Yup the sequels, forgot to harness the power of the unknown, the unexplained and basically made them Pokemon like, with all their stats, power and orgin naked on the table. With nothing left to fantasize, theorize, wonder and fear about.
They forgot the core principle - "There is nothing more scary than the horror left to the viewer's imagination."
I'm pretty tired of Ridley Scott. For some of the amazing films he's directed (and I'm a fan), he lost the plot years ago. I'm a huge believer in making singular/stand alone films and leaving them ALONE. Alien was a near perfect film, and like you said, did not need to be explained. Well, they fucked it all up and will continue to fuck it up as long as possible thanks to modern Hollywood cranking shit out for the sake of cranking it out. If I had a dollar for every time I've wished they would just leave something alone...
Spot on about Scott. I don't think he's even aware of the movies he is making at this point. God bless him for the handful of truly great movies he did make.
I don't think I quite understand your question here. Which ole men are you referring to? Scott isn't the showrunner or writer of this series. I don't believe he had any involvement with Romulus either.
I'm thinking about Prometheus & Covenant for starters. The other old man I think about is Martin Scorsese. Some great old directors still make incredible movies (Wim Wenders) but I don't see young talent being encouraged to make the kind of movies Scorsese and Ridley Scott made when they were young.
Romulus was made by a younger director and has impressive action scenes, but it frankly lacks the ambition of previous alien movies. Even Prometheus & Covenant, while they were failures, were at least ambitious. So what I see is that only older directors who are household names are allowed to be ambitious, but they lack the energy to pull it off. Younger, untrusted directors are forced to stick to formulas.
I think a lot of it is just risk-aversion which leads to over-reliance on old IP and old men. What I don't see is ambitious, risk-taking young directors. I think that's what happens when the balance of power shifts entirely in favor of the money people.
Movies do not exist in a vacuum. The same financial corporation that greenlights a 200 million dollar movie also greenlights a 200 million dollar power plant. As such, while the product may be vastly different, the corporate culture that creates it is identical across different industries.
The corporate world is no longer a culture of abundance that promotes innovation and the next generation taking their place in the world. It is a culture of scarcity where everyone is afraid of losing what they have to increasingly brutal, take no prisoners competition. Truly talented young directors are seen as a threat to the status quo rather than the engine of innovation that will carry the company forward. The mentor/protégé relationship is dead, replaced by the strongest lion killing and eating his predecessor.
That's interesting. My impression is more that talented young directors tend to rise too fast: you make one small, indie movie that gets attention, and you're given a big budget blockbuster next. But you have much less creative control with the blockbuster. I think it's usually better for talent to mature slowly, make a number of smaller movies, enjoy obscurity for a while.
In Scott's case, I agree, but other than some misguided decision-making like the Irishman, I think Scorsese is still putting out fantastic movies. Unlike Scott, who somehow keeps getting funded for his nonsense, Scorsese seems to struggle getting financing for most of his movies. They're also being relegated to streaming services. I do hear you though. I'd like to see young talent being given opportunities.
I think Napoleon is a fun movie if you forget it has anything to do with historical figures and see it purely as a vehicle for Phoenix to schlock it up.
Great stuff. I know Alien is a brilliant film but I always love to read what other people see in it too.
It's that weird, creepy and unfathomable feeling that we want, isn't it?
I wonder if Alien would have been as well loved if they'd gone with the original ending (so I heard) of the Alien killing Ripley and sending a message back to Earth in her voice.
I didn't know about that ending! On the one hand I'm glad Ripley survived because throughout the movie she's the one character consistently making smart decisions, on the other hand, the alien mimicking her voice is such a creepy and awesome concept.
Yes to all! I feel like I’ve been waiting decades for someone to end up on the same page as me, in terms of the first movie — and, finally, here you are using exactly the same framework I’ve got for appreciating its beauty and brilliance.
