Ridley Scott Prometheus: NOT the Alien Prequel Details

[Colin Droidmilk]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Always preferred the idea of Brett and Dallas being turned into eggs. Giger directly states in 'Giger's Alien' that that was to be their fate according to the script. As was said above it's more alien than the egg-laying queen. Here's his masterly obscene sculpture of Brett's metamorphosis for anyone who doesn't have the book:

 

[JunkSabers1138]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I think Dallas was a better example.... it looked more "egg-like". However, I never got why the opening at the top of that egg looked different than the other eggs.... maybe it was based on the earlier concept design and shot before the final egg design was finished?

 

[moffeaton]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

The original egg opening was deemed FAR too vaginal in appearance, so they changed it to an "x" - I guess they didn't want to freak out the prudes too much.

 

[glitterbomb]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I might be in the minority here, but I think the idea of a prequel is waaaay off base. It sounds like the same mistake Lucas made with the Star Wars prequels: not understanding the material and what fans enjoyed about it. I fear it's going to end up being a CGI fest that sacrifices story and tension for scary-monster-goes-splodey. And the article didn't put me at ease on that front.

The Alien series is really about Ellen Ripley (and the characters around her), not the Aliens. There's a fantastic arc to her character that few series manage to pull off. No Ripley, no point. Like most good sci-fi, the Alien series uses monsters, technology and space to make comments about human behavior. The monsters are really just a backdrop. A forceful, terrifying, visceral backdrop. And that's an important balance to keep.

When the audience doesn't know any more about the creatures than the characters who are fighting them, then the audience is just as terrified as the characters. Alfred Hitchcock was famous for a reason, he developed some of the techniques still in use today, things that have become cliche through so much use. The main being that what we don't know is a whole lot scarier than spelling it out, it allows the audience members to fill in the blanks with what they each find most terrifying. The Aliens are meant to be the ultimate Monster in the Closet. Unstoppable, grotesque, horrifically violent, inhuman, with unknown motives. So going back and giving us back story on the Aliens and the Space Jockey is not only unnecessary, it's actually doing a disservice. It kills the tension and mystery.

Case in point is the Star Wars prequels: Seeing thousands of Jengo Fett clones and a little boy whose sole acting expression was pouty-angry didn't make Boba Fett any cooler. It kinda made him lame. And that damn Midi-chlorians explanation turned the cool mystical beings that were Jedi into nothing more than dull space jocks.

 

[SSgt Burton]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

The introduction of the queen turned the alien from a formidable threat to a mindless drone.

Ripley: They cut the power.
Hudson: What do you mean 'they' cut the power? How could they cut the power man?! They're animals! (i.e. mindless)
--
Ripley: They found a way in. Something we missed. (i.e. formidable threat)

You were saying?

*sigh*

Once again you use a completely ambiguous event to support your argument.

There is nothing that directly connects the aliens being responsible for the power going out before they attack operations.

The aliens may have inadvertantly cut the power lines with their sharp claws (or tails) by crawling through the ceiling. Not purposefully, but accidentally.

The power could just have easily gone out due to the processor overloading.

This is like the guy who turns on too many devices in his house and blows a fuse, while at the exact same time the city experiences a large blackout. So he believes "he" caused the blackout when in actuality the two events were merely a coincidence and unrelated.

The power going out before the attack in operations could just have easily "not" been the responsibility of the aliens. So this is not "proof".

As for "finding another way in" as proof of intelligence... Well it certainly took them long enough to understand that running through the corridors and being shredded by the sentry guns was a "bad idea".

Bugs get into my house and I don't have a clue how they do it sometimes. But I certainly would not attribute "human like" intelligence to them for it.

The aliens are not intelligent. At least not on the same level as ourselves. What they definitely "are" however is "driven".


Kevin

 

[thegreatgalling]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Hmm. It has been pretty interesting to read both sides of the argument, I didn't realize this issue was one of contention among fans. I always assumed the filmmakers wanted us to believe they WERE intelligent, but I can see the whole instinctual bug angle too. Maybe its supposed to be unclear.

Neat thought!

