Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media Sci-Fi Television

New X-Files Movie 228

Posted by kdawson from the i-want-to-believe-it dept.
An anonymous reader writes to let us know that a new X-Files movie is in pre-production, directed and written by Chris Carter and starring David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson. Duchovny said in an interview that his understanding is that filming will start in November for a summer 2008 release. The article notes that in an earlier interview, Anderson said the film "would stay away from the series' (and first film's) sometimes tortured mythology" (quoting the article, not Anderson).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New X-Files Movie More

New X-Files Movie

Comments Filter:

  • Wow! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by j0nkatz ( 315168 ) <anon AT memphisgeek DOT com> on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:28PM (#19896697) Homepage
    I want to believe!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by WED Fan ( 911325 )

      It would be nice to have a movie based on the original season and a half. Before they started with the mythology. Sure, there was smoking man, but I don't think Carter had it worked out at that point.

      The horrible thing was, I watched the first few seasons, then my company sent me out to Tokyo to take over Far East training. When I finally got back to the states, I had missed a year and a half of the series and I was lost on all the black filmy eyes. By the time the movie came out, I didn't care. I've tried

  • Wait, what?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LordPhantom ( 763327 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:31PM (#19896713)
    Ok, so if the 2nd movie will be staying away from the "tortured mythology" of the series and the first movie.... how is it an X-Files movie?

    God help us if this turns into some John Cusak-esque romantic comedy (with a dash of aliens).

    • Re:Wait, what?! (Score:5, Funny)

      by aichpvee ( 631243 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:35PM (#19896753) Journal
      Better than what I first read. I was still groggy from a nap and read "New X-Men movie starring starring David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson." Worse still, my first thought at that wasn't that I'd read something wrong but rather "who cares if Solid Snake isn't writing this one?"

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by ChromeAeonium ( 1026952 )
      It will be like the monster of the week episodes. There'll be some monster/mutant/ghost/miscellaneous paranormal phenomenon/entity to center the movie around, but no extraterrestrials or global conspiracy covering up said extraterrestrials .

      • but no extraterrestrials or global conspiracy covering up said extraterrestrials
        Then exactly why would I watch it?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by redanzl ( 455100 )
      I just hope they don't cast Gary Shandling as Muldur's long-lost sister.

    • it's funny (Score:5, Interesting)

      by caitsith01 ( 606117 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @01:57AM (#19897569) Journal
      There has always been a big division amongst fans.

      Myself, I have always loved the conspiracy arc in the x-files, and I know a lot of others who feel the same way. Although it got rather convoluted with the bees and so on, some parts of it (such as Tunguska and all that stuff with Krycek, and the shifting role of the Cancer Man/X/Deep Throat/Bill Mulder) were fascinating and were definitely what kept me tuning in week after week.

      Yet some people hated that stuff, and loved the "locals tell of the mythical swamp monster... and here it is!!!!11!!!1!" type episodes, the "monster of the week" as someone called it here (also "serial killer of the week" at times). Personally I feel like those episodes were frequently poorly done, and the sfx never really carried the silly plotlines adequately. There are some notable exceptions of course (I loved the Loch Ness Monster episode, but of course that was great mostly because they never show the thing).

      Of course some of the better episodes had a bit of both - a "monster of the week" which turned out to be part of the broader conspiracy arc, or segued into it.

      My perception is that more hard core fans tend to prefer the aliens, casual fans prefer the wolf-man stuff. Maybe it's an attention span thing too. It will be a shame if the new episode does nothing to move the conspiracy arc forward - of course, it may well be set earlyish in the series, rather than at the end.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Lemmy Caution ( 8378 )
        Non-fans - that is, people who don't have loyalties to series but simply look for quality stories - will want a good film that stands on its own, instead of engaging in self-absorbed world-building.

        I'm really getting to hate fan-think. It's cheapening the way we think of narrative. Too much adolescent desire to inhabit an imaginary world, not enough use of art/narrative to think reflectively about our own world and lives.

        I normally wouldn't be so abusive, but the way that you framed it actually valourized e

        • Re:it's funny (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Pfhorrest ( 545131 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @03:45AM (#19898085) Homepage Journal
          I think your portrayal of those intrigued by fictional worlds as "self-absorbed" is just a nasty a slight as the person to which you're replying.

