Alien: Covenant Spoilers from post 747

seamus · 08-03-2017 12:30PM

Every futuristic movie ages badly because it takes contemporary technology and attempts to "evolve" it by a few hundred years. In 40 years time, the technology in Prometheus will look infantile - "what do you mean they're using their hands to interact with the computers and not voice and VR interfaces?".

Nothing is immune to it, look at Star Trek and Star Wars. As much as they have attempted to be faithful to the original styling, for the most part the newer instalments have changed the technology to be much further ahead than the originals.

While I get some purists have the whole idea of these stories existing in a universe which should be internally consistent, ultimately this is sci-fi and needs to have settings and imagery that engages the audience and is in some way believable. A modern film with the retro push-button styling of the original Alien would be far less believable to modern audiences and people would find it much harder to engage. It's called "suspension of disbelief". And if your movie can't get audiences to suspend their disbelief, it will flop.

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 12:46PM

seamus wrote: »

Every futuristic movie ages badly because it takes contemporary technology and attempts to "evolve" it by a few hundred years. In 40 years time, the technology in Prometheus will look infantile - "what do you mean they're using their hands to interact with the computers and not voice and VR interfaces?".

This is possibly true, but I think we'll be using our hands to pilot aircraft and spacecraft for some time yet, simply from a practical and safety POV.

But it doesn't change the fact that it's jarring when someone decides to make a prequel to something and it looks like it takes place after the events of the original(s).

In any case, 'Prometheus' could (should) have been a sequel. There was no need whatsoever to make it a prequel. But, I suspect that the film started out as something unconnected to the Alien films entirely and its attachment was screwed in somewhere along the line.

seamus wrote: »

Nothing is immune to it, look at Star Trek and Star Wars. As much as they have attempted to be faithful to the original styling, for the most part the newer instalments have changed the technology to be much further ahead than the originals.

'Star Trek' and 'Star Wars' are no excuses. There's a multitude of sins going on there, the least of which is their tech disconnect.

seamus wrote: »

While I get some purists have the whole idea of these stories existing in a universe which should be internally consistent, ultimately this is sci-fi and needs to have settings and imagery that engages the audience and is in some way believable. A modern film with the retro push-button styling of the original Alien would be far less believable to modern audiences and people would find it much harder to engage. It's called "suspension of disbelief". And if your movie can't get audiences to suspend their disbelief, it will flop.

Push button tech will be with us for many years to come. While swipe technology looks nice on an iPhone, it's wholly impractical for operating aircraft and spacecraft.

You can't swipe with gloves on.

Besides, I don't think making the tech match up with the original trilogy will somehow make things look quaint. 'Alien' still looks like it's set in the future. A real looking future.

Bacchus · 08-03-2017 01:49PM

Completely agree with seamus. While I'm all about consistency in connected movies that share the same universe it would just be so jarring to see the tech of Alien/Aliens used in modern sequels/prequels. I accept that tech in the older movies because of when they were made. Same goes for Star Trek. Star Wars is a different beast because it is essentially timeless.

Tony EH wrote: »

This is possibly true, but I think we'll be using our hands to pilot aircraft and spacecraft for some time yet, simply from a practical and safety POV.

.
.
.
.

Push button tech will be with us for many years to come. While swipe technology looks nice on an iPhone, it's wholly impractical for operating aircraft and spacecraft.

You can't swipe with gloves on.

Ah come on now. We're already in an era where driverless cars are becoming a reality and autopilot is the norm for aircraft. If you can't suspend belief in a sci-fi movie set 100 years in the future that we might have moved passed push button technology or over come issues like swiping with gloves on... then maybe this isn't the genre for you :P

The fact is if a movie produced in 2017 that is supposed to be set in... what? 80 years time? ... if that movie showed us as a space faring society, yet we've gone backwards in almost every single way technologically, to me that would be just ridiculous. Yay, we've mastered space travel but Apple bought up all the touch screen technology patents so we had to put push buttons and 80s style CRT screens in our ships.

To be fair as well to the Alien universe, it is still able to hold some consistency in terms of technology. As has already been stated... Alien was set on a transport ship, not a fancy science vessel. The vehicles in Aliens were military and therefore more "rugged".

NyOmnishambles · 08-03-2017 01:58PM

Tony EH wrote: »

You can't swipe with gloves on.

Ehm yes you can, can even buy them in Aldi/Lidl so are fairly standard these days I would have thought

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 02:05PM

NyOmnishambles wrote: »

Ehm yes you can, can even buy them in Aldi/Lidl so are fairly standard these days I would have thought

Aldi/Lidl astronaut gloves?

