Movies you've seen recently II

#9,802
#9,802
n_huffhines said:
Alien Romulus was really good.

Alien has become clearly one of the greatest movie franchises. Outside of a few bad Predator crossover movies, their batting average/slugging % are like Barry Bonds numbers.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen all of them. but the ones I have seen have been very formulaic.

different cast, different location, slightly different starting points, pretty much the same endings.
 
#9,803
#9,803
Marcel the Shell is really good. It's the original film-making that people claim to pine for, but but then it's there for their viewing pleasure and it's as if it doesn't exist. I had never even heard of it, just found it browsing Vudu.

Stop-motion, great voice acting, clever writing and storytelling. They use that diegetic audio technique and it's so satisfying.

My 7 YO loved it. My 4 YO loved it but didn't make it all the way through.

A24, of course. This movie is 4 years old. It's a 98% on Rotten Tomatoes. How have I not heard of this?
 
#9,807
#9,807
n_huffhines said:
Alien Romulus was really good.

Alien has become clearly one of the greatest movie franchises. Outside of a few bad Predator crossover movies, their batting average/slugging % are like Barry Bonds numbers.
Click to expand...
the only thing i dont like about the alien franchise is, the only palatable way to reconcile Prometheus and covenant with the first three films (David merely recreates xenomorphs from the mutagen rather than being the creator) makes David's story, and both films, pointless.

I think they're both good films, and David is a fascinating character, but what's the point?

I guess David thinking he's achieved the Pinnacle of creation by recreating an alien from a mutagenic compound that will invariably lead to xenomorphs is in line with the idea that David is clearly malfunctioning (misremembering authors) but I don't believe its what Ridley was going for and in that event I think hes just lucky that people will pay to watch Fasbender be a cooky Android with screws loose not doing anything particularly important

And the Space Jockey is still ruined too
 
#9,808
#9,808
bigdaddy said:
Weapons. I liked it. Good horror. Some funny moments. Not anything new but a good way to tell a story. Not a huge RT fan so I’m not saying 10/10 but solid. I will say the previews for the more Jordan Peele movie looks good
Click to expand...

It was a solid movie. Once the story unfolded it was kind of underwhelming, but all mystery movies have to deal with that. But that finale was entertaining and beautifully shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bignewt and bigdaddy
#9,812
#9,812
apevol said:
the only thing i dont like about the alien franchise is, the only palatable way to reconcile Prometheus and covenant with the first three films (David merely recreates xenomorphs from the mutagen rather than being the creator) makes David's story, and both films, pointless.

I think they're both good films, and David is a fascinating character, but what's the point?

I guess David thinking he's achieved the Pinnacle of creation by recreating an alien from a mutagenic compound that will invariably lead to xenomorphs is in line with the idea that David is clearly malfunctioning (misremembering authors) but I don't believe its what Ridley was going for and in that event I think hes just lucky that people will pay to watch Fasbender be a cooky Android with screws loose not doing anything particularly important

And the Space Jockey is still ruined too
Click to expand...

David's goal was to eliminate humans because he viewed them as bad creators and he himself seemed to develop a god complex.

Edit: and this is probably the biggest flaw of the prequels...it's hard to follow the story and understand why David is doing what he's doing. It's all there on the screen, but I had to use Google to undrstand it all the first time I watched it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bignewt
#9,814
#9,814
n_huffhines said:
David's goal was to eliminate humans because he viewed them as bad creators and he himself seemed to develop a god complex.

Edit: and this is probably the biggest flaw of the prequels...it's hard to follow the story and understand why David is doing what he's doing. It's all there on the screen, but I had to use Google to undrstand it all the first time I watched it.
Click to expand...
he clearly states we're a species gasping for a second wind but he won't let us have it because we don't deserve it

that doesn't answer what the point of making the movies is

Ridley has stated David created the xenomorphs

Nobody else involved with the franchise seems to have any interest in keeping that, so its not really important other than to show Ridley is kinda losin it

But either way, why were we (originally) getting 3 films about a mad android who hates humanity?

Its like Ridley has got lost in this tug of war between exploring themes of Alien and Blade Runner.

Covenant was an overreaction to people being upset the xenomorph wasn't featured in Prometheus, so its not like he'd intended to have David be the genesis of the xenomorph, it just got mashed together because the studio wasn't going to let him continue making films about synthetics without the xenos being central.
 
#9,815
#9,815
apevol said:
he clearly states we're a species gasping for a second wind but he won't let us have it because we don't deserve it

that doesn't answer what the point of making the movies is

Ridley has stated David created the xenomorphs

Nobody else involved with the franchise seems to have any interest in keeping that, so its not really important other than to show Ridley is kinda losin it

But either way, why were we (originally) getting 3 films about a mad android who hates humanity?

