It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Shame about That’s My Boy. While you can count me as one of the number of people who have loathed his recent efforts, namely Grown Ups and Just Go With It, (have not seen Jack & Jill), I actually thought TMB was a step up, though not by a great deal. It actually had a script, he actually played a character, there were a few honestly laughable moments, including a few serviceable cameos.
Was it a great comedy? No. But I’m still a bit surprised it didn’t do closer to $20m for the weekend. Looks like the R rated comedyfest was confined to 2011, cause thus far 2012 is 0 for 2 with home run successes thus far. Ted is still not a sure thing. What a difference a year makes. Even the two R rated comedies that ‘failed’ last year, 30 Minutes or Less, (with no big box office star), and The Change Up, opened to $13m.
Maybe it’s b/c people are sick and tired Sandler’s shtick. I, for one, hope to never see or hear from him again.
I’m sorry, but JACK & JILL looked like a fuck you to the Sandler audience. It was a film straight out of Apatow’s mock parodies in FUNNY PEOPLE. Adam spent too many years making sub par films. He seems to have no interest in making another HAPPY GILMORE or a WEDDING SINGER.
Sandler has turned into the Harrison Ford of comedy. Nobody showed up when he tried something different, with Punch drunk love, Spanglish, and Reign over me (and Grown ups made over three times the gross of Funny People), so he’s just gone in to ‘fuck you, I’ll take the paychecks’ territory!
There were already cracks in Sandler’s box office armor before Jack and Jill. You Don’t Mess with the Zohan, Just Go With It and Bedtime Stories all hit $100 million, but they just BARELY hit that mark. Zohan’s gross was $100.3 million.
That’s My Boy is a near-masterpiece and a FOUR-STAR movie. I know in my heart it is, and anyone who doesn’t like it or Sandler is DEAD WRONG. It is fantastic. Laughed, cried, etc. It also has a third-act plot point so Larry David out-there that anyone complaining about the movie without even alluding to it, so CLEARLY did not see the film.
ROCK OF AGES, THAT’S MY BOY, BATTLESHIP– one after another, these are the great movies of the summer, and everybody’s still pumped for stale bullshit like Avengers and, sorry, Snow White, which I saw six times but is kind of snoozy and dull.
I think the Sandler brand is still pretty strong, not at the last nineties level where every releases was a “Hangover” size hit, but still one of the more sure things in HOl. “Jack and Jill” looked abysmal and was in line with other Sandler films that looked awful in the trailers like “Little Nicky” or “Eight Crazy Nights” which it actually did significantly better than.
“That’s My Boy” is R-rated and Sandler’s bread and butter has always been the under 17 crowd. Try asking a reasonably intelligent college age kid or someone older if they want to see the newest Sandler and you’re likely to be confronted with a confused stare. It’s clear that the R-rating hurt “TMB” because the trailers were pretty good and the film did half of what the awful PG-13 “Jack and Jill” did.
If Sandler’s next wheel house PG-13 comedy does worse than even “Jack and Jill” did then I think it’ll be fair to start worrying.
Jack and Jill isn’t “awful,” it’s really funny. And Pacino’s best performance since ’97.
“Jack and Jill” was terrible. It was just lazy and witless. I want to see Sandler do something again like “Billy Madison” and “Happy Gilmore”, which are a lot smarter than most mainstream critics give him credit for. The Stiller nursing home attendant in “Happy Gilmore” or the O’Doyle gag in “Billy Madison” are both funnier than anything in “The Hangover” or “Wedding Crashers”; two films that are for whatever reason put on a pedastal as irreverant comedy done right.
Split decision: Agree that “Jack and Jill” is awful but I also agree that Pacino is brilliant in it.
J&J and also You Don’t Mess with the Zohan are comic genius
I want to see Sandler do something again like “Billy Madison” and “Happy Gilmore”, which are a lot smarter than most mainstream critics give him credit for.
