Over the past few days, there’s been quite the kerfuffle regarding whether Neill Blomkamp intends to retcon the ALIEN franchise is a way which basically abolishes ALIEN 3 and ALIEN RESURRECTION.
These concerns grew out of number of several admittedly vague comments by the filmmaker, by Sigourney Weaver’s stated desire for a ‘proper ending,’ and were initially raised by concept art for the film - which clearly shows Michael Biehn’s ‘Hicks’ alongside Ripley.
Hicks, of course, cursorily and unceremoniously bit the dust in the opening moments of ALIEN 3. I actually have a touch of affection for the third ALIEN film - especially the workprint version available on THIS amazing Blu-ray set - but I’ll totally conceded to the deaths of Hicks and Rebecca in that film being among cinema’s greatest-ever dismissive cop-outs.
It’s now looking like such a whopping and ballsy retcon might not necessarily be the case. In a discussion with AlloCine, Blomkamp clarifies…rather he attempts to clarify…
“My favorites are the first two movies, so I want to make a film that’s connected to ALIEN and ALIENS - that’s my goal. I’m not trying to undo ALIEN 3 or ALIEN RESURRECTION, I just want it to be connected to ALIEN 1 and 2…”
You can see video of the same, including brief insight from Sigourney Weaver, here:
So…
Damage control? Backpedaling? Or, have we simply been misunderstanding Blomkamp’s intent from the outset? How does his comment reconcile with that Hicks concept art? I mean, if the dude's dead in one film and is now alive and looking more or less like he did before he died - how does that work if retcon isn’t afoot? Or, can it? Is Blomkamp merely saying he’s ‘not setting out to undo ALIEN 3 and AR…even though that’s what’s gonna happen by force of design…anyway’?
Or, does he have a gag up his sleeve? An angle we’re not considering which might let us all have our cake, and eat it to? I suspect the later might be the case, but we’ll see…
These are wonderfully strange and interesting developments, and I’m not sure Blomkamp’s AlloCine comments will quell the hornet’s nest of arguments on both sides of the fence here.
Personally? I feel a bit bludgeoned by the ALIEN verse these days. RESURRECTION and the AvP films were tough to take when stacked up against the earlier era of the franchise. At this point, while I’m not intrinsically a fan of retconning and whatnot, I’d be perfectly content for someone to feed me a respectable, digestible ALIEN movie. Period. In whatever context. I’d rather see a good and new ALIEN movie - even one which is jarring to continuity - than no new ALIEN movie at all.
But I’d feel likely differently if A3 & 4 had been knocked out of the park, which clearly they were not. As is, they feel a bit like scabs. Taunting. Inviting. Just begging to be peeled away to expose the healing skin underneath. I’m not suggesting they necessarily should be picked…but I could understand such temptation.
IF the franchise’s continuity needs a sledgehammer taken to whack it in the balls and get it back on track? I find myself atypically OK with such a notion - as long as the fresh story is approached with logic and respect, and is more clearly shaped and considered than ELYSIUM. After all these years, having respectable ALIENverse storytelling back on screens would be tremendously exciting, and launching that process with characters and ideas we know work (based on past experience) doesn’t seem like a bad place to start.
Now more than before I find myself hugely curious about what Blomkamp is up to. For better or worse, bring it on…
———
Glen Oliver
“Merrick”
