Is there a connection to the "Alien" series or just in the flavor of? There is a glimpse of an Alien being that looks a lot like the big dead alien sitting in the cockpit of the ship in "Alien" the movie... Hmmm.
Ridley Scott has explicitly stated that the film began as a pure prequel to Alien, but then morphed into something different, and now just shares a few ideas with Alien. Whether that is even true, or just a Ridley smokescreen, has been left open to debate, and if it is true, whether that means it is even geuninely in the same continuity, or some alternative is also open to question.
I saw the preview and was reminded of Alien without even knowing it was Ridley Scott Hopefully it's really eerie and unnerving, and a million times better than Pandorum.
Prometheus just looks better and better, roll on summer.
As for connections to Alien nobody knows. Its been said that its a totally different space jockey ship from the derelict in Alien and non of the locations feature, such as LV426. But who knows?
I did find this shot quite interesting from the new trailer, is it just some funky architecture or is there more to it
I think allot like the hybrid Alien resulted from the alien/predator mix, the alien in "Alien" is a hybrid of whatever they were and the aliens featured in this film. If there's a connection of course.
I wonder if the black/grey metallic creature that wanders into shot at the end of the trailer is some form of proto alien and the crew are in someway responsible for creating the "Aliens".
This would then explain why the company really sent the Nostromo crew to LV426. They knew what had been created and wanted Ripley et al to collect it.
It would also go some way to explain the "Aliens" humanoid appearance.
I'll go to see this I think, but I can't help feeling that it'll be answering questions to which I don't want the answer. I like the mystery of the derelict and the space jockey, filling all the gaps in isn't really for me.
Howard A Treesong wrote:I'll go to see this I think, but I can't help feeling that it'll be answering questions to which I don't want the answer. I like the mystery of the derelict and the space jockey, filling all the gaps in isn't really for me.
I'm torn. I totally see where you are coming from, but I think a bigger part of me has to know.
Either way, I'm so dying to see this it hurts. It looks amazing to me.
Howard A Treesong wrote:Put it this way, if the 'backstory' is crap I'll wish I never saw it.
Agreed. If the "truth" comes out, and it's not as sexy as the mystery of our imaginations, it's always a huge let down.
(looks at Ep. I,II & III, shakes head sadly while walking away)
These ads definitely look too busy to me. There can't be a whole lot of action left unshown. Other than the obvious "it's that crashed ship from Alien/s" reveal theres got to be another surprise or he film will be a massive disappointment.
I'll wait for reviews and or DVD for this one I think.
Is there a connection to the "Alien" series or just in the flavor of? There is a glimpse of an Alien being that looks a lot like the big dead alien sitting in the cockpit of the ship in "Alien" the movie... Hmmm.
What say you Dakka?
Thats the "spacejockey," from the firwst movie. Evidently this one is about that race.
Here's the deal- it'a an Alien prequel, but it doesn't lead directly into Alien, and the point of it isn't just to flesh out Aliens back story. It's more of a stand alone prequel so to speak. It exists in the same universe, and will probably be about the space jockey(s), but its something bigger and grander than a mere prequel, covering it's own story. IMHO, Ridley Scott is too good of a director for cheap expositions of the back story.
That said, I am extremely pumped, and am glad it isn't just a prequel. Scott has said it will be philosophical like Blade Runner, yet still have some of the action we remember from Alien.
Also, it's interesting how many parallels there are between the original teaser trailer of Prometheus and a 1979 Alien trailer.
Notice that same strange repeated sound, along with the title slowly coming in across the screen.
Needless to say, I haven't been this excited for a movie for as long as I can remember. I'm definitely going to see it at a midnight release, possibly at IMAX.
Anyone else reckon the bald man (on board the Prometheus; not the huge bald man aboard the Derelict) could be a mutated/changed version of Fassbender's character? "Big things have small beginnings." Vickers (also a synthetic?) says: "A king has his reign and then he dies. It's inevitable." My guess is that she's talking about sentient species, comparing the presumably ancient Jockeys with humanity -- and maybe also artificial persons? (Bladerunner, ya'll.)
Our only line of dialog, aside from PLEEEASE, from the teaser trailer was Shaw saying "we were wrong, we were so wrong." In the new trailer, she postulates regarding the cave paintings "I think they want us to come and find them" and then declares in the briefing "it's not a map; an invitation." The "we were so wrong" line is repeated here shortly after we find out that "they" are leaving to go to Earth. Later, as the ground is splitting apart, so that the soon-to-be Derelict can emerge and take off, we also find out that "if we don't stop it, there won't be any home to go back to." It's unclear whether Shaw was wrong about the pictograms being an invitation at all or merely about assuming the it was a friendly invitation. "They were looking for our beginning. What they found could be our end."
So ... space jockeys lure us to some rock so that they can figure out the way to Earth? To destroy humanity with the xenomorphs? But then, why do all these ancient Earth cultures seem to know where the space jockeys are ... um, based? The trailer analysis Flashman posted above wonders whether the pictogram is actually a warning to stay away -- seems a bit unlikely given scholars could read the ancient writings and one would think the Aztecs or Babylonians might have scrawled "beware" under their star pictures if they knew as much. Most plausibly, the jockeys already know where Earth is and don't need us to help them find it but for some reason cannot currently (i.e., by 2085) get there.
I'd guess then that the space jockeys placed these images into human cultures at a time when they did not yet require, for whatever purpose, humanity, knowing we would eventually develop interstellar flight (maybe setting us on that path, von Daeniken style) -- perhaps at a time when the jockeys would require rescuing/awakening/resurrection. It seems that human exploration of the ship catalyzes the changes leading up to the ship's activation -- and the appearance of ambulatory jockeys. Using the parasitic ecology of the xenomorph by way of analogy, perhaps the jockeys also require a host. But instead of breeding, the host in this case is required for evolution. (Just tossing it around but perhaps the xenomorph is one of their previous stages of evolution?) That doesn't explain, however, the existential threat to Earth Shaw mentions. Or the giant human-looking head statue.
Unless the head statue is a shill, meant to get humans to put their faces near those ampules and so get ... infected. There's a shot, maybe only in the UK trailer, where a crewman is looking in the mirror and checking out his eyes. I'd bet this is the same dude whose wailing around while something melts his helmet. Near the end of both trailers, we see someone in a Prometheus crew uniform/space suit who looks burnt/scarred/changed jump down on someone busy with a flamethrower.
Also -- we seem to know how the Derelict became a derelict (assuming this flick takes place on LV426): Janek crashes the Prometheus into it ... explaining the huge hole that Dallas and company and later Newt's parents climb into to meet their dooms. But where oh where in Alien and Aliens is the Prometheus? Must have made it off-planet somehow -- but to where and with what onboard?
The movie is called Prometheus? What fire of the gods does that little ship bring back and to cause what big things? Or is the Prometheus bringing human fire to LV426?
I've wondered if at some point the species that left the map died off but left a contingency plan to repopulate their species by transforming their 'children' into them. One of the crew gets infected and begins the transformation to become a space jockey and head to Earth to do the same to the rest of the human population. Shenanigans ensue.