Yes, Bulldog.
I remember saying in 1999 that “Big Daddy”–because of its positive gay message wrapped inside a frat boy-style comedy–was more socially meaningful than any of the reams of oh-so-sensitive gay indies released at that time which merely preached to the converted.
Sandler never received the credit he deserves for that film.
The less said about “Chuck and Larry” the better, though: you have to go back to “Norman, Is That You?” or “Partners” to find a major studio release as full of cringe-inducing gay stereotypes and stale, witless sitcommy “jokes.”
movieman —
and playing the role of norman’s love interest in ‘norman, it that you?’ was dennis dugan, sandler’s usual go-to director….
I must confess I did laugh once during a Sandler film, but not at anything he said or did. In J&J, after Jill breaks Pacino’s Oscar and says, “I’m sure you have others,” Al deadpans, “You would think, but oddly enough, no.” Funny because of his perfect delivery, as well as his willingness to make fun of what must be a personal sore spot.
Yeah, I knew that Scooter.
The fact that Dugan directed “Big Daddy” almost made it feel like a bit of a mea culpa for “Norman.”
Of course, since Dugan also directed “Chuck and Larry,” maybe not, lol.
All things considered, I think Dugan may actually be a better director than he was an actor.
i spoke with dugan about ‘norman’ a few years ago and he was totally clueless as to how offensive the movie was…i doubt ‘mea culpa’ entered his mind while directing ‘big daddy’….
I can easily see people being offended by Norman, Is That You? today. In its time, though, the movie — like the play, a dinner theater staple, that inspired it — actually seemed kinda-sorta enlightened. For all its stereotyping, it does wind up having an initially homophobic dad accept his son and his partner. Trust me: In 1976, that was a radical notion.
joe — i was out and proud when ‘norman’ was released in ’76 and, believe me, nobody i knew in the gay community was happy with the release of ‘norman’….i guess there was a handful of people who were just so happy to see a ‘gay’ onscreen that any depiction was faaaaaaabulous but i didn’t know any (and i was working in a couple of pretty large gay clubs at the time)….
if ‘norman, is that you?’ broke any ground at all, it was in moviemaking as it was one of the first to be shot on tape rather than film…. i guess that’s something….
A friend of mine co-wrote Norman (nice, gentle, funny guy) and the show continues to play around the world, a new version landing in Israel this year.
I don’t remember the movie well enough to have an opinion about the level of offense. But when it hit Broadway (for 13 shows), it was clearly seen as a breakthrough event.
I’m interested to know Scooterzz, what was the first main stream film, that in your mind broke new ground in the gay community? Both with a realistic portrayal of a gay person and not being all preachy about it at the same time.
And what about Boys in the Band? As I recall, that was considered a groundbreaker back in the day. But by the 1980s, it was being derided as being stuffed with stereotypes.
As for Norman — the funny thing is, that, Murder at the Howard Johnson’s and quite a few other Broadway flops really were dinner theater staples in the 1970s. Are there still dinner theaters in many places anymore? I stumbled across one near the main airport in Toronto last year — and was a bit shocked to see such a thing still was around.
dp — the play closed after 31 performances (inc. previews) and got pretty bad notices…i’m guessing that it became a dinner theater staple exactly because of the broad comedy stereotypes that the middle-brow dinner theater crowd would find entertaining…i’m also willing to bet that after flopping on broadway it was pretty cheap to get clearence…..
bulldog — as i recall, it wasn’t until the mid ’80s, when the aids crises was hitting its stride, that gay movies stopped being minstrel shows…’parting glances’, ‘longtime companion’, ‘and the band played on’ all come to mind…but i’m horrible at pop quizzes so would need to do some research…
joe — ‘boys in the band’ was rife with self-hating stereotypes and still didn’t seem as offensive as ‘norman’… btw, if you haven’t seen last year’s doc ‘making the boys’, it’s well worth checking out….
