OK, remember in Alien they have that scene where
the android Ash tries to kill Ripley by rolling up a
magazine and shoving it into her mouth? I always
wondered what the hell that was supposed to be about.
Then here in Convenant, we have the suck my flute
scene between David and Walter, where David is trying
to assert his dominance or see if Walter will submit to
him or something ... I don't know what that was about,
but did it creep you out or bore you? I just though it
was so stupid, and that it must be an artifact of Ripley
Scotts sexuality that he must expose in his movies like
an flasher or something.
What a stupid scene, and what a stupid character. In
the middle of a life and death struggle for species
survival two robots take a break for flute lessons
and flirt with each other? Sheesh!
That's a cheap shot. Those were stupid scenes, and I could just as well
say you have issues about having to have silly stuff like that in movies
and defend it because you think it is somehow helping gays. Besides,
both of them were robots ... it was just a stupid set of scenes. You comment
is also a waste of time since you didn't answer anything I commented about.
Are you gay or not, and if so are you offended. If not, why are you trolling?
It's a very odd line to put in a movie, i'll say that. But no, I don't think it was meant to be homoerotic in any way.
I'm trying to go for an engaging, funny youtube channel so, if you have the time, take a look. Hope you enjoy what you see. Thanks in advance. A review of the movie here-https://youtu.be/fyYgj2Fpur0
So now you've gone from speculating that Ridley Scott must be gay to wanting to interrogate me about my sexuality.
And what is this nonsense about the idea of the scene "helping gays?"
It sounds like you're saying there's some kind of gay agenda at work here.
You're beginning to sound like those guys who were butthurt because women took such prominent, lead roles in Mad Max: Fury Road and Star Wars: The Force Awakens.
Is that what's going on here? You can't look at gays or women being the lead characters without believing somebody is pushing an evil liberal agenda?
It took you 4 days to think of that? Anyone stupid and clueless enough to actually use the word "butthurt" in a post is something I just put on ignore. Bye
considering your reaction, it's pretty safe to say that the other poster is pretty much right with his speculation. dude, it's 2017, there is no need to feel ashamed.
Just based on his movies there are some odd stylistic choices that could come across to someone as 'gay' but if he was gay I'm not sure that he would use his movies to give the audience subtle hints about his sexuality.
Also, I got the impression from reading an interview recently that he wanted to bone the actress who plays dr shaw and that it was one of the main reasons he hired her
That scene got audible bad laughs from my crowd, and this was a tiny crowd a week after release. The part where David said he'll "do the fingering" got the laugh. Haha!
Anyone who thinks the scene didn't have intentional homoerotic undertones is a moron. I'm sure Scott would openly admit it. I'm sure the reason its "top critic" score is so much higher than the regular score and higher than Prometheus' top critic score is because it got "homosexual bonus points" from the leftist media, just like the awful Star Trek Beyond did for Sulu.
Did you notice also that two of the crew members are gay? It's made clear in the online prologue, but also clear when the one guy cries over the other one. Much more obviously so than Baze and Chirrut in Rogue One, because of the physical contact between them. Hollywood spent the '90s pushing lesbians on the public and now they have firmly moved onto promoting homosexual male characters. As usual, homosexuals seem to comprise 20% of TV and movie characters even though they are about 1% of the public.
>> it got "homosexual bonus points" from the leftist media, just like the awful Star Trek Beyond did for Sulu.
Good post until you wrote this foolishness. I am very Progressive, but I would
never give anything "homosexual bonus points", what a stupid thing to
believe in. This proves you know nothing about Leftists, and that means
you problem don't know anything about anything other than what someone
brainwashed you with.
I don't see anything wrong with modeling social behavior, because what we
see in reality is gays getting beat up, abused, insulting, etc because people
seem to think they must be hated. I don't see anything with with pushing
these types of issues up front because it has a large effect on people in the
negative direction.
This is the same thing people said when blacks showed up in sports for the
first time, or the military.
There is no epidemic of "beating up" gays. It's a myth and always has been.
The critics, especially top critics, ripped X-Men Apocalypse because it had a scene where Auschwitz was damaged. They also overpraised Girlbusters because feminism. A huge motivating factor for many critics, especially top critics who have been hired by the left-wing cabal known as the mainstream media, is "social justice," which means doling out points or punishment based on how designated "minority groups" are treated. It's no comment on you personally, but on the general attitude of the mainstream media critics.
"There is no epidemic of "beating up" gays. It's a myth and always has been.
