criterionforum.org

(Damn, forgot I was on the internet ](*,) ).
Really, the idea of forgetting 3 & 4 just seems creatively lazy, and appears to be part of the whole dismissal of these two films while ignoring all the really good elements to them. After all, the studio responsible for producing the new film is also responsible, by way of the series producers, from grinding things to a halt in the first place with all the usual script revisions, crew changes, post/production interference etc.

I'd still say though, that most series sequels ignore the main points of the original film that got things going and dilute and further derail everything the further along things go. This is hardly presenting a new argument, either. Reboots, remakes, and ignoring previous sequels is all part of this. Despite the mixed results of the final film, at least Prometheus chose to present a side story rather than throwing everything out. If you want to ignore certain films, but not others, why not just go off on a tangent or start from scratch rather than pretending two perfectly interesting sequels don't exist, despite what some may think of where things ended up.

Lost Highway wrote:You seem to be in a minority who wants the further adventures of Clone Ripley and Call, that fembot played by Winona Ryder.

Maybe, though more for a development of the world presented than any particular love for Call. Ripley's clone on the other hand is incredibly fascinating and features a fantastically animalistic performance from Sigourney Weaver. I like to think of Resurrection as a somewhat poetic, blackly comic coda to the series, while taking Ripley off in a really interesting, inherently tragic direction.

I'm still really interested to see where Blomkamp might take the film, but I do think it would be short sighted to ignore half of what is a rare series of films, each a creative expression of the respective director's while continuing to maintain a fairly consistent universe. While I really like it, I think thematically and somewhat stylistically, Aliens is actually the odd one out, and the constant drive toward taking Cameron's film as the blue print or touchstone for the series is completely ignoring most of what makes the films so interesting and creatively satisfying. Still, as has been shown with this series, nothing is really set in stone as to the direction it might take until the film is actually released. At the least, the earlier artwork released suggests interesting potential for where this film might head.

Adam Grikepelis wrote:(Damn, forgot I was on the internet ](*,) ).

Yup, and as so often what I'm reading on forums is that people have already made up their mind about a film about which we know very little so far and instead keep proposing the film they personally want to see. Because having an opinion set in stone is so much more important than keeping an open mind.

Shooting will now start in January.

“I’ve got back into the sci-fi thing, I kind of adore it”

With how promising The Martian looks, this may not be too bad of a thing if he becomes a full-on sci-fi director again.

A 30th anniversary edition of Aliens comes out September 13th. According to thedigitalbits, it'll include a new interview with James Cameron.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:According to thedigitalbits, it'll include a new interview with James Cameron.

So it wouldn't simply be the old disc repackaged, but a new disc re-authored to accomodate a new interview ? Allow me to doubt it.

tenia wrote:

flyonthewall2983 wrote:According to thedigitalbits, it'll include a new interview with James Cameron.

So it wouldn't simply be the old disc repackaged, but a new disc re-authored to accomodate a new interview ? Allow me to doubt it.

Perhaps it's a print interview included in the booklet?

According to the description, it will have both versions of the film, a new featurette, the commentary track, plus the Superior Firepower: Making Aliens doc (complete with "Enhancement"), which on the Anthology set is on a separate disc.

I still strongly doubt FOX will re-author the disc and add these video extras on-disc (which would be quite a huge chunk of video to incorporate along with a 2h37 movie).

The Superior Firepower documentary and "Enhancement Pods" total close to four hours of content. Even though all of this material is in SD, I'd have to think they'd do two discs* - one for the two edits of the film plus commentary and one for the new featurette (in HD, probably) and bonus features.

*I know, the photo only shows one disc!

Well on the Anthology disc it's shared with 3 other docs of similar considerable length, so it's not impossible.

There's a way this can work. Frame the 3rd film (and by extension the 4th as well) as one of Ripley's nightmares. It's so bleak it could actually work.

All they really need to do is to simply ignore the other two films. People don't even talk about them all that much so it's not like we'd miss out if they were no longer pieces of the canonical timeline.

I'd normally agree, but something would be necessary to explain Newt, Hicks and Bishop still being around. It wouldn't have to be very long or convoluted at all, at most just a throwaway line that explains it. If done well enough it could actually shine those 2 films in something of a better light.

Watching Aliens with the commentary track, and I wondered how it sounded in the theatrical cut as opposed to the special edition which the track was recorded against. Interestingly it seemed to be edited rather seamlessly on the theatrical version.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:

Mr Sausage wrote:I like the workprint version of Alien 3. Not more than the first two in the series (it's still very flawed), but it's much, much more satisfying than the limp theatrical version.

What do you make of Cameron's directors cut, as opposed to the theatrical one for Aliens?

I think that's one case where it's a significant improvement, giving the world and characters more texture and ratcheting up the suspense. If only it didn't have the fucking teal-washed color-timing on the Blu-ray.

I love the poster. But that doesn't necessarily make me excited for the film itself. My sincerest hope is that he brings it back to it's roots or makes it like Aliens.

After Prometheus, I'm just happy it's not directed by Ridley Scott.

But it is?

While I know calling this "Prometheus 2" would be silly given that the eponymous ship was destroyed at the end of the first movie, do they have to bring the "Alien" name back into this? I personally would rather view this series of movies more as a spinoff to that one, rather than having direct ties. :-k

MoonlitKnight wrote:While I know calling this "Prometheus 2" would be silly given that the eponymous ship was destroyed at the end of the first movie, do they have to bring the "Alien" name back into this? I personally would rather view this series of movies more as a spinoff to that one, rather than having direct ties. :-k

I keep thinking it's very possible it'll just be called Covenant as it gets closer to release.

swo17 wrote:But it is?

Crap, I thought it was the Neill Blomkamp movie. #-o

tenia wrote:Crap, I thought it was the Neill Blomkamp movie. #-o

I think that's still happening, but I think what's holding it back right now is either one of two things. Either Fox wants to see how well this will do to see if they can justify finally giving Blomkamp's movie the greenlight, or that Fox will give it the go after this anyway because his story will act as the finale to the franchise. It's very most likely the former, but I like the idea of it all coming to an end with a Ripley-centered movie.

I've read about Covenant on Wikipedia, and the Blomkamp film seems to still be happening but Scott has requested Covenant to be the first of the 2 to be done and released.