So very true.
The Alien Franchise Discussion
- Thread starter abake
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
So very true.
JAWS has spoken.
Now, if Alien is a masterpiece of cinema and Aliens is a great ****ing movie, how should Alien 3 be regarded? What is the most probable fairest estimation?
Personally I love it, I rate it right up there. The last worthy entry in the franchise. Everything afterward had truly lost the magic.
Now, if Alien is a masterpiece of cinema and Aliens is a great ****ing movie, how should Alien 3 be regarded? What is the most probable fairest estimation?
Personally I love it, I rate it right up there. The last worthy entry in the franchise. Everything afterward had truly lost the magic.
Been thinking a lot about this lately. The first three films are the only ones I consider canon and the more I watch them, the more I believe they are Ripley's story above all else. While I love that each of these films has its own distinct look, tone, and genre, Ripley's arc remaining believable is probably their greatest achievement. She evolves so much from the first film to the third, yet her beats make sense and Weaver does a great job selling them.
I think recent entries have lost sight of that focus. Before every one of Ridley Scott's new Alien films -- Prometheus, Covenant, and now the unnamed next chapter -- he gives an interview about how the creature is either "cooked" or needs to be made scary again. It's very clear what his focus is. Scott is a premise guy, not a character guy. Though it served him well for Alien and maybe half of Prometheus, the audience doesn't have an emotional attachment to any of those films. Cameron is the one who gave us that attachment and Fincher, well, he boldly tested it.
Scott could have explored the dynamic between Shaw and David in Covenant, but instead he kills the former off-screen and (whether he knows it or not) places the audience's future investment in David's hands. As great as Fassbender is, his android character needs compelling humans to riff off of, lest he become one-dimensional. We see it happen in Covenant; the man can only give so many speeches about "creation" before we start wondering if that's all David can do at this point.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
I think recent entries have lost sight of that focus. Before every one of Ridley Scott's new Alien films -- Prometheus, Covenant, and now the unnamed next chapter -- he gives an interview about how the creature is either "cooked" or needs to be made scary again. It's very clear what his focus is. Scott is a premise guy, not a character guy. Though it served him well for Alien and maybe half of Prometheus, the audience doesn't have an emotional attachment to any of those films. Cameron is the one who gave us that attachment and Fincher, well, he boldly tested it.
Scott could have explored the dynamic between Shaw and David in Covenant, but instead he kills the former off-screen and (whether he knows it or not) places the audience's future investment in David's hands. As great as Fassbender is, his android character needs compelling humans to riff off of, lest he become one-dimensional. We see it happen in Covenant; the man can only give so many speeches about "creation" before we start wondering if that's all David can do at this point.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
Last edited:
abake
Rex Tremendae Majestatis
Those are some very good points.
Prometheus was a great set up for a new series of movies, with two great characters to move forward: the idealistic scientist and the unhinged android, and I think Scott didn't so much lose focus as lose faith in the alien itself. The characters were there for you to root for and follow, but fans reacted poorly to the lack of our beloved xenomorph, so Scott course-corrected for Covenant, but without Rapace, he had to get a new heroine.
I'm not sure why Rapace didn't come back as Shaw... was there a schedule conflict or did they write the character off? From what I can remember, Rapace was willing to come back as Shaw, so it was both surprising and disappointing that she was killed off. Whatever the case, it put Covenant in a tricky situation, because then you have to set up yet another heroine, so it just starts to become formulaic no matter what you do.
Anyway, going into Covenant, it's clear that Scott said "screw this, I'm going to give them what they want" and failed miserably. Again, IMHO, because he lost faith in the alien itself. Of course the alien can still be scary! If movies with simple ghosts can still scare audiences, there's no reason why you can't make a movie with aliens in it scary again.
Unfortunately, Scott decided that blood and gore were the way to go, instead of building up tension and genuine dread. And mind you, I don't think Covenant is terrible, it's just nowhere near the quality of its predecessors in the franchise (well, it is above A:R, so there's that).