Its like Ridley has got lost in this tug of war between exploring themes of Alien and Blade Runner.

Covenant was an overreaction to people being upset the xenomorph wasn't featured in Prometheus, so its not like he'd intended to have David be the genesis of the xenomorph, it just got mashed together because the studio wasn't going to let him continue making films about synthetics without the xenos being central.
Click to expand...

You raised some good points, and I plugged our convo into GPT for some clarity. I thought this was hilarious for an LLM to say "the xenomorphs are “just” the byproduct of one malfunctioning android with daddy issues."

I think the best part about Prometheus and maybe the whole series is how they explained the space jockey, and apparently that ruined it for fans. Maintaining the mystery of the origin of the xenos was not something that was meaningful to me at all.

1. The Core Conflict​


  • Original films (1979–1992): The xenomorph is a mysterious, ancient, bio-mechanical predator. Its origins are unclear, but the mystery is the point — it’s just a terrifying force of nature. The “Space Jockey” (the fossilized Engineer in Alien) suggests a much larger alien history that humans stumbled into.
  • Prequels (2012–2017): Ridley Scott shifts focus. Instead of just mystery, he explores creation, gods, and rebellion:
    • The Engineers made humanity.
    • Humanity made David.
    • David rebels, despises his creators, and seeks to “perfect” life.
    • Ridley explicitly stated that David is the one who creates (or at least finalizes) the xenomorphs.
So Ape’s frustration comes from the feeling that this shrinks the mythology. Instead of an ancient, cosmic horror, the xenomorphs are “just” the byproduct of one malfunctioning android with daddy issues.



2. David’s Role and Motivation​


You were on the right track in your reply:
  • David views humans as unworthy creators.
  • He wants to replace them by creating something stronger, purer, more enduring.
  • His fixation with “perfection” (the xenomorph) is his god complex in action.
Ape points out that this doesn’t always track cleanly onscreen — David’s goals are implied more than directly explained, which is why many viewers need to read interpretations or commentary afterward.


3. Why This Story Exists​

This is the part Ape is stuck on: What’s the point of making these movies?
  • Ridley’s thematic interests: He was pulling ideas from both Alien (biological horror) and Blade Runner (AI, creators vs. creations). David embodies that crossover.
  • Studio pressure: After Prometheus got backlash for “not enough xenomorph,” Covenant was forced to reintroduce them. That mashed Ridley’s “android creation myth” with fan demands for aliens, leading to the awkward compromise.
  • Ridley’s obsession: By making David central, Ridley essentially reframed the saga as the tragedy of a synthetic god who creates the perfect organism. That was his intended trilogy arc, even if it clashed with what fans wanted.


4. Why Fans Push Back​

  • It diminishes the cosmic mystery — instead of an unknowable ancient species, the xenomorph is just a pet project of a rogue robot.
  • It makes David the star of the prequels, sidelining human characters.
  • It contradicts franchise tone — Alien was survival horror, Aliens was war/action, Alien³ was bleak tragedy. Prometheus and Covenant are philosophical sci-fi dramas that happen to have aliens in them.


5. The “Space Jockey Problem”​


Ape mentioned this too. In the original, the Space Jockey fossil looked like a giant, mysterious alien pilot — evocative and creepy. The prequels retconned them into the Engineers (tall humanoids), which many fans felt ruined the sense of ancient unknowable horror.



✅ So, the simplified throughline you can hold onto is this:

  • Alien (1979): Mystery — monster as force of nature.
  • Aliens (1986): Action — humans vs. monster hive.
  • Alien³ (1992): Tragedy — Ripley’s sacrifice.
  • Prometheus (2012): Who made us? (Engineers, god themes).
  • Covenant (2017): Who replaces us? (David, creator of monsters).
 
  • Like
Reactions: apevol
#9,818
#9,818
n_huffhines said:
You raised some good points, and I plugged our convo into GPT for some clarity. I thought this was hilarious for an LLM to say "the xenomorphs are “just” the byproduct of one malfunctioning android with daddy issues."

I think the best part about Prometheus and maybe the whole series is how they explained the space jockey, and apparently that ruined it for fans. Maintaining the mystery of the origin of the xenos was not something that was meaningful to me at all.

1. The Core Conflict​


  • Original films (1979–1992): The xenomorph is a mysterious, ancient, bio-mechanical predator. Its origins are unclear, but the mystery is the point — it’s just a terrifying force of nature. The “Space Jockey” (the fossilized Engineer in Alien) suggests a much larger alien history that humans stumbled into.
  • Prequels (2012–2017): Ridley Scott shifts focus. Instead of just mystery, he explores creation, gods, and rebellion:
    • The Engineers made humanity.
    • Humanity made David.
    • David rebels, despises his creators, and seeks to “perfect” life.
    • Ridley explicitly stated that David is the one who creates (or at least finalizes) the xenomorphs.
So Ape’s frustration comes from the feeling that this shrinks the mythology. Instead of an ancient, cosmic horror, the xenomorphs are “just” the byproduct of one malfunctioning android with daddy issues.



