Following the recent and monumental acquisition of 21st Century Fox by Disney, South-African director Neill Blomkamp has released some previously unseen concept art from the sequel to James Cameron's Aliens he had proposed and was briefly considered by Fox back in 2015. These two images, one of the iconic UD-4L Cheyenne Dropship in a hangar and another of the titular Xenomorph antagonist lurking in a ventilation shaft (pictured below), have sparked new interest in Blomkamp's canceled Aliens sequel. With many fans of the Alien franchise apprehensive about the future of their beloved movie series following Fox's acquisition by Disney and the division of the fanbase caused by Ridley Scott's polarizing prequels to Alien, these two pieces of concept art have been viewed by some commentators as a possible pitch by Blomkamp to the new executives at Disney at reviving interest in his proposed Alien movie, originally titled Alien: Awakening.
In 2015 Blomkamp released concept art via his Instagram account that featured franchise star Sigourney Weaver reprising her role as Ellen Ripley, accompanied by Michael Biehn as Colonial Marine Corporal Dwayne Hicks, complete with the facial burns he suffered toward the end of 1986's Aliens. The release of other conceptual images featuring the derelict Juggernaut and the Xenomorph Queen, among others have ignited an overwhelmingly positive response from fans, movie critics, and even general audiences. Following the release of the concept art for the movie, long-term Alien franchise collaborators Amalgamated Dynamics (ADI) released concept make up effects for Biehn's character. With support growing for the movie from ADI, Weaver, and Biehn, Blomkamp confirmed that the sequel would be his next movie, but in October 2015 the project was put on hold by studio Fox, pending the reception to Scott's Alien: Covenant. Yet, despite Covenant's underwhelming performance at the box office Scott, who had previously been attached as Alien: Awakening's executive producer, confirmed that Blomkamp's movie had been canceled and that the next installment in his series of prequels to Alien would assimilate the movie's title.
Despite Fox chairperson Stacey Snider's claims that she trusts Scott with the future of the Alien franchise, the recent acquisition of Fox by Disney, Blomkamp's timely release of these new pieces of concept art, and the growing division among the fanbase may actually be the chain of events that could see Disney executives seriously consider Blomkamp's vision for the future of the Alien franchise. Unfortunately, since the initial cancelation of the project, support for it among the Alien fanbase has grown divided with supporters eager to revisit the world and characters Cameron first created in 1986, but with detractors citing Blomkamp's filmography as reason enough to leave the project abandoned. We here at Scified have played devils advocate and aired both arguments; believing Blomkamp's vision to revisit the popular "Ripley" era of the universe may be the much-needed injection the franchise needs, while conversely, we have cited our concerns that the projects use of nostalgia and fan-service may not be enough for fans that want to see the franchise evolve beyond its humble movie monster beginnings.
To seriously consider Blomkamp's vision of a sequel to Aliens over Scott's preference for a "War of the Worlds" between the Engineers and sociopathic synthetic David, we have to ascertain which proposal is the better alternative, but to do so we must ask ourselves what constitutes a good Alien movie. Not in terms of our individual opinions, which are subjective, but by critically identifying the better movies of the franchise through objective analysis. As such, poor characterization and poor narrative structure immediately omit's Scott's prequels, and the needlessly comedic undertones and poor execution see Alien: Resurrection join them. Despite its growing favor over the years one too must also strike Alien 3 from contention due to its many narrative inconsistencies, which leaves us with the first two installments; Scott's Alien and Cameron's Aliens. The former is the progenitor of the franchise, which while scattered with small flaws is considered a classic and a masterpiece by most of the fanbase. The latter, while the subject of much criticism from some fans was executed beautifully within its chosen genre and has since inspired other franchises such as Starship Troopers and Halo. Each of these two movies features memorable and cherished characters and effectively use the Xenomorph as the antagonist to create fear, suspense, drama, and a sense of overwhelming and impending futility.
