|
Title: Alien 5 Post by: WindupAtheist on August 08, 2009, 10:52:46 PM All I know so far is that it's a prequel, and that it'll be directed by Ridley Scott (http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118006722.html?categoryid=13&cs=1&ref=bd_film). That last fact alone is enough to give me hope that this could be the first good Alien movie since 1986. Fuck Alien 3, fuck Alien 4, and fuck the shit out of those dumbass Predator crossovers.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: schild on August 08, 2009, 11:25:18 PM How do you reboot a series with a prequel?
Also, you didn't read that article. Quote "Carl Rinsch is going to do the prequel to Alien," Scott told Collider while promoting The Taking of Pelham 123. "He's one of our directors at our company." Carl Rinsch is directing it. Anyway, Rodriguez is doing the new Predator movies, so cheers all around. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on August 08, 2009, 11:48:33 PM A week or two ago, I read that Rinsch was out. He's dating (?) Scott's daughter, so Ridley probly wanted to give the guy a leg up to begin with and then decided against it. Maybe the decision had something to do with the head scratching that went on after the announcement of the original director.
edit: Even though it may be a prequel, I'm looking forward to the new one. Watching a midnight Halloween screening of Alien several years ago still ranks high with me. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: WindupAtheist on August 08, 2009, 11:55:40 PM Oh, I linked an old article. Ridley Scott is in fact directing. I'll turn up a newer article and edit it in.
Also, Rodriguez doing Predator makes me apprehensive. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Hoax on August 09, 2009, 12:09:35 AM The most recent Predator wasn't as awful as expected after the whole trapped in a pyramid one.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ironwood on August 09, 2009, 02:08:26 AM You could see anything ?
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: WindupAtheist on August 09, 2009, 10:01:17 AM AVP2 was slightly less horrible than the first one, thanks to at least being R-rated, but it was still pretty terrible.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Yegolev on August 09, 2009, 10:21:01 PM AVP2 was slightly less horrible than the first one, thanks to at least being R-rated, but it was still pretty terrible. :uhrr: Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Margalis on August 09, 2009, 10:51:19 PM AVP2 was Dawnson's Creek meets Friday the 13th. Also one of the worst-shot films I've seen.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: FatuousTwat on August 10, 2009, 01:29:31 AM The best thing about the second AVP was It just kind of came out of left field and made me laugh out loud in the theater.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Margalis on August 10, 2009, 01:48:36 AM Too bad that was in the trailer.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Cadaverine on August 10, 2009, 02:24:31 AM The very first movie I recall seeing as a child was Alien. It remains one of my favorite films of all time, and along with Blade Runner, is Scotts best work, in my opinion.
However, given how much he has changed as a director over the years, as well as the medium of film itself, I just don't see how this film will be any good. As an aside, despite my owning the Quadrilogy, there are only 2 Alien movies. The third film is an ok film in and of itself, but isn't Alien(s). As for the fourth? Well, it has Brad Dourif, Dominique Pinon, and Ron Perlman in it. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Hoax on August 10, 2009, 10:34:31 AM The very first movie I recall seeing as a child was Alien. It remains one of my favorite films of all time, and along with Blade Runner, is Scotts best work, in my opinion. People say that about him like he hasn't done a movie worth talking about since and it confuses me, sure Blade Runner is one of the best movies I've ever seen and its possible Alien which I haven't watched in quite some time would stand up as well but its not like he's been making pure shit recently. Last decade: American Gangster Kingdom of Heaven Matchstick Men Blackhawk Down Gladiator I liked all of those movies, Blackhawk Down was a fantastic book adaptation even though he was saddled with Josh Hartnet however you spell his name. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: DraconianOne on August 10, 2009, 12:22:04 PM However, given how much he has changed as a director over the years, as well as the medium of film itself, Can you elaborate on this? What's changed so much about the medium of film and why does that mean Alien 5 may not be any good? Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: jason on August 10, 2009, 12:35:29 PM A prequel to Alien? Is that going to be the story of how/why the ship piloted by the dead giant crashed on LV-426?
Just as long as they don't gay it up by making it take place on Earth and we find out that humans genetically engineered the thing and launched it into space... Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: ghost on August 17, 2009, 12:56:57 PM Does information from the AVP movies really need to be spoiler tagged?
