Wapitikev Wrote:Welcome Lexator:

Well...it does give one food for thought.

One would have to assume that the script for Aliens was in development well before '86.

Since the Tomb came out in '84, that would be one hell of a fast re-write.

-Wapitikev

bones weep tedium Wrote:Still, not impossible. Wikipedia says:

[SIZE="2"]While completing pre-production of The Terminator in 1983, director James Cameron discussed the possibility of working on a sequel to Alien (1979) with Twentieth Century Fox producer David Giler.[6] A fan of the original, Cameron was interested in crafting a sequel, and entered a self-imposed seclusion to brainstorm a concept for Alien II.[6] After four days, Cameron produced an initial 45 page treatment, although management changes at Twentieth Century Fox resulted with the film put on hiatus as they felt Alien did not create a compelling profit to warrant a sequel.[6] A scheduling conflict with actor Arnold Schwarzenegger caused filming of The Terminator to be delayed by nine months as Schwarzenegger was filming Conan the Destroyer, which allowed Cameron to write a script for Aliens. While filming The Terminator, Cameron had written 90 pages for Aliens, and although the script was not finished, Fox were impressed and told him if The Terminator was a success he would direct Aliens.[7]

Following the success of The Terminator, Cameron and partner Gale Anne Hurd were given approval to direct and produce the sequel to Alien, scheduled for a 1986 release. [/SIZE]

Which means that the final draft of the script would not have been written until '84, after which he'd have a full year to alter the ending - not so 'speedy' if you thunk aboot ett.

But is it really that similar? Could it not just be a similar solution to a similar problem? A lone hero has to kill a whole flock of superior, seemingly impervious baddies . . . a flamethrower sounds good. Even if it is a rip-off, it nowhere near as blatant as when FPW ripped off the Highlander (1986) when he wrote Glaeken into The Keep (1981). Ginger swordy immortal? Come on.

Wapitikev Wrote:So what you're saying is that A) Hollywood has ripped off FPW on numerous occasions and he hasn't sued anyone, or B) that these are simple coincidences that we are obsessing over?

...

Hasta be A. We would never be big enough conspiracy theorists to be able to believe B...after all, there are no coincidences.

I commend FPW on his magnanimous acceptance of (clearly) derivative works.

Good Wikisearch too, Bones.

-Wapitikev

bones weep tedium Wrote:I was kinda siding with B myself, for similar reasons that Neil Gaiman defends JK Rowling over accusations that Harry Potter is a rip off of Tim Hunter.

Wapitikev Wrote:Heh.

Good one. I hadn't heard that one before.

I wish Neil good luck with his efforts.

-Wapitikev

lexator222 Wrote:Remember, NO coincidences!

And speaking of JK, lets see:
A young man (the chosen one) with no parents, is befriended by a legendary old man, sometimes called a "wizard", who has to fight an ultimate evil, who has changed
his name, when he became evil?



Curiouser and curiouser!

Lexator

Libby Wrote:It's a typical formula. SPOILER FOR THE LAST HARRY POTTER AND STAR WARS!!!!!

The last horcrux is in Harry, so Voldermort is part of him, and Darth is Luke's dad, so Darth and Luke are connected.

Wapitikev Wrote:Which proves the saying: "There is nothing new under the sun." Everything is constantly recycled in popular culture. Rarely is there a "new" idea.

The real trick is to use the conventions of a genre (or multiple genres) without explicitly and blatantly ripping off the last popular thing.

JK's stuff may be derivative in some regards, but it is also novel enough (no pun intended) that it entertains most people without them saying: "Hey. She lifted that from so and so!" while they are reading it.

If you or I could do the same, then we could have our shot at being the bestselling author of all time as well.



-Wapitikev