Same as above but with the character being a synthetic human it doesn't quite work out like it is supposed to, creating a biomechanical monster. Shenanigans ensue.
Or, in Warhammer nomenclature, the Old Ones left the invitation, but not being a space faring race we didn't know that at some point thousands of years ago they were wiped out in a war with the C'tan and so when we show up it is the last remnants of the C'tan waiting for a way to bring themselves back and not the Old Ones. Shenanigans ensue.
As you might guess from my own post, I think your first hypo is the most likely and your second one is the most interesting. The third one, while also cool, seems the least likely to me because the addition of a replacement mystery race seems a bit redundant. Although I guess that could be a consolation prize for everyone who hates the idea of knowing anything more than visual references to the jockeys. I wonder if the "key" isn't the role of the xenomorph.
I tend to balk at the idea that the xenomorph is a weapon. It'd be a terrible weapon, based on what we've seen in Alien and Aliens.
I have been tracking this movie for awhile now. Ever since I heard that Ridley Scott and H. R. Giger were working on this I have been very excited about it. As some of you may know, those two and Dan O'Bannon are what made the original Alien the best, (unless you are still a 12 year old boy and you think Aliens is the best).
What some of you may not know is that Giger was royally screwed over by the producers when he worked with them on the sequels. Alien 3 was when he got the worst treatment. Heck they only credited him for the original alien design in the credits and that didn't even happen until the DVD release.
Giger swore off working with the franchise ever again unless Scott helmed the project as a director. This was way before Prometheus was even on the table or Scott as a director for that matter. Giger really liked working with Scott who was of the few people who ever really appreciated Giger's work on the Alien franchise.
As for the connection to Alien, I believe it is pretty apparent that they are related. I do not think the movie is a direct prequel, as in tying directly into Alien by the end of the movie, but more or less an event that had taken place in the same universe prior to the events in Alien. It shows the space jockey for one thing, and the ship that the Space Jockey is in does fall over in the trailer and lands in the same position as the ship in Alien. The two ships are exactly alike.
More or less I believe (in my honest opinion), that this movie will detail the story that describes either the origins of the human race and/or the origins of the xenomorph aliens, perhaps showing what they would look like if they did not use a host body to evolve.
Manchu wrote:As you might guess from my own post, I think your first hypo is the most likely and your second one is the most interesting. The third one, while also cool, seems the least likely to me because the addition of a replacement mystery race seems a bit redundant. Although I guess that could be a consolation prize for everyone who hates the idea of knowing anything more than visual references to the jockeys. I wonder if the "key" isn't the role of the xenomorph.
I tend to balk at the idea that the xenomorph is a weapon. It'd be a terrible weapon, based on what we've seen in Alien and Aliens.
Well I think the original cncept behind the "alien" ship was that it was effectively a biowarfare bomber, who's payload got out of containment...
I've mulled over the idea of xenomorphs as weapons for a while. The are some problems: they cannot be directed, they don't preserve infrastructure, they can't take captives, they are about as susceptible to small arms fire as humans, and there is no off-switch. Yes, I know: "none that we know about." But if the space jockeys or whoever had a weapon powerful enough to deal with the xenomorphs, why not just use that on their enemies rather than the messy, inefficient xenomorphs? The best you could do conceptually to rehabilitate the idea of xenomorphs-as-weapons is propose that they have some kind of internal killswitch/control box that we don't know about, not being space jockeys (yet). That strikes me as pretty silly and it still doesn't explain away other weaknesses of the xenomorph as a means of warfare. What kind of bomb is only dangerous if someone goes near it and is successfully attacked by its payload? And, much like the absurd idea that zombies would pose a threat to modern much less future human military might, I can't really see a more realistically-portrayed Marine Corps (PFC Hudson's anxiety was a bit of a plot conceit, don't you think?) having much trouble against the xenomorphs. If all you wanted to do was punish or terrorize a culture then the xenomorph might be good for that -- assuming, like in the movies, that every possible thing that could go wrong for the target does go wrong. Otherwise it's only good for torturing primitive species. Bioengineering the xenomorph seems like a lot of work just to give cavemen a hard time.
If you assume that somebody designed these things, looking at their strengths is a good way to figure out what they were designed for. So what are the aliens good at? Hiding, ambushes, hand-to-hand combat, maybe pack tactics (that may or may not depend on the presence of a queen). These things won't give a species with air planes, tanks, machine guns, and atomic weapons a run for their money -- unless that species voluntarily forgoes all of those advantages in an effort to be ... sporting. That's right, the xenomorph just happens to be good at all the things that Predators value in their prey. Now that is just a coincidence. I mean, the franchises were not developed with each other in mind. But they do seem to call out to one another all the same.
If they are a weapon, and I agree that I'm not 100% on board that idea, they would seem to be an exterminatus role, not a tactical one. Even that is still questionable becuase of the amount of time it would take and humans already had shown they could leave the planet. Sure making Earth a terrible place to be would be mean, but just doesn't seem like a good weapon.
I think we will find that they are either a new species created by the events of Promethues somehow, or just an alien species the Space Jockeys were using for some purpose. Perhaps they are the locusts they unleash on a new planet to prepare it for terraforming?
Of course the Scott Alien and the Cameron Alien were a bit different so I wonder which he is going to go with. In the original the creature had a self contained life cycle but had a very short life span, which is why it was so aggressive, went from snake to adult so fast, and collected people. There was no need for a queen.
A couple of points regarding a write-up in a movie mag. They originally had the plan to include the 'banana head' classic Alien in the film. But, Scott reasoned that we had already seen everything about it, and it can't carry the horror that the original showing in the movie did in 1979. Hell, even Cameron realised that back with Aliens, hence why he opted for an 'Action' film for Aliens, and looked at the Alien universe from a different angle. I wonder also if Scott probably felt that the Alien itself has forever been sullied by the Alien Vs. Predator movies, and this film will go back towards more mature storytelling, more mystery and more of a draw to bring people into the cinema than something like say 'Alien 4' might have otherwise managed.
Ahtman wrote:I think we will find that they are either a new species created by the events of Promethues somehow, or just an alien species the Space Jockeys were using for some purpose.
I don't think the xenomorph existentially results from the plot of Prometheus, given the fact that something very like the xenomorph appears in the trailer ... as a carving or something? Again, I wonder whether the xenomorph might be a more primitive form of the space jockey. The original concept for the xenomorph was that these things are born violent but mature into sentient and cultured beings. The one to be born on the Nostromo in early scripts would be born "out of context" and so simply leash out against humans who have no idea how to raise it properly. In that version, the eggs were not found in a ship piloted by a space jockey but rather in a pyramid constructed by the xenomorphs themselves. Maybe we could see some of that slightly recycled here?
I have a bet with a friend that Prometheus's big reveal is that human beings are actually the bioweapons engineered by the space jockeys. I guess the xenomorph could have just been one of their failed experiments.
Perhaps they are the locusts they unleash on a new planet to prepare it for terraforming?
