back to article Ridley Scott talks up 'nasty' Alien prequel

Sir Ridley Scott has been talking up his Alien prequel, promising a "really nasty" 3D treat which he described as "the dark side of the moon". The movie will be set in 2085, five years before the original, and will see the protagonists "first come across this thing on a planet called Zeta Reticuli". Scott teased to Screen …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Dale 3

    Money

    I would have thought Mr Scott (er, Sir...) had already sorted out his pension pot. That's what this is, isn't it?

  2. Aristotles slow and dimwitted horse
    Thumb Up

    More importantly...

    What discreet reference to Joseph Conrad will be slipped in?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Stop

    Please don't ask.

    The great mysteries of Alien were where did the Alien come from? and who were the people in the crashed ship?

    I have a horrid feeling they're going to try and answer these mysteries. Some things are best left to our imagination, especially when you see the pathetic way they explained the force in star wars.

    There are more examples of this need to explain away everything in sequels but I can't bring them to mind right now.

    1. Rob
      Unhappy

      Already done

      Read the comics and all these questions have already been answered, so no doubt their film will trash those storylines :(

  4. Kimo
    Grenade

    I for one...

    ...am looking forward to a third Alien(ses) film. (The ones after Aliens don't count...they are blocked from my mind, never to return.)

    1. Marvin the Martian
      Thumb Down

      What?

      Jeunet's fourth Alien (Resurrection) is definitely a good one.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    sadly

    There won't be any place for Hudson and Hicks.

    Should just watch Aliens again, perhaps if they converted that to 3D it would be good.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Coat

    I liked Alien 3

    ...... just because they had Brian Glover, voice of the Tetley tea folk, in space.

    I think there should be more Yorkshireman in sci-fi.

    Geoffrey Boycott in Star Wars... " You dinn't want to be mucking about with t' force stuff Luuke. Just bowl line and length, and Death Start wilt be History."

    [Foot note to US readers Geoffrey Boycott is a (in) famous opinionated cricketer.]

    1. TeeCee Gold badge
      Happy

      Boycott?

      I just can't see him as Kenobi myself.

      Fred Trueman on the other hand.........

  7. Dave H 2
    FAIL

    Oooh a 3D prequel...

    ...I'm just wetting myself in anticipation of the snarky review I'm going to post on imdb when it comes out.

  8. Kimo
    Go

    About the title...

    If the first movie is Alien, and the second is Aliens, will the two prequels be "Negative Alien" and "Zero Alien(s)" or is there no zero in this numbering system, leading us to a symmetrical "Negative Aliens" followed by "Negative Alien?"

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom ?

    Massive suckage. Only worth watching for the hot busty babe.

    1. Ammaross Danan
      FAIL

      Title

      "Only worth watching for the hot busty babe."

      Which would be quite the spectacle in 3D. Just think of how exaggerated Angie would have been if Tomb Raider had been shot in 3D...

      Ah well, I'm a Sci-Fi fan, and thus will be prone to watching it, no matter how terrible it may be.

  10. Blubster
    FAIL

    @I liked Alien 3

    That's the worst Yorkshire accent I've ever seen/heard.

    It should read-

    Geoffrey Boycott in Star Wars... " Tha dun't want to be mucking abaat wi' yon force stuff Loook. Just bowl line an' t' length, an' t' Death Star will bi 'istory."

    From a West Yorkshireman

  11. Gav H.

    H.R. Giger

    I hope he's involved.

    1. Marvin the Martian
      Dead Vulture

      He will be.

      He'll do the rolling in his grave thing.

  12. Armus Squelprom
    Thumb Up

    That's a classic!

    Geoffrey Boycott in Star Wars... " You dinn't want to be mucking about with t' force stuff Luuke..."

  13. Christos Georgiou
    Megaphone

    Seemingly forgotten fact

    Scott did not make a tetralogy (or trilogy with four movies so far, RIP DNA; and no, I don't need an explanation of what trilogy means). Scott created a fine thriller: “Alien”. Then Cameron made a fine action movie: “Aliens”. Fincher made a sequel which I do not currently remember whether I liked it or not: “Aliens³”. Then Jeunet made a movie which I remember I disliked.

    So, Scott has no obligations to the world regarding the rest of the movies in the saga.

  14. Charles Osborne

    "...even Marty is doing 3D."

    Scorsese?

    Raging Alien...Taxi Alien...Goodaliens....

    (OK, I'll go sit in the corner now.)