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 02:15PM

Bacchus wrote: »

Ah come on now. We're already in an era where driverless cars are becoming a reality and autopilot is the norm for aircraft. If you can't suspend belief in a sci-fi movie set 100 years in the future that we might have moved passed push button technology or over come issues like swiping with gloves on... then maybe this isn't the genre for you :P

'Prometheus' is set in 2093 and sure, I can accept the tech in the film. The problem is that tech immediately produces a glaring anachronism that the viewer either has to ignore or make excuses for.

In any case, it's one of the film's lesser problems. When stacked up against the poor script/characters etc, it's small potatoes...even if it is still potatoes.

Perhaps it's more a question of whether prequels should be made or not, if they're not going to jive with what came before.

NyOmnishambles · 08-03-2017 02:21PM

Tony EH wrote: »

Aldi/Lidl astronaut gloves?

Fair point but I see no reason it wont happen in time

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 02:27PM

Perhaps. But there's a real practicality and a safety aspect to push button technology that's completely absent with iPhone style swipe buttons and holographic vision equipment.

It's also vastly easier to repair, which is a real consideration in the overall design.

It'll be around for some time yet.

Bacchus · 08-03-2017 02:57PM

Really can't believe we're talking about the longevity of push buttons. Look how far tech has come in the last 10 years. We've gone from 3310's to smart phones (and fancy 3310's again) with 4k touch screens and more processing power in the palm of your hand than the smartest of supercomputers that were around when the originals were made. To ignore the technological advancements in the real world when making sci-fi movies set in the future just so they look consistent with with older movies set in the same universe or time period is folly. It's easy to just accept that those movies were made in a different era that viewed the future through the eyes of the technology at the time and that these movies are doing the same.

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 03:00PM

Who's "ignoring" it?

Pointing out an anachronism in a film isn't ignoring something.

Zubeneschamali · 08-03-2017 03:14PM

Bacchus wrote: »

It's easy to just accept that those movies were made in a different era that viewed the future through the eyes of the technology at the time and that these movies are doing the same.

Movies are a visual medium. If it doesn't look related, it won't feel related.

Take Rogue One - they went to great lengths to make the movie line up with Star Wars, the original movie, because it is supposed to end hours before that movie starts.

Should they just have said "Who cares? That movie is 70s, and this one is being made 40 years later - lets have slicker holograms and computer interfaces and everyone with a mobile phone!".

Well, no, that would be jarring and the movie would not feel related.

Lucas's prequels have an excuse for looking shinier: they are set before 20 years of Imperial misrule. Aliens has an excuse - it is set 50+years after Alien.

Prometheus has no excuse, the people making it just didn't care.

Bacchus · 08-03-2017 05:38PM

Tony EH wrote: »

Who's "ignoring" it?

Pointing out an anachronism in a film isn't ignoring something.

Correct me if I've mistaken your stance here but you are advocating that the new Alien movies should purposefully set the bar for technology (clunky push buttons, tiny CRT screens that display text like a dot-matrix printer, etc.) because that's what the originals had. Essentially, this is ignoring the advances in technology over the past 30 years the the point where my phone is far more powerful than the space ships computer. Keep the decor and styling to match the tone of the universe but (even though we're talking about a sci-fi movie with chest bursting aliens) it removes the movies from "reality" that modern technology is not reflected in the technology of the future.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Movies are a visual medium. If it doesn't look related, it won't feel related.

Take Rogue One - they went to great lengths to make the movie line up with Star Wars, the original movie, because it is supposed to end hours before that movie starts.

Should they just have said "Who cares? That movie is 70s, and this one is being made 40 years later - lets have slicker holograms and computer interfaces and everyone with a mobile phone!".

Well, no, that would be jarring and the movie would not feel related.

Lucas's prequels have an excuse for looking shinier: they are set before 20 years of Imperial misrule. Aliens has an excuse - it is set 50+years after Alien.

Prometheus has no excuse, the people making it just didn't care.

Star Wars is a poor example (as I said already) as the universe is quite timeless and technology doesn't seem to evolve. Also, the technology is often fantastical and has no relationship to modern tech. Technologies there exist and always have. What Rogue One did was match the style of Ep IV which I have no problem with. Also they showing scenes that were set on the same location as in Ep IV so there was a greater requirement to look consistent.

To be clear, I've no issue with matching the "look" and "feel" of the movies. It's the willingness to ignore technology advances in the real world, restricting us forever to what the 70s thought the future would look like, that I have an issue with.

Zubeneschamali · 08-03-2017 06:15PM

Bacchus wrote: »

Correct me if I've mistaken your stance here but you are advocating that the new Alien movies should purposefully set the bar for technology (clunky push buttons, tiny CRT screens that display text like a dot-matrix printer, etc.) because that's what the originals had.