          While meandering about a library once I picked up some book vaguely related to Lord of the Rings or Tolkien or some such and read a bit of it wherein Tolkien was lamenting the popular (at the time of his writing) disdain for fictional worlds as works of art in their own, and the insistence that all fictional stories serve some allegorical purpose of illustrating something about some particulars here in the real world. (If anyone can cite the passage I'm trying to recall I'd much appreciate that!) Of course all stories, no matter what "world" they're set in, will touch on and illustrate themes about "human" nature, whether or not the characters are actually human, because for the story to be engaging at all they've still got to be recognizable as people and thus will have (and act according to, and suffer the consequences of) psychological traits just like humans in the real world do. But the War of the Rings doesn't have to be an allegory for World War II; Sauron's Orcish army doesn't have to be a representation of the German war machine; Gandalf is not Jesus Christ come to guide the West against the forces of evil! Certainly real-world events and history can influence the creation of a fictional world - e.g. Tolkien's mythology draws clear inspiration from real-world mythology, both Christian and pagan - but that doesn't mean the fictional world has to be somehow a proxy for the real one. Maybe someone just wanted to tell a cool story against a cool backdrop. Or maybe, as was the origin of Middle-Earth, maybe someone just wanted to create a cool backdrop. Reading real-world mythology isn't always that engaging, but it paints an interesting and sometimes beautiful picture of the world.

          This debate seems to me like arguing whether portraits or landscapes make for better paintings; or more accurately, whether representational painting (of real things that actually exist before the painter) is better than purely imaginative painting (of things that exist nowhere but in the artist's mind). Each sort requires a different kind of talent and is useful to different ends: a representational painter must be able to accurately reproduce the details of the real things before him, and as such talk about the details of his painting, if it's well done, can serve as proxy for talk about the real thing. But an imaginative painter who creates fanciful images from whole cloth has a level of creativity and inspiration that someone who can only paint representationally lacks, and such fanciful art is great for - you said it - escapism, which is a perfectly fine recreational activity. Likewise with portraits vs landscapes - different levels of scope, different levels of detail, both valid art forms.

          Some people like vast, epic stories that flesh out grand worlds; some people like close, character-driven stories instead; some people like stories set in the real world, during real events, with which the reader is familiar to some extent; others like stories created ex nihlo which transport you into a wholly original, novel experience. All of these things have their appeal, and arguing for one over the other is as silly as arguing over favorite colors or ice cream flavors.
          • "But the War of the Rings doesn't have to be an allegory for World War II; Sauron's Orcish army doesn't have to be a representation of the German war machine; Gandalf is not Jesus Christ come to guide the West against the forces of evil!"

            Considering that Tolkien described it as "a fundamentally religious and Catholic work, unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision" to a Jesuit friend, it would seem more applicable to the incursions of Islamic forces into Europe and the eventual response to

            • Re:it's funny (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Curien ( 267780 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @06:33AM (#19898679)
              He was refering to the themes and morals, not to the mechanics or plotpoints. Obviously, the world being created and guided by a paganesque pantheon wouldn't mesh well with Catholicism. If you see a clash between Islam and Chritianity (or the Middle-east and Europe or whatever) when you read Tolkien, that says a lot more about you than it does about Tolkien.
            • Tolkien says in the foreword that he heard that it was symbolic of something a lot, and that it was simply untrue. Basically, he says that Lord of the Rings not allegorical. It's quoted here [everything2.com], although reading it yourself is very enlightening.
          • If I had the points, I'd burn 'em. Excellent points all around.

            Even the Chronicles of Narnia started this way - Lewis didn't start out to write an allegory of Christ, it more or less just happened after Aslan came bounding into the picture.

          • Re:it's funny (Score:4, Informative)

            by cHALiTO ( 101461 ) <elchalo&gmail,com> on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @09:07AM (#19899645) Homepage
            I think the work of tolkien you refer to at the beggining is his essay "On Fairy-Stories" published in "Tree and Leaf [wikipedia.org]".

            At some point he says something about fantasy and world creation (or sub-creation) being not so much 'escapism' as in a deserting soldier (a rather demeaning word), but rather as in a prisoner escaping to freedom.

            Highly recommended reading.

      • Personally I feel like those episodes were frequently poorly done, and the sfx never really carried the silly plotlines adequately.

        A little coaching on the locations would have helped, too.