I've considered this, too, but it's another case of "then some magic happens"-type missing information. Specifically, (1) xenomorphs just kind of make a mess, (2) there's no apparent reason to strip a planet of roughly human-sized life forms, speaking generally, and (3) there's still the "turn it off" problem. The third objection is easiest to answer: they eat themselves into starvation. But the first two weigh more heavily -- unless, as I said, Ridely comes up with entirely new information of an extremely narrow scope to answer them.
Of course the Scott Alien and the Cameron Alien were a bit different so I wonder which he is going to go with. In the original the creature had a self contained life cycle but had a very short life span, which is why it was so aggressive, went from snake to adult so fast, and collected people. There was no need for a queen.
At least one poster here has opined that only 12-year-old boys would enjoy Aliens more than Alien. I guess that means I'm less than half the age I thought because I thought that Aliens was a far better action film than Alien was a horror film. Alien has that one big gasp and once you've been exploitatively shocked by it the first time it's lost it's scare-punch. Sure, it's still gross but gross on its own hardly makes for a good horror film. So naturally fans start to notice how great the acting and sets are and the film becomes more of a thriller, which in turn has little to do specifically with the xenomorph (any monster will do). By contrast, Aliens is a great action film every single time that I watch it and the xenomorphs, especially the queen, are relevant in every viewing. So, long story short, Cameron's xenomorphs are better than Ridely's. That said, I don't think Ridely will have to choose if what he's said about the xenomorph not being in the film (other than maybe as wall decor?) is actually true.
Manchu wrote:something very like the xenomorph appears in the trailer ... as a carving or something?
being very like something isn't the same as being something. The aliens as we know them could be a combination of the original creature we see in the carving and a synthetic, thus creating a bio-mechanical version.
They went through several concepts for the Alien, and I recall them talking about the pyramid with the eggs. They also talked abut it having a short life cycle as well.
Manchu wrote:So, long story short, Cameron's xenomorphs are better than Ridely's.
Ahtman wrote:being very like something isn't the same as being something. The aliens as we know them could be a combination of the original creature we see in the carving and a synthetic, thus creating a bio-mechanical version.
Sure but what I was getting at is that the xenomorph cannot be an entirely new product of the events in Prometheus. Also, given the vast egg chambers in the Drelict, I doubt it even more strongly.
Ahtman wrote:being very like something isn't the same as being something. The aliens as we know them could be a combination of the original creature we see in the carving and a synthetic, thus creating a bio-mechanical version.
Sure but what I was getting at is that the xenomorph cannot be an entirely new product of the events in Prometheus. Also, given the vast egg chambers in the Drelict, I doubt it even more strongly.
I didn't mean that it was solely an entirely new creature created from scratch. It may be a change in something. It seems that it can't be a coincidence that in one of the rooms there are fields of vats that are arranged the same as eggs, a similar visual style as the eggs, with something alive in/on both.
This is all speculation and just random thoughts. None of this may happen, or anything remotely like it.
Manchu wrote: I guess that means I'm less than half the age I thought because I thought that Aliens was a far better action film than Alien was a horror film. Alien has that one big gasp and once you've been exploitatively shocked by it the first time it's lost it's scare-punch. Sure, it's still gross but gross on its own hardly makes for a good horror film. So naturally fans start to notice how great the acting and sets are and the film becomes more of a thriller, which in turn has little to do specifically with the xenomorph (any monster will do). By contrast, Aliens is a great action film every single time that I watch it and the xenomorphs, especially the queen, are relevant in every viewing. So, long story short, Cameron's xenomorphs are better than Ridely's. That said, I don't think Ridely will have to choose if what he's said about the xenomorph not being in the film (other than maybe as wall decor?) is actually true.
Can I ask what sort of age you were though Manchu when you first watched Alien, and how long ago? Being in my early 30's now while I wasn't there for the cinematic release (and am deeply envious of those who were), I watched it as a 11/12 year old on VHS and the film absolutely scared me witless. It's wonderfully shot, with the sense of claustrophobia and unglamorous setting, and the characters were portrayed brilliantly. You wanted Dallas to escape down the tunnel, and were angry at the incompetence of the hysterical woman who was unable to save him, a marked difference from a lot of modern and shallow gore-fests that leave you idly chewing popcorn as yet another boy/girl band wannabe gets gibbed on screen. But, I think the important point is that this was back before the internet, and the kind of cult-following that these films would later receive. Other than from a few comments from friends, who had seen the film and recommended it as only young kids watching 18-certificate movies can, I had no idea of what to expect. However, I think if I had watched it more recently, perhaps over the last decade, with full knowledge of the quadrilogy of films (and the later 2 A vs. P debacles), then there is no way I would have had anything like the experience of the film for a first viewing. And, I think that for a horror movie, the key is the controlling of the psychology of the viewer - if they know what's coming, then that effect immediately loses its potency.
As you say, the Alien has now lost its 'scare punch' - as I mentioned in a previous post, Scott has used this as a reason for the 'banana heads' not appearing in the movie, even though it seems a bit odd to have an 'Alien' film without them! But, if Scott can capture the atmosphere of the first film, and give us a new object for terror, then there is no reason at all it can't fulfil it's objective. In fact it has been too long since there has been a decent sci-fi horror, and I think I might well abstain from any further internet research on Prometheus just so that I can get the full effect of it!
To be honest though I think that comparing movies of different genres is a bit of a fruitless exercise. If they manage to complete what they set out to do (namely 'horrify' and ... erm... 'actionify'? ) then you can say that they are a 'good' film. I would put Alien in probably my top 3 horror films, along with 'The Thing' (Kurt Russell version) and the original Japanese version of 'The Ring', if one is to base how good the film is on an emotional reaction to it's content. I will say that this is somewhat harder to achieve with a horror movie - the genre is chock-full of movies that just have just missed the mark, and fail in their objective of gluing their viewers to the seats, and clammy hands clamped on the sides of the chair. Action movies can succeed in their remit by fulfilling some of the staples of film making - be it plot, character and the actual action sequences themselves, and I think are enjoyable in a far more relaxed manner than horror.
@Pacific: I saw Alien for the first time while in middle school, so between 11 and 13. It certainly scared me then and I had been primed for fright by the Alien 3 trailers on TV years before. (I even had the xenomorph toys before I saw any of the films and I remember playing with them with a marked sense of dread, disgust, and fear -- like they might somehow act as talismans to attract the things out of the film. Such is a child's imagination!) But I saw it again very shortly afterward and it didn't scare me at all. In no time flat, the franchise's monster went from childhood nightmare to sci-fi universe furniture.
My comparison between Alien and Aliens revolves around how well each consistently does what it's supposed to do. Alien scared me once. Aliens thrills me every time. Horror movies can aspire to being scary for more than one viewing. The Shining, for example, still scares me on some level (usually some new level) every time I watch it and most especially when I think about it and have one of those great "it could have been hallucinations" type conversations with another fan of the film. For those who've already seen it, Aliens isn't an effective horror movie so it has to do something else -- it has to be an artsy, philisophical scifi film (a la 2001) that transitions into a suspense thriller than transitions into an action film. It's horrendous as an action film -- who the feth goes back for the cat? (a dog, I could see) -- but thanks to its wonderful script, camera work, lighting, acting, costumes, and sets it's a pretty damn good artsy, philosophical film and all of those same factors make it a much more than servicable suspense film. By contrast, Aliens is a terrible "boo from the dark" horror film -- but then again, it makes no pretense at trying to scare you for the sake of horror. It's scaring you for the sake of getting your adrenaline up, getting you pumped and tense and ready to fight even a big nasty you have no hope against, and it works wonderfully, nearly perfectly, in that way. "Get away from her, you bitch" has all the punch, everytime, that the chestburster sequence had once.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote:It seems that it can't be a coincidence that in one of the rooms there are fields of vats that are arranged the same as eggs, a similar visual style as the eggs, with something alive in/on both.