At any rate, I do hope we get another entry, if only to finish David's story. I really don't care for whoever was the female lead in Covenant... can't even remember her name.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
Agreed on everything.
But, regarding point 2, to be fair, it really is a huge stretch of the imagination how the Queen even got onboard the dropship... I just watched Aliens again recently, and the way the scene is edited it's just impossible for the Queen to have been able to get in there. But that's fine, I just gloss over it.
Man , it goes to show you how differently people view films.....
I for one really felt all the characters in Aliens....
We had some basic knowledge of them in the ship scenes, but who would have though Gorman , the lazy incompetent leader would come around and end up sacrificing himself for one of his crew?
Bishop, the wild card, hold true to his programming....
Hudson, the panicked humor guy, goes down in a blaze of adrenaline glory.
Hicks, the common sense honorable grunt is totally incapacitated for the final showdown.
Even Newt , the pessimist without any childlike emotions , finally gives in and become a kid again when reduced by Ripley.
If any of the characters were predictable, it was Ripley and Burke.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I for one really felt all the characters in Aliens....
We had some basic knowledge of them in the ship scenes, but who would have though Gorman , the lazy incompetent leader would come around and end up sacrificing himself for one of his crew?
Bishop, the wild card, hold true to his programming....
Hudson, the panicked humor guy, goes down in a blaze of adrenaline glory.
Hicks, the common sense honorable grunt is totally incapacitated for the final showdown.
Even Newt , the pessimist without any childlike emotions , finally gives in and become a kid again when reduced by Ripley.
If any of the characters were predictable, it was Ripley and Burke.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
After getting NECA's Parker and Brett figures I was in the mood again for Alien.
I always catch something I somehow didn't notice before - when Ripley runs into the Alien in the corridor on the way to the shuttle and flees, leaving Jonesy behind in his carry-case - the Alien briefly studies the case - obviously I knew that - but what I never realized before is it actually slaps the case aside. Anyone else make new discoveries like this?
That's why I feel like the focus of the criticism we see for Aliens comes from a place of putting more value on one thing - the Alien - than the thing that perhaps James Cameron valued more than anything else - Ripley.
He could have just remade Alien with some other crew finding the derelict but he wanted to continue Ripley's story. He found a way to reinvolve her that made sense for the character.
I guess the problem was that no one knew what Fincher's ''thing'' was at the time. He was pretty much unproven. But as I said in that Blomkamp thread - with the quality of his later stuff and the reputation he developed from it Fincher would now be considered a prime directorial acquisition for the Alien franchise had he not already done one.
'Amen' on the score.
Yeah. We know when she got on - obviously when the landing gear crash against the platform - I wonder though, even if Cameron could have made an actual shot of the Queen climbing aboard, would he have? I feel like he probably wanted at least some members of the audience to get a shock later.
I've always loved the reversal that occurs with Burke and Gorman. The latter is my most wanted as an action figure for NECA's excellent line, hoping they can work their likeness-acquiring magic again.
I always catch something I somehow didn't notice before - when Ripley runs into the Alien in the corridor on the way to the shuttle and flees, leaving Jonesy behind in his carry-case - the Alien briefly studies the case - obviously I knew that - but what I never realized before is it actually slaps the case aside. Anyone else make new discoveries like this?
That's why I feel like the focus of the criticism we see for Aliens comes from a place of putting more value on one thing - the Alien - than the thing that perhaps James Cameron valued more than anything else - Ripley.
He could have just remade Alien with some other crew finding the derelict but he wanted to continue Ripley's story. He found a way to reinvolve her that made sense for the character.
The closest the franchise can get to arthouse before alienating all of its audience.
It's certainly polarizing in the way artsy movies tend to be. Some of my all-time favorite films have this effect on people. The things I love about it are the things others hate and vice-versa. I think the only consensuses surrounding Alien 3 are:
1. The studio should have let Fincher do his thing; even if some don't like his ideas, the overall film would've at least been more cohesive
2. The egg makes no sense and any fan theory about how it got there (Bishop bringing it, the Queen laying an emergency egg, etc.) is just us doing a shoddy writer's work for them.