        There was one episode that took place somewhere near Lack Sacangaga in upstate New York. I know this area. I live 30 miles from it. I went to a summer camp on its shores as a kid.

        It would have been nice if someone, especially one of the "locals", pronounced it "sa can DA ga", as it should be, rather than "sa CAN

      • In otherwords: There are those who like to watch frankenstein dancing at a Cher concert and those who don't.

      • Re:it's funny (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Himring ( 646324 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @09:52AM (#19900173) Homepage Journal
        There are some notable exceptions of course (I loved the Loch Ness Monster episode, but of course that was great mostly because they never show the thing).

        There was not an actual episode on the Loch Ness monster that I remember. It was rather an episode on 'a' lake monster (one like nessy). And they did indeed show it, at the very end of the episode after Mulder and Skully finished a great dialogue wherein Skully compared Mulder to Ahab and his quest the white whale. They leave the lake area and then the thing pops up.

        I re-watched the entire series recently. The running mythos episodes were indeed good ... at times. Rather, they were good until the movie. The "jump the shark" episode for the x files is arguable, but to me the movie was it. The mythos worked until that point, but afterwards you could sense Carter losing a grip on things. The writers actually admitted to killing off the syndicate because it made no more sense and they couldn't keep up with all the complexities themselves.

        You must remember, the mythos migrated from uncovering the government hiding aliens, to bees being used to inject the black oil alien and enslave the human race (no, wait, they were going to be used to inject the green stuff from the movie and convert all humans to sleestacks -- see my point?), to a government plot in building super soldiers, to all sorts of junk in-between.

        Carter fell into the trap of keeping a series alive by never really revealing anything, but making fans think you were gonna -- the "revealing for revealing's sake." Underneath all the mystery and revealing, there was nothing there. There was no big "aha!"

        Were the mythos episodes good? Yes, at first, but they fell apart and the last couple of years -- the super soldiers episodes -- were taxing at best. Now, what were always good about the mythos were some of the characters. CSM, Krychek & TLG were awesome no matter how sucky the mythos episode.

        The stand-alone episodes were always up in the air, but by-and-large had staying power. Some were incredible and, yes, some sucked. To me, my best memories of x-files are from these stand alones. The Chung episode, the genie episode in the last year of Mulder, even the Burt Reynolds episode. These are some of my favorites.

        I have always suspected, though, that Carter was inspired by Oliver Stone's JFK. I re-watched it a few years back and the scene between Costner and Southerland's character is like watching Mulder talking to Mr. X or the CSM. "You're closer to the truth than you realize" says Southerland to Costner. My gosh, put that into any x-files mythos episode.

  • Oh man, I Think I Just.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by N8F8 ( 4562 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:31PM (#19896717)
    Had a geekgasm!

  • Aliens won't probe anymore (Score:3, Funny)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:32PM (#19896729) Journal
    Gillian Anderson has got to be pretty old by now. The fun may be gone.
  • a movie about the return of the sideshow freaks might be good.

    and a high probability of a good soundtrack.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )
      a movie about the return of the sideshow freaks might be good

      Oh, that was funny as shit! X-files was one of the few series that both my wife and I watched (normally, we have very different tastes). After the sideshow episode, we both starting using the cliche, "Don't worry, somebody ate the problem".
           

  • Lost its edge (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:38PM (#19896785) Journal
    Part of the fun of the original series was the non-closure (no solid proof or clarity) and the tension between believer and skeptic. They drifted away from this later in the series, and even the first movie. At the end of the series, Scully became the believer and the new guy the skeptic, but it never quite worked right. For one, there was no sense of sexual tension between the new dude and Scully like there was in the original pair.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mcmonkey ( 96054 )

      Did you ever watch the X-Files?

      Part of the fun of the original series was the non-closure (no solid proof or clarity) and the tension between believer and skeptic.

      Didn't Scully once do a hostage swap with an alien corpse for Mulder? Wasn't that in the first season? I was a big fan back in the day, but I think was fun involved a lot of ignoring the solid proof and carefully avoiding the lack of tension between believer and skeptic.

      That said, the only time I ever dreamt I was married, it was to Gillian

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Joebert ( 946227 )

        That said, the only time I ever dreamt I was married, it was to Gillian.

        Did it go somthing like you were a fanatic believer that you & her were made for eachother, but she was a carefull skeptic & you ended up chasing her around for the whole dream ?

