I think sometimes I forget how fervently I worship certain directors, or even just the career itself. It’s an awe-inspiring, cyclopean task that’s taken on by these brave men and women, and when they emerge on the other side of it successful, it’s to be applauded. When the emerge on the other side as icons, it’s to be worshiped.
I’m reminded of that healthy obsession whenever I hear a director who has risen to the top of his or her field say something completely moronic.
In an interview with Screen Daily, Ridley Scott claimed that he wouldn’t have any of he iconic creature designs in his upcoming Alien prequel. The main reason: because they’re completely “worn out.”
This is, well, damn it, it’s true. Scott brings up a great point, and it’s perfectly valid (and heartbreaking that commercial bullshit killed such a cool creature), but part of me still thinks it’s a misstep. No drooling, teeth-baring, double-teeth-baring alien in Alien? The shark from Jaws has been culturally beaten to death, but I can’t even conceive of a Jaws prequel (or another film for that matter) not featuring the damned shark.
To wit, I offer Patton Oswalt‘s famous rant about the Star Wars prequels as proof that we don’t want to see where something we love came from. We just want to see something we love:
Keep in mind, there are bound to be some sort of aliens in the prequel. I mean, logic dictates it. Still, it can be seen as a fantastic opportunity to create and innovate or a fantastic opportunity to let fans down.
So what do you think?