Alien 5 as a prequel could very well kick major ass. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on September 26, 2010, 11:45:03 PM (http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff26/stuabrtow/alienbursthurtarise.jpg)
This isn't so much Alien prequel news, but some stuff I found while tooling around. I wanted to find out who the original Alien 3 director was and what he wanted to do with the franchise. The guy was Renny Harlin. Not too hot, but the image of the cornfield is kinda cool. Instead he went on to make Ford Fairlane and Die Hard 2. After finding out he was the original director, I thought it was funny that he had taken over for another guy to re-shoot the last Exorcist flick. That one was even worse than the AvP movies. This next one has already done the rounds but I figured what the heck. Scott interview at The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/ridley-scott-im-doing-pretty-good-if-you-think-about-it-2068888.html) There was even a script floating around over the summer which someone "leaked" after applying the name of the project screenwriter to it. The aliens in it were tiny. The Space Jockeys forced human male slaves into having sex. In 3-D. Something like that. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: KallDrexx on September 27, 2010, 05:37:30 AM IMDB has him directing two Alien prequels, not just one FYI
*Edit* Wasn't the ship that crashed on the planet (Alien 1) Alien and not human? I thought alien 1 was the first time humans had been in contact with the aliens. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on September 27, 2010, 06:03:16 AM IMDB has him directing two Alien prequels, not just one FYI *Edit* Wasn't the ship that crashed on the planet (Alien 1) Alien and not human? I thought alien 1 was the first time humans had been in contact with the aliens. Indeed sir. It was an alien craft in which the occupants were killed by the creatures. That said, I always wondered why the Company sent a mining vessel to check out an alien distress call. I can see if they were the only ship in the area that could get there in a reasonable timeframe, and I assume the company was only looking for alien tech when they came upon what they deemed an organism that could be used as a weapon - but they came to that conclusion almost too quickly. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: HaemishM on September 27, 2010, 07:59:37 AM IMDB has him directing two Alien prequels, not just one FYI *Edit* Wasn't the ship that crashed on the planet (Alien 1) Alien and not human? I thought alien 1 was the first time humans had been in contact with the aliens. According to the canon of the AVP franchise movies, no, it was not the first time aliens had been in contact with humans. If you believe AVP 2, the company that sends the Nostromo to that planet in the first Alien movie is the same company who found alien genetic material at the end of AVP2 and is the company that was run by Lance Hendrickson in AVP 1 that went to the Arctic to find alien samples there. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on September 27, 2010, 09:31:39 AM IMDB has him directing two Alien prequels, not just one FYI *Edit* Wasn't the ship that crashed on the planet (Alien 1) Alien and not human? I thought alien 1 was the first time humans had been in contact with the aliens. According to the canon of the AVP franchise movies, no, it was not the first time aliens had been in contact with humans. If you believe AVP 2, the company that sends the Nostromo to that planet in the first Alien movie is the same company who found alien genetic material at the end of AVP2 and is the company that was run by Lance Hendrickson in AVP 1 that went to the Arctic to find alien samples there. Ah yes, I failed to pick up on that since I fucking hated the AvP films and all they stood for. However, that is correct. I still hold Alien and Aliens as two of my all time favorites. AvP, not so much. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: HaemishM on September 27, 2010, 10:15:27 AM The AvP movies sucked the stale sweat off a monkey's balls.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ratman_tf on September 28, 2010, 02:14:36 AM Bleargh. They don't make movies like Alien or Blade Runner anymore. And if Hollywood has shown us anything, it's that they can fuck up a franchise and still (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29) make a (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers:_Revenge_of_the_Fallen) shitton of money. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_Episode_I:_The_Phantom_Menace)