        I just want to make sure without a doubt, that I'm not alone.
    • Regardless of the relationship between Scully and Doggett, the episodes in Season 8 rival any of those in the other seasons. It was time for a change, and the writers really showed that they knew what they were doing.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
      Part of the fun of the original series was the non-closure (no solid proof or clarity) and the tension between believer and skeptic. They drifted away from this later in the series, and even the first movie. At the end of the series, Scully became the believer and the new guy the skeptic, but it never quite worked right. For one, there was no sense of sexual tension between the new dude and Scully like there was in the original pair.

      The problem with series is, that try to keep the status quo for years and y

  • The Lone Gunmen die! (Score:3, Funny)

    by tylersoze ( 789256 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:44PM (#19896821)
    Oh wait, was I suppose to put a spoiler alert first?

  • It will never reach the cinema (Score:3, Informative)

    by david_craig ( 892495 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:58PM (#19896901) Homepage
    As someone who shares a flat with an avid X-Files (or more correctly Gillian Anderson) fan, I've been hearing rumours about this for, oh, at least two years now. And even now it sounds as though the script hasn't even been finalised yet, and they might not have all the funding they require at this point. Because the series finished so long ago, and (even according to a significant portion of fans) lost it's way over the final couple of series I think this movie is going to be a hard sell for a mainstream audience. Which I think will result in budgeting problems for the producers, which could mean delays or the filming not even being completed. I'd love to seen another X-Files outing, (and not just to watch my flat mate explode in the ecstasy of a celluloid Anderson experience) however I'm a very long way from getting my hopes up.
    • The reason it hasn't materialized yet is that Chris Carter and FOX were locked in an epic battle of lawsuits over the money that the first movie made, among other things.

      With the lawsuit resolved, the property can now be developed in new ways.
    • There have been rumors about an X-Files movie for years. The reason people are running with the story now is that supposedly Chris Carter actually finished a script, and they have signed contracts to bring everyone on board. A week ago Duchovony was telling people that he and Gillian had been signed, and that he was getting his script sent to him.

      So it all sounds a lot more likely/official this time around.

      Thusly, all the stories now.

  • So what's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Tuesday July 17, 2007 @11:58PM (#19896911)
    said the film "would stay away from the series' (and first film's) sometimes tortured mythology"

    So what's the point, other than to cash in on the franchise? Way bother to have an X-files move if you don't folow the X-files back story in it? It would be like taking some scifi space move that was completely unrelater to the star trek universe, casting a couple of aging trek actors, and slappimg the Star Trek name on it.

    • Re:So what's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by g0at ( 135364 ) <ben @ z ygoat.ca> on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @03:34AM (#19898043) Homepage Journal
      So what's the point, other than to cash in on the franchise?

      In the film industry, sequels get created precisely for that purpose: to cash in on the franchise.

      Executive producers greenlight these types of films because they're virtually guaranteed a certain audience.

      -ben
      (BCIT Film)

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by niin ( 1013329 )
      Some of the best episodes had nothing to do with the mythology. 'Home', for example, was great, and had nothing to do with aliens. That specific episode wouldn't make a good movie, but still, there really were very few episodes that had to do with the main mythology.

  • Duchovney & Anderson (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Bitsy Boffin ( 110334 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @12:08AM (#19896979) Homepage
    Meh. I never really liked Fox Mulder, Dana Scully was hot initially, but over time she got older, and whinier, and then the whole hooking up with Fox, and the child and the.... oh man, totally sucked the hot right out and replaced it with booooring.

    An X-Files movie would be great. But you don't need Fox or Dana to do it. Fresh faces, fresh talent, less annoying. Although, if they could get W. B. Davis back as the C.S.M in a major plot part that would be fine by me, I liked that guy. It could be a pre-quel, before the X-Files, examining some aspect of the origins of the whole back story. That'd be cool.
    • A prequel? How about some continuity and closure?

      X-files is to blame for my refusal to watch long story arc shows anymore, Lost, Heroes, etc.
      A good story arc doesn't just fizzle away, but you can bet your TV that's what will happen. It gets to the point that it's obvious the writers are just making things up from week to week just to string the viewers along. The plot starts to look like swiss cheese, and then it just melts away.

      I was hooked on Chris Carter's long running "mythology". Talk about ge

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
        I was hooked on Chris Carter's long running "mythology". Talk about getting snookered.