In the original Alien, the Company could build an android so good it was indistinguishable from Ian Holm, but Mother, the ships computer, was a clunky mainframe with clackety keyboard CRT terminals. Why? Who knows?

It's just one of those things in the movie's Universe, never explained.

And Prometheus is clearly not in that Universe.

Bacchus · 08-03-2017 06:29PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In the original Alien, the Company could build an android so good it was indistinguishable from Ian Holm, but Mother, the ships computer, was a clunky mainframe with clackety keyboard CRT terminals. Why? Who knows?

It's just one of those things in the movie's Universe, never explained.

And Prometheus is clearly not in that Universe.

Why? Because it's surprisingly easy to have an actor play an android that looks like a real human but touch screen technology didn't exist.

The restrictions on the technology of the movie we're founded in the restrictions of the era in which the movie was made. Why continue to apply those restrictions? You can still keep the look and feel of the universe but just update the tech so that it fits with the world that we live in today.

Zubeneschamali · 08-03-2017 07:00PM

Bacchus wrote: »

You can still keep the look and feel of the universe but just update the tech so that it fits with the world that we live in today.

No, you really can't, because holodisplays and so forth don't come from the same era as clacky keyboards, so the look and feel is different.

Tony EH · 08-03-2017 07:10PM

Bacchus wrote: »

Correct me if I've mistaken your stance here but you are advocating that the new Alien movies should purposefully set the bar for technology (clunky push buttons, tiny CRT screens that display text like a dot-matrix printer, etc.) because that's what the originals had. Essentially, this is ignoring the advances in technology over the past 30 years the the point where my phone is far more powerful than the space ships computer. Keep the decor and styling to match the tone of the universe but (even though we're talking about a sci-fi movie with chest bursting aliens) it removes the movies from "reality" that modern technology is not reflected in the technology of the future.

I'm not saying that as people we should ignore techological advances no.

However, I am saying that if you're making a prequel to an already established series of films that takes place in the future (sometimes far) that it's wise to at least try and establish a look that feels like it's happening before them to avoid the obvious anachronisms that will arise from imprudent desires to wow.

I'm also not saying that Scott should have gone to back lots and car boot sales to russle up some green screens, Commodore 64 keyboards and CRTs. Flat screens would be perfectly fine. But he could have also lessened the CGI **** that put on the screen in 'Prometheus'.

'Prometheus' just goes too far (I think even Scott admitted this) and none of the fan excuses work and they are just excuses. The simple fact is that they just weren't bothered.

It's incredibly jarring to watch the series if you include 'Prometheus' among the list.

The thing is, the film could have worked just as well as a sequel. Or an insert between 'Alien 3' and 'Alien: Ressurection', not that I even consider that film as part of the series any more. 'Prometheus' may have been bad, but by god, 'Alien: Ressurection' takes the biscuit.

buried · 10-03-2017 04:07PM

ricero · 10-03-2017 04:32PM

Kenny ****ing powers

Ipso · 10-03-2017 06:40PM

Ridley says he is planning on six more movies.

Tony EH · 10-03-2017 08:01PM

?

He's nearly 80.

10-03-2017 10:32PM

Tony EH wrote: »

?

He's nearly 80.

It's grand, he knows some engineers

WHIP IT! · 11-03-2017 08:46PM

Having been in and out of this thread all week, I decided to give Prometheus another watch today. I think this was my third viewing. I must say, despite some of the horrifically dumb parts - not least of course Charlize Theron's laughable death scene - I actually quite enjoyed it this time... third time's a charm! I still don't like it - but I guess I no longer hate it...

TerrorFirmer · 11-03-2017 10:04PM

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Having been in and out of this thread all week, I decided to give Prometheus another watch today. I think this was my third viewing. I must say, despite some of the horrifically dumb parts - not least of course Charlize Theron's laughable death scene - I actually quite enjoyed it this time... third time's a charm! I still don't like it - but I guess I no longer hate it...

I re-watched it the other day as well and while I liked it initially I found I liked it even more on a second viewing. It is a solid movie, maybe not what we would have hoped for but to call it bad is unfair.

Currently watching Alien vs Predator....now that is a terrible movie devoid of any redeeming qualities and entirely deserving of all the flack it gets and more besides.

ebbsy · 11-03-2017 10:16PM

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Having been in and out of this thread all week, I decided to give Prometheus another watch today. I think this was my third viewing. I must say, despite some of the horrifically dumb parts - not least of course Charlize Theron's laughable death scene - I actually quite enjoyed it this time... third time's a charm! I still don't like it - but I guess I no longer hate it...

I re-watched it the other day as well and while I liked it initially I found I liked it even more on a second viewing. It is a solid movie, maybe not what we would have hoped for but to call it bad is unfair.

