Alien Covenant

[hotrodder636]

Agree, the first Promethius (no one cares if it's spelled right)- was WTF.

It had potential but was not well laid out and some valuable story line was left out.

[MountainRaven]

I hope this picks up after Aliens, treats Alien 3 like a bad dream (it happened, but it is gone now) and totally ignores Alien:Resurrection. I can hope....
ETA: cannot watch trailer at this time. Will do so when I get normal wifi abiltiies back.

That was the Neil Blomkamp version. Or was going to be. But Ridley Scott doesn't want to let go of his control of the franchise to let Neil do his thing.

This? This looks meh.

[Co-gnARR]

It had potential but was not well laid out and some valuable story line was left out.

I think Ridley Scott was stuck trying to do his thing his way, and still needing to appease the studio executives. Ridley wanted to go back to 1979 and start his story from the beginning, but the money wanted him to make a one-off sciencey-action-creep fest for the sheep who do not know nor GAF about the origins of the Engineers and their bio-weapons running amok. Prometheus had so much potential, and for me at least, it answered some questions, but I have to know that before I rewatch that movie I need to skip the BS characters and stupid sh*t and try to geek out on the deeper, hidden clues and look for the Easter eggs. There are some things in there that challenge divinity and the staus quo of western thought, but you need to do some research outside of what is presented in the movie itself. There are blogs and youtube videos that get into this. My mind was (sorta) made up about the Engineers before really looking into what Scott was trying to achieve, but after seeing/reading some things that Scott himself seems to endorse (without overtly saying so) and now I need to get the DVD and really spend some me time digging into the movie. Yes it was a commercial flop, and a dud for those who were expecting something relfective of Scott's abilities, but there is a depth to it that is easily overlooked if you aren't paying attention.

[glocktogo]

I think Ridley Scott was stuck trying to do his thing his way, and still needing to appease the studio executives. Ridley wanted to go back to 1979 and start his story from the beginning, but the money wanted him to make a one-off sciencey-action-creep fest for the sheep who do not know nor GAF about the origins of the Engineers and their bio-weapons running amok. Prometheus had so much potential, and for me at least, it answered some questions, but I have to know that before I rewatch that movie I need to skip the BS characters and stupid sh*t and try to geek out on the deeper, hidden clues and look for the Easter eggs. There are some things in there that challenge divinity and the staus quo of western thought, but you need to do some research outside of what is presented in the movie itself. There are blogs and youtube videos that get into this. My mind was (sorta) made up about the Engineers before really looking into what Scott was trying to achieve, but after seeing/reading some things that Scott himself seems to endorse (without overtly saying so) and now I need to get the DVD and really spend some me time digging into the movie. Yes it was a commercial flop, and a dud for those who were expecting something relfective of Scott's abilities, but there is a depth to it that is easily overlooked if you aren't paying attention.

Guess I'm weird because I've watched Prometheus at least 10 times. For some reason it works for me.

[Co-gnARR]

Not weird at all...maybe you just get it. For me I did enjoy the movie for what it was, but there were some serious gaps and obvious garbage thrown in there that did nothing for the big picture story line and instead were just filler. For example, the wild Scotsman and dork biologist...WTF did they add? Just two dumb meat sacks to get killed for the sake of action. There was a lot to digest in that movie but the gratuitous crap distracted the viewer away from the subtleties. For example, when the people were looking around the Engineers' temple, did you look at the friezes? Did you notice the crucified xenomorph in there? WTF is that all about? These are the parts I enjoyed finding as I went back through the movie after the initial viewing.

[glocktogo]

Not weird at all...maybe you just get it. For me I did enjoy the movie for what it was, but there were some serious gaps and obvious garbage thrown in there that did nothing for the big picture story line and instead were just filler. For example, the wild Scotsman and dork biologist...WTF did they add? Just two dumb meat sacks to get killed for the sake of action. There was a lot to digest in that movie but the gratuitous crap distracted the viewer away from the subtleties. For example, when the people were looking around the Engineers' temple, did you look at the friezes? Did you notice the crucified xenomorph in there? WTF is that all about? These are the parts I enjoyed finding as I went back through the movie after the initial viewing.

Agreed, but as already stated, the studios would never let Scott make a film devoid of action. Not that many cerebral viewers willing to watch sci-fi w/o action.

And no, I don't get the crucifixion of a xenomorph, unless they ray to them like deities?

[SteyrAUG]

Agreed. It really did reach out to some unexplored territory in terms of bringing cinematography to the sci-fi genre. It legitimized science fiction as a viable thriller/horror/deep thought fix for thinking people. That movie and Bladerunner were Scott's masterpieces IMO. They brought serious direction and artistic expression into the mainstream movie experience in a way that sci-fi movies like Star Wars could not at that time. I am not knocking George Lucas or Star Wars in any way, but the style of that franchise contrasted to Alien and Blade Runner shows the stark difference in direction and execution of some deep story lines. Character development, the casting, camera work, lighting, set development, tone, etc are worlds (galaxies?) apart.

Giger might have been insane, but he did manage to offer up a truly alien vision of things. Also one of the first films to show us what the true nature of an ET would probably be like, a completely amoral creature that is intelligent but lacks the humanity we assume we'd expect.

No secret plan for world domination for us to outsmart, just a bad ass biological competitor that is better adapted to harsh alien environments than we could ever dream of being. This is one of the few movies that actually became scarier as my father discussed it from a scientific point of view.

[HardToHandle]

James Franco and Danny McBride? Ummm.... Didn't they already mess up the forgettable "This is the End"?

This screams Jar Jar Binks meets Prometheus. I do not believe I will drop a penny on this one.

[jpmuscle]

I think Ridley Scott was stuck trying to do his thing his way, and still needing to appease the studio executives. Ridley wanted to go back to 1979 and start his story from the beginning, but the money wanted him to make a one-off sciencey-action-creep fest for the sheep who do not know nor GAF about the origins of the Engineers and their bio-weapons running amok. Prometheus had so much potential, and for me at least, it answered some questions, but I have to know that before I rewatch that movie I need to skip the BS characters and stupid sh*t and try to geek out on the deeper, hidden clues and look for the Easter eggs. There are some things in there that challenge divinity and the staus quo of western thought, but you need to do some research outside of what is presented in the movie itself. There are blogs and youtube videos that get into this. My mind was (sorta) made up about the Engineers before really looking into what Scott was trying to achieve, but after seeing/reading some things that Scott himself seems to endorse (without overtly saying so) and now I need to get the DVD and really spend some me time digging into the movie. Yes it was a commercial flop, and a dud for those who were expecting something relfective of Scott's abilities, but there is a depth to it that is easily overlooked if you aren't paying attention.

Got a link that goes into all of this in detail by chance?

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

James Franco and Danny McBride? Ummm.... Didn't they already mess up the forgettable "This is the End"?

This screams Jar Jar Binks meets Prometheus. I do not believe I will drop a penny on this one.

Worse than that.

'Your Highness" in 2011. Natalie Portman coming off a Best Actress win does this. Doh.