• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Ridley talks about the Alien prequel. Lions and tigers and Space Jockeys, oh my!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Searched, didn't see this posted yet.

http://www.latinoreview.com/news/ridley-scott-gives-out-more-alien-prequel-info-9807

Where the project is at in the writing stage:


Ridley Scott: As we speak, I've got a pile of pages next to me; it's like the fourth draft. It's a work in progress, but we're not dreaming it up anymore. We know what the story is. We're now actually trying to improve the three acts and make the characters better, build it up to something [we can shoot]. It's a work in progress, but we're actually making the film. There's no question about it, we're going to make the film.


A bit on the plot:


Scott: It's set in 2085, about 30 years before Sigourney [Weaver's character Ellen Ripley]. It's fundamentally about going out to find out 'Who the hell was that Space Jockey?' The guy who was sitting in the chair in the alien vehicle — there was a giant fellow sitting in a seat on what looked to be either a piece of technology or an astronomer's chair. Remember that? And our man [Tom Skerritt as Captain Dallas] climbs up and says "There's been an explosion in his chest from the inside out — what was that?" I'm basically explaining who that Space Jockey — we call him the Space Jockey — I'm explaining who the space jockeys were.


On Sigourney Weaver's participation:


Scott: It will be before she was born! Well, the main character [in the prequel] will be a woman, yeah. We're thinking it could go down that route, yeah. When I started the original "Alien," Ripley wasn't a woman, it was a guy. During casting, we thought, "Why don't we make it a woman?"

On creating new aliens, and whether he'll consult original "Alien" designer H.R. Giger:


Scott: I think, I have to design — or redesign — earlier versions of what these elements are that led to the thing you finally see in "Alien," which is the thing that catapults out of the egg, the face-hugger. I don't want to repeat it. The alien in a sense, as a shape, is worn out. (Giger's) still around. Once I get more serious and get going, and the big wheels start turning, we'll certainly talk. And maybe we'll come up with something completely different.


When we can expect to see it:


Scott: We're hoping to have it in theaters in late 2011, or maybe the best date in 2012.


On what made him change his mind about doing another "Alien" film:


Scott: Honestly? They've squeezed the franchise dry. The first one will always be the most frightening, because the beast we put together with Giger and all its parts — the face-hugger, the chest-burster, the egg — they were all totally original, and that's hard to follow. ... I've always avoided sequels, unless I felt there was something fresh.
 
I don't trust Scott with this. He's kind of....lost it. He needs a break for awhile then he should tackle this exciting (yet unnecessary) idea of a prequel.
 

eXistor

Member
I pretty much hate all of Scott's movies except Alien and Blade Runner and I love the Alien series (I even liked Alien 3 and Resurrection, not the AvP shit though). I really want another great Alien film, but I'm not sure if this is gonna be it. I just don't like the sound of it and i have zero faith in Scott as a director these days.
 

Binabik15

Member
eXistor said:
I pretty much hate all of Scott's movies except Alien and Blade Runner and I love the Alien series (I even liked Alien 3 and Resurrection, not the AvP shit though). I really want another great Alien film, but I'm not sure if this is gonna be it. I just don't like the sound of it and i have zero faith in Scott as a director these days.

You dont like Kingdom of Heaven: DC?!
 

black_13

Banned
While it's good to hear Ridley is back doing sci-fi after 20 years, like he said the Alien franchise has been milked dry. It would be better if he made an original sci-fi movie instead.
 
black_13 said:
While it's good to hear Ridley is back doing sci-fi after 20 years, like he said the Alien franchise has been milked dry. It would be better if he made an original sci-fi movie instead.

But it sounds like they aren't even going to use the original Alien design/creature.
 
SteelAttack said:
The first one kicks all kinds of asses. It was all downhill from there, understandably. Still, I'll definitely watch this one.
Oh man, now you've done it. Talking smack about Aliens is never a good idea.
 

JavaMava

Member
I just watched Alien for the first time last night and I thought that Space Jockey thing looked really awesome and I had so many questions about it the second it was on screen. However I think part of it's charm was that it is this big massive mysterious thing that the story rather quickly moves on from. You feel the same sense of wonder as the crew.
 