Did you know that the vfx unit had been shooting for weeks before Scott, in frustration, threw out all their footage and started directing the effects shots himself? In the big Alien coffee table book that came out last year, you can see the results: the original version (for example) of the planet’s big reveal shot looks like a frame from 60s Star Trek, but once Scott re-lights the painting and the miniatures, it’s become like Arnold Bocklin’s “Isle of the Dead” painting: that fantastic Goldsmith theme (the best music he ever did) rises and, as the tiny Nostromo approaches the dark planet, this feeling of “Oh God, where the hell are we” comes over the viewer in a way that rivals the Jupiter approach in 2001 (as you suggested). Anyway great stuff, and I’m so glad you wrote this and I read it.
Also: did you know that the final chapter on the disc — after titles like “The Last Supper” and “Crew Expendable” — is called “You Are My Lucky Star”?
Thanks for sharing all that! I had no clue about any of that. I'll definitely be picking up that coffee table book. It's amazing hearing how different the film could have ended up with so many different decisions and tweaks not being made.
Great points, Dave. I watched the first episode of Alien: Earth. Although I didn’t hate it, it feels so much more like a Bladerunner spinoff (minus the retro future synthy cyberpunk aesthetic) than Alien after the first scene. I can’t disagree here, man. But between Alien, Terminator, Predator, and Jurassic Park I wonder how much longer these go?
Bladerunner 2049 is the only sequel of one of these late 70’s/80’s franchises that I love and grew up with (excluding Aliens and T2) that gets it right and is worthy of being made). For all the Dune love, 2049 is that director’s masterpiece.
Filling in all the gaps of a fictional world actually makes it feel smaller. Franchises need a specialist in charge of restraint.
I really like how you worded that. Specializing in restraint. What a lost art.
Yup the sequels, forgot to harness the power of the unknown, the unexplained and basically made them Pokemon like, with all their stats, power and orgin naked on the table. With nothing left to fantasize, theorize, wonder and fear about.
They forgot the core principle - "There is nothing more scary than the horror left to the viewer's imagination."
This, one hundred million percent.
I'm pretty tired of Ridley Scott. For some of the amazing films he's directed (and I'm a fan), he lost the plot years ago. I'm a huge believer in making singular/stand alone films and leaving them ALONE. Alien was a near perfect film, and like you said, did not need to be explained. Well, they fucked it all up and will continue to fuck it up as long as possible thanks to modern Hollywood cranking shit out for the sake of cranking it out. If I had a dollar for every time I've wished they would just leave something alone...
Spot on about Scott. I don't think he's even aware of the movies he is making at this point. God bless him for the handful of truly great movies he did make.
The real question is why so much is being put on old men. Why aren't young directors being allowed to experiment and express themselves?
I don't think I quite understand your question here. Which ole men are you referring to? Scott isn't the showrunner or writer of this series. I don't believe he had any involvement with Romulus either.
I'm thinking about Prometheus & Covenant for starters. The other old man I think about is Martin Scorsese. Some great old directors still make incredible movies (Wim Wenders) but I don't see young talent being encouraged to make the kind of movies Scorsese and Ridley Scott made when they were young.
Romulus was made by a younger director and has impressive action scenes, but it frankly lacks the ambition of previous alien movies. Even Prometheus & Covenant, while they were failures, were at least ambitious. So what I see is that only older directors who are household names are allowed to be ambitious, but they lack the energy to pull it off. Younger, untrusted directors are forced to stick to formulas.
I think a lot of it is just risk-aversion which leads to over-reliance on old IP and old men. What I don't see is ambitious, risk-taking young directors. I think that's what happens when the balance of power shifts entirely in favor of the money people.
Movies do not exist in a vacuum. The same financial corporation that greenlights a 200 million dollar movie also greenlights a 200 million dollar power plant. As such, while the product may be vastly different, the corporate culture that creates it is identical across different industries.
The corporate world is no longer a culture of abundance that promotes innovation and the next generation taking their place in the world. It is a culture of scarcity where everyone is afraid of losing what they have to increasingly brutal, take no prisoners competition. Truly talented young directors are seen as a threat to the status quo rather than the engine of innovation that will carry the company forward. The mentor/protégé relationship is dead, replaced by the strongest lion killing and eating his predecessor.
