Ridley Scott Prometheus: NOT the Alien Prequel Details

re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Knightjar said:
I'm with JunkSabers1138 on this. The first movie worked because of its mystery. It's what made it alien (lower case 'a'). Nothing needed any more explanation. The story was complete in itself and only benefited from the unknowns. To paraphrase Patton Oswalt, "I don't care about where the stuff I love comes from, I just love the stuff I love".

I'd be happier if Scott's new movie didn't involve either of the alien species from the first film, but instead involved another crew of a ship like the Nostromo encountering something new. Tell me a new story instead of trying to add to one that doesn't need it.
Click to expand...

Yes, time to move on to something new.
Put the creep factor back. We are far too comfortable now with the original critters, there is little alien about them to us anymore.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I would love to see conceptional art with different alien hosts, or what the original alien race looks like!

CessnaDriver said:
Yes, time to move on to something new.
Put the creep factor back. We are far too comfortable now with the original critters, there is little alien about them to us anymore.
Click to expand...
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

nwjedidave said:
I would love to see conceptional art with different alien hosts, or what the original alien race looks like!
Click to expand...


There are lots of things to explore. Throw us a curve ball and weird us out again.

I really want that feeling again that makes you think in your head....

WTF is that! And it did it several times! Keeping the big reveal of the final form until the end.

I think we all felt that on our first viewing of ALIEN back in the day.
Not sure what younger folks thought who saw it long after it came out and had been exposed to so many different creatures and FX.

I think younger folks just think the warriors are bad ass and cool now.

That sensation of alien wierdness, mystery, fear of the unknown needs to be put back desperately. Not to mention the critical factor of a character driven story that makes us care about the people. That was a big thing about ALIEN, we cared about the crew, they felt real, there was a connection and when that thing finally gets blown to hell, it's satisfying!

Scott has as tough job ahead especially if it is two films.

He mentioned doing work under water for these prequals I think?

As they looked to the insect world for some inspiration for the first film, perhaps they have found some alien inspiration from the exotic life beneath the sea. Some of that stuff is truly unworldy.
 
Last edited:
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Though it would be cool to explore the whole Space Jockey mythos, I think it's more interesting to leave it to our own imaginations. Usually what we make up in our own minds is more interesting than the real thing.
Remember the briefcase in Pulp Fiction? I don't want to see a movie about what's in it and how it got in Brad's hands.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Jedi2016 said:
Actually, if you want to settle the issue, dig around for the quotes from Ridley.. he said outright at some point that the ship was transporting the eggs when it crashed.
Click to expand...

It's in the extras on the DVDs.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

It's pretty worrying when Scott believes the more savvy film goer won't discern the difference between shot-for-3d and post process 3d. In fact his whole approach so far to a 3d/space jockey Alien leaves me quite sceptical.

I'm of the mind he's purely (re)kickstarting an Alien franchise for Fox in order to obtain a nice big field to play in for the Forever War project, something I'm sure he's much more passionate about at this stage in his career.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I had a feeling that it wasn't legit after Ridley Scott said that the Space Jokey we saw "fossilized" was in fact a suit.

:confused
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

MTV: Have you given any thought on how you'll feel when you walk on set that first time, how you'll deal with the déjà vu from 1979?

Scott: Yeah, it'll be weird, because I always said I'll never do a sequel. [Laughs.]

MTV: What made you change your mind?

Scott: Honestly? Well, y'see, I'm an old man and chances are pretty thin that I'll be given something or can make up something that could make me as much cheap, fast cash as an Alien prequel. See, when you're young you always believe you are off to bigger and better things - but look over there at fat ass Russell Crowe playing Robin Hood.... You think I expected to be here??? Sheesh, no way.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I always figured that no matter what the Company would have gone back to investigate the planet knowing where everything was and recovered everything they could. They'd know about Ripley's hatred towards the Company and such from reports from (i forgot his name) the guy who tries to implant her and Newt. They'd know better than to trust any reports from her so for all we know they may have recovered the ship to some lab. Too bad they can't get rid of third movie as part of the series lol. How did Scott fall to the level of half these modern directors who think they have to do hip camera tricks anyhow? It's no wonder you don't see movies from alot of directors, they just won't be hip and get the work.

Edit: The fact that he was talking to MTV makes me sick as they're the last media source anyone should be talking to.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

cobalt crimson said:
Too bad they can't get rid of third movie as part of the series lol.
Click to expand...

I can do that.

*thinks for a second*

Even as a seven year old, I could tell this movie was taking way too many liberties in trying to get the story to go in a different direction. Remember the opening to Aliens with Ripley’s shuttle? The recreation was dead on. In this film, they changed everything. The bluish metalic look of the Sulaco was changed into a familiar warm/beige like color similar to the Nostromo. They also changed the way the cryo tubes looked and functioned.