SteelAttack said:
:lol It's because of the exo-suit scene, right? Everybody loves that scene.
Well, that and that it's an impeccably paced action flick that succeeds wildly at what it sets out to accomplish without simply mimicking it's predecessor. I actually prefer Alien to Aliens as well, but I think mostly because I'm partial to horror over action. They're both pretty astounding in their own way though.
 

Blader

Member
Binabik15 said:
You dont like Kingdom of Heaven: DC?!

Kingdom of Heaven is great, but severely crippled by Orlando Bloom's character (as far as acting goes, I thought he was fine). I think it's fair to criticize Scott with that film.
 
30 years before? I always got the impression that the derelict ship and the Space Jockey were ancient. Like, thousands of years old, if not older.
 
the_log_ride said:
So he admits the franchis has been squeezed dry, and yet is going forward with another installment? Ok, cool.

Except that the direction they're taking it in sounds original. I like the idea of the film focusing on the beginning of terraforming planets.
 
Scullibundo said:
Except that the direction they're taking it in sounds original. I like the idea of the film focusing on the beginning of terraforming planets.

If they can nail that atmposhere of the 1st one with this prequel, then I'm game. But if shit is for some reason really campy like the AvP flicks, then yeah. Fuck that shit. I'll be following this one for sure now.
 
"Once I get more serious and get going, and the big wheels start turning, we'll certainly talk. And maybe we'll come up with something completely different."

Oh hell yes, Giger redesigns? SIGN ME UP!
 
the_log_ride said:
If they can nail that atmposhere of the 1st one with this prequel, then I'm game. But if shit is for some reason really campy like the AvP flicks, then yeah. Fuck that shit. I'll be following this one for sure now.

Scott may not be on his A-game lately, but he's never been campy.
 

duckroll

Member
I like where he's going with this prequel idea. It definitely doesn't sound to me like he's trying to "explain" things or answer questions from the first movie. Instead it just sounds like he's taking elements no one really cared about from the first movie, and using them as a point of connection to flesh out of the world before Alien, and as an excuse to make what could be a very interesting scifi horror movie - something the series has not been since the first entry.

No one gives a fuck about the space jockey, but that's EXACTLY why it's a good element to use, because then no matter what he comes up with, creativity it can be original and not feel like an answer no one wants. It's not like he's explaining the force in Star Wars, instead it'll be more like what the actual good prequels in Star Wars' extended universe does: pick up minor elements from the original trilogy and use them as a branching point to tell different and unique stories from other perspectives of the universe.
 

Zophar

Member
duckroll said:
No one gives a fuck about the space jockey, but that's EXACTLY why it's a good element to use, because then no matter what he comes up with, creativity it can be original and not feel like an answer no one wants.
I give a tremendous fuck about the space jockey. The ambiguity and the mystery surrounding the crash is the highlight of the movie for me.
 
GrotesqueBeauty said:
Well, that and that it's an impeccably paced action flick that succeeds wildly at what it sets out to accomplish without simply mimicking it's predecessor. I actually prefer Alien to Aliens as well, but I think mostly because I'm partial to horror over action. They're both pretty astounding in their own way though.
I see where are you coming from, and I agree, Aliens is a rather competent movie. I guess I'm being a bit unfair with it because Alien blew my mind, and Aliens was so different that it kind of put me off. At any rate, it's been years since I watched Aliens, so this thread is as good of an excuse as any to watch it again.
 
I'm incredibly psyched about this.

I've been waiting ages for Ridley to return to sci-fi, and if he still thinks there's potential in the Alien franchise, I'm on board.
 
I've never been a fan of prequels and Alien is a movie I've never felt needed one. Gonna take a super solid concept to be worth doing.

It's Ridley Scott so at the very least it should look nice.
 
SteelAttack said:
I see where are you coming from, and I agree, Aliens is a rather competent movie. I guess I'm being a bit unfair with it because Alien blew my mind, and Aliens was so different that it kind of put me off. At any rate, it's been years since I watched Aliens, so this thread is as good of an excuse as any to watch it again.

Director's Cut or bust. And once again, Aliens is a Sci Fi thriller more than action flick people.
 
Scullibundo said:
Director's Cut or bust.