The only Rock of Ages review you’ll ever need to read.
I always find it hard to think of the first movies William Friedkin directed — Boys in the Band, The Birthday Party, Good Times and The Night They Raided Minsky’s — as, well, William Friedkin movies. It’s almost as though the guy who made those movies died, or retired, and the Directors Guild allowed some other guy to use his name.
Joshua – meh.
Ridley Scott said that “Prometheus” was rated R only because of ONE scene.
For the sake of US box office, Fox might have made mistake by not deleting that scene? (Without the R rating, “Prometheus” would have grossed more than $150 million in US…..)
fun fact — when i entered ‘norman, is that you?’ into my kindle fire video search engine (48 hr. rental $2.99) , it suggested that i might also like ‘leave it to beaver’…really…..
i spoke with dugan about ‘norman’ a few years ago and he was totally clueless as to how offensive the movie was…i doubt ‘mea culpa’ entered his mind while directing ‘big daddy’….
…that explains “I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry,” lol
That one scene was pretty important, although, yes I suppose there could have been a futuristic machine that could have done that. Either way, not sure a PG13 rating would have doubled the gross…
Artistically, that scene is indeed very important. But still, PG-13 rating can help “Prometheus” to do much better at US box office. (May not doubling the gross, but it would help “Prometheus” to gross more than $150 million in US box office. )
The main problem of R rating is that it has became a ‘turn-off’ factor for adults; more and more adults don’t want to watch R-rated films in theaters (even though they still feel more comfortable to watch R-rated films at home).
It is why more and more adult-driven films are made for PG-13. (Like what Sony’s Jeff Blake said , “There is some hesitation with adults in their 40s, 50s and above about the R rating.”)
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/08/entertainment/la-et-pg-13-20120508
How are you so certain that a PG-13 would result in significant better box office for Prometheus? How many adults would have chosen to not see it in theaters if it was PG-13 considering that the 4 Alien movies are all rated R? I don’t think any adults were turned off by its rating but some might have been if it was PG-13. Blake’s theory does not apply to something like Prometheus. A PG-13 would not have resulted in better box office.
I would say the marketing played a roll with Prometheus’s less than stellar box office. The TV ads kept hinting at it being a horror movie (the whole screaming effect) and not hyping up the sci-fi elements as much. With more and more stars taking a turn at horror these days, even those with “brutal violence,” I could imagine many adults thinking Prometheus was the same only with a name director. Had they downgraded that screaming and went with the sci-fi more, perhaps the movie might have done better, even with an R rating. But perhaps the execs were worried about it coming off as less of an Alien movie and the effect that would have on performance. Also, this surmises that sci-fi doesn’t have some boxoffice drawbacks in of itself and I am not sure of that.
Isn’t word of the mouth and audience reaction far more culpable than marketing? It did open to $51 million to rank in the top 10 all-time openings for R rated movies.
First, Big G, many would kill for those “cracks”
Second, as you perceive weakness, Sander’s international profile has grown in recent years and increased his value. Even Jack & Jill did $150m worldwide
He may have hit a wall now. But your perception of his slippage before J&J doesn’t seem real to me, based in the #s.
Just pointing out… Sandler has never had a Hangover level hit. His best grossed about $200m less. Waterboy was, at the time, about as close as he got.
A solid doubles hitter with the occasional triple.
I don’t actually believe the claim that one scene caused then R. If it’s true, it shows how f-ed up the ratings system is
Well in Canada, we have G, PG, 14+, 18+, R and Adult. For pictures with some nudity and some violence, 14+ means no one under 14 admitted without an adult. Prometheus and That’s My Boy are rated 14+, Avengers is PG and Cabin in The Woods is 18+. Works for me. It seems to be pointless to have THREE ratings with no restrictions. Don’t get me started on how Cars 2 should have been PG “may frighten younger children”.