3. With the exception of the compositing job on the rod puppet, the film looks damn good.
I'll add my personal opinion that it has the best musical score of the entire franchise.
I guess the problem was that no one knew what Fincher's ''thing'' was at the time. He was pretty much unproven. But as I said in that Blomkamp thread - with the quality of his later stuff and the reputation he developed from it Fincher would now be considered a prime directorial acquisition for the Alien franchise had he not already done one.
'Amen' on the score.
Yeah. We know when she got on - obviously when the landing gear crash against the platform - I wonder though, even if Cameron could have made an actual shot of the Queen climbing aboard, would he have? I feel like he probably wanted at least some members of the audience to get a shock later.
I've always loved the reversal that occurs with Burke and Gorman. The latter is my most wanted as an action figure for NECA's excellent line, hoping they can work their likeness-acquiring magic again.
I doubt Cameron would have shown the queen mount the ship.
I distinctly remember at my many theater viewings , many audience members saying Bishop had an alien in his chest.....I think Cameron was trying to insinuate that in the first seconds of the shot.
It was definitely a planned second thrill ending.
I give Cameron a lot of respect for making that a thing. It?s very cliche now, but I remember that moment, thinking it was over, and then WHAM, the queen in there and we are into the 2nd finale....
Not a lot of films did that back then, the duel surprise ending seems like a new thing and I struggle to remember another blockbuster that did this before Aliens.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I distinctly remember at my many theater viewings , many audience members saying Bishop had an alien in his chest.....I think Cameron was trying to insinuate that in the first seconds of the shot.
It was definitely a planned second thrill ending.
I give Cameron a lot of respect for making that a thing. It?s very cliche now, but I remember that moment, thinking it was over, and then WHAM, the queen in there and we are into the 2nd finale....
Not a lot of films did that back then, the duel surprise ending seems like a new thing and I struggle to remember another blockbuster that did this before Aliens.....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, Cameron repeated himself from his Terminator ending. The end of Arnold, and the rise of the Endoskeleton finale. Cameron was really nodding to the end of the first Alien which was similar -- supposedly leaving the beast behind in the explosion but, no, it got into the ship.
The idea of the "monster" being killed and then showing up again for a finale was not a new idea though. Wasn't that a principle gag of those Michael Myers movies and Friday the 13ths, etc? Even many Bond movies seemed over once the villain died, until the villain's henchman returned for a 2nd showdown.
For you, movie traditions really did not start until the 80's though, huh?
Jmek
Super Freak
Aliens is a great movie, but it's basically the same plot structure as Alien, only with "more".
Alien 3 is, and always has been, a flawed gem.
Alien Resurrection is Dark Horse comics the movie and doesn't feel like it's in the same universe. As a gory comic book movie it's OK.
Prometheus is ostensibly the first quarter of O'Bannon's original script and an absolute mess.
Covenant is a return to form, and one of my favourites in the series.
And Alien is unmatched, and probably never will be.
Alien 3 is, and always has been, a flawed gem.
Alien Resurrection is Dark Horse comics the movie and doesn't feel like it's in the same universe. As a gory comic book movie it's OK.
Prometheus is ostensibly the first quarter of O'Bannon's original script and an absolute mess.
Covenant is a return to form, and one of my favourites in the series.
And Alien is unmatched, and probably never will be.
No no . It?s not about the surviving part. That was done to death.
Terminator is a great example , and of course it?s Cameron. Blew him up? Nope another 15 minutes to go.
It was about dual climax. The idea that you had an adrenaline rush ending, they had the power and punch of a normal film end, THEN a second wave of ending after a brief lull, that was bigger and more intense than the first. They actually teach this in film school now.
In the films like F13 and Halloween, the second ending is more of a jump scare type thing, very brief. What I am talking about is a whole new scene crafted after the perceived ending of a film.
Try to imagine Vader appearing on the Falcon at the end of ESB, trying to kidnap Luke, and fought off by Leia and Chewie in a 15 minute battle.
