So Ridley Scott is directing an Alien prequel... (The official Prometheus Thread)

[BTR1701 60]

The PG-13 trend is becoming a little too popular. Easy A and The Social Network both got that treatment. It was obvious Easy A was supposed to be R, there was still a lot of stuff that surprised me for PG-13.

It's just surprising when studios are censoring David Fincher and Ridley Scott and other great directors. Would WB censor Chris Nolan?

It's all about putting the tween butts in the seats. There's lots more money to be made with a PG-13 than an R. You cut off a huge segment of the customer base that way. Kids are the only demographic that actually goes to the movies regularly anymore. Most adults have invested in a decent home setup and much prefer to wait a few months for the DVD and forego all the hassles at the theater.

The best example I can think of this phenomenon was when they made that first Alien vs Predator movie. They took two fantastic R-rated franchises and dumbed them down to PG-13 so they could maximize the tween box office. The result was an insipid mess.

[A24 5,157]

I would love to score this film! I totally would bring in the Goldsmith tone. I love the sparse stark quality of his original score. Still the best of the bunch, although Goldenthal's is my second fave. I think he did bridge some of that quality to Alien3 IMO but just made it more savage at the same time. Wreckage and Rape (the opening) is still one of my all time fave renditions of the Fiorina 1 theme. It's as apocalyptic as anything I've ever heard.

Goldenthal's score was musically impressive but I felt it was also a bit obstrusive, as if it had to compensate for something. When I watch Alien, I hardly realize there is a score.

Alex

[Melange 448]

There's lots more money to be made with a PG-13 than an R.

Yep. Even then, it seems that far younger children are getting in to see movies that sttrreettcch PG-13. For example,I learned yesterday that my 8 year old Nephew and 11 year old Niece saw Avatar in the cinema. Nothing new I guess. Money talks. VHS Rental shops sneekily handed out 18+ Vids when I was about 11 or so. Still though, I bet it was a case of my nephew going berserk about any suggestion that his sister could watch it but he couldn't. My brother's wife simply can't say no to them and keeps trying to treat them equally all the time in the interest of 'peace'.

[David Coscina 4]

I would love to score this film! I totally would bring in the Goldsmith tone. I love the sparse stark quality of his original score. Still the best of the bunch, although Goldenthal's is my second fave. I think he did bridge some of that quality to Alien3 IMO but just made it more savage at the same time. Wreckage and Rape (the opening) is still one of my all time fave renditions of the Fiorina 1 theme. It's as apocalyptic as anything I've ever heard.

Then start pulling your contacts!

I solute your optimism!

[Jill Sandwich 11,171]

I would love to score this film! I totally would bring in the Goldsmith tone.

No! Make it original! I'm sick of nods and homages.

[Naïve Old Fart 13,026]

There's lots more money to be made with a PG-13 than an R.

Yep. Even then, it seems that far younger children are getting in to see movies that sttrreettcch PG-13. For example,I learned yesterday that my 8 year old Nephew and 11 year old Niece saw Avatar in the cinema. Nothing new I guess. Money talks. VHS Rental shops sneekily handed out 18+ Vids when I was about 11 or so. Still though, I bet it was a case of my nephew going berserk about any suggestion that his sister could watch it but he couldn't. My brother's wife simply can't say no to them and keeps trying to treat them equally all the time in the interest of 'peace'.

Does anyone remember a time when a grown-up film industry made grown-up films for grown-up people?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 12,392]

[A24 5,157]

Does anyone remember a time when a grown-up film industry made grown-up films for grown-up people?

We are living it right now.

[Thor 9,362]

I can't wait to see this, Ridley being my second favourite director (after Spielberg, obviously) and ALIEN being one my very, very favourite movies (if not THE favourite movie). It's surely taken long enough to have it materialize! And it ain't finished yet.

[Ollie 1,375]

The PG-13 trend is becoming a little too popular. Easy A and The Social Network both got that treatment. It was obvious Easy A was supposed to be R, there was still a lot of stuff that surprised me for PG-13.

