Neill Blomkamp's Alien Sequel Concept

Necronomicon · 26-02-2015 11:34am

.ak wrote: »

Hmm, whilst obviously Alien 3 and 4 were weak films (I actually didn't think 3 was THAT bad, it had a lot of good things about it and it did keep the feel of the first movie with plenty of atmosphere and an interesting setting), I really don't like the idea of completely ignoring them. It's fine if you're making comic book movies, as there's different story arcs or universes, but this just seems... weird. You can't unwrite history just cuz you don't like it.

Maybe 3 and 4 were cyrosleep dreams?

Incidentally, I wish Weaver wasn't in it. I actually don't like her. They made it work in the first 2 films as she's still very much frightened about the whole scenarios, but I feel as an older woman they'll do the whole gung-ho thing and it'll just be cheesy.

I agree with this. I'm conflicted here; as much as I'm tempted by the idea of retconning Alien3 and Resurrection, it feels like a bit of a cop out to to just say 'it never happened' when a studio releases weak installments of a franchise.

Bacchus · 26-02-2015 11:38am

Adamantium wrote: »

The people who grew up with these movies and watched them in their PJ'S (Alien, Star Wars, Jurrassic Park) are now making their childhood imagined sequels, I hope they remember to make these space operas with depth and story, and not fanservice (as no doubt anyone of us would be tempted to do)

It must be amazingly annoying to be a kid these days and not have movies heroes and franchises of their own that were birthed in their own era and not the late 20th century.

Ok, what kid had "Alien" PJs!?

I think you may be looking back with slightly rose tinted glasses. Star Wars was THE movie for the 80's kids, Jurassic Park the 90's, Star Wars & LotR the 00's and the Marvel movies is this generations "PJ movie"

I get your point though that we get treated to a lot more rehashes (often watered down too) of old hits but there's plenty of stuff out there that is THIS generation's movie of their childhood too.

LaGlisse · 26-02-2015 11:39am

What is this alien3 and resurrection people are talking about here? there is only alien and aliens

TheDoc · 26-02-2015 11:50am

.ak wrote: »

Yes, but it was explained very well.

Fine, I'll keep an open mind, but fwiw I mean film history.

Can't say I have particular issue with it. Alien 3 was such a mess and mishmash of ideas that I don't think it ever provided any continuity. And resurrection, **** me.

Drexel · 26-02-2015 12:40pm

Wouldnt have an issue with forgetting about the last 2 Alien films at all.

Wouldnt have an issue with no ripley either to be honest. Id prob actually prefer it.

Im hoping it goes back to horror. The first film was a pure horror movie.

Id love to see the Alien (or space jockey) home world but Id imagine this would be a balls out action movie instead then

pixelburp · 26-02-2015 12:40pm

.ak wrote: »

Incidentally, I wish Weaver wasn't in it. I actually don't like her. They made it work in the first 2 films as she's still very much frightened about the whole scenarios, but I feel as an older woman they'll do the whole gung-ho thing and it'll just be cheesy.

Thing is, it's kind of unavoidable considering part of the point of the original trilogy (I'm ignoring number 4 because god knows what the hell it was trying to contribute) was about Ripley and how her life became haunted by the xenomorph. She started scared & bewildered, trying to run from this monkey on her back, before accepting that she's somehow tethered to this fate of always bumping into the monsters. She can never go back to simply being Lt. Ripley because how could anyone after going through those events? She maintained her humanity, just about, but eventually confronted her personal bogeyman.

I have to say, while the death of Newt and Hicks was a massive, colossal bummer at the start of Alien 3, the possibility of re-writing everything so they never died is incredibly cheap. When you think about it, it's daytime soap-opera territory, not to mention self-gratifyingly fan-wanky.

Alien 3 had its problems, but it still served as part of Ripley's overall character arc, of how this scourge would follow her to the ends of the universe, destroying everything she held dear unless she chose to end it when she did

Bacchus · 26-02-2015 1:03pm

pixelburp wrote: »

Thing is, it's kind of unavoidable considering part of the point of the original trilogy (I'm ignoring number 4 because god knows what the hell it was trying to contribute) was about Ripley and how her life became haunted by the xenomorph. She started scared & bewildered, trying to run from this monkey on her back, before accepting that she's somehow tethered to this fate of always bumping into the monsters. She can never go back to simply being Lt. Ripley because how could anyone after going through those events? She maintained her humanity, just about, but eventually confronted her personal bogeyman.

I have to say, while the death of Newt and Hicks was a massive, colossal bummer at the start of Alien 3, the possibility of re-writing everything so they never died is incredibly cheap. When you think about it, it's daytime soap-opera territory, not to mention self-gratifyingly fan-wanky.

Alien 3 had its problems, but it still served as part of Ripley's overall character arc, of how this scourge would follow her to the ends of the universe, destroying everything she held dear unless she chose to end it when she did

Pretty much agree with all the above. Alien 3 was a perfectly respectable end to Ripley's story. Yes, it sucked that they just killed off Hicks and Newt off screen, and the CGI is dodge but it was still a good movie that completed the trilogy.

I'd rather a new story with new characters was done in the same universe. I defo don't want to see some setup where it's 100 years later and the Aliens are well studied and contained on the original planet but then something goes wrong. I want them wild, alien and full of horror. It'll be interesting to see exactly what it is they can do with this second attempt at 'Alien 3'.

Mickeroo · 26-02-2015 2:09pm

I think Blompkamp is more likely to go the Cameron route rather than ape the original film. He loves his mechs and guns too much to go for a claustrophobic horror movie over a sci-fi action movie with horror elements. He's all about the hardware. I also think the studio would have hired somebody else if they didn't want a more action orientated film.

Chris_Heilong · 26-02-2015 2:28pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think Blompkamp is more likely to go the Cameron route rather than ape the original film. He loves his mechs and guns too much to go for a claustrophobic horror movie over a sci-fi action movie with horror elements. He's all about the hardware. I also think the studio would have hired somebody else if they didn't want a more action orientated film.

Id say you are 100% correct here.

conorhal · 26-02-2015 2:49pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think Blompkamp is more likely to go the Cameron route rather than ape the original film. He loves his mechs and guns too much to go for a claustrophobic horror movie over a sci-fi action movie with horror elements. He's all about the hardware. I also think the studio would have hired somebody else if they didn't want a more action orientated film.

Include his new movie Chappie and it seems as though he's been remaking the last third of Aliens for 3 whole movies now.
Personally I'm not thrilled that he's involved on this project, I think he's a horribly over-rated film maker and fanboys are rarely the best people to make sequels to beloved genre films.
District 9 had an interesting first half, but as soon as they new toys (power armour) came into play he chucked out the social commentary from the first half of the film and wen't a bit Michael Bay.
Elysium is just a bad film from start to finish and Chappie looks like a tedious retread of his past two films.
More and more he looks like a one trick pony and I suspect Alien 5 will suffer for that. Like Peter Jackson I suspect that Blomkamp is a director of whom it can be said, the less you give him budget wise the more you get for him because he's forced to pare back his obvious delight in excess and concentrate on storytelling.

I don't think there's much to add to the arc of Ripley's character to be honest. If he has to make an Alien movie, let him go nuts with a stand alone Colonial Marines story or something.

TheDoc · 26-02-2015 5:07pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think Blompkamp is more likely to go the Cameron route rather than ape the original film. He loves his mechs and guns too much to go for a claustrophobic horror movie over a sci-fi action movie with horror elements. He's all about the hardware. I also think the studio would have hired somebody else if they didn't want a more action orientated film.

Can't say I'd have a problem with that. While I love both films and appreciate their differences, I always lean towards Aliens as my favorite due to the more action orientated setting.

Mickeroo · 26-02-2015 5:29pm

TheDoc wrote: »

Can't say I'd have a problem with that. While I love both films and appreciate their differences, I always lean towards Aliens as my favorite due to the more action orientated setting.

Same, though I would rather he resurrect his Halo movie than do this tbh!

Belial · 26-02-2015 5:32pm

Lol @ 'rewriting history'

Anyway, almost every long-running horror series has done this already (had sequels that disregard prior sequels). It's completely normal.

Chris_Heilong · 26-02-2015 6:00pm

An example would be Evil Dead 2 being a redone version of Evil Dead 1.

