Talk:Alien (film)

GA reassessment

Alien (film)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted Multiple citation needed tags still present. A bit of a shame as these could have been fixed relatively easily. Still it has been open for three months now and more than enough time has passed Aircorn (talk) 18:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

2008 promotion that has seen better days. Although many parts are exquisitely detailed, there are dozens of citation needed tags (including one in the lead) that need to be addressed. I recently made some edits myself regarding extra references in the lead and infobox, but I can't assist anywhere else. I feel the dozens of tags are sufficient enough to nominate for reassessment. – zmbro _(talk) 19:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Now there are 14. I am not going to work on this article myself but am curious to know whether if all the remaining uncited sentences were removed it would still rate as "good"?Chidgk1 (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

• Are you ready to close this zmbro Aircorn (talk) 18:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

• Aircorn Yep go ahead. – zmbro _(talk) 18:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
• Ah I thought it was an individual reassessment. I can close this then. Aircorn (talk) 18:20, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by CSJJ104 (talk) 22:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the working title of Alien was Star Beast? Source:
  • ALT1: ... that Alien was made into a high school play by students at North Bergen High School? Source:
  • ALT2: ... that Alien has been called a "rape movie with male victims"? Source:
  • ALT3: ... that while filming the 'chestburster scene' in Alien one actor found it so shocking they fell over and went into hysterics? Source:
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Lankyant (talk). Self-nominated at 11:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC).

• Promoted to GA status on 9/2. Long enough and appears policy compliant. My attempt to run an Earwig check was unsuccessful (the results would not load) but my spot-checking didn't detect anything nefarious. (If someone else can get earwig to run, that would be great.) The proposed hooks are interesting/hooky and are short enough. Certain of the sources are books that are not available for my online verification, but they are accepted in good faith. This is the nominator's second DYK and so no QPQ is required. Cbl62 (talk) 13:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Earwig flags a potential violation, but they're all direct quotes and presented as such within the article. CSJJ104 (talk) 22:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Erotic horror films category

The article has multiple sources discussing the overt sexual themes and imagery used in the film, as well as the symbolism of these. I think it is, without a doubt, a horror film that is intentionally erotic. In fact, the word "erotic" is used in the article to describe Giger's work on the film. For these reasons, I think that the article should be placed in Category:Erotic horror films, but somebody disagreed, so I am coming to the talk page to discuss it. What say you all? Pinging @Canterbury Tail: for discussion. Di (they-them) (talk) 13:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for coming to the talk page. There's quite the gap between sexualized imagery and erotic, and that may be personal interpretation. Even if some could be described as erotic, I've never seen a source say it's an erotic horror movie. However ultimately at the end of the day it simply fails WP:CATDEF. Alien is not commonly and consistently referred to as an erotic horror movie. Sources don't support the category. Canterbury Tail talk 13:22, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

I see, thanks for your input. Di (they-them) (talk) 13:26, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

The main article for the category, Erotic horror specifically mentions Alien so I don't see any problem with it. MFNickster (talk) 06:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Categories are not meant to be exhaustive, articles are not supposed to be in every category it's possible for them to be in. Articles should only be in the main categories that are their defining categoristics. As you read in WP:CATDEF above "A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to". Most references do not commonly and consistently refer to Alien as an "erotic horror." Now it's fine for the article on erotic horror to mention and discuss Alien, but it's WP:UNDUE to use the category on the film as it's not defining according to most sources. Canterbury Tail talk 12:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not a member or author of anything so far, thus I have no account yet.

I am somewhat baffled by the use of the term "eroticism" in context with this movie. Yes Gigers work does definitely contain art that is erotic, no counterargument there. However, a lot of his work relies on body horror. Horror which is heavily inspired by genitalia, the process of giving birth, pornographic imagery, and so on.

Sure, everything can and will be fetishized, but I seriously doubt that anything mainstream considers the act of giving birth to be erotic in any way.

So coming back to the movie, yes it does feature set pieces or stylistic choices that are pretty in your face phallic or clearly are similar to female genitalia and so on. I really would like to know what is considered "erotic" in any of its depiction in the movie. Acts of rape and assault, the horror the process of giving birth could be seen as... Woth all its gore, it really escapes me what exactly is considered erotic. The only "erotic" scene is probably at the end of the movie in which Ripley is seen in underwear, but that would be somewhat cheap, wouldn't it?

Maybe I am a little lost here, but the huge mistake that is being made here is to make anything that remotely resembles genitalia seem erotic, which it isn't. Genitalia =/= Eroticism

I am not sure if it is a cultural thing, as - for example - US culture certainly does have issues with nudity as compared to most parts in Europe. Maybe this is a reason a door is considered erotic as it somewhat reminds the viewer of a birth canal, I really don't know. As mentioned earlier, apart from certain fetishes, the movie lacks mainstream erotica or depictions thereof.