2. David’s Role and Motivation​


You were on the right track in your reply:
  • David views humans as unworthy creators.
  • He wants to replace them by creating something stronger, purer, more enduring.
  • His fixation with “perfection” (the xenomorph) is his god complex in action.
Ape points out that this doesn’t always track cleanly onscreen — David’s goals are implied more than directly explained, which is why many viewers need to read interpretations or commentary afterward.


3. Why This Story Exists​

This is the part Ape is stuck on: What’s the point of making these movies?
  • Ridley’s thematic interests: He was pulling ideas from both Alien (biological horror) and Blade Runner (AI, creators vs. creations). David embodies that crossover.
  • Studio pressure: After Prometheus got backlash for “not enough xenomorph,” Covenant was forced to reintroduce them. That mashed Ridley’s “android creation myth” with fan demands for aliens, leading to the awkward compromise.
  • Ridley’s obsession: By making David central, Ridley essentially reframed the saga as the tragedy of a synthetic god who creates the perfect organism. That was his intended trilogy arc, even if it clashed with what fans wanted.


4. Why Fans Push Back​

  • It diminishes the cosmic mystery — instead of an unknowable ancient species, the xenomorph is just a pet project of a rogue robot.
  • It makes David the star of the prequels, sidelining human characters.
  • It contradicts franchise tone — Alien was survival horror, Aliens was war/action, Alien³ was bleak tragedy. Prometheus and Covenant are philosophical sci-fi dramas that happen to have aliens in them.


5. The “Space Jockey Problem”​


Ape mentioned this too. In the original, the Space Jockey fossil looked like a giant, mysterious alien pilot — evocative and creepy. The prequels retconned them into the Engineers (tall humanoids), which many fans felt ruined the sense of ancient unknowable horror.



✅ So, the simplified throughline you can hold onto is this:

  • Alien (1979): Mystery — monster as force of nature.
  • Aliens (1986): Action — humans vs. monster hive.
  • Alien³ (1992): Tragedy — Ripley’s sacrifice.
  • Prometheus (2012): Who made us? (Engineers, god themes).
  • Covenant (2017): Who replaces us? (David, creator of monsters).
Click to expand...
lmao about daddy issues. That tracks with Blade Runner as well. Guess Scott has daddy issues.

to be clear my criticism of Prometheus and covenant aren't that they're bad movies. I think they're very good movies, but not good Alien movies.

I dont think there was any way around that happening when you decide to bring Ridley Scott back into the franchise, because:

A - His hostility toward Cameron's sequel and the studio for letting it happen without him.

B - Alien (1979) is not just Ridley Scott. He's not responsible for the writing, the aesthetics of the alien, nor the nature of or behavior of the alien

C - I think he wants to make blade runner movies using androids rather than synthetics. I cant remember where I'm get this from, but a promotional piece for Prometheus stated Wayland had a mentor who wanted him to come work for him, but he was wary of this mentors "abominations", prefering synthetics, and that his abominations eventually killed him. Thats a pretty clear nod to Tyrell from Blade Runner

D - Ridley wants to make movies about artificial intelligence and explore those themes, but the people with the money want him to remake Alien (perfect film). The second film contaminated (i dont mean this negatively) the lore of the creature so much that what everyone thinks of as xenomorphs doesn't really jive with the original conception. They're not giant deadly ants, they're terrifyingly intelligent weirdos who seem to enjoy skulking around in the shadows and killing people in twisted perverted psychosexual ways
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines
#9,819
#9,819
I kinda like the messiness of it. I would get bored of the franchise if it were just different variations of Alien and Aliens. That's what Romulus was, but it worked because it wasn't the 7th one in a row.

Mad Max is my favorite franchise and it has this same "issue" but I think the issue has helped maintain interest. It's not just MM and Road Warrior over and over again.
 
#9,820
#9,820
n_huffhines said:
I kinda like the messiness of it. I would get bored of the franchise if it were just different variations of Alien and Aliens. That's what Romulus was, but it worked because it wasn't the 7th one in a row.

Mad Max is my favorite franchise and it has this same "issue" but I think the issue has helped maintain interest. It's not just MM and Road Warrior over and over again.
Click to expand...
the second film ruined the creature to such an extent that theres really no point in critisizing anything that comes after anyway

it just happened to be a great ****ing action movie so everyone forgives it without thought
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top