Nope, Scott’s claim isn’t true. I assume the one scene we’re talking about is Rapace/machine but there are a couple of others bloody enough to get an R and the language is also R-level (ridiculous as that may be).
How much were you guys EXPECTING “Prometheus” to take? Did Fox or anybody really think that was gonna be a 300-mil domestic?
Considering it’s dark and hard R and kind of WEIRD, garish and “Hannibal”-like, isn’t the fact that it’s at 90 pretty good?
Definitely word of mouth is rightly killing PROMETHEUS domestically.
It might be high-brow fanboy, but it’s still a fanboy movie nevertheless. It’s too dumb for a serious, intelligent audience to engage with and apparently too boring for Joe Popcorn to get into. The fact that Lindelof has admitted that he & Scott purposely withheld some of the story for a possible sequel causes me to have a slight bit of schadenfreude that the box office will probably derail that plan.
Of all the movies Scotts made, I’d much rather see him shoot a sequel to MASTER & COMMANDER than anything else.
Yeah, that’d be thrilling, since MASTER AND COMMANDER isn’t the most boring sexless drab-looking sausage fest that Scott didn’t even direct ever.
Maybe he can do DOCTOR DETROIT II next.
Don’t you mean Peter Weir, the actual director of Master and Commander?
Or were you referring to White Squall, Scott’s boat movie?
There’s a 45-minute section of White Squall that’s great. Just cut the first 40 minutes and the last 10.
For Prometheus to get a PG-13, you’d have to cut the Rapace/machine scene, seriously trim the two-guys-trapped-overnight scene, cut some of the F-words (there actually weren’t that many), and then trim some of the bloody-splatter shots by a second or two each, including quicker cuts when tentacles jam down someone’s throat. But then, the worst movie ever made remotely associated with Alien was Paul WS Anderson’s Alien v. Predator, which was the only PG-13er of them all, and why would we want to hearken back to that?
I still hope they do a Prometheus 2.
I used to find Sandler movies funny. I was in my 20’s at the time. Zohan and Funny People are the last Sandler movies I saw in theaters. I rented Just Go With It and Grown Ups and hated both of them. I have no plans to see Jack & Jill or That’s My Boy. Or Grown Ups 2, when it opens.
Even though most of the movie was bad, Rock of Ages was still worth seeing for Tom Cruise. And I imagine the eventual RiffTrax on it will be priceless.
DP I was using adjusted. “Big Daddy” and “The Waterboy” have a similar adjusted number to “The Hangover.”
“Considering it’s dark and hard R and kind of WEIRD, garish and ‘Hannibal’-like, isn’t the fact that it’s at 90 pretty good?”
Yep. But pretty good is no longer acceptable.
Lex, it’s struggling internationally, and that’s where it’s shocking most people. Seeing as Prometheus might struggle to get to 300m total, that’s not pretty good at all. That’s sort of half-assed given the way of combined box office.
“There is some hesitation with adults in their 40s, 50s and above about the R rating.”
If the majors honestly and truly take moviegoers over 40 into consideration when they craft big-budget blockbusters, I just might keel over because the results sure as hell don’t seem like it.
To be fair, “Prometheus” won’t open in several major markets until August. (ie. Germany, Japan, etc….)
PROMETHEUS is going to be so Big In Japan.
This kind of Sci-fi films tend to do very well in Japan.
Earlier this year, even “In Time” grossed $21 million in Japan, and “Prometheus” would be able to gross higher.
“PROMETHEUS is going to be so Big In Japan.”
This – both because Japan loves sci-fi and because they also don’t give a shit what Western audiences think.
Hell, when Watanabe was nominated for Last Samurai he was by FAR the favorite in Japan to win the Oscar despite barely featuring in most western discussions.