I'd really appreciate if someone could explain it to me, as I find it quite strange this movie is put under the same category as "Dracula" (erotic horror).

Thx and sorry if my English isn't as good. 2A02:3032:30C:4EB9:D144:862D:B7BD:A0DB (talk) 18:01, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Ultimately it's not up to us, Wikipedia editors don't get to decide how something is described, we go by reliable sources and what they say. I don't see it myself either, but it seems a few sources (clearly not the majority) do call it that. However this is about should it be in the category and it very clearly fails WP:CATDEF when it comes to it. Canterbury Tail talk 18:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Disagree that it's undue weight when the film is specifically mentioned as exemplar of the subgenre. MFNickster (talk) 04:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, all you need to do is provide references that back up that it's defining as per WP:CATDEF. "The defining characteristics of an article's topic are central to categorizing the article. A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently refer to[1] in describing the topic, such as the nationality of a person or the geographic location of a place." Canterbury Tail talk 12:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Should the chronology of settings be added to the Alien film and its sequels

Currently I am updating the dating for the new Alien: Romulus film, which is to be set between the time frame of Alien and Aliens. The dating of Alien is given as 2122, and your edit on Aliens states that it is 57 years after the first film, which is 2179. It makes sense to add the timeline since Alien: Romulus is coming out later this year. HenryRoan (talk) 10:23, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Nothing is mentioned in the film about a year though and retrospective information wouldn't be added in the plot, at most it would be a hidden note backed up with a reliable source. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 10:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Since the director of Romulus has made a point of stating that his installment is set in time between the first film Alien and the second film Aliens, it seems that the films might be in danger of tripping over each other in readers' minds if the time frame is not made more explicit. Since your edit in the Aliens plot already states that it is exactly "57 years" later, then it makes sense to give the actual dating in more than a hidden note. Let me know what you think, dates or no dates in the Aliens article, dates or no dates in the Romulus sequel article? HenryRoan (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

It would depend on the reliability of the source but it would still be a hidden note because it's not stated in the film while 57 years is. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 11:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

No dates are mentioned in either Alien or Aliens. Any dates applied are post movie ret-cons which are not actually part of the original movies. I don't see why saying something is set between two movies requires a specific date, just between the movies is sufficient. You would need to provide a reliable source that the Alien and Aliens films are specifically (at the time) set in those years, which at the time they were just some unknown future. We write movies from the perspective of the original release, not any retconning that happened later. Canterbury Tail talk 14:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Cailee Spaeny (an actor in Romulus) stated to Variety that Alien: Romulus will take place between the events of 1979's Alien, and the 1986 sequel Aliens.

I also just located this official looking poster released for the film which might be good for the Infobox of the film if you know might know someone with experience on how to load it for the Wikipedia article here: [1].

Canterbury Tail: The published companion books to the film productions also contain information on the timelines if an added source is needed. HenryRoan (talk) 14:09, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Again they were published well after the films and reconned dates into them. No date appears in the films. The plot is only for what appears in the film with the film as the primary source. If it doesn't appear in the film, it doesn't go in the plot section. MOS:FILMPLOT. Canterbury Tail talk 14:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Other interwiki versions of the articles about Alien include the date for the film setting such as the one in Russian. Also its covered in the companion books such as: Becoming Alien: The Beginning and End of Evil in Science Fiction's Most Idiosyncratic Film Franchise (Reel Spirituality Monograph Series) Paperback – March 15, 2021 by Sarah Welch-Larson (Author).

Also this second source book covers the timeline in: Author: Perry, S. D. (Stephani Danelle), author. Title: Alien : The Weyland-Yutani Report / S. D. Perry. Publisher, Date: San Rafael, CA : Insight Editions, [2016]

Two reliable sources are usually sufficient to support adding the information, both those authors thought it was useful to add dates. If you do a search on "2122 Alien" in the Google search engine then a bunch of sources come up justifying the use of these dates. HenryRoan (talk) 14:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I think you're missing what's being said to you. Per MOS:FILMPLOT only the film as a primary source is used for the plot. Since the date is not mentioned, referenced or shown in the film it cannot be included. You can find as many sources as you want, if it's not in the film it doesn't go in. Also what happens in other language Wikipedias has no baring on the English language Wikipedia and it's policies/guidelines etc, they're completely separate unconnected projects. Canterbury Tail talk 15:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Not to disparage foreign wikis but we try to work to a higher standard and Aliens is also a Featured Article. We don't modify plots based on retcons developed in future instalments or spin-offs. The best example I can think of is we don't change Star Wars' plot to read "Luke meets with Leia, secretly his sister" which I don't think is identified until the third film. Dating the Aliens films is a mistake anyway, as they are they're relatively timeless, but as I've expressed above, if the information can be reliably sourced we could add it as a footnote, but we shouldn't be saying "In 2179" because that isn't in the film as it was released.Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

