Ridley Scott Prometheus: NOT the Alien Prequel Details

[Mola Rob]

What's wrong with ALIENS? Is it because the Aliens act more like insects than aliens? I seem to recall Ridley Scott comparing the birth cycle of the alien to that of a wasp. He's also said many times both in the Quadrilogy/Anthology documentaries and commentaries that the alien taking on the "characteristics of the host" was the whole bloody point. You're dissing ALIENS for reasons that Ridley Scott used when he was making ALIEN! If you want a good place to start discounting alien films, start with the massively retconed, redesigned and super convenient Alien3.
:thumbsdown

Whoa calm down dude. I was making no comment on the quality of the sequels (except Resurrection which is a major POS), I even like Alien 3 so there. I am just theorizing about the origin of the alien and how the Jockey would fit it. Looking at the bio suits from Prometheus just sent my brain into theorizing mode.

That being said I do prefer the alien in the first movie over the insects in the second and I'm not a big fan of the alien queen concept or design. I do think Aliens is an entertaining action movie remake of Alien.

Speaking of the whole alien taking on the characteristics of the host I wonder what it took from Kane? Did it smoke while it was hanging out in the air ducts? :lol

 

[JediG60racer]

It did seem to be nice to cats....

 

[Jeyl]

Mainly, it has a massively capable, strong female lead.

That's just not realistic.

You're just jealous because she has four arms.

 

[Jeyl]

I do think Aliens is an entertaining action movie remake of Alien.

But it's not a remake. :cool

 

[Jedi2016]

It did seem to be nice to cats....

LOL.. read the script sometime. The alien tried desperately to get into that box, to the point of repeatedly slamming it into the wall trying to break it open. Small wonder it got cut, I don't even think it was filmed.

 

[Jeyl]

LOL.. read the script sometime. The alien tried desperately to get into that box, to the point of repeatedly slamming it into the wall trying to break it open. Small wonder it got cut, I don't even think it was filmed.

Watch the Director's Cut in the Anthology BluRay or Quadrilogy DVD. It features an alternate take of the Alien looking into Jonesy's box, pulling it's head back, and BAM! Slams the box right out of frame. It really started me when I first saw, but I knew something was coming because the shot looked really different compared to the original. This explains why the box is laying on it's side on the floor when Ripley finds it again.

 

[Mola Rob]

But it's not a remake. :cool

Guess it depends on who's watching it. :lol

 

[Jeyl]

Guess it depends on who's watching it. :lol

You have no concept of sequels?

 

[Mola Rob]

You have no concept of sequels?

I have a very solid concept of sequels thank you very much and an equally solid grasp of what constitutes originality versus a rehashing of the same story just with more of everything. Not trashing Aliens at all just stating my opinion based upon my observations.

 

[Jeyl]

I have a very solid concept of sequels thank you very much and an equally solid grasp of what constitutes originality versus a rehashing of the same story just with more of everything. Not trashing Aliens at all just stating my opinion based upon my observations.

But it's still a sequel. We pick up 57 years where we left off. We see the original cast during Ripley's debriefing. How does this constitute as a remake when it's clearly telling the audience it takes place after ALIEN? What sense would it make if I just told everyone that the Godfather Part II shouldn't be considered part of the same story or continuity as the first film when it clearly demonstrates that it is? It doesn't make any sense calling a sequel a remake when it follows the first film.

 

[Jedi2016]

Watch the Director's Cut in the Anthology BluRay or Quadrilogy DVD. It features an alternate take of the Alien looking into Jonesy's box, pulling it's head back, and BAM! Slams the box right out of frame. It really started me when I first saw, but I knew something was coming because the shot looked really different compared to the original. This explains why the box is laying on it's side on the floor when Ripley finds it again.

I think I've only seen the DC once.. hehe. Ridley says it was nothing more than a marketing gimmick and that the theatrical version remains his version of choice.. so that's the one I watch.