That?s the duel end format.
And yeah, the craft of film as summer blockbuster was at its peak from 1975-1988.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk in
Actually a pretty good take.
abake
Rex Tremendae Majestatis
That wasn't very novel... the exact same thing happens in Alien.
Alien: Nostromo set to self-destruct
Aliens: Atmosphere Processor is going to explode
Alien: Ripley goes back to look for Parker and Lambert
Aliens: Ripley goes back to look for Newt
Alien: Ripley apparently dodges the alien
Aliens: Ripley apparently dodges the queen
Alien: the creature was inside the Narcissus all along
Aliens: the queen was inside the dropship all along
Alien: Ripley outsmarts it and blows it out the airlock
Aliens: Ripley outsmarts it and blows it out the airlock
There are some different story elements here and there, but the structure is exactly the same.
Not dissing on Cameron or Aliens, it's just that the double finale isn't something new and unheard of that Cameron came up with.
It?s interesting you brought that up , as I was going to as well. It?s odd that the two examples of that type of ending come from Cameron and Scott.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ALIEN 3 is an underrated Gem... nowhere near as great as the first 2 but a film that has found its following over the years.
I agree that is the last worthy film in the franchise.
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2013
- Messages
- 10,979
- Reaction score
- 4,929
I think it?s underrated because people don?t necessarily want it in the continuity; maybe too much of a downer..?
The film itself ... I don?t love it but have no problems with it, and see it as very stylish from a visual perspective.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
abake
Rex Tremendae Majestatis
So did anybody read the Alien The Original Screenplay comics?
I thought they were awful... I remember hearing O'Bannon say in the Quadrilogy documentaries how little Giler and Hill had contributed to the screenplay, and how they wanted to "steal" it from him, but damn... his original screenplay really was pretty poor.
I sincerely have a vast appreciation for all the stuff Giler, Hill and Scott put into it.
I thought they were awful... I remember hearing O'Bannon say in the Quadrilogy documentaries how little Giler and Hill had contributed to the screenplay, and how they wanted to "steal" it from him, but damn... his original screenplay really was pretty poor.
I sincerely have a vast appreciation for all the stuff Giler, Hill and Scott put into it.
Yes it's new. I was also surprised.
This franchise needs some compelling characters if it's to be brought back... again. And by compelling, I don't mean generic cardboard cutouts, cheesy archetypes, or Ripley clones. Sadly I don't know if writers for these things are capable of anything else.
Just reminds me of how mismanaged these movies have been under Scott. Oddly enough, the only idea I like from them (besides David) is that the "perfect organism" we all know and love was created by an android with a god complex. Kind of fitting.
Buuuuuuut it's still not canon. Sucks too much to be canon.
Just reminds me of how mismanaged these movies have been under Scott. Oddly enough, the only idea I like from them (besides David) is that the "perfect organism" we all know and love was created by an android with a god complex. Kind of fitting.Buuuuuuut it's still not canon. Sucks too much to be canon.
Last edited:
This franchise needs some compelling characters if it's to be brought back... again. And by compelling, I don't mean generic cardboard cutouts, cheesy archetypes, or Ripley clones. Sadly I don't know if writers for these things are capable of anything else.
Buuuuuuut it's still not canon. Sucks too much to be canon.
ALL of this is true.
Except I don't like David creating the Alien.
I like the mystery of not knowing where it came from. I was OK with the idea that perhaps it was some form of bioweapon used by the pilots. But I preferred the speculation long ago that those 'pilot' aliens discovered the eggs and were bringing them home when one got loose aboard their ship. Foreboding parallel.
Reinhardt
Super Freak
I'm with you. I was super pumped when Prometheus was coming out and it was probably my most anticipated movie ever. And then when they explained (kind of) where the Aliens came from, I then, and only then realized that part of the reason why Alien is still so amazing all these years later is because of the unknown. Because we don't know about the space jockey and why they were carrying eggs etc...
And this idea of David creating the Alien is totally ridiculous (IMO).
Similar threads