    1. Bod

      Scorsese it is

      Yeah, he's doing some kids film, in 3D

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2010/apr/14/martin-scorsese-3d

  15. Daniel B.
    Alien

    What would Ridley Scott do?

    It could be that it will be more similar in style to the first Alien movie, as that one is the only one he did.

    I disliked the third movie; Dark Horse Comics' "Aliens: Earth War" was much better than the tripe we were given with Alien3. Hell, even Alien 4 looks better than Alien3!

    A prequel might actually work... The Company already knew about LV426, that's why the Nostromo had that return route plotted. It could be that they knew because somebody had already found the thing. So it's workable...

  16. TeeCee Gold badge
    Stop

    Oh God, not more 3D.

    Watched Burton's Alice the other day, the first of the new crop of 3D I've seen. Wrong. Very wrong.

    The elephant in the room is that films need to be also shown in 2D for conventional cinemas, TV / DVD / BD release et. al. This means that they are shot conventionally with the Director using a very tight depth of field to focus your attention on what he wants you to look at.

    With a 3D picture, your brain expects to be able to focus on any part of the apparently deep picture, this doesn't work as only the bit that's supposed to be looked at is actually shot in focus. The brain starts fiddling with the eye muscles in an attempt to do its thing composing the full picture internally (which it does whether or not you *want* to look at the back/foreground) and you get a headache.

    To cap it all, the foreshortening caused by the depth of field effects leaves the "3D" effect looking like a series of planes at varying distances so, while the whole picture has apparent depth, the individual items in it appear flat (like one of those cutout theatre things). I found that anything moving "out" of or "in" to the picture (it's 3D, so lots of things do this because they can) felt* like it was "hopping" between the apparent planes and gave me a second headache to match the first.

    The solution is to shoot films for 3D with a very long field depth to ensure that everything in view is in focus. The first problem here is that you'd have to compose and shoot every scene twice, once for 3D and once for 2D. The second problem is that doing this removes a great deal of the scope for doing things with lighting.

    *Yup, not "looked", "felt". They looked like they were moving smoothly, but........no, I can't explain it.

  17. Bobster
    Alien

    Scott should direct...

    Cameron may have 'raised the bar' somewhat, but only in terms of filming techniques, the content and story of Avatar was weak.

    I really hope Ridley Scott decides to direct this, few can match his attention to detail and the Alien storyline needs to be respected... and by that I mean Alien and Aliens, not the crap that was made after them...

    Perhaps they should join forces... after all it was Cameron who directed Aliens ;)

  18. Gavin Burnett
    Grenade

    hollywood and its bloody sequels

    I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

    It's the only way to be sure.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    call george lucas

    He knows a thing or three about prequel's...

  20. JeeBee
    Thumb Up

    Looking forward to it

    Alien3 was horrifically under funded.

    I think prequels could work well, if done appropriately and not worrying about catering for the PG/12/15 market. 3D can work if recorded originally in 3D (none of this 2D -> 3D post-processing rubbish).

    Then again maybe Space Hulk would make a good horror sci-fi movie...

  21. Bruno de Florence

    Jog on

    Rather than rehash the same thing over and over again, how about tackling some new material, such as Frederick Pohl's Heechee saga or Franck Herbert's Dune saga (Lynch's film was a complete disaster, Graham Norton would make an excellent Benet Gesserit queen bitch)?

  22. BongoJoe
    Welcome

    It depends...

    I, for one, was disappointed by the Cameron Aliens. Just another gung-ho bunch of American Marines in a movie.

    I have to say that I loved the feel of the Extended version of Alien 3. The cinema release of that, thank you production studio, was mangled and stank to high heaven but the 'proper' full cut was utterly magnificent and was actually one of the better films in the series.

    Then again I'm not a fourteen year old kid waiting for mom to take me to the arcade in the mawl who loves to watch films with lots of explosions.

    If Scott is involved with this one and, hopefully, helming these two films then I have high hopes for this idea. But, please let's not make this into another useless slug-fest. I've seen enough movies of John Wayne, etc., fighting the whole of the Japanese army with one rifle - no matter how it's translated on screen.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    Pro Tip

    When your main selling point is "Look at this shiny 3D movie." you tend to lose focus on other parts. I mean look at Avatar, beautiful movie, extremely thin plot. If he had come out and said this first: "We can do some really interesting things with the story line" THEN I would be excited to see this. Less blue screens more scriptwriters please!

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.