special place in my movie buff heart.

BAIN123

The first Alien is undoubtably the best and a great study in creating suspense on film. Aliens is good but rather cheesy. Hated Alien 3 when I first saw the theatrical edition (the special edition is better but it still falls apart at the end). Resurrection is a weird joke.

bondsum

True that, @BAIN123. I guess I didn't like the fact that Cameron turned the Aliens into pesky space bugs that could easily be squashed. What I liked about the Big Chap (as he's often called) is that it was virtually impossible to destroy him or it. I also preferred the dialogue, the acting, and the overall design in the first movie over the second one. Aliens always struck me as an arcade shoot-em-up video game with the semblance of a story tagged on. Though I admit, I've come to like it more now, especially after all the terrible sequels that followed.

fjdinardo

What was the original script for Alien 3? I read somewhere it involved Hicks and Newt and a story on earth

QsAssistant

fjdinardo wrote: »

What was the original script for Alien 3? I read somewhere it involved Hicks and Newt and a story on earth

I don't believe Hicks and Newt were in it. It wasn't on Earth but an Earth like planet where monks lived. I think the plan was to still have Ripley shave her head to fit in with the monks. At some point a xenomorph shows up and starts to kill the monks. All the buildings are made of wood and they end up trapping the xenomorph in one of them. They burn the village down, thus killing the xenomorph. I can't remember if Ripely was still suppose to die at the end.
It would've been an interesting movie but I'm kinda glad we got what we did because I'm one of the few that actually enjoy Alien 3.

Master_Dahark

I remember one version that took place on a planet made of wool. Er.... wood



;)

I'd kind of like to read that. Was it a vastly different story or just an earlier version of the prison planet, I wonder?

Thunderfinger

After Alien 4, I was sure the next would take place on Earth. I would still like to see that.

fjdinardo

With Alien: Covenant mere weeks away from release, Sir Ridley Scott (who would have served as executive producer on Blomkamp’s Alien) is currently doing the press rounds to promote the new film and was asked by French outlet Allocine about Alien 5.

“Ridley Scott, who was in Paris for the promotion of the new opus of the saga, was even more definitive in our microphone: “I think he will never see the light,” he replied after explaining That the project was far less advanced than previously thought. “There was never a scenario, just an idea that evolved into a pitch of ten pages, I had to participate as a producer but it did not go any further because the Fox decided that She did not want to do it. I had already done Prometheus and worked on Covenant.” (Translated from French)

Though Scott mentions the project never went past a pitch, a script for the film was reportedly completed with James Cameron described it as “amazing.”

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/2017/04/27/ridley-scott-thinks-alien-5-not-happening/

I just have this feeling Scott doesn't want Alien 5 to happen in fear it might be better than any of his prequels. Sigorney has said she has loved the story Blomkamp came up with.

Creasy47

I still want that 'Alien 5' continuation that focuses on Ripley, Newt, and an injured Hicks. Shame it isn't happening, especially because that looked ready to go until Scott stepped in and decided to do 'Alien: Covenant' instead. It better deliver.

bondsum

I must be one of the few here that's not too bothered by Blomkamp's attempt to cash-in on Aliens, nor am I that eager to see the end results. Ripley's story arc was complete when she decided to sever all ties with the franchise at the end of Alien 3, and that's the way it should've stayed. For me, it was a mistake to bring her back for Alien Regurgitated. Though I agree it was a mistake to kill off Hicks in cryosleep in 3, the same could not be said of Newt, who would have aged considerably between Aliens and Alien 3, and I didn't particularly like her character much to begin with anyway. Kids in horror movies are not a favourite ingredient of mine. Personally, I think Hicks should have been the lead in Alien 3 and not Ripley, as per the original pitch, before the execs decided you couldn't have an Alien movie without Sigourney Weaver being the main star. We're all pretty much aware of the mistakes made on Alien 3. I just can't figure out how and where Blomkamp's version is meant to fit in. Is it a parallel universe or a complete erasing of anything post Aliens?

To use a favourite @RC7 term, I think Blomkamp's movie would just be fanwankery. We don't even know the content of his 10-page story treatment other than those dreadful pieces of artwork he used to pitch the idea to the studio with. And there's no indication that what Blomkamp would serve up would be any better than what has already followed. It might even be a stinker, much like Chappie and Elysium were, despite having Hicks and Ripley reunited together again.