It's just surprising when studios are censoring David Fincher and Ridley Scott and other great directors. Would WB censor Chris Nolan?

You can get away with certain things in a PG-13 film. You can drop a few "F" bombs and some female above the waste nudity.

I would love to score this film! I totally would bring in the Goldsmith tone. I love the sparse stark quality of his original score. Still the best of the bunch, although Goldenthal's is my second fave. I think he did bridge some of that quality to Alien3 IMO but just made it more savage at the same time. Wreckage and Rape (the opening) is still one of my all time fave renditions of the Fiorina 1 theme. It's as apocalyptic as anything I've ever heard.

Then start pulling your contacts!

I solute your optimism!

You can do it!

[Uni 307]

Hmm . . . I'm divided on this one. Growing up as a major fan of the original, I remember thinking Aliens was gonna suck. Of course, it didn't (you hit it on the head with that "perfect Sunday afternoon combo" bit, Joey). Alien3, on the other hand . . . did. As did the one that followed. The first AVP wasn't too bad--it, at least, had the virtue of being fun. AVP: Requiem was a gigantic turd, the stench of which lingers in a mind eager to forget it ever happened.

I was having a discussion about these movies not too long ago with another fan whose opinion largely reflected mine. We agreed that the series went wrong at exactly the point when they started trying to make them horror films. They're not (at least, they're not supposed to be). Horror films attempt to be scary by bending toward gratuitous, graphic violence. When you think about it, the original Alien and its first sequel weren't really all that violent. Sure, there were the chestburster scenes, but those were more disturbing than gratuitously violent. Aside from those, there was a minimum of on-screen blood in both films (though there was certainly plenty of opportunity for it). These were intelligent and well-executed science fiction thrillers, not horror films.

The further sequels blew all of that. They were exploitative gross-fests designed to see how many weird and wild images they could stuff into a movie, using large casts elected solely to be thrown into a meat grinder. Nothing interesting, intelligent or entertaining about that at all.

So, what about a prequel, then? It has potential, I suppose. If it could be geared once again as a good sci-fi thriller--or even just a good ol' science fiction film--then it might turn out all right. I'd certainly trust Ridley Scott more than many other to pull it off.

- Uni

[Mr. Breathmask 624]

Hmm, Aliens certainly kicked up the gore. Exploding, splattering aliens, anyone?

[crocodile 9,724]

Disgusting things happening to disgusting creatures? These two things simply cancel each other out.

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,260]

Hmm . . . I'm divided on this one. Growing up as a major fan of the original, I remember thinking Aliens was gonna suck. Of course, it didn't (you hit it on the head with that "perfect Sunday afternoon combo" bit, Joey). Alien3, on the other hand . . . did. As did the one that followed. The first AVP wasn't too bad--it, at least, had the virtue of being fun. AVP: Requiem was a gigantic turd, the stench of which lingers in a mind eager to forget it ever happened.

I was having a discussion about these movies not too long ago with another fan whose opinion largely reflected mine. We agreed that the series went wrong at exactly the point when they started trying to make them horror films. They're not (at least, they're not supposed to be). Horror films attempt to be scary by bending toward gratuitous, graphic violence. When you think about it, the original Alien and its first sequel weren't really all that violent. Sure, there were the chestburster scenes, but those were more disturbing than gratuitously violent. Aside from those, there was a minimum of on-screen blood in both films (though there was certainly plenty of opportunity for it). These were intelligent and well-executed science fiction thrillers, not horror films.

The further sequels blew all of that. They were exploitative gross-fests designed to see how many weird and wild images they could stuff into a movie, using large casts elected solely to be thrown into a meat grinder. Nothing interesting, intelligent or entertaining about that at all.

So, what about a prequel, then? It has potential, I suppose. If it could be geared once again as a good sci-fi thriller--or even just a good ol' science fiction film--then it might turn out all right. I'd certainly trust Ridley Scott more than many other to pull it off.

