David Giler & Walter Hill killed the franchise
-
successor13326 — 9 years ago(June 18, 2016 06:55 PM)
The monks would've been more interesting as characters than the prisoners, even if not all of them were named.
How so?
Their rejection of technology and their belief that the alien represents the devil is more intriguing than a bunch of rapists and murderers who just can't get any new tech and run screaming like chickens with their heads cut off.
Plus, the idea of monks being attacked in the wheat field with high angles of the Alien closing in on them sounds so much more interesting to me than the final film where nameless prisoners run through the same corridors and get picked off.
It kinda seems like the scene in Jurassic Park: Lost World where the raptors get the guys in the long grass. Not exactly better really.
Disagree. I think it would have been a very enjoyable, suspenseful scene.
Not to mention the scene where the one monk is yanked through the toilet.
Now that just sounds odd and belongs more in a Nightmare on Elm Street movie.
Again, I disagree.
and the part where they burn the wheat fields down.
Again, not sure why that is better than what we got.
It would be more beautiful and artistic than the prisoners running down similar drab tunnels. -
wears-alan — 9 years ago(June 19, 2016 03:32 AM)
Their rejection of technology and their belief that the alien represents the devil is more intriguing than a bunch of rapists and murderers who just can't get any new tech and run screaming like chickens with their heads cut off.
As opposed to the prisoners who found God, rejected modern technology (ie, the chance to leave when the facility was being mothballed) and seen the Alien as the devil.
Disagree. I think it would have been a very enjoyable, suspenseful scene.
I'm not saying it wouldn't have been enjoyable. But no better than the prisoners being chased down claustrophobic corridors.
You disagree that a monk being pulled down a toilet seems more akin to a Nightmare on Elm Street movie? Oh right. In that case I disagree with you. See how that works?
It would be more beautiful and artistic than the prisoners running down similar drab tunnels.
I see. In that case, guess what? I disagree with you.
Alien 3 is considered stupid by a lot of people, but the idea of monks travelling around space on a wooden planet is beyond stupid.
You're old enough to kill, but not for voting. -
Filimon — 9 years ago(June 27, 2016 02:12 PM)
The whole monks/prisoners in space idea was something Ward litteraly came up with on the plane to first meeting with Fox. It was a wacky idea that would fit into a stand alone film but not in the Alien series. I would have liked his original vision compared to what we got thou.
Aliens set up a sequel to go in many possible good directions. I Think it could have been on par with the previous entries even.
It could go into action, horror or a mix of both. It could involve one or more of the surviving characters. Ripley was not nessecarily the focal Point. Her arc was done after Aliens anyway. The notion it had to be so very different compared to the previous was the reason it got so messy. They twisted themselves into a lame compromise that repeated what we had seen Before and done better anyway. -
Filimon — 9 years ago(June 28, 2016 11:11 AM)
It absolutely did with 4 survivors! We (as most people watching Aliens) would love to see more adventures with Ripley, Hicks, Bishop and possibly Newt. They were well liked characters that could carry over to Another setting. It would continue something and develop the character relations instead of pressing the reset button like 3 and 4 did.
-
wears-alan — 9 years ago(June 28, 2016 01:40 PM)
Don't agree.
The last thing I wanted was Ripley and her Alien hunting family.
It would have been better if Aliens was the conclusion of her nightmare and Fox had been brave enough to continue without Ellen Ripley. They weren't. But an Alien hunting family would have been too silly for me. Killing them all was sad, but hey, who said life is fair?
The greatest trick the Devil played was convincing people he didn't exist.. -
Filimon — 9 years ago(July 14, 2016 10:05 AM)
I dont like the Alien hunting family either. But I do Think Ripley and Hicks had a good Chemistry. He was the only character that Ripley really liked and trusted. Like that softness in her Eyes when she is interacting with Hicks. And Bishop was an awesome character by Lance!
-
malley321 — 9 years ago(July 15, 2016 10:54 AM)
I just read the Gibson script for the first time. I had a general idea of it before hand, but this thread made me curious enough to go read it, and I have to sayit's terrible. I think people are blinded by the fact that it has Hicks and Bishop in it, that they ignore the bad writing. I'm glad it was never made.
-
jetairliner — 9 years ago(February 09, 2017 08:45 AM)
Monks on a wooden planetoid in space and all that would seem an amazing idea on paper, but really unfilmable. Ward seemed like a guy who had the right novel ideas but didn't know how to put them into practice.