I know it's vogue to slate Ridley Scott due to a lot of people being disappointed with Prometheus, but I'd take a Ridley movie over a Ripley/Blomkamp movie any day. I actually think it's refreshing to see a new Alien movie series without Sigourney Weaver's presence in it. Oh, and before any of you mention AvP, I don't acknowledge those crap movies either. Probably one of the worst decisions ever to team those two creatures together since Dracula meets Frankenstein, or Freddy vs Jason.

fjdinardo

bondsum wrote: »

I must be one of the few here that's not too bothered by Blomkamp's attempt to cash-in on Aliens, nor am I that eager to see the end results. Ripley's story arc was complete when she decided to sever all ties with the franchise at the end of Alien 3, and that's the way it should've stayed. For me, it was a mistake to bring her back for Alien Regurgitated. Though I agree it was a mistake to kill off Hicks in cryosleep in 3, the same could not be said of Newt, who would have aged considerably between Aliens and Alien 3, and I didn't particularly like her character much to begin with anyway. Kids in horror movies are not a favourite ingredient of mine. Personally, I think Hicks should have been the lead in Alien 3 and not Ripley, as per the original pitch, before the execs decided you couldn't have an Alien movie without Sigourney Weaver being the main star. We're all pretty much aware of the mistakes made on Alien 3. I just can't figure out how and where Blomkamp's version is meant to fit in. Is it a parallel universe or a complete erasing of anything post Aliens?

This because Alien 3 and 4 were shit

DarthDimi

I don't think Alien³ is a bad movie. It's just a bad movie if you're a Fox executive planning to launch rather than end a franchise. But Weaver, who was a producer on the film, wanted things to be finished just like Fincher. They made a film about death, a well-made and well-acted but depressing film.

Those who want Aliens 2 have tons of comic books and video games to have fun with. ;-)

bondjames

I saw Alien 3 once and have never had any desire to revisit it. I've seen the other three many times though.

bondsum

They might be shit, @fjdinardo, but they still exist, and you can't erase them no matter how hard you might try. There's also the distinct possibility that Blomkamp's Alien could be even worse than Alien 3, then we'd have a situation where people actually prefer the original Alien 3 over Blomkamp's and wish he'd never bothered. Like I said before, I've seen nothing of his work that makes me think he'll be an improvement over David Fincher. From all accounts it was Peter Jackson that rescued D9 from being another Chappie or Elysium.

On a side note, I also don't like the idea of Hick's face being obscured by a scarred mask with one white eye.

Personally, I think they've left it too late now to try an undo the mistakes of the past. Let Ripley lie at the bottom of her giant smelting vat.

DarthDimi

The Fincher cut of Alien³ made me appreciate the film a lot more to be honest.

talos7

bondsum wrote: »

They might be shit, @fjdinardo, but they still exist, and you can't erase them no matter how hard you might try. There's also the distinct possibility that Blomkamp's Alien could be even worse than Alien 3, then we'd have a situation where people actually prefer the original Alien 3 over Blomkamp's and wish he'd never bothered. Like I said before, I've seen nothing of his work that makes me think he'll be an improvement over David Fincher. From all accounts it was Peter Jackson that rescued D9 from being another Chappie or Elysium.

On a side note, I also don't like the idea of Hick's face being obscured by a scarred mask with one white eye.

Personally, I think they've left it too late now to try an undo the mistakes of the past. Let Ripley lie at the bottom of her giant smelting vat.

The thing is you would not be erasing them just presenting a story that goes in a different direction. The entire premise of the latest Star Trek movies is a separate timeline. Star Trek "Kelvin Timeline" does not erase an established 50 year plus timeline, Spock Prime, who traveled to the future remembers the events up to and beyond Picard, it creates a parallel.

While Blomkamp's concept does not do it in the same way it is similar in comparison.

fjdinardo

I agree it be a different (hopefully better) timeline and the fans would decide which direction was better. Alien 5 needs to happen

boldfinger

Master_Dahark wrote: »

I remember one version that took place on a planet made of wool. Er.... wood



;)

I'd kind of like to read that. Was it a vastly different story or just an earlier version of the prison planet, I wonder?

The box set with the two extra discs contains some interesting info on that. The story wasn´t terribly far from Alien3, but not very far developed. The concept was about a small wooden planet with an atmosphere so shallow that a human could stand on the surface of the planet and poke his head out into space. One producer claims there was a problem with the realism of that planet, raising the question where the wood comes from out of which the planet is made, or that such a shallow atmosphere wouldn´t be technically possible. He didn´t question acid for blood, or a 30cm creature growing into 2m within a day just by metabolising air.
One could argue that if monks inhabited that planet, they could very well have transported all that wood there and built the planet.
In any case, the concept would have surpassed the weirdness of Resurrection by far. If it would have been visible that everything is wood that is.

Thunderfinger

Wood be terrible.

Some_Kind_Of_Hero

Vincent Ward's Alien 3. You might still be able to find the script online. I recall skimming parts of it years ago. Really should give it a full read some day, see how it compares. He did receive story credit on the final product.