Belial · 26-02-2015 6:12pm

&

Halloween 7 ignores 4-6 and follows 2 (3 is already its own thing)

Exorcist 3 ignores 2

Jaws 4 ignores 3

Elm Street 3 ignores 2; 6 ignores 2-5 (I think)

Texas Chainsaw 3 ignores 2; 4 ignores 2 & 3; 7 ignores 2-4 (5 & 6 are their own thing)

Godzilla 1984 ignores all the previous sequels and follows Godzilla 1954

Friday the 13th, with the exception of the Tommy Jarvis arc (4-6), I'm pretty sure every sequel ignores every other one

LaGlisse · 26-02-2015 6:57pm

Genuinely can't understand people getting worked up about 2 awful films being ignored.
Loved district 9 but will reserve judgment on this, been let down too many times

happysunnydays · 27-02-2015 12:24am

.ak wrote: »

Hmm, whilst obviously Alien 3 and 4 were weak films (I actually didn't think 3 was THAT bad, it had a lot of good things about it and it did keep the feel of the first movie with plenty of atmosphere and an interesting setting), I really don't like the idea of completely ignoring them. It's fine if you're making comic book movies, as there's different story arcs or universes, but this just seems... weird. You can't unwrite history just cuz you don't like it.

Maybe 3 and 4 were cyrosleep dreams?

Incidentally, I wish Weaver wasn't in it. I actually don't like her. They made it work in the first 2 films as she's still very much frightened about the whole scenarios, but I feel as an older woman they'll do the whole gung-ho thing and it'll just be cheesy.

You know what, if you don't like the idea then don't go! You have your timeline and you can stay living in that world.
For those who hated Alien3&$, our time has come, there is a hell of a lot of us, huge market, more of us than you ALien3/$ lovers anyhow.
Now Blomcamp is giving us the REAL sequel to Aliens and creating the 3/$ haters timeline as we wanted. Maybe us haters will get a fourth film to rival the lovers timeline. The quality might even surpass 3/$ and then you be mad jealous for not jumping ship. Why didn't I hate 3/$ like the diehards? Those guys who grew up in the 80's and live for the franchise and have waited three decades for the REAL sequel.
Then you slate Sigourney Weaver, the heroine of the piece, you are no fan. Alien is Sigourney Weaver. Don't piss on our parade mate!
Filmakers can do whatever they want, its the movies...not history or reality!

.ak · 27-02-2015 11:10am

Belial wrote: »

Lol @ 'rewriting history'

Anyway, almost every long-running horror series has done this already (had sequels that disregard prior sequels). It's completely normal.

It's not really the same though, is it? One's a long running cheap horror genre flick and the other is cult classic sci-fi story arc?

.ak · 27-02-2015 11:16am

happysunnydays wrote: »

You know what, if you don't like the idea then don't go! You have your timeline and you can stay living in that world.
For those who hated Alien3&$, our time has come, there is a hell of a lot of us, huge market, more of us than you ALien3/$ lovers anyhow.
Now Blomcamp is giving us the REAL sequel to Aliens and creating the 3/$ haters timeline as we wanted. Maybe us haters will get a fourth film to rival the lovers timeline. The quality might even surpass 3/$ and then you be mad jealous for not jumping ship. Why didn't I hate 3/$ like the diehards? Those guys who grew up in the 80's and live for the franchise and have waited three decades for the REAL sequel.
Then you slate Sigourney Weaver, the heroine of the piece, you are no fan. Alien is Sigourney Weaver. Don't piss on our parade mate!
Filmakers can do whatever they want, its the movies...not history or reality!

Don't really understand that? I'm hardly here stamping my feet like a trekkie who's beloved series is being torn apart. I'm not really that bothered by it, and like I said, I really didn't like 3 or 4, but as pixelburp hit the nail on the head; it's an incredibly cheap thing to do. Imagine for Star Wars EP7 they decided to ignore Ep 1-3 because they're ****e? Why not just do an Alien movie without Weaver instead of trying to reboot her character midway through the series? The star of the movies has always been the Xenomorph for me, Weaver is just a conduit for the fear it portrays, although I do take pixelburp's analysis of her character and how it's built from 1-3 on board.

For me, re-casting Weaver is akin to what they wanted to do in 4 - they're trying to make some sort of legacy out of her character that's bigger than it needs to be.

I'm incredibly excited about the movie, and I am a massive fan of the series, more than you'll know anyway.

Infact, I don't think your read my post at all, maybe try that and chill out?

happysunnydays · 27-02-2015 11:45am

.ak wrote: »

Why not just do an Alien movie without Weaver instead of trying to reboot her character midway through the series

...they did, they made two of them! They're even worse than 3/4. :pac:
I'm always on the chill pill buddy, no hard feelings eh? Just a bit of friendly banter between Alien fans, we all want what's right in the end.

