To much detail anyone?

agreed, considering the sub-par heavy-handed cgi and lack of "practical effects" that took the fear and horror out of the film. I remember bracing myself for the backburster scene but because it was soo over-the-top cgi it didn't look real and hence was not frightening.

I loved the film but my one gripe is the use of visual effects in the film   

'I remember bracing myself for the backburster scene but because it was soo over-the-top cgi it didn't look real and hence was not frightening.'

I think that the backburst scene is shocking, I like it very much. And the background music is awesome in it. I don't feel the CGI, but it is only my opinion. :)

Ridley Scott's films, including Alien, have always been detail oriented. People will find something to nitpick, but I thought the budget was well-utilized.

I embedded those videos for ya, miss Moon. Wonderful post, i'll feature it awhile. x

Haha it would probably be hard to stop Ridley from putting that much detail into everything! I think that is the reality of his films as well as most other films. Building a world, whether completely fictional, based somewhat in reality, or totally in reality, it takes a hell of a lot to put that together (even a world for a standalone film). Those ltitle details, how everything works and having a function for every little piece in a spacesuit, are part of what makes a film immersive. 

That's probably not new information to most here, but it was a super long winded way to sound smart and state that I don't think the details, such as the amount that went into Covenant spacesuits, will, or necessarily can, be left out of Ridley's next entry into the franchise. 

I mean, MAYBE some can be cheated/left out, but due to the level of detail Ridley will want to/end up put(ting) in, anything that could be left out would not make enough of an impact budget wise. Basically, it would be more worth it to go super hard on the ever-so-slight details. 

On this topic you can check the pulse monitor on Daniels pod when she realizes that Walter is in fact David, it goes from 81 to 161 or so. A detail that most viewers don't look for.

All details in the movie are carefully observed, nothing is overlooked, therefore if the Engineers look different on Paradise it is for a good reason.

If Ridley didn't put so much detail into the suits, it wouldn't be an alien suit lol Remember what the Nostromo crew wore? They had so much detail in those suits. I feel the same way about the sets, it wouldn't be Alien if Ridley didn't put so much into the sets. 

I wouldn't say the 'nobody' actors were to the films detriment. Remember, most of the actors from the original films were nobodies until Alien.

All very good points, and as IRaptus said, the Proto/Xeno itself, as well as the HORRID "chestburster" were just absolutely horribly rendered. There's no excuse to spend so much money on suits and blood and extra detail, and make the CGI look like a high school film project.

I didn't believe the CGI was bad. I thought it looked quite good tbh lol There were a couple scenes like the Xeno climbing down the ladder where the CGI faultered but it looked amazingly beautiful when it counted.

@Lawrence the one that got me was the chestburster scene. That was just not good, sorry. They filmed it with practical effects, but ended up having to convert to CGI because it didn't work. The DARK scenes with the xeno/proto were much better, but not at all as good as they should've/could've been.

@IRaptus & @Starlogger

I agree on that the backburster was bad CGI

Plus, the scene where Oram gets chestbursted could have been better too.

@Lilly (Svanya)

Thanks

@daliens

I think you're right that the Engineers look different on "Paradise" for a reason.

When the neomorph attacked Rosenthal, that scene could have had better CGI.  I remember when I saw that scene in a trailer, I thought that it was horrible CGI, but it was much better in the actual movie.

All of the facehuggers where great!

@Lawrence of Arabia

Maybe Ridley should put more responsibility on the actors and spend less on details?  

I'm don't watch all kinds of Ridley Scott movies, so I didn't know that he puts a lot of details in all of his movies until now.

The problem with the A:C spacesuit is I don't remember them wearing it to much.  There where two suits that I know of.  There is that giant yellow one which has bearings in it and the one featured in this thread.  I just don't remember the crew wearing either one very long at all.  Does anyone remember it any differently?  If not, then all this detail is created for maybe 5 min. of screen time.

When the Nostromo crew went to investigate the alien ship, they wore those suits for quite some screen time, so I could see more detail being important there.

@cuponator3000

All that detail would make a really good "Behind the Scenes" or "The Making of..." movie for the actual movie, but cutting these expenses out to spend more in other places or to spend less overall was another option I feel was ignored in A:C.

I Moon Girl The Nostromo crew wore for about as long as they do in Covenant. It's just the aesthetics of the Alien suits to be detailed lol If they weren't, it wouldn't feel a part of the same universe. I thought the acting in Covenant was fantastic even if they weren't all A-Listers. That's my opinion though, like how I thought the CGI was great. Idk how anyone could say the back burster scene was bad but eh.

cuponator3000 I totally agree with your assessment.

@Lawrence of Arabia

I don't even remember where the Covenant crew wore the suit featured in this thread.

I remember Tennessee wearing the bulky, yellow one to fix the solar sails.

When did the crew where the other suit?

They wore different gear once they landed on "Paradise".  I guess that gear is called their Expedition Uniform.

Oh yea, they wore it when they fought the Xeno on the Covenant ship.  

Some may not notice the level of detail, but I think it is great that it's there for those whom notice. I also suspect they would get hammered for leaving out some details. Just look at how badly past films get criticized because "no scientist would ever do that on a big expensive mission like this 'type of thing'".

The backburster scene doesn't look like inadequate CGI to me, but it was a little off-putting the first time because I expected (as well as the baby Neomorph) something more mostly practical, but I think it was still well done. 

I also didn't notice or have a problem with the Oram chestburster CGI. Sill, that's one of those things that may very well be objectively subpar, but it doesn't bother me at all. 

But the most basic point I was trying to make is that cutting the design portion a tiny wouldn't be enough to make the CGI any better. Really, this production needed more money. OR, they needed to re-write to compensate that. I was happy with how the effects turned out and do love all of the detail though. 

Let me make myself clear---IF the budget allows it, I LOVE "detail". It is fun to watch, rewatch, and continue rewatching a great movie to find all the extra features and "detail". BUT, it simply cannot be done at the risk of the whole story/movie. Whatever it takes, the story/movie has to be the primary focus/attention.

@Starlogger

That's exactly how I feel.

@daliens, I did notice Daniels' pulse monitor racing when I saw it at the cinema. I also made a mental note to check the digital download (which I don't have yet) because the accompanying sound effect did not seem to match the displayed rate. Yeah, I know, maybe I should find better things to worry about.

I love Ridley's attention to detail on the whole. There is a scene in Prometheus on the way to meet the Engineer, where they pass an awesome shiny bronze exoskeleton suit. It must have cost a ton of money to design and manufacture, yet was only on the screen for mere seconds.