The cynical response is that the studio wanted to market Sir Ridely's new sci-fi horror film using his Alien creditentials but Ridley insisted on telling everyone there were no xenomorphs in the movie. The compromise? Visual cues that suggest scenes from Alien.
But I'm not a cynic. I agree that it's not likely a coincidence. Note the weird "dancing" matter atop the ampule David is grinning at -- reminiscent of the wrong-side-up water drop effects on the eggs Kane encounters. There was absolutely no explanation for that phenomenon and I still can't think of one, other than Sir Ridley wanting to freak us out. Maybe Prometheus will explain? I very much doubt, however, that the ampules contain facehuggers (maybe some kind of X-Files type oil that gets in your brain through your eyes?). But could the Derelict start Prometheus with an empty cargo bay and end it with a full complement of evenly spaced xenomorph eggs? Sure -- just like anything that we've seen no hint of could possibly happen. I do like the idea that David will somehow hybridize with the jockeys and if that creates the xenomorphs ... well, I'll be interested to see how those eggs got there, all nicely placed and protected by that blue light field.
@Pacific: Sir Ridley talked in one interview about seeing the xenomorph at a Disney themepark. It was them, he knew, that the xenomoprh could not be scary anymore. But this conversation has made me think: it's actually really smart not to have xenomorphs in this movie for retroactive reasons. As Ahtman points out, his xenomorphs and Cameron's are so very different that he'd inevitably have to pick one variety or the other. And that's a no-win choice unless he's planning to spend some time, distracting from his own pacing and plotting, to explain it.
Yeah, ammonia-soaked clay is the tell-tale fragrance of hygienic living.
More on topic, as fresh as everything else is or could be about Prometheus, it will be interesting to see how the corporation-as-ultimate-evil theme gets played. Everyone has been talking about whether or not we can stand any more xenomorphs but I've heard nothing on the oh so stereotypical and massive hubris of Mr. Weyland. Speaking of corporate mottoes, perhaps this would be a better one for WY:
it is finally nice to see more of the fictional universe setting of aliens other than with the aliens. I always wanted to know more about humanity, corporations, politics, etc....
Buffo, you may want to take a look at this book. It's been out of print and in high demand for years (check out those used prices!) but is going to be reprinted soon. If you were ever curious about any aspect of the early 22nd-century Marine Corps then this is the book for you.
Manchu wrote:Buffo, you may want to take a look at this book. It's been out of print and in high demand for years (check out those used prices!) but is going to be reprinted soon. If you were ever curious about any aspect of the early 22nd-century Marine Corps then this is the book for you.
Oh wow!!!!
Thank you very much for taking your time and showing me this. I will definitely look into that!
Manchu wrote:Everyone has been talking about whether or not we can stand any more xenomorphs but I've heard nothing on the oh so stereotypical and massive hubris of Mr. Weyland.
It would be nice to see if they can give more information on the company , its people, and its motivations, beyond 'corporation = evil'.
@Buffo: There were also a couple of (rules heavy) roleplaying games from Leading Edge games that had tons of info on the military. Leading Edge even produced a line of minitaures:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote:It would be nice to see if they can give more information on the company , its people, and its motivations, beyond 'corporation = evil'.
To be honest, I'd be a bit chagrined if David turned out to be a villain for the same reason. For my money, the best villain in all the films is Burke. Paul Reiser was born for that role.
Frazzled wrote:It would be nice if the company actually wasn't some monlithic evil corporation. That shtick has kind of been done to death already.
Weren't people complaining about that aspect of the new Muppets film?
To be fair, with the first few films that offered one hell of a plot device. The deeply sinister moment in Alien when you find out that it wasn't a distress signal, but a warning, and then Ash tries to kill Ripley (that was just such a well filmed sequence, studied it in detail during college ) And as Manchu says, Burke was a great character in Aliens, and again a good plot device for some of the best sequences of the film - namely Ripley waking up under the bed with newt to see the face-hugger container spilled in front of them.
On the other hand, the Wayland character in A vs. P was appallingly two-dimensional, just missing the white cat. Even a usually pretty competent actor like Lance Henrikkson couldn't do anything with such shoddy material. Thankfully, it looks like Guy Pearce's character is a lot more realistically portrayed if the trailers are anything to go by.
Huh, I thought Charles Bishop Weyland was written pretty sympathetically in AvP. Yeah, he gets caught up in the moment and needs reminding that human lives are at stake but he's not a total jackhole and he seems humbled as well as driven by his mystery malady. What bothered me most about him in that film is how the character was totally thrown away. AvP's Weyland was certainly more than some corporate gangster and deserved better than the meaningless death scene he got. It's hard to say about Sir Peter Weyland, just running off his monstrously arrogant TED 2023 speech. But it looks like we'll see him as a frail old man in Prometheus and maybe Ridley will mix up the corporations are bad schtick like in AvP.
What if the "field of vats" from Prometheus are a type of blank genetic slate. Like a tub full of stem-cells waiting to be programmed? The xenomorph could be a horrible mistake made by the Prometheus crew in their ignorance.
I read somewhere that the Space Jockey race were the creators of many sentient races, humanity included. If that were the case I could see them having some type of way to speed up the evolutionary process...
The biggest hint will be that mural of the alien seen in the trailer. Ridley made it very clear that this is a completely different movie nor have much of a connection to Alien. Expanding the universe is more his goal.
Mr Hyena wrote:Ridley made it very clear that this is a completely different movie.
And then there was the mural. I was dubious about his "no, seriously, guys" approach before. Now I am downright
Spoiler:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:For the second picture: look at Giger's drawings. He did a two-tailed serpent beast that looks exactly like that. Its not a Xenomorph.
And a gerbil isn't a hamster.
For the first, thats pretty much the nod to Alien that was expected.
I would agree that a "proto-xenomorph" is a pretty solid nod at Alien.
Giger did a lot more drawings than the Xenomorph design. Its ignorant of his work to refer to them all as Xenomorphs.
A 'proto-xenomorph' would be a pretty solid nod to alien yeah, but is pointless since its not LV-426. I'm going with the House of Horrors Biomechanoid theory that seems the most correct. That is, multiple various kinds of biomechanoids.
How much have you been following Prometheus's development?
For it to be LV-426 you would need to explain why there has been a massive enviromental change between this movie and Alien. Remember how harsh LV-426 was for lifeforms (before the human terraforming facility). It was cold, rained Methane and was stormy.
Scott says it occurs in the same system though.
No one said all of Giger's drawings were xenomorphs. And Prometheus is hardly a documentary about Giger's sketchbook.