Joeface · 27-02-2015 3:28pm

http://www.gamesradar.com/neill-blomkamps-alien-sequel-wont-undo-alien-3-or-alien-resurrection/

“My favourites are the first two movies,” says Blomkamp to AlloCine. “So I want to make a film that’s connected to Alien and Aliens. That’s my goal. I’m not trying to undo Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection, I just want it to be connected to Alien and Aliens"

oh so he is doing what ..............Fast n Furious deal were 4,5,6,7 all happen between 2 & 3 HA HA

Belial · 27-02-2015 5:31pm

.ak wrote: »

It's not really the same though, is it? One's a long running cheap horror genre flick and the other is cult classic sci-fi story arc?

Which one? I gave you seven examples. And Alien is just as much a horror series and just as long-running as any of them.

Belial · 27-02-2015 5:38pm

Joeface wrote: »

...

“My favourites are the first two movies,” says Blomkamp to AlloCine. “So I want to make a film that’s connected to Alien and Aliens. That’s my goal. I’m not trying to undo Alien 3 or Alien: Resurrection, I just want it to be connected to Alien and Aliens"

oh so he is doing what ..............Fast n Furious deal were 4,5,6,7 all happen between 2 & 3 HA HA

He also told The Guardian that he would "categorically" rule out any return for the cloned Ripley. So it's definitely not picking up after Resurrection. And there's no room in between Aliens and Alien 3 for another story (they go into hypersleep at the end of Aliens and Hicks and Newt die in hypersleep and Ripley ends up on Fiorina). So what he means when he says he doesn't want to "undo" Alien 3 & 4 is that he has nothing against them and that they'll still be there for anyone who likes them, but he's still going to ignore them and do an alternate sequel to Aliens.

Arciphel · 27-02-2015 5:50pm

Maybe he is going to do a sequel to Aliens, and at the end of the Blomkamp movie Ripley agrees to have her memory wiped by the company and is put back into hypersleep on the Sulaco, that way they can explain away Ripley turning up on Fiorina 161 on the escape pod and the Sulaco being destroyed by fire. Maybe the bodies of Newt & Hicks that were in the escape pod at the start of Alien 3 are clones...

Belial · 27-02-2015 5:54pm

Some other people are speculating that he's going to incorporate the plot from some videogame that retcons Hicks' death.

Blomkamp isn't a complete hack though, so I kind of doubt it.

Also Weaver said this film would conclude Ripley's story.

happysunnydays · 27-02-2015 10:20pm

Belial wrote: »

Also Weaver said this film would conclude Ripley's story.

Well the Sigorney Weaver version cause they are going to reboot ALien in the future with a new actress, shiny new production and big time VFX.
Stop, rewind, play is how the Hollywood boys like it! I'd do it too if it put a few Ferrari in the garage, that's how the real world plays the game!

Adamantium · 27-02-2015 10:34pm

happysunnydays wrote: »

Well the Sigorney Weaver version cause they are going to reboot ALien in the future with a new actress, shiny new production and big time VFX.
Stop, rewind, play is how the Hollywood boys like it! I'd do it too if it put a few Ferrari in the garage, that's how the real world plays the game!

I've always been amazed it how similar Mary Elizabeth and Sigourney Weaver look. She was great in the Thing prequel.

Lena Headey would be my choice for it though.

happysunnydays · 27-02-2015 10:44pm

Adamantium wrote: »

Lena Headey would be my choice for it though.

Tough as old boots :pac: good choice!

Tony EH · 28-02-2015 12:45pm

This is stupid idea.

Newt and Hicks are dead. Get over it FFS.

Also, why the hell does Sigourney Weaver HAVE to be in every bloody aliens film? If ever there was a franchise that didn't need a central star it's the Aliens franchise.

She's an OAP now.

Tony EH · 28-02-2015 12:58pm

Belial wrote: »

&

Halloween 7 ignores 4-6 and follows 2 (3 is already its own thing)

Exorcist 3 ignores 2

Jaws 4 ignores 3

Elm Street 3 ignores 2; 6 ignores 2-5 (I think)

Texas Chainsaw 3 ignores 2; 4 ignores 2 & 3; 7 ignores 2-4 (5 & 6 are their own thing)

Godzilla 1984 ignores all the previous sequels and follows Godzilla 1954

Friday the 13th, with the exception of the Tommy Jarvis arc (4-6), I'm pretty sure every sequel ignores every other one

...and almost all of them are crap.

Neill Blomkamp's Alien Sequel Concept

Comments