Eh, the automated gun sequence is cool and some of the added dialogue was nice but almost everything else either didn't matter or takes away from the movie. The scene of the colony finding the alien space craft is a really necessary cut and the scene of Hudson spelling out the entire concept of a queen alien with the ant comparison is terrible.
 
Space A Cobra said:
Eh, the automated gun sequence is cool and some of the added dialogue was nice but almost everything else either didn't matter or takes away from the movie. The scene of the colony finding the alien space craft is a really necessary cut and the scene of Hudson spelling out the entire concept of a queen alien with the ant comparison is terrible.

Wasn't that one directed by James Cameron? I.e. not the director in question?
 

GhaleonEB

Member
Mr. Sam said:
There are some questions which don't need answering.
.

One of the things I love about the first film is the sense of history to the alien and it origin. Some things don't need explaining, and I fear this prequel could fill in blanks I'd rather be left mysterious.

Edit: though I should say, since they're making a prequel, they've picked the right guy to direct it. I hope they go for the same approach as in the first film - less Scott doing quick cut shaky action, more Scott doing a brilliant atmospheric mood piece.
 
SteelAttack said:
I see where are you coming from, and I agree, Aliens is a rather competent movie. I guess I'm being a bit unfair with it because Alien blew my mind, and Aliens was so different that it kind of put me off. At any rate, it's been years since I watched Aliens, so this thread is as good of an excuse as any to watch it again.
I was pretty young when I saw them both so I don't think I had any concept of how they each fit into the wider context of cinema, but I definitely see how Aliens would have less impact. Alien was genuinely unprecedented for it's time, and I agree that as good as Aliens is the original casts an awfully long shadow. I give it a lot of credit because I feel like it did as good a job as could be reasonably expected of any sequel. It means a lot that it didn't just try to out-Alien Alien.

I actually find myself defending Alien 3 a lot in spite of its flaws for similar reasons. It's not everything it could have been, and you can tell it was hampered by production difficulties, but I've always admired it didn't just take Aliens and try to reproduce it on an even larger scale. It was humble enough to accept its role as the third act in the overall arc of Ripley's character, and I thought thematically it managed to be believable as another facet of the same universe as the first two. A lot of people hated it for opening with two of the main protagonists from the last film dead, but I personally liked how bleak and uncompromising it was. It's just a shame that we'll never get to see Fincher's unfettered vision. I really think it had the potential to be in the same league as the first two if Fox hadn't pissed in the well.

Scullibundo said:
Director's Cut or bust. And once again, Aliens is a Sci Fi thriller more than action flick people.
I'd say six of one half a dozen of the other. I wouldn't object to someone classifying it as either one, honestly.
 

Zeliard

Member
Judging from the quotes in the OP, Ridley Scott doesn't seem to be a huge fan of Cameron's Aliens, but has he ever publicly commented on that movie?
 

jett

D-Member
Well, you know, it's like the Predators movie, I want to believe. I guess this means The Forever War is on hold? I don't really see the point of Ridley returning to the Alien franchise, for me that shit is just FUBAR'. But you know, I hope he does something decent out of this. If he can restrain himself and keep it horror/thriller like the original that'd be great. Set phasers to cautious anticipation.

Scullibundo said:
And once again, Aliens is a Sci Fi thriller more than action flick people.

Hardly. And I prefer the theatrical cut.
 
Space A Cobra said:
Eh, the automated gun sequence is cool and some of the added dialogue was nice but almost everything else either didn't matter or takes away from the movie. The scene of the colony finding the alien space craft is a really necessary cut and the scene of Hudson spelling out the entire concept of a queen alien with the ant comparison is terrible.

Ripley losing her daughter makes her connection to Newt so much more important. Also her relationship with Hicks is the best part. The final goodbye bitches.
 

Blader

Member
Scullibundo said:
Ripley losing her daughter makes her connection to Newt so much more important. Also her relationship with Hicks is the best part. The final goodbye bitches.

Before Ripley descends into hell, yeah, yeah.

That scene is nowhere near as poignant as you make it out to be.
 

.la1n

Member
Ridley Scott has made two good movies as far as i'm concerned and really I didn't even like Alien half as much as the cameron helmed sequel Aliens. Really don't have much faith in this but would like to be proved wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom