Ridley Scott and the future of Alien franchise
Posted May-19-2017 8:36 PM
I think this video is pretty important since Ridley Scott says the sequel to Alien: Covenant basically will be a direct prequel to Alien explaining the mystery of the Space Jockey..
Posted May-20-2017 1:27 AM
As always I find the video interviews more useful than the written ones which often are three points beyond the source.
This is a clear statement that he knows where he is heading and the reveal of the whom the Jockey is.
The narrowing of the vision and the dismissal of the Engineers and Shaw in favour of David, Daniels and Tennessee and a community of colonists and embryos enables him to prepare the narrative threading from the beginning of the film. There are three issues he needs to address :-
1) David as David does not appear in A L I E N though the science division views his children with considerable interest.
2) The creature is not yet entirely Bio Mechaniod.
To work out the vision for the follow up from say Das Reingold has merit Alberich, has two sets of interlopers that come between him his slaves and the ring and of course we need a Juggernaut.
That he spews out two embryos from his mouth I think is a visual message but equally its interesting we have a "pilot" surviving at the end of Covenant who could have been seen off by the xx121. Tennessee is probably needed to create triangulation between the two humans who actually experienced Covenants response to a distress code.
Ridley has suggested the Aliens in the next movie night operate under their own steam instead of at the behest of A. I.
Logically then the reason why the A L I E N creature is bio mechaniod is because it is/becomes capable of infecting a Synthetic. For the Jockey therefore to be the first synthetic victim would be highly emblematic and explain the evolution. The film itself can explain how that potential arises.
So whose in the Jockey chair and where does the Juggernaut come from. David and Walter and not necessarily in that order.
That highly focused easy to follow approach builds on the way Covenant has been shaped and lets go off the high and mighty pretensions of Prometheus. It also allows for a routine film of more victims and more Xeno's but on a bigger more cinematic scale.
At the end of the movie David sends a message as Walter which will take six years to reach W-Y that may also play into how they set up the Awakening.
Posted May-20-2017 4:42 AM
A valid point with all sorts of armchair critics giving career advice to hugely successful directors. Three points :-
1) Ridders is the first to admit, and talks about it frequently, the hardest part is getting a really good script.
2) With John Logan writing, and liking and knowing his methodology, I like to shadow where he is taking things. Indeed I know him so well the only element of Covenant I did not anticipate was the prologue with Weyland. When I wrote about this a year ago my prologue was what we received in "The Crossing". Once Wayne Haag indicated that David was the straight line into Covenant from Prometheus and would explain tons of questions and dismiss the BS I was convinced that David destroyed the Engineers and was responsible for the creation of the XX121 out of what we now know as the Pathogen. What I did not anticipate is the Engineers being reduced to texture, the Shaw/David dynamic being left in a muddle and a third act by the numbers.
3) Damon Lindelof in his commentary exhorted us to the very thing we are doing. He left Prometheus deliberately opaque so we could speculate and then in the follow up he and Ridley would pursue some "very cool ideas" he had. Obviously given the hysterical attacks he received from certain parts of the audience who want certainty and to be spoon fed he decided to move off or Ridley decided he needed someone with stronger exposition talents. As Katherine said about one of her movies give yourself permission to think for yourself.
The really interesting thing about Covenant in the first and second act, when they are building character and offering exposition, people say its to slow get on with the gore.
I think its fair to say that most people view A L I E N as a horror movie and are not interested in it being contextualised. I think as far as David Giler is concerned it goes all the way back to post ALIENS is there really an appetite for more of these particular types of films without diverging to far from the formula or just repeating yourself. I think Prometheus the reaction to it and Covenant shows they think fans want to stay tight with ALIEN and if you do that you are simply repeating yourself.
Posted May-20-2017 4:55 AM
I was very quiet after Prometheus. I watched it and was like okay. Bought the digital and half forgot about it. Then I hear there is another one. That's when I read about the backlash. Interesting I thought. Anyway, what drew me most to covenant was an interview by the fx crew stating how bloody it was. I was thrilled.
I am glad they got rid of that David guy. I don't like him. I was seeing the film regardless of who worked on it as long as Scott directed it. I usually stay loyal to directors who I like. I do prefer a writer/director.
Anyhow you have good insite with your posts.
Sign in to add a reply to this topic!