David.9
MemberOvomorphApr-29-2017 1:01 AMDavid.9
MemberOvomorphApr-29-2017 1:01 AMMe wink
JOHNNYMORPH
MemberOvomorphApr-29-2017 1:09 AMRidley seems to have an excellent relationship with 20th Century Fox, having done so many movies with them, and after the box office profits from The Martian, Fox trust Ridley with the Alien series.
If Alien:Covenant is a big financial hit, then Ridley will be allowed to do what he wants with the next one.
LadyStardust
MemberOvomorphApr-29-2017 7:11 AMIt would have been something interesting.
Facehuggers
MemberNeomorphApr-29-2017 3:54 PMI think this film would've been a cinematic milestone; a story-line that would've split a single franchise into two parallel universes. I don't think that's happened before!
Don't get me wrong though, I cherish the ALIEN 3 theatrical edition! Awesome movie, just wish that the special effects were improved upon!
Starlogger
MemberChestbursterApr-30-2017 5:38 AMRidley (and Fox) is revising the canon, it's clear, and he is going to disregard any "Alien" movies that aren't his, namely "Aliens" in this particular case, so there is NO "Newt" or "Queen" or other events of said movie, and that is why Alien 5 will not happen.
MonsterZero
MemberXenomorphApr-30-2017 8:16 AMLove to read those 10 pages!
Hopefully, Blomkamp moves on, stops spinning his wheels and writes his own 'Alien' or 'Star Wars'.
Chris
AdminEngineerApr-30-2017 9:40 AMI agree Alien 5 could be a neat avenue to explore for the franchise but it had to factor in so many variables. Alien 3 and Resurrection were going to be retconned and essentially written off. Although I would be okay with Resurrection meeting that fate I feel Alien 3 still holds some water.
Ridley and Fox did create a rule book. How Blomkamp's story could fit into this is uncertain, but nothing is impossible. I think the focus on Blomkamp's version was drawing only from James Cameron's Aliens and disregarded a lot of what Ridley had created. I'm sure if Blomkamp had focused his concepts around Alien instead of Aliens, Ridley might have been more inclined to back the project. But I think Cameron took the series in a dramatically different direction and that's what Ridley is trying to dial back and refine.
RehabJip
MemberOvomorphMay-04-2017 12:26 PMNewt and Corporal Hicks Die (and Bishop is destroyed) in the prologue to Alien 3. It shows the Face Hugger in the Cryo Bay of the Sullaco spraying acid on their pods. This leads to the emergency protocol to eject the pods into an escape module and they end up on Florina 161. Ripley has their bodies burned in the incinerator (and Bishop is thrown in the Rubbish) on the prison colony.
How would Hicks and Newt be able to come back for a sequel, especially one where Newt is in her 20's???? I guess if you consider Aliens, directed by James Cameron, to be the final true "Alien Universe" Movie before Prometheus and disregard Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection. Sir Ridley Scott only Directed or had any artistic involvement with the Original Alien movie until he made Prometheus. He has turned down several offers to make a sequel to Alien both as producer and as director.
That being said I think the Prequel, keeping it in the same universe, was a good move and gives Alien fans a back story of how things lead up to the Nostromo, LV426 and Ripley but also provides a new story for a new generation who have never seen Alien. Also Ellen Ripley is arguably the greatest Heroin in Cinema History. Just Sayin'. Sadly Sigourney Weaver has said several time she would never reprise the Roll of Ellen Ripley again even if asked. Closest we will get to a sequel is the Alien Video Game with Ripley's Daughter as the lead, searching for answers as to how her mother met her demise, sometime between Alien and Aliens when Ripley is still in Cryo in Deep Space abroad the Narcissus