 

[Mola Rob]

But it's still a sequel. We pick up 57 years where we left off. We see the original cast during Ripley's debriefing. How does this constitute as a remake when it's clearly telling the audience it takes place after ALIEN? What sense would it make if I just told everyone that the Godfather Part II shouldn't be considered part of the same story or continuity as the first film when it clearly demonstrates that it is? It doesn't make any sense calling a sequel a remake when it follows the first film.

Okay so it's a sequel with a rehashed story. It's a requel.

 

[Jeyl]

Okay so it's a sequel with a rehashed story. It's a requel.

Labeling ALIENS as movie as a mere rehash i find to be quite disingenuous. Men in Black II, Ghostbusters II, and Indiana Jones 3 & 4 I consider to be all rehashes. Even the original Alien was a rehash of other scifi material that came before it.

Same goes for labeling it as an action movie. Yes, it's got a lot of gun play, but the film has one heck of a cadence. Nothing is rushed, scenes build tension and suspense occurs throughout. And the character interactions I find very pleasing. I know I brag about how cool Ripley is as a strong female character, but the film never goes out of it's way to broadcast that fact. Some of her cooler moments are when she and Hicks work things out. Here are two characters who respect and confide with one another in a near hopeless situation. This is certainly a change from what the crew of the Nostromo was like.

 

[Carson Dyle]

Tonally, ALIENS has more in common with Starship Troopers that it does with ALIEN. And that's probably for the best.

Rare is the sequel (or prequel) that manages to build upon the original without diminishing it.

At the end of the day, ALIENS is a fantastic sci-fi action movie; one of the best ever made. And ALIEN... well, ALIEN is a work of art.

 

[SKIN JOB 66]

Tonally, ALIENS has more in common with Starship Troopers that it does with ALIEN. And that's probably for the best.

Rare is the sequel (or prequel) that manages to build upon the original without diminishing it.

At the end of the day, ALIENS is a fantastic sci-fi action movie; one of the best ever made. And ALIEN... well, ALIEN is a work of art.

Well said. :thumbsup

 

[Nwerke]

Yep, it's a fantastic action sci-fi remake. I've been saying that for about 26 years.

Jeyl, it's a remake - not, I'da thought obviously, in the 'openly acknowledged' sense. But it is a remake in the 'for all storywise intents and purposes' sense. You've got the same structure, the same McGuffins (Jones = Newt), etc.

 

[moffeaton]

Did Aliens usher in the "Summer Blockbuster Rollercoaster Action" film? I seem to remember the phrase "A THRILL A MINUTE ROLLERCOASTER RIDE, AIEEEE" in every review of that film, in '86.

 

[Mola Rob]

Yep, it's a fantastic action sci-fi remake. I've been saying that for about 26 years.

Jeyl, it's a remake - not, I'da thought obviously, in the 'openly acknowledged' sense. But it is a remake in the 'for all storywise intents and purposes' sense. You've got the same structure, the same McGuffins (Jones = Newt), etc.

Thank goodness there are other people who recognize this fact. I noticed the incredible similarities the first time I saw Aliens in '86.

I find it interesting that when you point it out to people they take it as an attack on the quality of the movie when in fact I am just pointing out the same things you did about the structure, story, McGuffins, etc. It's a well made movie but it's not original by any means.

 

[Nwerke]

Oh yep. If you cared to go searching you'd find earlier posts where I say the same, right here (not this thread, I mean years ago.)

Originality is a slippery slope anyway though; to be fair, A L I E N was widely described in '79 as a haunted house movie in space and that's got some merit too.

It seems silly to get so personally invested in a film that you refuse to acknowledge even its minor flaws. Aliens is a BLAST, and achieved remarkable production values on a tight budget. The story is the same thing again, but cleverly recast as a war/action movie. As you note, that's not precisely a criticism!

 

[Mola Rob]

It's been said by many that Alien is just a remake of It! The Terror From Beyond Space. It's a really well done remake but it's the same thing minus the chest bursting and more realistic trappings of later science-fiction. I love It!, Alien, and Aliens so it's all good.