Currently watching Alien vs Predator....now that is a terrible movie devoid of any redeeming qualities and entirely deserving of all the flack it gets and more besides.

I agree. I thought Prometheus was a good film and certainly worth the entrance fee.

WHIP IT! · 11-03-2017 10:58PM

TerrorFirmer wrote:

I re-watched it the other day as well and while I liked it initially I found I liked it even more on a second viewing. It is a solid movie, maybe not what we would have hoped for but to call it bad is unfair.

I think that might be what it boils down to for me - it just wasn't what I was hoping for or expecting at the time. I guess I've made my peace with it by now

PooArse · 13-03-2017 03:44PM

Ipso wrote: »

Ridley says he is planning on six more movies.

Convinced he has nothing to do with these movies anymore and just throws his name on them and gets in a few set photos

TerrorFirmer · 16-03-2017 01:22PM

What are people's thoughts on Alien VS Predator and AVP2? I think the first one is a steaming pile, so unbelievably cheesy and hammed up beyond all reasonable tolerance for even the most casual fan of either franchise. It's an abomination that's difficult to sit through without getting angry.

On the other hand - and maybe only because AVP is that terrible - I think AVP: Requiem is a massive improvement, with a half serviceable story, vastly improved cinematography and direction and overall captures the tone of the Alien/Predator films incomparably better (notwithstanding it's still not a great film). It is to AVP, in my mind, what Plan 9 from Outer Space is to Citizen Kane.

But funny enough critics rated the first movie much higher in general as did cinema goers. Thoughts?

16-03-2017 01:30PM

I dont know how scientific this is :-) but I watched AVP to the end, I had to turn off requiem 1/3 of way through

pixelburp · 16-03-2017 01:33PM

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on Alien VS Predator and AVP2? I think the first one is a steaming pile, so unbelievably cheesy and hammed up beyond all reasonable tolerance for even the most casual fan of either franchise. It's an abomination that's difficult to sit through without getting angry.

On the other hand - and maybe only because AVP is that terrible - I think AVP: Requiem is a massive improvement, with a half serviceable story, vastly improved cinematography and direction and overall captures the tone of the Alien/Predator films incomparably better (notwithstanding it's still not a great film). It is to AVP, in my mind, what Plan 9 from Outer Space is to Citizen Kane.

But funny enough critics rated the first movie much higher in general as did cinema goers. Thoughts?

I'd side with the critics: AVP: Requiem was a hamfisted fan-film masquerading as a major motion picture. It contrived to include plot & characters even worse than the first crossover film; at least AvP had a competent set of professionals & scientists with some cliff notes of backstory & narrative drive, rather than the bimbos and 'slasher' fodder in the sequel that we were meant to give a sh*t about. Requiem also had a really nasty, mean spirited streak that substituted adolescent gore & tasteless shock for any real menace or threat, like the idiot film-makers giddily thought a lack of gore was the sole reason the first movie failed. The maternity ward scene was the precise moment I checked out and decided the film could go f*ck itself.

Certainly wouldn't agree about the cinematography either; from what I recall it was horribly shot, many fight scenes being a confusing and dark blur of flailing limbs that made it really hard to know WTF was going on. I'm still not sure what happened in the supposedly climatic fight on the roof of the hospital. Even Michael Bay knows how to properly block a shot.

F*ck AvP: Requiem, frankly. It did more damage to both respective franchises than Prometheus, or Predator 2 ever managed

Tony EH · 16-03-2017 01:43PM

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on Alien VS Predator and AVP2? I think the first one is a steaming pile, so unbelievably cheesy and hammed up beyond all reasonable tolerance for even the most casual fan of either franchise. It's an abomination that's difficult to sit through without getting angry.

On the other hand - and maybe only because AVP is that terrible - I think AVP: Requiem is a massive improvement, with a half serviceable story, vastly improved cinematography and direction and overall captures the tone of the Alien/Predator films incomparably better (notwithstanding it's still not a great film). It is to AVP, in my mind, what Plan 9 from Outer Space is to Citizen Kane.

But funny enough critics rated the first movie much higher in general as did cinema goers. Thoughts?

I actually have some time for 'Alien vs Predator'. It's sort of entertaining in a B movie kind of way. Did it need to be made? No. Does it add anything to the Alien universe? Not really. But, it was enjoyable enough.

The pretentiously titled 'Aliens vs Predator: Requiem' ( :rolleyes: ) wasn't as entertaining, despite some very good visuals. The story is silly and it's littered with annoying characters. Plus the nuking of the town at the end? WTF?

To be Honest, I have more time for AVP these days than I do for 'Prometheus'. It doesn't ask anything of me and delivers what I ask of it.

Alien: Covenant *Spoilers from post 747*

Comments

Alien: Covenant Spoilers from post 747