 

[burningman]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I was thinking about this prequil and was wondering if Ridley will retcon the queen out of existance (my preference) I'd love to see what Ridley had in mind for how the aliens got here and I doubt it was a queen blah blah. Basically treat the franchise as if Aliens and Resurrection never existed. (i only leave Alien3 in because even though it was infearior to Alien is was very much in the same spirit)
Can you just imagine the hellstorm that would cause with Cameron fans LOL. I'd pay money to see that

As you might have guessed I'm not a fan of "Aliens"

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

What is this "it" you are referring to as a bomber? The derelict? You're saying that the derelict is a bomber?! Well, if you're going to use the "Special Editions" to back up your arguments, watch the Director's Cut. It's not a bomber. All those eggs in the derelict were the crew who were captured by the alien and mutated into eggs. I'll even have Sir Ridley Scott back me up on that.

26 minutes into the commentary Ridley specifically describes the Derelict as a carrier/bomber. And watched all the behind the scenes stuff yesterday and I didn't hear much mention of ants, bees or wasps as the basis for the alien species, so if you can point it out where and when they talk about that, please do. At 29 minutes in he does talk about insects impregnating a grub beneath the bark of a tree and that that was the basis...

 

[Weequay]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

*sigh*

The aliens are not intelligent. At least not on the same level as ourselves. What they definitely "are" however is "driven".


Kevin

I would agree, but I must confess that I have always thought the aliens were responsible for cutiing the power.

My guess is that was camerons intention, and I think most of the audience would have thought the same.

You make a good point re the century guns, they just kept coming didnt they! lol

Just to ask, whats the problem with the queen idea?

Is it that the exposition was not needed? (I would agree), or is there an objection to the actual use of a queen to lay the eggs?

If its the later, then what did people think layed the eggs?

As I say, at least ridley makes serious films. Had he helmed all the alien films post Aliens, (and even the AVP series), we could probably all agree that we would have amuch better series of films...

weequay

 

[ghostryder]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

My personal favorite line of all the films:

CALL
All Aliens please proceed to level one.​

Really? They understand English?

 

[moffeaton]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Willie for the win! 10 points awarded to Gryffindor!!

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Just to ask, whats the problem with the queen idea?
Is it that the exposition was not needed? (I would agree), or is there an objection to the actual use of a queen to lay the eggs?
If its the later, then what did people think layed the eggs?

I have to stress that I love ALIENS. The whole movie. I just don't think the queen was necessary, but understand the use of her for the climax. If they are a biological weapon it would be illogical to bring eggs carrying queen huggers that could create queens - you want a weapon to be limited and not be able to harm yourself after the enemy is down. Bringing a queen hugger wouldn't make sense.

However, the idea in ALIEN is however that the alien is able to produce offspring... so that again kills the need to a queen, but also in a way seems illogical for the reason I gave before, as you want a weapon to be deadly, but limited.

So... whatever Ridley decides, as long as he stays true to what was established in the first film and not worry too much about the rest, he has a huge undertaking on his hands.

 

[ghostryder]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Not that I don't love me some Ridley, but Star Wars was always better for me BEFORE I knew what the "prequel era" looked like. The vague story in my head beat anything anyone could have come up with. Same with the Space Jockey. Define it and you kind of destroy it.

 

[SSgt Burton]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Really? They understand English?

Well hey they cut the power right? They must be able to read English too! :lol

Maybe they consulted the blueprints first.

Hey why don't we talk about the Queen using the elevator to go to the landing pad. She must have known to press the "up" button. :eek


Okay sarcasm aside...


To be perfectly honest I too believed the aliens "cut the power" when I first watched the film nearly 25 years ago.

But upon rewatching the film (I don't know how many times.. a lot ), I've come to understand that a lot of what can be used to determine the aliens' intelligence can actually go either way. To this day I don't know if this "was" Cameron's intention (for it to be ambiguous) or that he was simply "dumbing it down" for us.


And again for the record "Aliens" is one of my three all time favourite movies. I love this movie.

However as a superfan who costumes as a Colonial Marine, even "I" can see the flaws in this film, and how it dramatically changed the direction of just what the "aliens" truly are.