That's interesting. My impression is more that talented young directors tend to rise too fast: you make one small, indie movie that gets attention, and you're given a big budget blockbuster next. But you have much less creative control with the blockbuster. I think it's usually better for talent to mature slowly, make a number of smaller movies, enjoy obscurity for a while.
In Scott's case, I agree, but other than some misguided decision-making like the Irishman, I think Scorsese is still putting out fantastic movies. Unlike Scott, who somehow keeps getting funded for his nonsense, Scorsese seems to struggle getting financing for most of his movies. They're also being relegated to streaming services. I do hear you though. I'd like to see young talent being given opportunities.
The Last Duel was very good, and is a recent film. It was so good, in fact, that it tricked me into watching the terrible Napoleon.
I think Napoleon is a fun movie if you forget it has anything to do with historical figures and see it purely as a vehicle for Phoenix to schlock it up.
Great stuff. I know Alien is a brilliant film but I always love to read what other people see in it too.
It's that weird, creepy and unfathomable feeling that we want, isn't it?
I wonder if Alien would have been as well loved if they'd gone with the original ending (so I heard) of the Alien killing Ripley and sending a message back to Earth in her voice.
I didn't know about that ending! On the one hand I'm glad Ripley survived because throughout the movie she's the one character consistently making smart decisions, on the other hand, the alien mimicking her voice is such a creepy and awesome concept.
Yes to all! I feel like I’ve been waiting decades for someone to end up on the same page as me, in terms of the first movie — and, finally, here you are using exactly the same framework I’ve got for appreciating its beauty and brilliance.
Did you know that the vfx unit had been shooting for weeks before Scott, in frustration, threw out all their footage and started directing the effects shots himself? In the big Alien coffee table book that came out last year, you can see the results: the original version (for example) of the planet’s big reveal shot looks like a frame from 60s Star Trek, but once Scott re-lights the painting and the miniatures, it’s become like Arnold Bocklin’s “Isle of the Dead” painting: that fantastic Goldsmith theme (the best music he ever did) rises and, as the tiny Nostromo approaches the dark planet, this feeling of “Oh God, where the hell are we” comes over the viewer in a way that rivals the Jupiter approach in 2001 (as you suggested). Anyway great stuff, and I’m so glad you wrote this and I read it.
Also: did you know that the final chapter on the disc — after titles like “The Last Supper” and “Crew Expendable” — is called “You Are My Lucky Star”?
Thanks for sharing all that! I had no clue about any of that. I'll definitely be picking up that coffee table book. It's amazing hearing how different the film could have ended up with so many different decisions and tweaks not being made.
This is an excellent post, a nice bit of writing, with good insights into the movies. Thanks!
Cheers you legend!
Great points, Dave. I watched the first episode of Alien: Earth. Although I didn’t hate it, it feels so much more like a Bladerunner spinoff (minus the retro future synthy cyberpunk aesthetic) than Alien after the first scene. I can’t disagree here, man. But between Alien, Terminator, Predator, and Jurassic Park I wonder how much longer these go?
They go on for all eternity. They're already bringing poor Ian Holm back to life. They will not and cannot let these franchises end.
100!
Even though Bladerunner wasn’t a franchise really.
Sadly, you’re probably right. At least maybe until Gen Z becomes middle aged execs and don’t have the nostalgia for it.
If you’re going to try and redo something that had plenty of room for improvement go for Species.
Yeah!!! That first movie was great cheese. Once again great Gige concept art let down by dated CGI.
Absolutely. That rare Michael Madsen lead hero role. Ben Kingsley and Forest Whitaker getting paychecks.
The Rewatchables podcast recently did a great episode
on it.
A fellow Rewatchables fan! I listened to that one recently.
Nice!! Glad to hear. Maybe the best movie podcast out there.
Just caught up on the Robocop and Out For Justice episodes.
Bladerunner 2049 is the only sequel of one of these late 70’s/80’s franchises that I love and grew up with (excluding Aliens and T2) that gets it right and is worthy of being made). For all the Dune love, 2049 is that director’s masterpiece.
2049 was fantastic. Dennis understood the assignment.