        When the supposed super secret conspiracy government was spilling all sorts of urban legends for everyone to see, and mystically collecting the evidence in the end, that should've tipped you off better.

        You can't have a conspiracy that involved the entire horror pop-culture, and that is both so poorly kept that it has sprungs hundreds of weird cases across USA, and then still well kept enough not to leave evidence.

        Not to sp

    • "hot" women (Score:3, Informative)

      by caitsith01 ( 606117 )

      Dana Scully was hot initially, but over time she got older, and whinier, and then the whole hooking up with Fox, and the child and the.... oh man, totally sucked the hot right out and replaced it with booooring

      If you want consistently "hot" women then try watching porn, that's what it's for.

      Scully's character was very complex and brought a vital part of the main dynamic of the x-files (faith/spirituality versus objectivity/rationality) to life. On matters of the paranormal, she represented science and obje

      • I watch shows that I find appealing, character hotness is only one of the factors contributing to the appeal of a TV show, Scully being hot made the show more appealing, Scully being not so hot made the show less appealing, but nether hotness status is the sole reason for appeal. Note here that I specifically identify this as Scully's hotness, not Anderson's - there is more to hotness than physical appearance, infact, Anderson wasn't then and isn't now particularly hot in my opinion.

        Being straight, Duchovn

      • Re:"hot" women (Score:5, Funny)

        by Sponge Bath ( 413667 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @05:25AM (#19898443)

        If you want consistently "hot" women then try watching porn

        The truth really *is* out there.
        I just didn't expect to find it on Slashdot.

      • Umm so whats special about Duchovny's hands?

    • An X-Files movie would be great. But you don't need Fox or Dana to do it. Fresh faces, fresh talent, less annoying. Although, if they could get W. B. Davis back as the C.S.M in a major plot part that would be fine by me, I liked that guy. It could be a pre-quel, before the X-Files, examining some aspect of the origins of the whole back story. That'd be cool.

      The episode "Musings of a Cigarette Smoking Man" did a pretty great job setting up CSM's back-story. He killed both JFK and MLK Jr, and explained that he did the latter himself because he respected the man too much to leave the job to someone else.

      The kicker is when CSM's short story gets published -- in a porn rag.

      • The kicker is when CSM's short story gets published -- in a porn rag.
        No, it was a pulp fiction magazine. The irony was that CSM - who built his life around distortions and re-writing history, had his own story edited so heavily that he couldn't even recognize it as his own work.

    • Re:Duchovney & Anderson (Score:5, Funny)

      by suv4x4 ( 956391 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @03:55AM (#19898117)
      An X-Files movie would be great. But you don't need Fox or Dana to do it. Fresh faces, fresh talent, less annoying.

      Yup. Other movie ideas I'm having along the same approach:

      X-Men movie but swap the DNA mutations for emo culture and hard metal/rock underground.
      Batman movie without costumes and gadgets, about the struggles of a billionaire Bruce Wayne to increase his company revenue.
      James Bond prequel. Like, how his parents met up and married or something?
      Toy Story movie about alcoholic toys in mid-life crisis, sexual problems and physical abuse.
      Star Wars movie set in the wild west.
      Jurassic Park, but instead of real dinosaurs, it turns out Dr. John Hammond hired ILM to make elaborate fake computer dinosaurs and escape abroad with hundreds of millions of investor funding.
      Saw 4, where it turns out everything in Saw 1, 2, 3 was a dream sequence of a poor patient dying of cancer, and telling the story of a cancer patient finding true love in his last days of life.

      • Yup. Other movie ideas I'm having along the same approach:

        X-Men movie but swap the DNA mutations for emo culture and hard metal/rock underground.
        Batman movie without costumes and gadgets, about the struggles of a billionaire Bruce Wayne to increase his company revenue.
        James Bond prequel. Like, how his parents met up and married or something?
        Toy Story movie about alcoholic toys in mid-life crisis, sexual problems and physical abuse.
        Star Wars movie set in the wild west.
        Jurassic Park, but instead of real dinos

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
          Wow! I had no idea a famous Hollywood screenwriter was posting on Slashdot! So tell me - how's the work on the latest Star Trek sequel going?

          Doing great, actually. We're shooting last scene now, but it's pivotal to the plot: we put all old Star Trek episodes in a pile in the middle of the screen, and the everyone in the new cast takes turn peeing on it.
      • You shut your filthy mouth. Where will we be if MIchael Bay reads slashdot?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Jim Hall ( 2985 )

        Star Wars movie set in the wild west.