And really, there is an egg on the ceiling. Do you remember any area of the Sulaco that remotely looked like that? And it’s on the freaking ceiling! So we’re supposed to believe that the Queen somehow managed to suspend herself upside down against the ceiling, lay an egg without the use of her ovipositor, all while attacking Ripley and Newt AT THE SAME TIME. And let’s not forget that even with the Queen dead, you think Ripley is stupid enough to not check every part of the ship to see if anything else got onboard? Having an Alien get away this easily just makes Ripley look stupid.

And another thing, what was with the Sulaco jettisoning the cryo pods? If the cryo tubes can be relocated to a safer location that's sealed from the rest of the ship, why not just extinguish the fire by creating a vacuum in that compartment? They are on a Marine ship for crying out loud. And why, why why did the emergency escape vehicle do such a terrible job with the landing? No parachute, no landing thrusters, nothing. It crashes and kills nearly everyone onboard.

So there you have it. ALIENS never had an official follow up. It had a stupid "What if?" scenario that contradicts everything previously established and gets to the story in the stupidest way possible. I bet the director doesn't even acknowledge this film either.

......crap. I just went on a rant about Alien3 didn't I?
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

To be fair to Scott, he's on record as far back as 1979 as regretting that the first film lacked an explanation of the origin of the derelict. In the 'Book of Alien', he talks about his idea of it as a battlewagon ferrying 'either its own kind or a weapon' to some war zone or something.

I think this regret shows lack of judgement, but at least it shows that his aims are sincere with the new film, and that he's not just looking for some new angle to milk.

My view: each new Alien film damages the first film through needless extra exposition, causing the steady erosion of the very 'alien-ness' the original was lauded for in the first place. It's sad to see Scott himself adding to the damage.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Colin Droidmilk said:
My view: each new Alien film damages the first film through needless extra exposition, causing the steady erosion of the very 'alien-ness' the original was lauded for in the first place.
Click to expand...

Correction, the AVP films damages the first film by literally bringing the Aliens to Earth and saying they've been there for thousands of years.

And what do you mean by "needless extra exposition"? How did ALIENS damage the first film through exposition?
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Jeyl said:
And what do you mean by "needless extra exposition"? How did ALIENS damage the first film through exposition?
Click to expand...

The Queen was an unnecessary complication in an elegantly 'alien' life cycle. The Queen and 'hive' structure is just too familiar and Earth-like. Much as I love ALIENS, I prefer the simple horror of victims becoming new eggs.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

I'm a sucker for back stories and details, I always end up wondering "why this or what was that like?" after seeing stuff. I'd love an explanation of things if done right in this franchise and I agree I'd rather see it take place when colonization is just starting. Have it so that you see how it got there and then later on have it discovered by some independent mining crew scanning the planet and then after they have a bad time of it explain how the Company got a hold of the info it was there. Sadly I haven't seen the first one that much compared to Aliens. As much as I like the guys who made the first AVP it was lame but I do like the idea that Bishop was a tribute to the company founder. Anyhow I hope Scott doesn't drop the ball. To be honest he could call this Aliens III and totally wipe out the others.
 
re: Ridley Scott: Alien Prequel Details

Knightjar said:
The Queen was an unnecessary complication in an elegantly 'alien' life cycle. The Queen and 'hive' structure is just too familiar and Earth-like. Much as I love ALIENS, I prefer the simple horror of victims becoming new eggs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and parasites that lay embryos inside it's victims that eat their way out are nothing like what we have on Earth. And don't diss the Queen. At least that wasn't just a simple guy in a suit.

And victims becoming new eggs? You can't count that as canon if they didn't include that in the movie. And don't you dare bring up "The Director's Cut" because Ridley Scott himself has said that he still prefers the original cut, as do a lot of other critics and fans. Myself included.

At least with the Queen, it presented us with a scenario that makes the Aliens a lot more scarier than the simple killing creature from the first and third film. They don't want to simply kill you, they want to rape you and kill you through birth. Now THAT is scary.
 
This thread is more than 11 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.

Similar threads

feek61
Apollo 15 Movie by Dave Scott
Replies
2
Views
361
joberg
joberg
doppelganger
Great Scott...Happy November 12th
Replies
2
Views
266
Riceball
Riceball
Moviefreak
Crystal Lake, Friday the 13th prequel series coming to Peacock.
Replies
3
Views
1,633
CopperRevan
CopperRevan
NakedMoleRat
Look out for the Little Guy, Scott Lang’s book
Replies
3
Views
548
NakedMoleRat
NakedMoleRat
TheVCCco
1979 Alien - MUTHUR was tiny!
Replies
1
Views
388
joberg
joberg
Back
Top