The critics, especially top critics, ripped X-Men Apocalypse because it had a scene where Auschwitz was damaged. They also overpraised Girlbusters because feminism. A huge motivating factor for many critics, especially top critics who have been hired by the left-wing cabal known as the mainstream media, is "social justice," which means doling out points or punishment based on how designated "minority groups" are treated. It's no comment on you personally, but on the general attitude of the mainstream media critics."
or in other words: i haven't had a single own thought throughout my entire life.
at first you read dog shit like this and it's funny, cause you think, "who's the dumb?". But then you realise it's this type of bigotry that hurts people in real life. I wish one of you homophobes would explain to me how what two strangers that you'll never meet or have any contact with get up to affects you?
Next you'll be having a little rant about bathrooms. 😒
No it doesnt. Two people having sex doesnt dictate what you do. And lets not forget, heterosexual sex spreads HIV just as well as gay sex. So whats your point now mr homophobe?
It's not homophobic to know that in America, AIDS began in the homosexual community and eventually spread to the hetero community. You seem very ignorant.
No, it was reported first in the homosexual community. That doesn't mean that's where it started. However, let's assume that's true. So what? Put a fucking rubber on, end of problem.
Unless your problem is that you're pissed off straight people can't just fuck whenever they like anymore? Oh no, god forbid people have personal responsibility for their own actions.
What's homophobic is that people like you think gay people are less than you. What's homophobic is that people like you think you can blame the gay community for stupid shit like hiv so you can justify your prejudice. Do you have the same hatred for straight people that spread all the other horrible STIs? Doubt it. Do you want to stop people with herpes getting married and having children?
Calling someone a virgin? Yup, youre either 12 years or fat neck beard that cant get a girl to touch him. In any case, I cant imagine what your dick must look like. Theres a lot more than "the gay virus" out there. Probably a cesspool of genital warts, herpes and weird discharge. Does the room start to stink whenever you open up your jeans, per chance? That smell of fish isnt a good thing.
Jesus Christ, did you get that come back from the "how to argue on the internet" handbook?
You really don't see how fucking dumb your logic is? You don't wanna use a condom, which means you're the fucking scumbag spearding disease. fishy dick.
There is nothing bigoted about wanting critics to rate movies honestly instead of on how they portray "protected classes" of people. And there is nothing bigoted about wanting movies to have a balanced portrayal of society instead of putting homosexual characters in countless TV shows and movies, at a far higher representation than most people will ever know in real life.
Ah, the real life argument applied to a movie about aliens. How many gay dudes were in this? Two? Out of a cast of 21ish? So if you were on a boat with a crew of 20 and there was one gay dude, you'd lose you're shit because it's not representative on real world statistics? Real world statistics based on people telling the truth about being something that's not socially acceptable. Are you under the mistaken impression that gay people can't congregate in the same area over a certain percentage? You think they get to 1% or current amount of people in a certain amount of square feet and then start telling any new gay people to fuck off?
But again, who gives a fuck that there was two guys dude with less lines of dialogue than the fucking alien? This isn't real life, it's shucking movie. And for better or worse entertainment has been the biggest help to changing people's points of view about groups they have no contact with.
Where are all these reviews that only care about gay people in movies? heavy handed pushing of any agenda is annoying, I'll grant you, but that's not going on here. So I don't really get why you're so bothered about a couple of gay dudes who meant absolutely nothing to the story, and didn't have their relationship shoved in your face.
I think the sexual stuff in the Alien movies originally came from Giger's art, and then Scott and the screenwriter just sort of expanded on it into other scenes. And critics and film analysis made a big deal about it too.
So I think that scene was an attempt to continue that theme/symbolism and tie this movie to the original movie. I thought it was kinda dumb too and i got bored with it. I did not pick up on the symbolism until I just read your post. But now that I know it it seems pretty ridiculous and unintentionally comedic. "Playing the skin flute". Its too blatant and contrived.
Indeed, if anything gigers original illustrations where more sexual. The top of the eggs were supposed to look just like vaginas. I saw an interview where he was talking about the design of the space jockey ship and he said he didn't get to do exactly what he wanted because of time and money.
The way he was talking made it sound like he might have taken it too far. In my opinion it's got the right balance
LOL. Ash rolling up the magazine and trying to place it in Ripley's mouth was it just using what was available to suffocate and kill Ripley... they didn't have pistols or assault rifles on the Nostromo. Not to mention Ash is a synthetic, so it naturally uses the most simplest of means to get things done.