Of course. But its relevant when this isn't a movie about xenomorphs.
Ridley Scott is full of crap. That's my two cents.
The US and International trailer both hardly show Charlize Theron. Think they hired an well known Oscar winner just to do a bit part, or maybe they arer trying to trick us.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the third (space?)ship in the trailers yet either. It is at 2:01 in the UK international trailer. The Prometheus, the Derelict, and ???
Another thing I was just thinking about was how they had to wear environmental suits in Alien, and Aliens to some extent, but in this they are just walking around without there helmets on inside quite a bit, and the outdoor area is quite calm it seems.
Edit: Mr. Hyena beat me to pointing out the evirnment was different. Though if these things are space gods changing a planet for the worse wouldn't be to hard. If we nuked the Earth it would radiaclly alter the climate as well. Making a planet worse is easy, making it better is hard. Still it could just as easily be a different planet. I would be happy to see it take place on several different worlds.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:
Ridley Scott is full of crap. That's my two cents.
The director isn't credible?
Did you know that Ken Watanabe is playing Ra's Al Ghul in Batman Begins?
Mr Hyena wrote:It was cold, rained Methane and was stormy.
Could be a nice day. Everyone seems to have helmets on outside so I'm not buying that there is a necessarily giant difference in environment between a clear bright day and a dark stormy night. Also, humans did okay without astronaut suits on LV426 in Aliens.
Scott says it occurs in the same system though.
Did he say "it's not LV426"?
But its revelant when this isn't a movie about xenomorphs.
The movie doesn't need to be about xenomorphs in order for them to be present. Ahtman and I were chatting about this earlier in the thread. If anything, a Giger design showing up in a prequel to Alien has a lot better chance of being a xenomorph or proto-xenomorph than some random drawing out of a Taschen coffee table book.
Ahtman wrote:The US and International trailer both hardly show Charlize Theron. Think they hired an well known Oscar winner just to do a bit part, or maybe they arer trying to trick us.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the third (space?)ship in the trailers yet either. It is at 2:01 in the UK international trailer. The Prometheus, the Derelict, and ???
Another thing I was just thinking about was how they had to wer environmental suits in Alien, and Aliens to some extent, but in this they are just walking around without there helmets on inside quite a bit, and the outdoor area is quite calm it seems.
It sounds like its a different world on the same system terraformed by the Jockies. What I'd like to know is why is the system so important to them?
Seems to hint at no 'huggers or chestbursters as we know them.
Could be a nice day. Everyone seems to have helmets on outside so I'm not buying that there is a necessarily giant difference in environment between a clear bright day and a dark stormy night. Also, humans did okay without astronaut suits on LV426 in Aliens.
They were walking around in the temple ruins with no helmet on. What about where the Jockey Ship lands in the trailer? it isn't positioned anywhere like it is in Alien (missing the mountains).
Thats because LV426 was being terraformed by Humans during Aliens.
I imagine we won't see hardly anything 'as we know them'. I'm not expecting an Alien movie, but a story that is part of the mythology of that same universe, and that, even in some small way, it will have connective tissue to the alien creatures from the other films.
Ahtman wrote:I imagine we won't see hardly anything 'as we know them'. I'm not expecting an Alien movie, but a story that is part of the mythology of that same universe, and that, even in some small way, it will have connective tissue to the alien creatures from the other films.
From what we've seen so far is that we'll see how the Jockies make creatures LIKE the Xenomorphs (aka Biomechanoids) through that primodial goo stuff rather than see them.
Ridley also said we'll see something like a chestbuster scene but he was 'too embarassed to say' much about it. So expect something pretty gruesome (vaginal birth/c-section of a biomechanoid is hinted)
Ahtman wrote:I'm surprised no one has mentioned the third (space?)ship in the trailers yet either. It is at 2:01 in the UK international trailer. The Prometheus, the Derelict, and ???
I guess this is a very early or very late sequence in the movie showing some exposition regarding some aliens or other visiting Earth. Note that the water fall connects the Flying Saucer and Bald Man. If the saucer is taken to indicate a fourth species, the theory that the pictograms are a warning is stronger. OTOH, the Bald Man is clearly transforming in a way similar to what happens to the panicked Prometheus crewman aboard the Derelict -- indicating that the saucer belongs to space jockeys. Maybe ancient jockey ships look like saucers and future jockey ships look like horeshoes? One thing about sci-fi films is that they often portray races that are older than mankind not changing at all.
Ridley Scott is full of crap. That's my two cents.
The director isn't credible?
Not when he's quoted specifically stating that this movie will have absolutely no ties to the Alien franchise except for the Weyland connection, and that it is in fact a whole new and entirely seperate universe.
The saucer is probably linked to the whole 'seeding of life' scene at the beginning of the movie.
Not when he's quoted specifically stating that this movie will have absolutely no ties to the Alien franchise except for the Weyland connection, and that it is in fact a whole new and entirely seperate universe.
Didn't he say its in the same universe but a different story than about the xenomorphs?
Mr Hyena wrote:They were walking around in the temple ruins with no helmet on. What about where the Jockey Ship lands in the trailer? it isn't positioned anywhere like it is in Alien (missing the mountains).
The facehugger breached Kane's helmet to no consequence (as far as respiration is concerned).
Thats because LV426 was being terraformed by Humans during Aliens.
The one atmospheric processer had been there for only twenty years. Doesn't sound like it was too hard a job to turn a completely poisonous atmosphere into a completely breathable one after all -- unless the atmosphere wasn't totally poinsonous. But we don't have to speculate because Ash tells us: 10 percent agron, 85 percent nitrogen, 5 percent neon, and trace elements. Similar to Earth's atmosphere, minus the oxygen -- which only took 20 years to change. So yeah, this could be LV426. I'm not saying it is but unless you've been chatting with Sir Ridley or were at a secret screening, I'm not sure that you can just declare that it's not LV426.
Lint wrote:Maybe you missed this. I did include it in my previous post...
And as you said, he is obviously full of gak. A corporation named Weyland is obviously not the only connection. For starters, there's the Derelict and the space jockies.
Manchu wrote:How'd you figure that it isn't LV426?
No one said all of Giger's drawings were xenomorphs. And Prometheus is hardly a documentary about Giger's sketchbook.
Yes in fact, having owned some of the books featuring his art, there is only a single drawing of the 'banana head' alien (and even then quite different to the actual design in the first film).
Lint wrote:Maybe you missed this. I did include it in my previous post...
And as you said, he is obviously full of gak. A corporation named Weyland is obviously not the only connection. For starters, there's the Derelict and the space jockies.
It does raise the question, though, as to why Scott's trying to pass Prometheus off as having minimal connections with the Alien universe, when the evidence we've seen in the trailers show otherwise.
The facehugger breached Kane's helmet to no consequence (as far as respiration is concerned).
Facehuggers feed oxygen to the host to keep them alive.