Oh well, at least I save money by not going to movies in the theater anymore. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Riggswolfe on September 28, 2010, 05:52:54 PM IMDB has him directing two Alien prequels, not just one FYI *Edit* Wasn't the ship that crashed on the planet (Alien 1) Alien and not human? I thought alien 1 was the first time humans had been in contact with the aliens. Indeed sir. It was an alien craft in which the occupants were killed by the creatures. That said, I always wondered why the Company sent a mining vessel to check out an alien distress call. I can see if they were the only ship in the area that could get there in a reasonable timeframe, and I assume the company was only looking for alien tech when they came upon what they deemed an organism that could be used as a weapon - but they came to that conclusion almost too quickly. [geek] The distress call was actually a warning telling people to stay away from the alien ship because of what it had on it. The company intercepted it and decoded it. the Nostromo was the closest ship and since, at least in the first movie, space travel takes months it was determined that crew would be the one to investigate since they were expendable. [/geek] Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Sir T on September 28, 2010, 06:06:35 PM That doesn't gel with the fact that the Android ash was placed on the Nostromo to capture and study whatever brought down the Alien ship, as was said quite clearly in Alien
From the script (http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/alien_shooting.html) Quote ASH Special Order 937 in essence asked me to direct the ship to the planet, investigate a life form, possibly hostile and bring it back for observation. With discretion, of course. RIPLEY Why. Why not tell us. ASH Would you have gone. PARKER It wasn't in the contract. ASH My very point. RIPLEY They wanted to investigate the Alien. No matter what happened to us. ASH That's unfair. Actually, you weren't mentioned in the order. LAMBERT Those bastards. ASH See it from their point of view. They didn't know what the Alien is. RIPLEY How do we kill it. ASH I don't think you can. Not in this ship, given its life support systems. But I might be able to. RIPLEY How. ASH I don't know quite yet. I'm not exactly at my best at the moment. If you would reconnect... RIPLEY No way. ASH Don't be so hasty. You'll never kill it without my help. RIPLEY We've had enough of your help. ASH You've barely got any oxygen left. If you don't go into hypersleep, you'll die with or without the Alien. RIPLEY Nice try, Ash. ASH I will do whatever I can to help you. I swear it. PARKER Pull the plug. LAMBERT I agree. ASH You idiots. You still don't realize what you're dealing with. The Alien is a perfect organism. Superbly structured, cunning, quintessentially violent. With your limited capabilities you have no chance against it. LAMBERT You admire it. ASH How can one not admire perfection. I will kill it because I am programmed to protect human life as you know. RIPLEY Even if you have contempt for it. ASH Even then. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on September 28, 2010, 06:18:27 PM That doesn't gel with the fact that the Android ash was placed on the Nostromo to capture and study whatever brought down the Alien ship, as was said quite clearly in Alien From the script (http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/alien_shooting.html) That's reaching a tad bit. Ash was on the ship (I assume unless I missed another AvP reference) before the signal was caught and deciphered. He was there to run things while the humans were in hibernation. However, that quote does make sense given if the distress call (warning beacon) contained references to Aliens being the cause of the crash. Once decrypted, they found the nearest ship and activated their company owned droid to investigate. Sadly, humans are always ones to go poking bad things with sticks even when told not to and why. Fuck now I miss those huge 80s (late 70s) movies. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Sir T on September 28, 2010, 06:23:54 PM Nope. They had no idea he was an android. He was in hypersleep same as the rest of them and earlier the captain says he had never served with him before, and he came on just before the ship left.
Quote RIPLEY Did you ship out with Ash before. DALLAS First time. I went five hauls with another science man. Then two days before we left Thedus, replaced him with Ash. Later after wires come out of Ash when they are fighting him Quote PARKER A robot, a God damn Droid. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on September 28, 2010, 06:31:45 PM Good point.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Typhon on September 29, 2010, 08:24:23 AM I always thought that the "an Ash is embedded on all ships to make sure company interests are maximized" rather then, "let's send a towing vessel, with refinery and ore attached, to extract an alien organism!"