- Uni

Please post more!

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Hmm . . . I'm divided on this one. Growing up as a major fan of the original, I remember thinking Aliens was gonna suck. Of course, it didn't (you hit it on the head with that "perfect Sunday afternoon combo" bit, Joey). Alien3, on the other hand . . . did. As did the one that followed. The first AVP wasn't too bad--it, at least, had the virtue of being fun. AVP: Requiem was a gigantic turd, the stench of which lingers in a mind eager to forget it ever happened.

I was having a discussion about these movies not too long ago with another fan whose opinion largely reflected mine. We agreed that the series went wrong at exactly the point when they started trying to make them horror films. They're not (at least, they're not supposed to be). Horror films attempt to be scary by bending toward gratuitous, graphic violence. When you think about it, the original Alien and its first sequel weren't really all that violent. Sure, there were the chestburster scenes, but those were more disturbing than gratuitously violent. Aside from those, there was a minimum of on-screen blood in both films (though there was certainly plenty of opportunity for it). These were intelligent and well-executed science fiction thrillers, not horror films.

The further sequels blew all of that. They were exploitative gross-fests designed to see how many weird and wild images they could stuff into a movie, using large casts elected solely to be thrown into a meat grinder. Nothing interesting, intelligent or entertaining about that at all.

So, what about a prequel, then? It has potential, I suppose. If it could be geared once again as a good sci-fi thriller--or even just a good ol' science fiction film--then it might turn out all right. I'd certainly trust Ridley Scott more than many other to pull it off.

- Uni

Please post more!

I disagree (not about posting more, you should), Alien is a horror film. You can wrap it in SF trappings all you like, it's still a haunted house movie.

Horror films attempt to be scary by bending toward gratuitous, graphic violence.

That's usually a generalisation normally used by people who are derogatory towards the genre of horror as a whole. But it's a broad statement. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (which was a HUGE influence on Ridley Scott and Alien) has no graphic violence. The Exorcist has very little. The Shining. The Omen. Halloween. None of these movies have any more graphic violence than Alien. Yet you'd be hard pressed to call them anything but horror movies.

I think probably what you're thinking more of are things like Saw, which I agree are generally a waste of time. But you infer a lack of intelligence in horror films, which again is an oversimplification, like saying all fantasy films are for adolescents and people who refuse to grow up. For example, Dawn of the Dead contains much graphic horror and wears its horror film tag on its sleeve, but it's known as much for its intelligence and satirical and social qualities as it is for its gore. David Cronenberg's films are fiercely intelligent.

Besides, Aliens is an action film

[A24 5,157]

"Haunted House" movies aren't horror movies, they are thrillers. It's about what you don't see, the dark corners, the noises on the attic. But yes, Alien adds a few 'horror' elements to the whole as well.

Alex

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Do you like horror films, Alex?

[A24 5,157]

I like all movies if they are good . Example: 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later are both horror movies but I only like the first one.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

I like all movies if they are good . Example: 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later are both horror movies but I only like the first one.

I see. I always find it useful to find out people's opinion on the genre before entering into any discussion on what exactly constitutes "horror" and "thriller". Interestingly, I remember reading Danny Boyle was very adamant that 28 Days Later was not a horror and expressed a distaste for the genre, which was somewhat ironic given the influence on it by Romero's pictures.

[A24 5,157]

Are you sure Boyle said "horror" and not "zombie"? The latter would make more sense since 28 Days Later is a horror movie. Weather it's a zombie movie is more debatable.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Are you sure Boyle said "horror" and not "zombie"? The latter would make more sense since 28 Days Later is a horror movie. Weather it's a zombie movie is more debatable.

It could have been zombie, in fact I think it might have been. I remember thinking it was funny because Alex Garland wrote it as an unashamed homage to Romero.

[Uni 307]

Are you sure Boyle said "horror" and not "zombie"? The latter would make more sense since 28 Days Later is a horror movie. Weather it's a zombie movie is more debatable.