The one atmospheric processer had been there for only twenty years. Doesn't sound like it was too hard a job to turn a completely poisonous atmosphere into a completely breathable one after all -- unless the atmosphere wasn't totally poinsonous. But we don't have to speculate because Ash tells us: 10 percent agron, 85 percent nitrogen, 5 percent neon, and trace elements. Similar to Earth's atmosphere, minus the oxygen -- which only took 20 years to change. So yeah, this could be LV426. I'm not saying it is but unless you've been chatting with Sir Ridley or were at a secret screening, I'm not sure that you can just declare that it's not LV426.
Then what about the mountain discrepancy? The ship isn't even located where it should be.
It does raise the question, though, as to why Scott's trying to pass Prometheus off as having minimal connections with the Alien universe, when the evidence we've seen in the trailers show otherwise.
It depends what kind of connection. He seems like he wants it to be connected universe-wise, but he doesn't want to revisit the Xenomorphs as he considers them done.
Well if it's a completely different Giger creature that is somehow not related to the Alien i'll be shocked.
Giger's work is two distinctive to plausibly represent drastically different creatures in these closely knit films.
As for LV-426 being different? Well there is that Sand storm thing.
Perhaps events in the film unleash some kind of planet altering force. A massive section of ground does open up after-all, and then that storm appears to arrive, it could be the opposite of the Atmosphere processor.
I think he wants to curb people from judging it against Alien. I think he wanted to do different things with sci fi and horror while the studio wanted to market it as "if you loved Alien -- and we know you did -- then you must see Prometheus." Remember the pre-trailers: "the inventor of the genre returns" and all that? And then at the same time you have interviews with Sir Ridley where he says it's nothing to do with Alien at all, even less to do with it than it obviously has to do with it in fact ... somehow ... because of drugs? There are always these tensions. Just look at the poster for Alien. It shows what looks to be a dinosaur egg cracked along the lower part. What the feth does that have to do with anything?
Mr Hyena wrote:
Then what about the mountain discrepancy? The ship isn't even located where it should be.
On this - one of the trailers shows what appears to be the 'jockey's' ship flying. I also think there was an explosion, which may account for its shift in position.
Mr Hyena wrote:Facehuggers feed oxygen to the host to keep them alive.
And where'd the facehugger get it from? Photosynethsis in the lightless bowls of the Derelict? "And then some magic happens."
Then what about the mountain discrepancy? The ship isn't even located where it should be.
The Derelict takes off, is rammed by the Prometheus, and the rolls all over the place. Is there a clear shot of where it settles? Also there are going to be some minor differences, even if we did have the GPS coodinates to hand. To wit:
Medium of Death wrote:Well if it's a completely different Giger creature that is somehow not related to the Alien i'll be shocked.
Giger's work is two distinctive to plausibly represent drastically different creatures in these closely knit films.
As for LV-426 being different? Well there is that Sand storm thing.
Perhaps events in the film unleash some kind of planet altering force. A massive section of ground does open up after-all, and then that storm appears to arrive, it could be the opposite of the Atmosphere processor.
Atmosphere De-generator?
Sounds a tad silly. Meh.
The ground has a sort of biomechanoid-like formation in LV-426 so it would need to be a high-yield nuke or a massive meteor to cause such a change (but then wouldnt the derelict be destroyed?).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:
Mr Hyena wrote:Facehuggers feed oxygen to the host to keep them alive.
And where'd the facehugger get it from? Photosynethsis in the lightless bowls of the Derelict? "And then some magic happens."
Then what about the mountain discrepancy? The ship isn't even located where it should be.
The Derelict takes off, is rammed by the Prometheus, and the rolls all over the place. Is there a clear shot of where it settles? Also there are going to be some minor differences, even if we did have the GPS coodinates to hand. To wit:
Spoiler:
I believe it was mentioned in Alien that the 'hugger was keeping him alive.
I know it gets rammed. But if its going to be LV-426 I'd expect it to be somewhere near a mountain and not just flat ground and its impact crater.
No need. The only shots sans helmets occur inside. And we know that the atmosphere is not actually composed of anything poisonous to humans. It's just like Earth minus oxygen, a bit more argon, and some neon (which is not poisonous).
Mr Hyena wrote:I believe it was mentioned in Alien that the 'hugger was keeping him alive.
Yeah, it's covering his nose and has a phallic ovipositor crammed down his windpipe. But the trick is that there was some moment when that thing wasn't down his gullet and the helmet was breached. And whatever it fed Kane before they brought him back to the Nostromo is unlikely to be oxygen since there's no evidence of any oxygen present on LV426. It's not like the facehugger would know that humans need oxygen.
I know it gets rammed. But if its going to be LV-426 I'd expect it to be somewhere near a mountain and not just flat ground and its impact crater.
As I said, I don't know if there is a shot of the settled Derelict post-crash from the same angle as in Alien so until we find that picture the idea that "there's no cliff nearby" is moot.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slarg232 wrote:So here is a question, did Ridley make Predator or was he just Alien?
Just Alien. Predator was John McTiernan (Die Hard). The second one was Stephen Hopkins (The Ghost & the Darkness).
Yeah, it's covering his nose and has a phallic ovipositor crammed down his windpipe. But the trick is that there was some moment when that thing wasn't down his gullet and the helmet was breached. And whatever it fed Kane before they brought him back to the Nostromo is unlikely to be oxygen since there's no evidence of any oxygen present on LV426. It's not like the facehugger would know that humans need oxygen.
The alien is a parasitoid of any species it can physically attach to. I'm sure it knows we need oxygen.
Its Parasitology. A parasite needs to be adapted to its host. In this case, the host will die before implantation is completed if no oxygen is supplied (humans die quite quickly to this). Its a similar case to parasitic worms of animals...if it is not meant to be in a human but does, they will wander aimlessly in the body until they die as they do not know how to complete the lifecycle.
The 'perfect organism' would therefore be adapted to any potential host.
is pure supposition.
Spike, the rottweiler. Humans. Predators. (if you add the expanded universe: Apes, Jockies, Whales, etc).
A parasite does not know whether it can survive on/in a particular host. A worm that can only live in a fish might find its way into a human. It doesn't suddenly change into a worm that can also live in a human. It simply dies.
What we have here is not a case of parisitology but of script writing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:Spike, the rottweiler. Humans. Predators. (if you add the expanded universe: Apes, Jockies, Whales, etc).
As far as Ridley's source material goes, you've only got humans I'm afraid. As I said, your statement is pure supposition.
Manchu wrote:A parasite does not know whether it can survive on/in a particular host. A worm that can only live in a fish might find its way into a human. It doesn't suddenly change into a worm that can also live in a human. It simply dies.
What we have here is not a case of parisitology but of script writing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:Spike, the rottweiler. Humans. Predators. (if you add the expanded universe: Apes, Jockies, Whales, etc).
As far as Ridley's source material goes, you've only got humans I'm afraid. As I said, your statement is pure supposition.
So Alien 3 isn't canon?
A parasite does not know whether it can survive on/in a particular host. A worm that can only live in a fish might find its way into a human. It doesn't suddenly change into a worm that can also live in a human. It simply dies.
What we have here is not a case of parisitology but of script writing.
I don't think "canon" matters to Sir Ridley. He won't ignore his work and it'd be a massive faux pas to ignore James Cameron's (so better not to deal with xenomorphs extensively, as I explained earlier). Fincher wants nothing to do with Alien 3, like everyone else, so why bother taking it into account?