The first just seems a more flexible and calculated evil. The second just seems like a blundering evil. Sure, it sucks if you happen to be the miners on the mining ship, but just seems like a bad choice all around if you actually want to retrieve the organism. Better to send a science vessel full of Ash's (or just a single Ash). Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mortriden on September 29, 2010, 08:52:44 AM I always thought that the "an Ash is embedded on all ships to make sure company interests are maximized" rather then, "let's send a towing vessel, with refinery and ore attached, to extract an alien organism!" The first just seems a more flexible and calculated evil. The second just seems like a blundering evil. Sure, it sucks if you happen to be the miners on the mining ship, but just seems like a bad choice all around if you actually want to retrieve the organism. Better to send a science vessel full of Ash's (or just a single Ash). This is how I always interpreted it as well. The 'droid was the ultimate failsafe for the company. I just made the assumption in Aliens that the military was applying the same principle, but within a chain of command structure. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ironwood on September 29, 2010, 10:58:52 AM That doesn't gel with the fact that the Android ash was placed on the Nostromo to capture and study whatever brought down the Alien ship, as was said quite clearly in Alien Actually, it does. The signal was detected, decoded and the Company quickly changed personnel on the closest starship that was going out there. I really don't see why you have a problem with the timeline - I'm quick sure they have synthetics in almost every station they own. I know I would have. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on September 29, 2010, 11:32:13 AM I also assume they went ahead and sent in a mining vessel rather than a full out science vessel complete with "containment cells" simply to avoid the red tape and answering a lot of bureaucrat questions - assuming again of course that the company does answer to someone/thing. Then again, the story plays out nicely when the players involved are not trained military forces and just hapless miners trying to make the rent. Hooray for the little guy... erm, girl. Going to have to order this movie up this week sometime since my interest is peaked.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Riggswolfe on September 30, 2010, 07:35:30 AM That doesn't gel with the fact that the Android ash was placed on the Nostromo to capture and study whatever brought down the Alien ship, as was said quite clearly in Alien Actually, it does. The signal was detected, decoded and the Company quickly changed personnel on the closest starship that was going out there. I really don't see why you have a problem with the timeline - I'm quick sure they have synthetics in almost every station they own. I know I would have. That's pretty much what happened. In fact, I figured the timeline was like this: 1) Company intercepts and decodes the transmission. 2) Comapny figures out which ship will be closest. 3) Company replaces the Nostromo's science officer with Ash at some stop along the way. 4) Alien: The movie happens. Even if they put Ash onto the ship before it ever left Earth it all still works. Since the original movie implies that trips take months then it's still a matter of "which ship will be closest in the next year or two." And yeah, I fully believe it was done that way so they could be sneaky about it. Probably to avoid red tape and other companies knowing what they have. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on October 13, 2010, 01:06:18 AM http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/10/fox_flips_for_damon_lindelofs.html (http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/10/fox_flips_for_damon_lindelofs.html)
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Margalis on October 13, 2010, 02:32:43 AM Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ironwood on October 13, 2010, 02:41:52 AM Totally.
The Film Industry is starting to really annoy me. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 13, 2010, 06:02:15 AM Natalie Portman, as a marine, you out of your dam mind casting people. :uhrr:
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on October 13, 2010, 09:02:26 AM I'm wondering if it even gets made now, just because Scott has been adamant about making the movie as a hard R.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Sir T on October 13, 2010, 08:02:04 PM Natalie Portman, as a marine, you out of your dam mind casting people. :uhrr: If you wanted nerd tits pulling power and someone that looks the part, they could go with that woman that played Starbuck in BSG. You could at least see her as a marine. But Portman?? I'm wondering if it even gets made now, just because Scott has been adamant about making the movie as a hard R. The original Alien had relatively little gore aside from that scene with the chestbuster, and that wasn't really that bloody. Ditto with Aliens. If they were going for a SAW style film then that would be way over the top. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Pezzle on October 13, 2010, 08:38:08 PM Is it in 3D?
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: HaemishM on October 13, 2010, 09:05:19 PM If it isn't now, I'm sure it will be. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on October 13, 2010, 09:32:43 PM I'm wondering if it even gets made now, just because Scott has been adamant about making the movie as a hard R. The original Alien had relatively little gore aside from that scene with the chestbuster, and that wasn't really that bloody. Ditto with Aliens. If they were going for a SAW style film then that would be way over the top. You don't need gore to be considered a hard R. Alien is rated R the way Cronenberg movies earn their's. They are strictly adult and give you a little something to chew on while the wick burns. You might not get too many scenes with gore, but when you do, it's visceral and a hell of a lot more effective than the Saw movies. The scene with Ripley getting choked by a rolled-up magazine and what happens after is edgier than what a gore-fest can feed you. Cary Elwes sawing off his own foot is gnarly though, yeah. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ratman_tf on October 13, 2010, 11:17:10 PM Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 14, 2010, 07:16:42 AM Natalie Portman, as a marine, you out of your dam mind casting people. :uhrr: If you wanted nerd tits pulling power and someone that looks the part, they could go with that woman that played Starbuck in BSG. You could at least see her as a marine. But Portman?? Agreed. She has a few B-movie gigs (pre-BSG, one I feel directly got he the BSG job) where she plays various military roles. Also, the "R" thing, the "R" of yesterday is not the same "R" as today. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Cadaverine on October 14, 2010, 04:31:15 PM Also, the "R" thing, the "R" of yesterday is not the same "R" as today. Almost all of todays horror films flat out suck. It's just buckets of blood, and brain chunks. There's no fright, just shlock. Interestingly enough, the movie that scared me the most growing up was Poltergeist, which is PG. Alien didn't bother me in the least as a child. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: 01101010 on October 14, 2010, 05:58:52 PM Also, the "R" thing, the "R" of yesterday is not the same "R" as today. Almost all of todays horror films flat out suck. It's just buckets of blood, and brain chunks. There's no fright, just shlock. Interestingly enough, the movie that scared me the most growing up was Poltergeist, which is PG. Alien didn't bother me in the least as a child. Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ratman_tf on October 14, 2010, 06:43:11 PM Interestingly enough, the movie that scared me the most growing up was Poltergeist, which is PG. Alien didn't bother me in the least as a child. Both movies tried to go for more primal fears. The thought of getting hurt is scary (Saw movies...) but it's a short ride. Stuff from Poltergiest or Alien can stay with you your whole life. Heh heh heh. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mortriden on October 19, 2010, 03:10:57 PM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 20, 2010, 11:51:16 AM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Samwise on October 20, 2010, 11:55:32 AM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html It's hard to believe today that movies used to be made using physical sets and costumes. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 20, 2010, 12:19:49 PM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html It's hard to believe today that movies used to be made using physical sets and costumes. There was an amazing amount of talent on that film, the work involved could only have been a labor of love. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: DraconianOne on October 20, 2010, 02:18:05 PM That site's a great find. Nice one.
On a side note: 2 months to build a model that's only used in one shot. Also, 2 months setting up lighting in a model that didn't get used at all! That's a whole lot of wasted time and money... Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: HaemishM on October 20, 2010, 02:49:17 PM It's hard to believe today that movies used to be made using physical sets and costumes. Chris Nolan intentionally uses real physical sets and costumes on some of the shots in his movies because he believes it looks better than CGI. That's one of the reasons Inception looks so damn good. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Samwise on October 20, 2010, 03:04:36 PM On a side note: 2 months to build a model that's only used in one shot. Also, 2 months setting up lighting in a model that didn't get used at all! That's a whole lot of wasted time and money... I'm going to guess you don't work on movies. Or software, for that matter. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on October 20, 2010, 06:51:04 PM Yeah, the biggest problem with the first one is the way the alien moves around. (When you see the alien's shadow as it stalks up to Lambert, and when it picks itself up off the floor after Ripley awakens it) They do have the one shot, though, where it appears to be gliding up to Lambert with its arms outstretched. That's creepy as all hell.
Still, I prefer how it gets around in the other movies. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: DraconianOne on October 21, 2010, 12:02:40 AM I'm going to guess you don't work on movies. Or software, for that matter. :awesome_for_real: Curiously, both. But figures like that still stagger me and make the producer in me cringe. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mortriden on October 21, 2010, 10:20:54 AM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html Weird, I could have sworn Scott said something like that on my bonus DVD. Now I'm going to re-watch that again. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Sir T on October 21, 2010, 10:32:14 AM I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html Those photos are superb it shows the level of craftmanship they put into those Movies. I remember reading how they had every Gun turret marked and placed on the physical models of the Star Destroyers and Battlestar Galactica. These guys took pride in their work. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on October 21, 2010, 10:49:01 AM Most of the movies now are brutality based. Alien was suspense based. I will have to dig up the link, but I recall reading how Scott kept the alien from fully being seen in the first movie because it left things much more intense. Likewise for the view you did see of it, they were fleeting shots or just parts here and there - which blended even more with the surrounding environment...made things much more twitchy. I believe it was also because the effects at the time could not hide the fact that "it was a tall man in a rubber suit". When the Alien was on screen, and fully exposed, it broke all the suspense by being too unrealistic as an alien/recognizable as a person. It's the same reason when the Captain gets attacked in the air vents you only see the Alien throw it's arms out to attack, you don't see the attack. Not so sure about that. http://www.zen171398.zen.co.uk/Alien%20%28page5%29.html Weird, I could have sworn Scott said something like that on my bonus DVD. Now I'm going to re-watch that again. He likely did. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Samwise on October 21, 2010, 11:09:59 AM I'm going to guess you don't work on movies. Or software, for that matter. :awesome_for_real: Curiously, both. But figures like that still stagger me and make the producer in me cringe. My first job in the software industry (as an intern) was doing QA on a product that was in development for a couple of months and ended up being canned before it saw the light of day because it just wasn't going to work out. IMO it's not wasted time as long as you learned something. And the Aliens guy at least got a few really cool photos to show for it. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Merusk on October 21, 2010, 03:51:38 PM It's hard to believe today that movies used to be made using physical sets and costumes. Chris Nolan intentionally uses real physical sets and costumes on some of the shots in his movies because he believes it looks better than CGI. That's one of the reasons Inception looks so damn good. It's a quickly dying art, too. I can't remember which movie it was, but the director wanted to use more costumes and models than CGI, but they couldn't find folks able to build them. Damnit, I wish I could remember which movie that was. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: stu on January 15, 2011, 12:55:57 AM Scott announced that the work he and his peeps were doing has morphed into a unique universe and the new Alien projects have... come undone? The new movie will be called Prometheus.
