One of the big stories of yesterday was the fact that Neill Blomkamp and star Sigourney Weaver alluded heavily to the fact that the South African born director’s planned Alien film will be a direct sequel (the “genetic sibling”, as Blomkamp put it) to Aliens, ignoring the events of Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection. This of course promptly broke the internet in half. But it appears that we may just have misunderstood. Apparently misunderstood so badly, that if you were to go back to that original video where Blomkamp and Weaver discussed this, you’ll find that you can no longer watch it as it’s been made private.
And if you can’t view the video, here’s the relevant quote from Blomkamp:
“I’m not trying to undo ‘Alien 3′ or ‘Alien Resurrection… My favorites are the first two movies. I want to make a film that’s connected to ‘Alien’ and ‘Aliens’. That’s my goal.”
As I was one of the people who was not too pleased with Blomkamp pulling a Superman Returns and ditching the events of the third and fourth films, you would think that I would now be breathing a sigh of relief. Problem is, I’m now too busy scratching my head trying to puzzle out just how this whole thing will work now. The concept art that got Blomkamp this gig, clearly shows Michael Biehn’s character Hicks – who was unceremoniously killed at the start of Alien 3 – being alive again, as well as a very young-looking Ellen Ripley, probably before she jumped into a giant furnace to kill herself. This fed straight into the idea of this movie being a direct sequel to Aliens.
But if Blomkamp is not ignoring the later movies’ continuity, then how the hell does this all fit together now? Just exactly where in the timeline does this take place, and in what way is it connected to the first two films? Let the speculation begin!
PS: If they turn out to be clones again a la Alien: Resurrection, I’m going to be pissed.
PPS: If Blomkamp pulls a Star Trek and tosses out an alternate timeline, I’m REALLY going to be pissed.
Last Updated: February 27, 2015