My edits have been centered on Romulus which Variety magazine says is to be set between Alien and Aliens in its time frame. If the years are not included in the Plot sections, then that sets up the problem for general readers to get confused when Romulus comes out about whether film A is set before film B or after film C, etc. Since DWB appears to offer the solution of using footnotes for this, and if you both agree to the footnotes solution, then I can look up the dates for all the films as listed in the Weyland-Yutani book which I cited above yesterday as a reliable source. I can post the results here over the next few days if both of you think that DWB's footnotes suggestion is the best approach at this time for the chronology issue between these films? HenryRoan (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I personally don't agree on the footnotes, it's trying to shoehorn in a retcon that doesn't exist in the films. And it's not a hard concept for people that Romulus takes place between Alien and Aliens. Actual years aren't needed for that concept and I think it's rather insulting people's intelligence to think they can't grasp such a simple concept. Plenty of films don't have specific dates with some taking place in between others, it's not an issue. It seems that you're looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. "It's set between Alien and Aliens", done. You're also assuming that Romulus will have a specific date to it in the film, when none of Alien, Aliens, Alien 3 or Alien Ressurection have. Additionally, any conversations around this and about changes to the article should take place on the talk page of said articles, and not on a user talk page, so a wider audience can be reached for consensus. Canterbury Tail talk 19:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The larger chronology of Alien and its sequels is not generally known to viewers of the films, although on numerous websites and published books the chronology is very consistently given as:

Alien vs. Predator (2004, it was supposed to be 'present day' when released)

Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2004, also set in 2004 as a direct sequel to AVP)

Prometheus (2089, as stated in its Wikipedia Plot section now)

Alien: Covenant (2104, as stated in its Wikipedia Plot section now)

Alien (2122, not currently in its Wikipedia Plot section though well sourced on web)

• Alien: Romulus (sometime between 2122 and 2179 according to Variety magazine)

Aliens (2179, not currently in its Wikipedia Plot section which only states its 57 years after Alien)

Alien 3 (2179, same year as Aliens)

Alien: Resurrection (2381, several hundred years later)

The dating of the films is currently inconsistently sometimes given (and sometimes not) on Wikipedia, and DWB's footnotes approach might make Wikipedia more consistent for this film series as a whole. It might make sense to move this discussion to the Alien Talk page which started this film series as suggested by Canterbury Tail. HenryRoan (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

HenryRoan There really is no discussion to be had. You read as though you have your heart set on adding the date but it's flatly against WP:PLOT. As has been said several times, the plot summary is (a) a short summary of (b) only what is seen and heard on the screen. As an aside, the film has storytold extremely well in its 45 years without a date, which may be why the filmmakers kept it out.ToaneeM (talk) 00:09, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

The filmmakers did include the dates in Prometheus and Covenant, excluded it from Alien, and partially included it in Aliens when they said "57 years" later. If this information is to be excluded from the Plot sections, then maybe it can be added elsewhere in the article. Its surprising for me to see this information about chronology also excluded from the Alien (franchise) page, where it would seem to be useful. If not in the Plot sections of the film articles, then maybe in another section of the articles could cover the chronological settings and not exclude this information outright. There are multiple reliable sources about these chronological dates which agree with each other. HenryRoan (talk) 00:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Again, those dates were retconned into the franchise many many years (decades) after they were made. They were not part of the original films (theatrical or directors cuts) and have no place in the article as a result. And (as per your commen on Darkwarriorblake's talk page) there is no drive for these films to be consist with two franchise films made decades later. Just because Prometheus and Covenant had dates in the films isn't an inconsistency with Alien or Aliens and isn't relevant. We need to be consistent with the actual film, it's not relevant what other movie articles have in them. Canterbury Tail talk 01:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

References

Error

According to the article:

"Following company policy to investigate any potential distress signal, they land on the moon"

But according to the movie:

"Any systematised transmission indicating intelligent origin must be investigated..."

Doesn't matter if it's a distress call or not. Dornwald (talk) 22:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Article text corrected accordingly. --ToaneeM (talk) 23:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

User:ToaneeM Thanks!

Actually it's ""Any systematised transmission indicating a possible intelligent origin must be investigated."

The transcript i quoted was slightly off, "a possible" should be added. Dornwald (talk) 00:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I did try to find that section of the film to get it right. The plot summary should be as succinct as possible while remaining unambiguous and this was quite wordy. But alternative wordings of it are just as lengthy and this article's plot gets toyed with far too much as it is, so the real one's easiest. Thanks.ToaneeM (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Greatest film in its genre or all-time?

This has confused me over the years. I'm curious about what makes a film like The Silence of the Lambs (film) mentioned as "one of the greatest and most influential films" (which I don't disagree personally, it's a great movie) vs. a film like Alien listed as just "one of the greatest and most influential science fiction and horror films of all time." It's a nickpick for sure, but I wanted to ask. Cahlin29 (talk) 07:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)