        They already made this movie (Serenity) .. it started as a TV series (Firefly). And it was great! :-)

        Those of you who were fans will know.

    • Dana Scully was hot initially, but over time she got older

      Guys like you are why women hide their intelligence and cultivate the whole ditzy airhead thing. Guys like me like cerebral women, even those who age with time (you know, like everything in the goddamned universe) and we hate guys like you because women think they're talking to you when really they're talking to me, and they are cautious about seeming too intelligent. You haven't quite ruined my life, but you make it much harder to find interes

  • Welcome back, Miss Anderson. We miss you... Oops, sorry, wrong movie quote.
  • I'm going to chime in with the others and say that the X-Files mythology was what made X-Files so great. ***SPOILERS:***

    At the end of the series, we're waiting for the alien apocalypse (or *something* significant*) in 2012. Mulder and Scully are finally together. Everything's pointing towards an end of the world scenario, and they're going to give us a MotW? Why bother? Unless, of course, there's a third movie planned to cover the events in 2012... or X-Files 2 is a Jose Chung-style "episode." That

  • The last episode tied up all loose ends, and said pretty much everything that they needed to say, IMHO. Not only that, I also felt that the X Files was only really sociologically relevant to the 90s, as well...I think pop culture is well and truly over the paranormal/ufology in general. The Greys have more than had their 15 minutes.

  • X-Files stopped being cool after the first few seasons. It was at its best when the series focussed on unrelated weird stuff every episode. In the later seasons it basically became a big soap opera with aliens. I stopped watching when it got to the point where missing an episode or two meant you had no idea what was going on for the rest of the season.

    • I always felt this way as well. I thought the conspiracy stuff was cool, but there were plenty of the monster-of-the-week episodes that stand out far more than the rest. Fluke-boy; the EXCELLENT Cockroach episode (who DIDN'T jump when one crawled across the screen); the inbred family; the guy with the shadow...true, they may have been more aimed toward the casual fan, but I always felt that several were well-written.

  • Yeah, (Score:3, Funny)

    by MrCopilot ( 871878 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @03:09AM (#19897933) Homepage Journal
    I miss Mulder. I miss Scully. I missed the last freakin episode. It was just so hard to stay till the end with that Terminator guy and the Baby and agent Reyes.

    Scully and Reyes Sex scene now we are talking Box Office Gold.

  • Surprise (Score:4, Funny)

    by Big Nothing ( 229456 ) <tord.stromdal@gmail.com> on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @06:58AM (#19898753)
    David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson in a new X-Files movie? That's a surprise, now that their individual, off-x-files careers have skyrocketed so completely!

    "Evolution" is the only non-x-files movie I can remember having seen either of them in, and belive me; I'd rather I forgot.

    • Actually, Anderson's career has been doing pretty well. She's been taking more serious roles ("House of Mirth", "Last King of Scotland", and PBS/BBC's "Bleak House"). Her only drawback is that she's now based in London, not LA, so it's a bit more difficult to land those plum roles in big-budget American films.

      Duchovny on the other hand has hit hard times ("House of D", anyone? Brrrr..), even though he does have a new flick coming out soon.

      Both of them it seems are trying desperately to avoid getting Shatn

  • A lot of people have commented that the conspiracy plot was the real meat of the show, and the non-conspiracy episodes were a waste of time. And a lot of people have commented that the oddball episodes were the only interesting ones, and the conspiracy got stale. I personally think the success of the show comes down to having both types of episodes. Obviously the FBI was not going to hire these two agents to investigate one single controversial case for a decade. It made sense that they had shifting res

  • The plot (spoiler warning!) (Score:3, Funny)

    by Cervantes ( 612861 ) on Wednesday July 18, 2007 @11:05AM (#19901259) Journal
    I'm glad this is happening, the world was crying out for a new X Files movie. I'm glad all my protest letters to Fox finally had an effect.

    Now that it's starting, I can tell you all the plotline. In the first half of the movie, Scully and Mulder will travel deep into the artic to find the lost alien mothership that contains the special brand of bees needed to resurrect the Lone Gunmen.
    In the second half of the movie, Scully and Mulder will try to save the world from Zombie Lone Gunmen.

Slashdot Top Deals

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Close