ALIEN PREQUEL TOO PRICEY?

I'm with him on the rating, but $250million is a crazy figure.

At the risk of being an unpopular killjoy, I'm not so sure I want "new" Ridley Scott doing this anyway. Maybe this is a blessing in disguise.

The whole time since it was announced I was praying, "don't do shit like reveal the mystery behind the space jockey."

What's the first tidbit he releases? "Remember that space jockey? Oh yeah, you're going to learn all about him..."

I don't know. I mean, on the one hand I would love to see Scott play in this sandbox again. On the other...

I don't know much about the economics, but $250 million's a lot. I'd imagine that would be for both films.

And a PG-13 ALIEN movie would be like a PG EXORCIST. "Stick your thingy up his butt, you mama-thumping worthless sock puppet!"

If Scott doesn't get what he wants, he should walk. He doesn't have a whole lot of time left to make movies, not to be pessimistic about it.

If only he was more bullheaded when he was making Kingdom of Heaven.

It boggles my mind that they'd refuse his budget after the sci fi success of AVATAR, but then again, I'm boggled that he's working with FOX again in the first place. With that said, I think FOX should give him his budget but force him to team with Cameron and shoot in native 3D. That would give FOX some assurances about the film's eventual BO haul, and it would ensure that Mr Scott could make the kind of film he wants to make

"From the Director of ALIEN and the Director of ALIENS" is a tag line that most studios would kill for.

Anyway, should my proposed solution not come to pass, I'd rather he just not make the film at all -- and I'm fairly confident that's what would end up happening. He has too many other projects waiting around for him to waste time making slick but under budgeted bargain bin junk

I can't agree with the articles sentiment that the film wouldn't get made without him though.. does anyone really doubt FOX wouldn't just bring in Louis Leterrier or someone of his ilk instead?

EDIT: I agree that I don't really want to know about the space jockey either, but oh well

I wish I knew where this Ridley Scott that hasn't been making mediocre films for the past eight years is, too. Everyone seems convinced this is a slamdunk when the guy's done nothing but churn out MOR-to-crap stuff over the last few years.

If he says it's going to be mean and nasty, I'm all for him making a sci-fi exploitation movie for $250 million dollars.

I'm all for a director making his movie his way, but $250mil is nuts. How are Fox being assholes by refusing to bankrupt themselves? The rating is a different story altogether...

That price tag HAS to be for both films. I can't imagine an Alien prequel costing almost as much as Spider-Man 3.

Maybe he's trying to get out of the gig by overpricing it. Stranger things have happened.

No, he wants it. But we don't need the history of the space jockey, even if it is tough and nasty.

250 Million? Not sure if it's for one film, or both "planned" films. If it is for one film, that would make it the highest budget for a rated R film ever (not counting for inflation). I think Terminator 3, with a budget of 170 million is #1 on that list.

Can't blame Fox for not rushing to write him a check. Robin Hood had a budget of 210 million, and made 110 million in the US. The last three films to feature Xenomorphs haven't been blockbusters either.

I was hoping for a dark intimate horror film that would bring the Alien creature back to it's roots. Something tells me with a budget that big, we wouldn't be seeing that.

Backstory for the Space Jockey? That is one of the most interesting parts about the first film, let it be a mystery. The Alien comics tried to explain it's backstory, and lets just say, it was better left unexplored. A hovering pink space jockey in a space suit holding a breifcase isn't what I imagined.

In my opinion, the 2010's Ridley Scott is no where near as interesting a film maker as the 1970's Ridley Scott, so I say let this project die. He's never going to recapture the wonder and terror of the original film.

And spending a spiderman-sized budget on this story completely misses the point.

What's the story in this one again?

Space Jockey.

Oh, you wanted more of one? I'm sure they've shoehorned in some Earth-bound humans or some bullshit, and one of them is a woman named Elanor Ripley, great-grandmother to Ellen. CAUSE THEN IT ALL TIES TOGETHER!

Nick P,

I was under the impression that the MATRIX sequels were the most expensive R Rated films of all time

Can I be the asshole and say that I really don't want this? 250 million or 25 million, I don't want this movie.

I'll be the asshole along with you, even though some would contend that no one needs two assholes.

Remember when the alien was a terrifying, fascinating, and totally unique movie monster? Yeah, that happened exactly fucking once, every presentation of the creature since then has been either a step above or below masturbation.

Scott's mixed record at the box office is not helping him much.
I hate Fox as much as anybody, but I can't blame them for turning down a 250 Million dollar price tag. Fox, like every other studio, is in a credit crunch. Banks are slower to lend money to studios then they once were,and some projects that might have been green lighted a few years ago are being turned down.
And, franly, the Alien/Predator films have not exactly proved that a 250 Million investment in a Alien or a predator film is a wise investment...