Back to parisitology, there is a hole in the Alien script here. But it could be plugged in Prometheus is the xenomorph turns out to be a parasite that is specific to humans. But that's just supposition on my part.
Maybe they need to introduce the DNA of the species with the growing of the face hugger so it knows what it's host is. I mean, how does the face hugger know what to do without eyes, or ever seeing a Human before. Could explain why the Alien has a Human skull underneath.
Perhaps a retcon that facehuggers are specifically designed for Humans because they were the first interstellar race to find the Space Jockey ship?
Hence why there aren't eggs, just vials filled with weird goo. The goo creates a Proto Alien and that in turns starts producing some xenomorph eggs as we know them.
But you came to a conclusion that was simply more speculation: namely that the facehugger could adapt to the needs of humans based on the scientific theory that they are a "perfect organism." Not too compelling. The better explanation is that none of O'Bannon and Shusset and Gyler and Hill thought very hard about the matter when they wrote the script. If Ridley wants to plug the hole in Prometheus, that's fine -- but we can't assume that's the case. And none of this does anything to prove that Prometheus doesn't take place on LV426.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mr Hyena wrote:If it does plug it up then I don't think we can call the alien the 'ultimate lifeform'.
Who says it's the ultimate life form? A defective robot? Big deal. I could call a piano the "perfect instrument" or a banana split the "ultimate desert." It's not a fact; it's a value judgement.
Perhaps Prometheus will retcon it with the goo. Different biomechanoid for different species? The worm thing in the trailer for humans but something different if it was dog DNA?
Medium of Death wrote:Maybe they need to introduce the DNA of the species with the growing of the face hugger so it knows what it's host is. I mean, how does the face hugger know what to do without eyes, or ever seeing a Human before. Could explain why the Alien has a Human skull underneath.
Perhaps a retcon that facehuggers are specifically designed for Humans because they were the first interstellar race to find the Space Jockey ship?
Hence why there aren't eggs, just vials filled with weird goo. The goo creates a Proto Alien and that in turns starts producing some xenomorph eggs as we know them.
Quite a lot of parasites don't have eyes. They sense many signals.
One problem with the only-human idea: what happens if an egg is on a world with no humans?
Manchu wrote:In Aliens, we see facehuggers jump across rooms aiming for fairly small targets (a human child's face). That's one hell of a sense of smell.
Kinda like hyper-evolved, hyper-sensitive fish lice.
Medium of Death wrote:Maybe they need to introduce the DNA of the species with the growing of the face hugger so it knows what it's host is. I mean, how does the face hugger know what to do without eyes, or ever seeing a Human before. Could explain why the Alien has a Human skull underneath.
Perhaps a retcon that facehuggers are specifically designed for Humans because they were the first interstellar race to find the Space Jockey ship?
Hence why there aren't eggs, just vials filled with weird goo. The goo creates a Proto Alien and that in turns starts producing some xenomorph eggs as we know them.
Quite a lot of parasites don't have eyes. They sense many signals.
One problem with the only-human idea: what happens if an egg is on a world with no humans?
I guess my theory is kind of based on eliminating Advanced Space fairing cultures.
Perhaps the Ships/Vial temples are located throughout the galaxy and are seen as a way to kill off advancing civilisations.
All intelligent life should be able to find the signals that the (insert name here) left behind.
Medium of Death wrote:I'd like to say my post makes more sense than a life-form that can couple with pretty much any creature in the Galaxy.
But then I would, wouldn't I.
Did you know there was "Mantis Aliens"? Guess the host. Some of the expanded universe takes this to ridiculous levels (the toys are mainly the only culprits of this...like the mantis alien) but some do make some logical sense.
Mr Hyena wrote:One problem with the only-human idea: what happens if an egg is on a world with no humans?
Drones can survive the vacuum of space. We don't know how hardy eggs are. The innards of the Derelict are a pretty safe environ and it doesn't seem like much time passes between Prometheus and Alien. Alien takes place in 2122, if you count back from Aliens. Prometheus occurs only 34 years before. That's not a lot of time for the eggs to sit around, especially under that blue light, which could have protected them. (Conversely, it could have been a "don't get closer than this to the eggs" warning sign.) If the eggs aren't hardy and the facehuggers do need humans then the eggs would still hatch if disturbed (actually, we don't know if it takes a human presence to stimulate them or whether any movement/proximity is sufficient) and any facehugger that couldn't find a human would implant the egg to no avail in another species or simply die without implanting anything in the case of barren planetoid like LV426.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:In Aliens, we see facehuggers jump across rooms aiming for fairly small targets (a human child's face). That's one hell of a sense of smell.
Kilkrazy wrote:It's almost like they are on wires!
And if I didn't know better, I'd say people were pulling the wires even!
Kilkrazy wrote:It's almost like they are on wires!
There's actually a quite cool little documentary in the Aliens bonus DVD of the ALIEN quadrilogy box-set regarding how they did those scenes.
It does involve wires, but it's an excellent use of said wire and camera trickery!
It's all easy mode CGI now.
As for the Mantis, yeah I know I have one in a box in the loft somewhere! Along with the Snake Alien. I think their was also Gorilla Alien, and a Winged King Alien IIRC.
I'll blame the toy companies for that though.
Mr Hyena wrote:Some of the expanded universe takes this to ridiculous levels (the toys are mainly the only culprits of this...like the mantis alien) but some do make some logical sense.
In the upcoming video game sequel to Aliens, we will see at least one further morph. You remember the bull alien toy?
Spoiler:
No imagine it much bigger:
Spoiler:
@5:48
"We call this one 'the Crusher.'"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote:It involves wires, but it's an excellent use of wire!
Didn't the xenomorph in Alien 3 come from a facehugger coupling with a dog? Wouldn't that pretty much confirm that the facehuggers don't specifically need humans to do their thing?
Hordini wrote:Didn't the xenomorph in Alien 3 come from a facehugger coupling with a dog? Wouldn't that pretty much confirm that the facehuggers don't specifically need humans to do their thing?
That's why I suggested a possible Ret-Con.
It's common knowledge that Ridley/Cameron weren't completely happy with the direction the films went after they did their.
I find it funny that Cameron is annoyed...considering he turned them into a cannon fodder race. Aliens was a good movie, but lets not kid ourselves. It reduced the horror of the aliens.
Alien 3 was actually quite good. It got back to the basics of Alien. Resurrection was almost good...good design and ideas...poor execution (seeing the Newborn much earlier would have saved it).
Hordini wrote:Didn't the xenomorph in Alien 3 come from a facehugger coupling with a dog? Wouldn't that pretty much confirm that the facehuggers don't specifically need humans to do their thing?
That's why I suggested a possible Ret-Con.
It's common knowledge that Ridley/Cameron weren't completely happy with the direction the films went after they did their.
I suppose it's also possible, that even if in Prometheus the scientists claim that the facehuggers or xenomorphs need humans to reproduce, it could just be because nobody realized that they could reproduce with another life form until the facehugger in Alien 3 attached itself to the dog.