I never got the idea that Prometheus was supposed to be this mega-breakout smash hit on the level of (random example) Inception. Alien 3 and Alien 4 grossed around $50 million in the 1990s, which even adjusted for inflation is around $100 million. Sure Aliens and Alien are big hits by today’s standards, but they were somewhat unique in their day, the ‘only game in town’ in you will. The fact that Fox sold Prometheus to a $50 million debut is pretty impressive, but it’s basically playing domestically at the same level as Green Lantern and Watchmen. The hard-cores came out on opening weekend, but the film’s word of mouth wasn’t strong enough to keep anyone coming back after that. Still, $120 million for an R-rated horror film with no real box office draws (unless we are in an era where Theron is suddenly ‘box office’) is no small thing, and it’s obviously benefiting from Fox’s foreign might (it’s already out-grossed the other two examples worldwide). It actually operates as a good lesson in somewhat responsible budgeting, as the film *only* cost $130 million and thus will make a decent profit even if it tops out at $350 million worldwide.
As for Sandler, he’s only had a single $250 million+ worldwide hit, and that was in the last two years (Grown Ups) and four of his six biggest worldwide hits were in the last four years. Harrison Ford is an apt comparison, although I’d argue Ford had it harder as critics *and* fans revolted whenever he tried to stretch as well as not even realizing when Ford was trying something different and mostly succeeded (the underrated comedies Six Days Seven Nights and Hollywood Homicide).
The issue with Prometheus’ performance is the cost of the movie. Because of the budget, Fox was probably hoping and needing $500M worldwide. As others mention above, $300-350M worldwide is not going to cut it, especially if there are hopes for a sequel.
Didn’t help that Alien 3 and 4 were pretty awful. Or is it sacrilege in this post-Transformers era to suggest quality has any effect on grosses?
LexG must know what the Razzies are going to honor next winter.
@mary: An R rating is not a turn-off factor for adults. It is a turn-off factor for those who support censorship and religious bigotry. Look at how eager Hollywood is to do business with the Parents Television Council.
@dougr: Movie ratings in Canada are administered on the provincial level. For example, “That’s My Boy” is rated 14A in British Columbia but a more restrictive 18A in Ontario.
I enjoyed 3 and Resurrection, I’ll admit they suffer in comparision to the first two Alien movies, most thrillers do, but I thought they were both fun and exciting rides.
With Prometheus, you could tell that Fox was hedging its bets, trying to keep themselves out of all the “Sure it was a moderate hit but look what it cost” stories that have been coming out since Carter, when the told the Hollywood Reporter that Prometheus only cost $130 (after tax incentives).
When the Syphilis Channel had an Alien marathon two weeks ago, I watched number 4 for the first time since I saw it in a theater and realized this one was also based on the assumption of stupidity in the characters involved, although corruption on the part of the military (!) played a large part as well.
Yeah, let’s perform experiments on a critter with acid blood in a multi-level station made of a compound the acid can easily dissolve–so easily, in fact, that one critter’s death can take out the flooring on four or five levels.
Well the militairy’s hubris is established early in 4. And while the acid is a major oversight, their behavior modifier was the cold blast and would not have caused them to bleed. Sure it was terribly short sighted, along with creating more than a dozen Aliens right out of the gate, they could have kept all the civilians in statis, created one Alien, and studied it instead of immediatly creating an infestation (though that was another flaw with that film, everything happened so quickly, the subjects were facehugged and then 10 minutes later the place is evacuated).
But for the flaws, the terrible Ryder performance, the laughable new breed Alien and its ridiculous demise. I was creeped out and curious and more than thrilled at the action (even liked the swimming). As long as I spend enough of the movie gripping the armrest, its not a total wash.
I actually really like 3 once I got over the killing off of Newt and Hicks. There are a lot of compelling ideas related to the alien being the devil to torment these former sinners who are trying to get beyond their sins. And it feels like a good ending spot for Ripley’s tale.
Has anyone else seen the making of features where the planet was supposed to be entirely made of wood and populated by monks. That shit was going to be weird.
That was when Vincent Ward was attached right Mike?