Scott is no fool, he knows how ROBIN HOOD performed. He must love the script to even bother asking for that much money.

I have some trepidation about this movie; the space jockey thing is disappointing and Scott's commercial instincts can really cripple his films. But then I remember how many of his films I truly love and I can't help but be interested...

Wow. I would've never thought the budget for this would be anywhere near that much.

It's hugely annoyingly that this kind of thing gets in the way of proper films getting made. I couldn't agree with you more Steve. Loving having you on the main page in a big way.

I got Matrix Reloaded at 127
and Revolutions at 110


As much as I think Predators was a "meh" film, I think they had the right idea when it came to the franchise. Scale back the budget, and bring the creature back to what made it cool. For a film to cost 250 million, I'm assuming it's going to be a FX driven epic action piece, which is exactly what I don't want for this franchise.

I hope Fox gives him the money, he makes an awesome Alien movie, it tanks and bankrupts the studio forever.

Would the directors just end up killing each other if it was Cameron and Scott?

Mean and nasty with alien face rape is a winner in my book.

These films are popular and profitable, but they're not the mega blockbusters that people seem to think. I don't think any of them have broken $100m domestic and that budget is more than any of them have grossed in their entire worldwide theatrical run.

Scott loves to burn cash, and he's got a mixed track record, so Fox is right to balk. If he walks, though, what's to stop them from getting someone less qualified to churn out a PG-13 version on the cheap?

Frankly, the last two pure ALien films did not exactly do well, and the AVP and recent Predator film were profitable only because they were done on modest budgets.
I think this is a case of fanboys not quite getting the reality of the film business: No Studio is going to spend 250 Million bucks on a film unless they are pretty sure it is going to be a huge blockbuster, and an Alien prequel does not have that going for it.
Fox has done Asshole behavior on many occasions..which is why I hate them..but turning down a very expensive film that has very quesitonable prosepects with a Director who is known for going overbudget is not asshole behavior.

Fanboy mode off:

The first movie did pretty well on a ratio of budget to box office, but I have to agree that they're more culturally positioned than huge blockbusters. Depending on what the movies are supposed to be, I don't even know how you could spend that much without being inefficient. Unless he wants to do something AVATAR-esque in scale.

Keep it R, but unless he's planning something so alien and CGI-ed up the wazoo, $250M seems excessive. Alien Resurrection was the most expensive that I could find, and that was $75M.

K so I'll come out and say it. I don't want these. Prequels suck and more importantly I don't trust Scott with this any more. I know everyone has their off days and Crowe isn't attached to this (yet) so I guess I should be more hopeful, but I'm not.

I am going to side with FOX on this one. 250 Million for an R rated "grim and gritty" prequel to a film franchise that hasn't made a well received film in a quarter century is a bit much.

I like Scott, but I don't think any studio is going to jump at that price tag under these circumstances.

ETA:
I think Fox wants one of 2 things: Either a much cheaper R rated film that Scott can have carte blanche over, or an expensive tent pole PG-13 film that Scoot brings his talents and makes it worth while and not just a studio cash grab.

Either way the risk/reward ratio stays more or less the same.

FOX isn't being assholes, they are operating like any and every studio would in this exact same situation.

As much as I love the Alien films, and find the creature to be incredibly interesting, I don't think there is much more to explore on film. The Alien has become less and less scary with each installment, and basically turned into cannon fodder over the past couple films. I would feel better about this whole project is they were sequels (without Ripley btw, the films are called Alien). By making it a prequel, they are adding restrictions to the story, since you are limited by the cannon of original trilogy (if they even care about that).

So you think a 80 million dollar, Hard R Alien Prequel, done by Ridley with no studio interference , would hold the same ratio as a $250 million, PG-13, Studio controlled Alien Prequel?

When I look back at some of the greatest Horror films, one of the contributing factors as to why they turned out great, was the limitations in budget. Alien falls into that category. I think a small, intimate Alien film would be much more satisfying then an Avatar-esqe Sci-Fi adventure.

Maybe I'm not giving Ridley enough credit, mabye all he needs is 100 million for his vision, and is just highballing them to begin with, so he can get his desired budget in the end, but seem like he's making a compromise.

It would take an incredible talent with a significant vision to make the Alien scary for me again. Predators tried, but in the case of that movie they didn't waver from the retro 80's futuristic design of the Predators at all. Hopefully with Alien they won't make the same mistake. Should Ridley choose to keep the Host specific traits for the Alien we could see all kinds of strange and unique Alien creatures(An alien from a Space Jockey), which could be a step in the right direction.

I don't think the "host trait" Aliens happened untill the comics, or Alien 3.