Yeah, that was kind of a point I was laboring to get to, that Ridley Scott in trying to deal with the failure of Prometheus by making this a very close analog, if not a copy, of the original "Alien" movie, including a creepy scene with weird sexual overtones. It makes him look simpleminded in doing that, but also creepy in the way he did it.
I just hope he doesnt get his own way enough that he shoe horns in his other stupid ideas that were vetoed by fox on the original alien. Like the alien talking for example. Or that shit they filmed with people being turned into eggs.
LOL, I did not hear about that, but I did hear some huge big thing about having the alien travel in time or something. Really, the best thing about Alien, maybe Ridley does understand, is the feeling and the potential of what the story could be, as opposed to anything the studio heads can conceive of. There are a lot of good science fiction stories, but I really cannot think of one that has been transferred to the screen faithfully. They have raped most of the Phillip K. Dick's stories for cheap thrills. Starship Troopers I thought was rather well done for what it was as a movie, but not really faithful or representative of the book. Maybe the Martian, but that was a simple and basic story that just required that it follow the story.
Alien is an interesting study in most aspects, but I am sorry that after Aliens most of the movies have been seen as opportunities to make profit by exploiting the basic idea that already exists. I wonder if James Cameron would make another Alien movie ... I think he would be more clear about having a coherent plot that is also fun to watch.
Yeah at the end of alien ripley was to have her head ripped off by the alien, and then the alien was to make a final captains log mimicking Dallas' voice as it pushed buttons and stuff. The guys at fox flew out and almost fired Ridley for his stupidity lol.
You're right though when you say books get raped for the purpose of cheap thrills. The one that always stands out for me is "I am legend". It's had 3 movies based off the short story and not one of them is accurate to the book. Which was fine when they changed the title to the last man on earth or omega man, but the will smith movie kept the title but ditched the end that had the title making sense. It has a wonderful little twist before twists were all the rage and it made the title relevent to the story.
Another one would be world war z. Understandably though that should have been a mini series rather than a movie, and that can be said for so many things these days. Shoe horning 20 or even 30 hours of material in to a 2 hour movie is silly.
Would Cameron make a good sequel to aliens? I don't know. Maybe? He would definitely be more coherent. Ridley and his writers seem to be throwing out the stuff we already know in favour of new ideas. One things for sure, he did the right things with aliens. We'd already had alien, we didn't need another one. He upped the ante. It's not one, it's a shit load. It's not creeping around, they are coming at you full speed. What needed to happen next was to open up the universe with more detail of the players involved. The company and its corrupt ways. Their competitors. Something alone the lines of the expanse for example. It's got lots of different players revolving around tow governments desire for a biological weapons project. It's more complicated than that, but you get the idea. Trying to remake alien was dumb idea 92 and it's still a dumb idea in 2017.
Are you either in middle school, or born in the 50’s?? It’s 2020, homosexuality and queerness has become a cultural norm. Deal with it, or be looked at as an ass backwards idiot.
Nope, it’s called reality lol. You do realize we are in 2020, right? In 1990 it may have been “virtue signaling,” but in 2020 it’s simply a part of life....
I could care less if Ridley Scott is gay, or what you think for that matter.
You're just stupid if you think because I asked if he puts homo-erotic suggestive scenes in his movies if he is gay. The scenes are stupid and unnecessary ... they are just bad. If there was some way gay scenes fit into either movies fine. Honestly, it is unpleasant to talk to such a stupid person as you, and the stupider people are, the louder and more obnoxious and confident they behave, and the more they desperately look for people they think they can be judgement about.
Are you really suggesting 99% of the population doesn’t tolerate/accept queer sexuality as simply a part of life? Or do you mean 99% of the population is not queer?
Statistically, queer people make up roughly 11-15% of the population. But yes, still a minority so not the norm. But in terms of societal acceptance, it is now the norm in 2020 to realize that queer people are all around us. Have you taken a look around you? So for mainstream sci-Fi movie made in 2020, of course there will be queerness portrayed. This isn’t the 1950’s my god!
Actually, if we are talking about Hollywood it would be much higher. The entertainment industry is heavily populated with queer people both on camera and behind the scenes. Welcome to the real world. Also, how many screen names do you have here, Jesus.
doubtful, 10-15% seems legit for Hollyweird,
100 people gathered at the cafeteria on a studio lot & you think 20 or 30 of those people would be queer? nah