This leads us to the conclusion that a good Alien movie should feature the titular antagonist, used effectively in its role opposite a group of well-realized human characters, along with every good movies necessary ingredient - a strong and effective narrative. Considering the aforementioned poor characterization of the Alien prequels and Scott's intention for the sequel to Alien: Covenant to continue its focus on David as the antagonist, rather than the Xenomorph would suggest that Scott's proposal would not make for a good Alien movie. On the other hand, Blomkamp wishes to metaphorically resurrect favored characters Ripley, Hicks, and Newt in a story that will see the Xenomorph return to prominence as the movie's antagonist. Fans of Scott's prequels will state their desire to see the prequel series completed and tied narratively into 1979's Alien, but do we really need a sequel to Alien: Covenant? Do we really need to see the fate of the colony ship? Do we really need the mystery of the derelict Juggernaut revealed? Would it not be better to leave the fate of the USCSS Covenant and the history of the derelict open to interpretation and future exploration? Conversely, one could argue the same of Blomkamp's proposed sequel and ask whether we really need to see Ripley, Hicks and Newt return, only for them to be returned to the grave? Do we really need to return to LV-426's derelict Juggernaut and its cargo of Ovomorph's (Xenomorph eggs)? and importantly for fans, how exactly does Blomkamp intend on resurrecting Hicks and Newt, who died in Alien 3's opening?
Another note for consideration is the viability of each director. Of the two Scott is arguably the more experienced, talented and capable director, however, Scott has stated that Alien: Covenant was produced in reaction to social media negativity towards Prometheus and despite their prominent roles in Covenant Scott believes the 'Morphs' to no longer be viable as the series antagonist. Meanwhile, despite his relative inexperience Blomkamp has repeatedly stated that he is an avid fan of and holds great love for the franchise. The final factor we should all consider is the future. In this we have to be blunt, Scott recently turned 80, whereas Blomkamp recently turned 38. As such, Blomkamp's youth makes him a worthy investment for the Alien franchise, with Scott posing a much greater risk.
Which brings us to our deliberation. Can we trust Scott to hastily direct another prequel movie that will again feature David as the prime antagonist with the Xenomorph likely making a poorly executed cameo appearance, which will spoon feed fans unnecessary answers to mysteries that will likely fail to live up to fans high expectations? Conversely, Can the relatively inexperienced Blomkamp be trusted to deliver on the promises of his concept art and direct a worthy sequel to Aliens that will reinvigorate and unify the widely divided fanbase. Although we may have our reservations, it would appear that Blomkamp's vision may be what the Alien franchise needs regardless of whether or not it is what the fanbase actually wants. The director's recent work at his newly founded OAT Studios shows a growing maturity in his work, which together with his well-publicized love for the series could be the deciding factor if Disney decides in Blomkamp's favor.
However, there is a third option. Rather than having to choose between either Scott or Blomkamp, why is not possible for the two to put their differences aside and work together. With Blomkamp directing and Scott as executive producer could Blomkamp's proposed sequel to Aliens not return to LV-426 as his concept art suggests. Instead, with LV-426 totaled in Aliens we could instead find Ripley, Hicks, and Newt on LV-223, Planet 4 or even Origae-6. One would imagine the latter would likely have become a Weyland-Yutani research outpost following the transmission David sent them detailing the Xenomorph in Covenant's closing scenes and in the movies post-marketing video titled "The secrets of Davids Lab: the Engineers" (above). Weaver, Biehn, and Carrie Henn (Newt) could be joined by Michael Fassbender as David, with the planet having become a graveyard following David's unseen confrontation with the Engineers, with only David having survived, possibly hiding in an Engineer hypersleep pod having maybe become mortal from too much exposure to the Black Pathogen.
The Alien: Romulus sequel is currently in development and cameras are set to roll by October, 2025! Be sure to bookmark the Alien: Romulus 2 Info Page for an up-to-date account of all available information, production updates and important details!
In addition to the upcoming Alien: Romulus sequel, we have the Alien: Earth TV series from Noah Hawley now streaming and a rumoured Alien vs. Predator reboot in the works as well!
Alien fans want another Alien prequel over Romulus 2 or anything else, according to new online survey!
It appears fans of the Alien franchise have grown tired of the same narratives being recycled and are finally embracing the idea of another Alien preq...
Alien: Romulus 2 still needs a director – Demián Rugna denies sequel involvement
The hunt for a director for the Alien: Romulus sequel is still on! Despite rumors circulating earlier this month that Demián Rugna might b...
Fede Alvarez addresses why he's not directing Alien: Romulus 2
Why is Fede Alvarez no longer directing the Alien: Romulus sequel? Well, according to him, he says there never were any plans for him to do so in the ...
