Ridley (Bafta LA) Interview2,125 Views8 RepliesAdd A Reply
May be old news but found this interview and thought it might be of interest to some.
Interesting how he qualifies AC as a sequel and what he says about his involvement with ALIENS . . .
@Deep Space always fun to hear the man talk about his life & art! thank u for posting!
"Must be something we haven't seen yet.."__Bishop
I have used this interview as a reference point for Covenant a number of times recently.
Listening to the crucial exchange he says nobody asks who and why you would make this beautiful monster and in Covenant the why will be explained.
It is easy to read to much into a response such as this. However put together with his ideas expressed in a Sky Movie interview " the Engineers are simply superior to us" "that the Engineers are not Gods … so who is god who made them" …"and so I am trying to layer this cake into a much bigger larger question than a monster in a tin can".
Taking all of that together Covenant may indicate why the monster was made but leave the who for the next movie. If the next movie the third part of the Trilogy leads directly back into A L I E N then the answer on why there was an Alien in the Space Jockey will be connected to who made the A L I E N.
I think I now understand why their is a further film after this one and I believe the connection with the SJ will come in the final one in the Trilogy and of course the options are many and varied :-
1) An Engineer.
2) The Hierarchy.
3) A radically changed transformed protagonist/antagonist from earlier in the story.
This business of three films two sequels can I think be explained. It is self evident that Covenant is a sequel to Prometheus and whenever I have seen Ridley actually discuss this is he talks about one after (see how it goes).
The three ALIEN films source is the Sydney Herald speech when they were celebrating the deal with the Australian government. Every one is quoting from this source and Ridley maybe talking about three ALIEN films including A 5 to be made in Australia the idea that Covenant is the first of three connected films is just not correct. It is 2 of 3 or 2 of 4 if you chose to believe he said sequels when he said Alien films.
I am interested in your second quote from Ridley where did that come from it sounds like an interesting interview ?
I am absolutely convinced that there is another layer which has not been identified. He has referred to the idea on two separate occasions. There is what I call moral relativism. If the Engineers have undergone a fall how do you define that fall ? It has to be relative to what their part in the plan was and that plan was made by/ set down by….. another layer.
There is also the John Logan element. His original treatment for Bond 24 was written as a two parter which Daniel rejected as he did not want to be boxed in. if you look at Spectre there is both layering and reverse engineering going on. Both of those elements are needed for the Alien Prequel trilogy. Seemingly insignificant events or characters become wound into the broader fabric which is gradually revealed and gives them weight and significance.
Ash and David suggest they know a great deal more than they are revealing. The "synthetic" strand of the stories can become more significant indeed if you really want to end up with a grand arc that kind of building is needed otherwise making sequences of movies makes no sense other than the obvious one.
There are so many elements of Prometheus which can be built on and off the top of my head here are a few :-
1) The significance of the head.
2) The triggering of the storm.
3) The ability of Elizabeth to become pregnant.
4) The notion of the Deacon as a forerunner.
Curiously we maybe pleased that this cycle was started with a low exposition screen play rather than a dot plot it has left the historical backing into wide open with potential.