http://www.slashfilm.com/ridley-scotts-alien-prequel-longer-alien-prequel-prometheus-starring-noomi-rapace/#more-95911 Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Ratman_tf on January 15, 2011, 06:21:12 AM Scott announced that the work he and his peeps were doing has morphed into a unique universe and the new Alien projects have... come undone? The new movie will be called Prometheus. http://www.slashfilm.com/ridley-scotts-alien-prequel-longer-alien-prequel-prometheus-starring-noomi-rapace/#more-95911 Good on them. If it doesn't fit in the franchise anymore, I'm glad they're not going to hammer it into bits to make it fit. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Jeff Kelly on January 15, 2011, 07:59:18 AM Seriously, I liked the pitch of the Lindelof script. I disagree with the casting but I liked the rest.
Maybe it's because I'm old and I actually like suspense more than gore. Alien is probably still one of the scariest movies I have ever seen in my life Alien and Alien 2 also are perfect examples that you can approach the premise of a story quite differently and make it feel like it's the same universe. From suspense horror to action flick while still keeping the essence. I never got the appeal of Saw or all the other torture porn out there. Without the twist at the end Saw wouldn't even work as a movie (seriously just think about how good the movie still would be if you cut that out of the movie) and until then the shock value is wholly derived from the gruesome scenes which only work for a few minutes because you get numb really fast. If you have to go from Saw to Hostel and end up in human centipede territory just to make people still watch your movies, you have no winning formula. Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity show that suspense horror still works. Nothing beats appealing to our most primal fears. But Natalie Portman? Seriously? Sigourney Weaver sold the tough girl act. After all you'd have to be if you were on a mining vessel with a mostly male crew for years at a time. Natalie Portman would be like Winona Ryder in Alien 4 who was outclassed by Weaver from start to finish. I like the suggestion of Katee Sackhoff though. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Merusk on January 20, 2011, 11:59:07 AM I viewed SAW on SciFi when I saw it and it held up incredibly well as just a suspense/ thriller movie since all the gore was cut out. If anything I think it was made better by not showing the scenes I later read about. I think the gore stuff was in there just because of the demographic it's aimed at.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Mrbloodworth on January 20, 2011, 01:25:47 PM Saw one, was incredible, the rest? Not so much. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Azazel on February 19, 2011, 05:56:09 PM Aren't they (Saw) pretty much just the same movie over and over?
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: K9 on February 20, 2011, 03:51:45 AM It's hard to believe today that movies used to be made using physical sets and costumes. Chris Nolan intentionally uses real physical sets and costumes on some of the shots in his movies because he believes it looks better than CGI. That's one of the reasons Inception looks so damn good. It's a quickly dying art, too. I can't remember which movie it was, but the director wanted to use more costumes and models than CGI, but they couldn't find folks able to build them. Damnit, I wish I could remember which movie that was. A real shame too; some of the most visceral action movies are ones that predated heavy CGI use, and CGI could never quite recapture the feel of those movies. Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Engels on December 22, 2011, 09:11:09 AM nm
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: apocrypha on December 22, 2011, 09:17:20 AM Most disappointing necro ever. :heartbreak:
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: Engels on December 22, 2011, 09:30:50 AM Don't be. Just read the Prometheus thread, aka Aliens 5. I necro'd this when I didn't have to, is all.
Title: Re: Alien 5 Post by: apocrypha on December 22, 2011, 09:31:51 PM Fair enough :awesome_for_real:
|