I'm glad to see so many people siding with the faceless, evil megacorporation who has disrespected many artists and beloved properties and not with the artist who made the amazing first film. You are good Capitalists.

You're right. THOSE GREEDY FUCKERS!

Prevailing sentiment in this thread:

Fox Accountants > Ridley Scott.

I guess there's a lot of Fox shareholders in this thread.

Your right. Any succesful studio, especialy in this economy, should hand over a 1/4 Billion dollars to a filmmaker who hasn't made a blockbuster film in ten years, who is basing this film on a franchise, as stated above, that hasn't even made 100 million domestically.

The point is, what does it matter to you? Do you own the studio? Who fucking cares how Fox spends their money? Do you like movies or money?

This summer from FOX STUDIOS: THE BIG PILE OF MONEY WE SAVED BY NOT LETTING RIDLEY SCOTT MAKE HIS MOVIE. IN 3-D.

See MGM.

Did I have stake in their well being. Nope. But due to their business model, films like Bond 22, and the Hobbit may not get made. I'm looking at the big picture. I rather see them baulk at this, and see Ridley do something else, and them spend that 250 million on multiple films, then to see them waste money on a needless, unwanted prequel, that from the sound of it, doesn't sound like what we even want to see.

Oh please, we're saying we understand and might be able to work up some righteous indignation if an Alien prequel seemed like a good idea in the slightest.

Anyway, Scott seems to have lost all sense of perspective. His films are getting closer and closer to overkill and frankly he could probably do with some restrictions.

I want to see Ridley Scott's epic vision of the Alien homeworld.

I don't want to see another moderately budgeted Alien horror movie set on a spaceship. We've seen that enough.

I would give you this except we are talking about FOX WHO FUCK UP EVERY SINGLE DECENT IP THEY GET THEIR HANDS ON.

Fight Club?


and see, we are in agreement too, which is why I don't understand your position. You know that chances are, Fox won't let Ridley have complete control, especially with a 250 million dollar budget. So we'd end up getting a PG-13, overblown, glossy, CGI Alien film that just insults Alien, the way the Prequels insulted Star Wars, and Empire. I just rather see it not happen, and see maybe a couple original films made with that money. Who knows, we may get something good from that, there's a chance of that. But based on Fox's track record, and what Ridley has made over the past 10 years, I rather see 5 smaller films.

Sure, they've been an abysmal studio as of late, but not handing Scott a blank check isn't necessarily fucking his film up. The rating thing on the other hand might well be.

Like I said above, maybe Ridley knows that whatever Budget he asks for, Fox is going to lowball him, so maybe that's why he is shooting high?

Are you serious? That was 11 years ago and it could be argued that they fucked up the marketing.

I'm not saying that 250 million isn't a ludicrous sum for an Alien movie. I just don't get people "siding" with bean counters and not with the artists who made the films they claim to love. Even if you aren't convinced the prequel is a great idea (I'm not either), wouldn't you rather see it attempted the way the artist envisioned than to have the security of knowing Fox saved a bunch of money? Or seeing a compromised take on the same idea by some hack? Which is what will happen if Ridley walks.

moderelty priced film, that was left alone to the filmmaker. If they gave Fincher 150 million to make that, it wouldn't have turned out like it did. And that's my point. With 250 million, Fox will interfere, that's a guarentee, but lesser budgeted films, have a better chance of being "good". For ever "I love Beth Cooper" we have a chance at getting "Fantastic Mr Fox". I'm just playing the odds.

Did you see Robin Hood? Some could say that Ridley has become a shadow of his former self.... who knows, maybe they want the Alien prequel bad, and with Ridley walking, we might get some upstart director who makes a name for himself making the Alien Prequel. I mean, it did happen 3 times with this franchise with Cameron, Scott, and Fincher.

Gimme a break, nobody's concerned about Fox saving money.

I don't see how your FIGHT CLUB comparison makes any sense. It wasn't a huge IP like ALIEN. What was there to interfere with? See how they treated Fincher 8 years earlier with the very property we are discussing.

What's happening here is Ridley is asserting his power so he can make the movie he wants to make.

I am "siding" with FOX on this because they are NOT "Assholes" for not handing a blank check over to Scott who, like the Alien franchise, might have seen his best days already.

Fox deserves bashing on a great many fronts, but this is just not one of them. If anything they are showing a little fiscal responsibility. In the wake of the MGM fiasco, I am really glad they are doing so. I want FOX to keep making movies, I want FOX to spend 250 Million on X-Men 4 and 5 or the most ridiculous Fantastic Four movie ever conceived. As unlikely as either of those two scenarios are, they would be 100% gone forever if FOX threw a quarter Billion dollars at Scott to make a "grim and gritty" Hard R Alien film.