I also really like Alien 3. There are some great performances and set pieces. You could also tell that the director had some serious skills.
I heard a story about a female acquaintance who had become a big Aliens fan–the core theme of saving Newt seriously grabbed her by the maternal instinct–and went into 3 all pumped up. She nearly walked out two minutes later when it’s almost off-handedly revealed that Newt died off-screen.
Yes many people were upset about the way Alien 3 handled Newt and Hicks. That is old news and doesn’t change the fact that A3 is a good flick.
Sigourney Weaver is awesome in every ALIEN film. The one constant.
Yeah, I think they got Vincent Ward to do a video extra on one of the Alien3 DVDs, and he seemed kind of amused by the whole thing – including getting fired (though it’s been a long time since I watched it). I loved his Navigator movie, but he was a weird fit for the Aliens series. I can totally see why the Fox execs freaked and fired him last minute and brought in Fincher.
@Mike, there was an article about the history of the Alien franchise at Grantland.com a week or so ago. In the article, there was a link to a site (I believe run by Vincent Ward) that had some of his storyboards for his Alien3 take. Pretty interesting.
For interested parties: http://www.empireonline.com/features/alien-3-tale-of-the-wooden-planet/ and http://vincentwardfilms.com/concepts/alien-3/unrequited-visio/.
Thanks Paul, I was just about to post the link. Pretty interesting vision.
That it is. Also I had forgotten just how many different people took a crack at part 3 (Ward, Harlin, Twohy).
I saw SAFETY NOT GUARANTEED yesterday and I really, really liked it. In fact I saw it at an afternoon matinee in Berkeley with a bunch of hipster looking people and at the end of the movie both myself and the 9 other people in the theater broke into spontaneous applause at something that was genuinely moving happening. It was a truly great moment for me and filmgoing…chills, applause….maybe even a tear squirted out. Super neat.
Now that I’ve had time to think about it, there’s some pretty hefty flaws in the film but overall, it’s a pretty great achievement and a fun, original film. Aubry Plaza continues to grow as an actress as does Mark Duplass. Both are playing against type but not in a “WE’RE PLAYING AGAINST TYPE!” kind of way.
Good stuff, go see it.
But Paul, killing off two of the most important characters in the previous installment before the movie even starts overrode anything I remember about 3 as well. If you don’t want to deal with the characters then have the decency to put them on a bus during act 1, but to do what they did makes the whole production feel like they merely tore the cover off an early draft of 1 or 2 and replaced it with “Alien 3”.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PutOnABus
Hey! I’m the only one allowed to link to tvtropes.org around here!
(and technically it’s “Dropped a Bridge on Him” since the characters are killed off anticlimactically. “Put on a Bus” leaves the door open for the characters to return)
By saying “decency”, I was going for bus because perhaps they could’ve been separated from Ripley and sent back to Earth. Killing them offscreen, before the movie starts, suggests Fincher really did want to drop a bridge on them because apparently he had an entirely different story to tell in 3 that had no relation at all to 2, which makes you wonder why he signed on to work in a franchise.
If there is ever a sequel to Prometheus, the writers will have to deal with a new issue: how do you tell a story so kick-ass you’ll want to get back in line after it’s over, yet so inconsequential that it’s never mentioned in Alien 1-4? The cheap answer is to kill the protagonists at the end so no one can find out what happened…yet the people of Earth will be left wondering, due to that message sent at the end of Prometheus. That message, then, is Prometheus’ Newt and Hicks. Would the solution be to coop up the protagonists in an alien zoo after sending a faked followup message in Shaw’s voice, saying “Sorry about that warning, my bad, it was a touch of space madness. Carry on, nothing to see here.”
P.S. I just happened to find mention of a ’92 letter to Starlog from Cameron, about where the chestburster egg was laid: “By the way, it’s not in the goddamned cat and it’s not in Newt, either. I would never be that cruel.”