It could have been zombie, in fact I think it might have been. I remember thinking it was funny because Alex Garland wrote it as an unashamed homage to Romero.

Interesting, the connections we make. Technically speaking, 28 Days Later isn't a zombie movie at all (since the "creatures" in it aren't dead, just diseased), and yet--because they feed on human flesh--everyone called it a zombie film. Guess if it looks like one and acts like one. . . .

I disagree (not about posting more, you should), Alien is a horror film. You can wrap it in SF trappings all you like, it's still a haunted house movie.

Horror films attempt to be scary by bending toward gratuitous, graphic violence.

That's usually a generalisation normally used by people who are derogatory towards the genre of horror as a whole. But it's a broad statement. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (which was a HUGE influence on Ridley Scott and Alien) has no graphic violence. The Exorcist has very little. The Shining. The Omen. Halloween. None of these movies have any more graphic violence than Alien. Yet you'd be hard pressed to call them anything but horror movies.

I think probably what you're thinking more of are things like Saw, which I agree are generally a waste of time. But you infer a lack of intelligence in horror films, which again is an oversimplification, like saying all fantasy films are for adolescents and people who refuse to grow up. For example, Dawn of the Dead contains much graphic horror and wears its horror film tag on its sleeve, but it's known as much for its intelligence and satirical and social qualities as it is for its gore. David Cronenberg's films are fiercely intelligent.

Besides, Aliens is an action film

Much as I'd like to, I can't really argue with you here. I don't infer a lack of intelligence in horror films as a whole (we can all think of some brilliant ones); but I'll cop to the generalization bit, and even to being a bit derogatory toward horror films. You make some good points here.

Still, I'm not yet ready concede all. I still think Alien is far more a thriller than a horror film. But, hey, maybe that's just me. . . !

Please post more!

Thanks for the sentiment. I wish I could spend a lot more time here than I do. That's been a problem for years now. . . .

- Uni

[Quintus 6,499]

I like all movies if they are good . Example: 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later are both horror movies but I only like the first one.

Whilst the original is the better movie, I found the sequel to be good in its own right. The opening sequence was an absolute barnstormer and the I found the movie in general to be thrilling, compared to the more character driven Days. 28 Weeks Later was a worthy sequel.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

When is 28 Months Later gonna come out?

[Charlie Brigden 7]

When is 28 Months Later gonna come out?

I think Boyle and Garland are working on it.

[Quintus 6,499]

Yeah I heard that, bring it on. I got room for one more.

[crocodile 9,724]

I lost patience 2/3 through the first one...

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,260]

The last third is the best part!

[Charlie Brigden 7]

The last third is the best part!

Not if you've seen Day of the Dead.

[A24 5,157]

The third part of 28 Days Later brilliantly shifted its focus from the 'infected' to the world of a new humanity: a frightened and lawless man that is even more dangerous than the poor but predictable 'infected' one.

Alex

[Quintus 6,499]

Or Rambo in Manchester.

[Naïve Old Fart 13,026]

Or Rambo in Manchester.

The best thing they did to Manchester was to incerate it.

[Quintus 6,499]

Maad for iiit

[Jay 46,245]

Update:

http://www.slashfilm.com/ridley-scotts-alien-prequel-titled-paradise-filming-delayed/

[Naïve Old Fart 13,026]

Nice that it's going to be a 2 - parter, but, honestly; "Paradise"?

[crocodile 9,724]

Alien is a lame title too, if you think about it. And the absence of that word in the new title is encouraging. Kind of like TDK. I like simple titles like this. They're more elegant, I think. And they promise something more special.

Karol

[Andy 7,733]

Don't know if this was posted, but there are rumors of H.R. Giger being involved in the Alien Prequel. Kinda cool to imagine.