Here are some of the would-be film's sketches:

DarthDimi

A lot can be learned about Ward's ideas from the bonus features on certain DVD and BR packs of the ALIEN franchise.

boldfinger

Oh yes, I forgot that they had included the idea of one or more aliens moving through a wheat field, and you can only see the trace, like it was done in Jurassic Park 2. Thanks for putting those pics up, @Some_Kind_Of_Hero.

Some_Kind_Of_Hero

Absolutely. My first thought when I saw that sketch was The Lost World, too. Ideas get passed around. The long grass scene with the raptors may very well have been inspired by this unused Alien 3 concept.

I was also a bit surprised to discover the "alien adapting to the shape of its host" concept perhaps originating as early as Ward's draft (with that mutant sheep sketch).

bondsum

talos7 wrote: »

bondsum wrote: »

They might be shit, @fjdinardo, but they still exist, and you can't erase them no matter how hard you might try. There's also the distinct possibility that Blomkamp's Alien could be even worse than Alien 3, then we'd have a situation where people actually prefer the original Alien 3 over Blomkamp's and wish he'd never bothered. Like I said before, I've seen nothing of his work that makes me think he'll be an improvement over David Fincher. From all accounts it was Peter Jackson that rescued D9 from being another Chappie or Elysium.

On a side note, I also don't like the idea of Hick's face being obscured by a scarred mask with one white eye.

Personally, I think they've left it too late now to try an undo the mistakes of the past. Let Ripley lie at the bottom of her giant smelting vat.

The thing is you would not be erasing them just presenting a story that goes in a different direction. The entire premise of the latest Star Trek movies is a separate timeline. Star Trek "Kelvin Timeline" does not erase an established 50 year plus timeline, Spock Prime, who traveled to the future remembers the events up to and beyond Picard, it creates a parallel.

While Blomkamp's concept does not do it in the same way it is similar in comparison.

Yet the purpose of the Star Trek's "Kelvin Timeline" was to kick-start a new series of Trek movies with a different and younger cast in place of the original actors. Blomkamp's Aliens would simply be a one-off movie with the same (much older) cast, and not the start of a new franchise. Seriously, you can't jump-start a new franchise with a 67-year-old actress as your lead. And I still stand by my earlier belief, and that is Blomkamp has not demonstrated the same abilities as Scott, or Cameron for that matter, to turn a 10-page treatment into a bonafide classic. It's just wishful thinking from those that were disappointed by Alien3 and the abysmal Alien: Resurrection, that Blomkamp can suddenly and miraculously make a great sequel to Aliens. Now, if we were discussing the possibility of Peter Jackson or James Cameron wanting to make an alternative Aliens sequel then I would be more up for it - but Blomkamp, nah.

talos7

Oh believe me, I am no fan of Blomkamp. He has not lived up to the promise of his initial films. But, I do think do a film, or series of films, that shows a alternate direction that a story could have taken is very valid, In fact, If James Cameron does return to the Terminator franchise I would not be surprised if he does a direct sequel to T2, disregarding the sequels that have been done by others. This would allow him to reestablish his vision and continue the "Cameron Universe" and avoid the mess that followed when he was not involved.

bondsum

Not wanting to bring The Terminator into the equation due to it being a completely seperate kettle of fish with its own problems, I will say that we still don't know how much Cameron will be involved in his own creation with the new Terminator movie. Reports indicate that he won't be directing it but handing over directorial duties to Deadpool director Tim Miller. Also, we don't know the end results of this partnership; it might turn out to be another Terminator Genisys, which Cameron actually endorsed. Until we see how this turns out, it's probably best not to pin too much hope on it or draw too many positive conclusions.

Blomkamp is in an entirely different situation to Cameron with regards to Terminator. He neither created Alien, nor has he had a recent hit. And as I pointed out above, Sigourney Weaver is 67-years-old, not the best age to jump-start a new movie franchise with. So how would they continue onward from Blomkamp's Aliens, hopefully not with The New Adventures of Newt? God-forbid.

talos7

He may not be the director but with Cameron regaining the rights, should their be another film, he will be the driving force and it will be his vision on the screen.

bondsum

That is true, @talos7, and I'm as eager as you are to see how this unfolds. But let's not forget that Cameron also came under a lot of flak for his Avatar movie, which was undoubtedly a huge success but also received a huge backlash afterwards. Personally, I didn't much care for Avatar myself, having seen and been a big fan of The Terminator, The Abyss, True Lies and Terminator 2 in the cinema. Avatar did absolutely nothing for me, and I honestly don't want to see any of its sequels.

But here we are, discussing Cameron and Terminator, and giving Blomkamp an easy ride.