It's already been said much more eloquently here- to say it once again:

The creature in "ALIEN" was a literal manifestation of the meaning of the word "alien": foreign, strange, unfamiliar.

This in essence is the whole point of the movie.

However the creatures in "Aliens" ARE familiar- they are bugs. Oversized, incredibly dangerous bugs. They have a hive. They have a Queen. They leave you alone unless you **** them off (the Marines poke around the hive- they are ignored until they kill one of the newborn aliens).

This is more or less the behaviour of bees.

This is what detracts from the first film. Going from the completely unfamiliar to the familiar. It reduces the aliens from something mythical to mere wild beasts. If you have the firepower they aren't a threat and not frightening. How frightening would Micheal Myers be if the house he entered had a SWAT team in it waiting for him?

Part of the point of the first film is that the creature appeared unstoppable, which is what made it so terrifying. How was Ripley going to kill it? She had to blow up her own ship causing a supernova! But it stowed away on her escape craft! What was she to do?! Ingenuity (and a bit of luck) was with her that she was able to force it out the airlock, and blast it with the engines.

As I've already said, even after the alien is shown flying away, it is not clearly revealed as to whether it is dead or not. It could still be "out there" floating through space waiting to attack some hapless victim and start the cycle of eggs/birth all over again.

So it is this intimation that the creature might be "immortal" that gives it a mythical quality, enhancing its terror.

The creatures in "Aliens" are most definitely mortal.


For me ALIEN is a standalone film. And while "Aliens" shares some commonalities with ALIEN, the two films couldn't be more different.

Suffice to say I enjoy both films for what they are; the first a horror film, the second an action film.


Kevin

 

[Organic Mechanic]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

My personal favorite line of all the films:

CALL
All Aliens please proceed to level one.​

Really? They understand English?

I always thought it was a bit of a joke on Call's part. I didn't think she was actually ADDRESSING the the beasts. :lol

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Yeah, you just don't need that kind of cheesy humor in what is supposed to be a horror-ish movie... though... it's more "weird" than "horror" anyway...

 

[Yellowjacket]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I personally love the scene where the power gets cut. Just the utter bafflement in Hudson's voice when he says, "What do you mean THEY cut the power?" The very idea that he might be suddenly facing down an intelligent, killing machine capable of reasoning out the destruction of power lines or access areas was a chilling moment that I liked and it played well on his dumbfounded face.

Surprise! You just went further down the food chain.

 

[genocyber]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I think when handling the Jockey they shouldn't explain what it is or its origins. Just show the pilot moving around and interacting with the xenomorph/s.
I recall a script that got made for Alien 3 that got scrapped was the Jockeys were a malevolent race that had engineered the aliiens for conquest and wanted to take over earth.

 

[JunkSabers1138]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I think when handling the Jockey they shouldn't explain what it is or its origins. Just show the pilot moving around and interacting with the xenomorph/s.
I recall a script that got made for Alien 3 that got scrapped was the Jockeys were a malevolent race that had engineered the aliens for conquest and wanted to take over earth.

ahem... *clears throat*.... *cough cough*.... and thats why the idea was never realized.... it sucks. Well I could see the Jockeys using the aliens as a tool of war, similar to diseased rats, bacteria, anthrax, etc, but I have never, NEVER, liked the idea of the aliens being the creations or engineered from a simpler form... to me that simply takes away from the creatures power and terrifying nature, while simultaneously giving more credit to the jockeys than was needed. Again, I could see the Jockeys as this race that simply found the aliens and added them to their inventory due to convenience, but the whole jockeys creating the aliens just seems to have a deep-seated wrongness about it, and why and how would the Jockeys have anything to do with earth or desire to overthrow it? Seems like they wouldnt be all that interested in a tiny insignificant planet in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

Re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

The Jockeys and the alien breed seem to be related. Maybe they are both creations by some third unknown creature. Just because it was a bomber doesn't mean it had to come bomb Earth - that's so cliché and overused and is beginning to get a little lame. Stumbling onto war-remnants between two alien races is much more interesting. Leave Earth out of it. Earth is trying to get those weapons so they can destroy themselves... not to defend themselves from alien invaders. Who wants this trashed globe anyway that looks so lovely from space?