[A24 5,157]

Ridley Scott's Prometheus will be released March 9th, 2012

Scott: "While Alien was indeed the jumping off point for this project, out of the creative process evolved a new, grand mythology and universe in which this original story takes place. The keen fan will recognize strands of Alien's DNA, so to speak, but the ideas tackled in this film are unique, large and provocative. I couldn't be more pleased to have found the singular tale I'd been searching for, and finally return to this genre that's so close to my heart."

Sounds like the start of a new science fiction series. The word "Alien" doesn't even appear in the official title of the film.

Alex

[crocodile 9,724]

From what I understand it is more of a spin-off than prequel. Doesn't matter anyway. I like what I'm reading here.

Karol

[A24 5,157]

Doesn't matter anyway. I like what I'm reading here.

I agree, except for the possible involvement of Jolie or Theron. Just like with Alien, I want the film to be the star, not the actors.

[Demondm810 473]

I'm glad it's not an "Alien" film. Give me Ridley doing Sci-fi, with no expectations.

[Koray Savas 2,260]

But it is an Alien film, it just doesn't have the word "alien" in the title. Is it still going to be PG-13 or is the studio going to let Scott do what he wants?

[Demondm810 473]

Hmm.. I read it to mean it was not related in any way to the Alien canon, but would be somewhat inspired by it.

[Brónach 1,330]

I understand they went all about the "space jockey" on the script, and then they they thought "Ok this is cool by itself, why don't we make it an original story instead of a prequel to Alien?". And then they chose a different title for it.

[A24 5,157]

Hello, sweetie. Alex, you know that statement goes against EVERYTHING you believe about films!

I don't think so, honey.

Hmm.. I read it to mean it was not related in any way to the Alien canon, but would be somewhat inspired by it.

That's how I read it too. That's also the reason why there's no "alien" in the film title. The producers ain't gonna like this.

[Naïve Old Fart 13,026]

Hello, sweetie. Alex, you know that statement goes against EVERYTHING you believe about films!

I don't think so, honey.

Au contraire, darling; au contraire. If you are as passionate about films as I think you are, then you'll know that ALL films are about people, and that no one element of a film should dominate, however good it is. Having said that, I will happily admit that, with some films, the only reason that they are even remotely watchable is due to the technical aspects of the film.

As far as "ALIEN" is concerned, Scott always intended the "look" of the film to be its main attraction, and, on that score, he succeeds magnificently! But is that right? It seems that more and more films get attention for their technical aspects, rather than their artistic merits. Surely, something is seriously wrong, here?

Hmm.. I read it to mean it was not related in any way to the Alien canon, but would be somewhat inspired by it.

That's how I read it too. That's also the reason why there's no "alien" in the film title. The producers ain't gonna like this.

PROMETHEUS: FROM AND INSPIRED BY THE MOTION PICTURE "ALIEN". Just doesn't sound right, does it?

[Brónach 1,330]

I just want to say the the look of a film IS and artistic merit, the same way a poet has an artistic merit in his usage of words or a comic book writer in the treatment of rythm, page flow and time dilation, or a painter's painting technique, for example.

[Naïve Old Fart 13,026]

I just want to say the the look of a film IS and artistic merit, the same way a poet has an artistic merit in his usage of words or a comic book writer in the treatment of rythm, page flow and time dilation, or a painter's painting technique, for example.

I absolute, agree with, and endorse your point, Chaac! my complaint is that too many films are known far more for what goes on behind the camera, than for what goes on it front of it. All elements of a film should, IMHO, be subservient to the story.

[A24 5,157]

If you are as passionate about films as I think you are, then you'll know that ALL films are about people ...

It's important, sure, but what distinguishes a movie from other movies? The artist's vision. The way a story is told.

I just want to say the the look of a film IS and artistic merit, the same way a poet has an artistic merit in his usage of words or a comic book writer in the treatment of rythm, page flow and time dilation, or a painter's painting technique, for example.

True.

[Ollie 1,375]

This film will end up tanking anyway.

Oh well it can't drag the Alien franchise any lower then it already is.