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8040967/from-ridley-scott-original-prometheus-not-brief-conversation-alien-franchise
So Cameron cared very deeply about Newt, yet Fincher cared not at all. Hmm.
I hated ALIEN 3 the second Newt was taken out so gruesomely. Brave choice but ALIENating…
I think the reason these “minor” storytelling issues bother me so much is because these long-lasting, heavily-watched film series have become this era’s epic tales, our Odyssey, our Golden Fleece, our version of the lives of the gods that will be remembered long after print blockbusters have turned to dust.
Sit any four adults around a table and they’ll have something to talk about if you bring up Star Trek, James Bond, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Batman, Indiana Jones and now Alien. The best ones seem to have a story running through the background, creating an arc that will pay off and bring a conclusion even if it takes four or five movies to get there. Interrupting that flow because one tyro decided he had to tell his own story would be like killing off Penelope and Telemachus in midstory because, really, who cares about them–it’s all about Odysseus and his adventures, which will go on forever if we’re lucky, because who the frick would want to go home when there’s plenty of monsters that need slaying and hot Greek chicks all over the Mediterranean just waiting to be banged?
It’s a little jarring sure, and I was a little annoyed by the decision the first time I saw Alien 3, but I’m over it. It seems short-sighted and foolish to obsess over something that happens in the opening moments rather than evaluate the film that Fincher made as a whole. Over time I have come to really like that film, and the fate of Newt and Hicks doesn’t bother me anymore.
I found it short-sighted and foolish for Fincher to jettison the storyline established in the previous film. As a result, all I remember is something about lice and Ripley torching herself like a Buddhist monk.
(Although, to be fair, all I remembered about 4 was the commandant setting his shoe polish on fire).
I don’t blame Fincher for wanting to do his own thing. I also don’t think he should have felt an obligation to feature Newt and Hicks in part 3. How much input did he even have? We all know how troubled the production was, how many other filmmakers were attached, how Fincher fought with the studio. Who decided to drop Newt & Hicks and why? It bothered me too the first time I saw it. Years passed before I watched it again. I had come across something claiming that Alien 3 was unfairly maligned and though definitely flawed (and not as good as Alien or Aliens), worth giving another chance. So I did, and I agreed. I got over the abrupt disposal of Newt & Hicks and enjoyed it.
Well, there is a Newt Autopsy scene later in the film (cut way down after previews). And had the story made me care about any of the myriad bald monk rapists and killers…Weaver is still the best thing about the film.
Yeah I agree Weaver is the best thing about the film, but some of the actors are pretty good in supporting roles. And I remember Charles Dance’s character being somewhat sympathetic.
Alien3 is another perfectly decent film living in the shadow of an overachieving sibling(s) ala the Die Hard Sequels and The Two Jakes.
OK, until David starts another thread devoted entirely to Andrew Sarris — which I’m sure he will — here’s my two cents’ worth.
http://www.movingpictureblog.com/2012/06/from-psycho-to-juno-andrew-sarris-wrote.html
“One thing you pick up from all the making-ofs and commentary tracks is that Ridley Scott and James Cameron have a real respect for each other and each other’s movies. (Cameron says he “went to school on Ridley’s style of photography” before making Aliens.) But whenever they get the chance, they talk about how David Fincher is a great visual director, but he ruined Alien3.”
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8040967/from-ridley-scott-original-prometheus-not-brief-conversation-alien-franchise
That was definitely the impression Scott gave when talking about Prometheus–3 & 4 had so effectively ruined the franchise that any new movie would have to be a prequel.
(Although, to be polite: “The actual Cameron quote, just so people can read it, is ‘[Sigourney] tried to have an influence on Aliens, but it didn’t work! She said, ‘I don’t want to shoot a gun,’ I said, ‘No, you have to shoot a gun.’ ‘Oh, well, can I get killed?’ ‘No.’ When I saw the third film I cracked up, because it was all the things she’d asked for on the second film.'”)