It is also possible that people don't ret con, but completely ignore anything past Aliens. Scott gets to decide what is canon and what isn't! Singer did that with Superman Returns where the movie acted as if anything past Superman 2 didn't exist.
Going slightly off topic here, but why do you guys think the Aliens/Predators are Iconic? What makes them so? I am just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are.
Oh, and today, I asked a good 17 people at work which they prefered, sixteen of us said Predator
Ahtman wrote:It is also possible that people don't ret con, but completely ignore anything past Aliens. Scott gets to decide what is canon and what isn't! Singer did that with Superman Returns where the movie acted as if anything past Superman 2 didn't exist.
That's true, but is there that much stuff past Aliens that would significantly change the way the species functions? The only thing I could think of really is their life cycle which doesn't really change much after Aliens anyway, right? It seems like Alien and Aliens sort of established how the xenomorphs work, and the rest of the films just go with the flow. So even if they ignore everything that happens after Aliens, there really isn't anything specifically discovered in the later films that might change the way we think about xenomorphs if it was ignored.
Ahtman wrote:It is also possible that people don't ret con, but completely ignore anything past Aliens. Scott gets to decide what is canon and what isn't! Singer did that with Superman Returns where the movie acted as if anything past Superman 2 didn't exist.
That's true, but is there that much stuff past Aliens that would significantly change the way the species functions?
Mostly the idea that the creature takes on aspects of its host insteaad of having a generally set form. I suppose there is the thing in AvP2 where the Predator/alien hybrid impregnated the chick directly through her mouth.
Ahtman wrote:It is also possible that people don't ret con, but completely ignore anything past Aliens. Scott gets to decide what is canon and what isn't! Singer did that with Superman Returns where the movie acted as if anything past Superman 2 didn't exist.
That's true, but is there that much stuff past Aliens that would significantly change the way the species functions?
Mostly the idea that the creature takes on aspects of its host insteaad of having a generally set form. I suppose there is the thing in AvP2 where the Predator/alien hybrid impregnated the chick directly through her mouth.
And didn't multiple Aliens come out of that, where as most of the time it's only 1 per host?
Manchu wrote:
Ahtman wrote:... impregnated the chick directly through her mouth.
There's no way to talk about that and make it sound good.
Not really, no
VGcats put it best: "If they're getting you pregnant through the mouth, wouldn't that mean they're sticking their.... You know.... down your throat?"
Manchu wrote:Yeah, this has been known for some time.
Are we thinking bad Android, seeing that we had a couple of films where they were good?
I think Theron's character might be a dodgy Wayland agent or something sinister. She recently gave an interview saying she only plays bad characters because she is a bitch, and can relate to that or something.
Slarg232 wrote:Going slightly off topic here, but why do you guys think the Aliens/Predators are Iconic? What makes them so? I am just curious as to what everyone's thoughts are.
Oh, and today, I asked a good 17 people at work which they prefered, sixteen of us said Predator
My prediction is that someone gets infected by something on that planet, and goes mad. In between killing other crew members he starts changing, over the course of some body horror sequences he becomes the Space Jockey. The rest of the crew try to stop him, eventually stopping most of his plan by wounding him or something. At this point he goes to settle in the chair from the first movie, while something else grows inside of him...
If I'm right, and it's a total shot in the dark, it actually makes some kind of thematic sense. Humans being used to restart some mysterious, dead species could be an interesting twist on the original series. More likely it will suck dog bollocks, but only time will tell.
Frazzled wrote:I'm just hoping he got off the pipe ling enough to make a good story again. His last few movies have been craptacular.
Previews so far have been superb though.
Yes, definitely all this.
Though I'll caution that the previews for other Ridley Scott movies also looked pretty good, despite sucking pretty hard.
(and my apologies to whoever it was that told me to watch the extended edition of Kingdom of Heaven, as I still haven't found the time... stupid wedding to plan).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:Maniacal laughh...maniacal laughhh...
Done to death, but not just by Alien. Lots and lots of movies with the evil corporate spiel. Meh,
Alien was among the first, so it gets a pass. But yeah, it's been done so often since then that you really need to do it well to make it interesting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slarg232 wrote:So here is a question, did Ridley make Predator or was he just Alien?
Predator was made by John Mctiernan. Who followed that up with Die Hard, and those two movies are basically demand every action movie fan worship him as a God. Except most everything else he made after that was either forgettable or absolutely, god-damn awful.
Mr Hyena wrote:I find it funny that Cameron is annoyed...considering he turned them into a cannon fodder race. Aliens was a good movie, but lets not kid ourselves. It reduced the horror of the aliens.
It reduced the horror of an alien, as a direct, personal threat. But it ramped up the horror of the species as a whole, the hive of aliens that captures people to bring back, trapped and waiting for eggs is a pretty god-damn awesome kind of horror.
Alien 3 was actually quite good. It got back to the basics of Alien.
Outside of killing main characters from the previous movie as part of the credits sequence, I have absolutely nothing bad to say about the idea of what happened in Alien 3. It's just the execution was dreadful. It basically amounted to a tedious exposition that didn't improve anything, before Ripley had conversations with a collection of indistinguishable characters, all of whom then got dispatched by the alien's magical power of appearing from the right side of the camera.
Resurrection was almost good...good design and ideas...poor execution (seeing the Newborn much earlier would have saved it).
Seriously? Resurrection is gorgeous, stylish Aliens vs Pirates fun... right up until the appearance of the newborn. Which as well as looking really stupid, and being born amidst a really stupid speach from a ridiculously over the top character, it once again defaulted to relying on the ability of the Alien to appear on the right side of the camera to kill its prey.
It reduced the horror of an alien, as a direct, personal threat. But it ramped up the horror of the species as a whole, the hive of aliens that captures people to bring back, trapped and waiting for eggs is a pretty god-damn awesome kind of horror.
It does yeah...just a shame it makes them look like glorified insects though. I did prefer the idea of Egg morphing, even if its wasteful host-wise.
Seriously? Resurrection is gorgeous, stylish Aliens vs Pirates fun... right up until the appearance of the newborn. Which as well as looking really stupid, and being born amidst a really stupid speach from a ridiculously over the top character, it once again defaulted to relying on the ability of the Alien to appear on the right side of the camera to kill its prey.
The Newborn was supposed to look kinda stupid given that its a deformed genetic mutant. The speech bit was pretty crap.
sebster wrote:(and my apologies to whoever it was that told me to watch the extended edition of Kingdom of Heaven, as I still haven't found the time... stupid wedding to plan).
That was me and I expect progress on that front, mister.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:LV246's atmosphere was absolute crap. If you see them boogeying around in the vehicles etc. the atmosphere is less..primordial.
The terrain is also much less broken. The terrain is Alien is craptacular badlands. The terrain in the preview looks like Arizona.
Also, in Alien when they discover the spacejockey one of them-I can't remember which- notes that the spacejockey looks fossilized. Yet the jockey popping out in the preview looks nice and new. Fossilization takes a bit of time.
It could theoretically be LV, but I doubt it.
Of course this brings up the jump the shark moment in Alien. If the Company new about something on that rock, why did they send the crew of tug boat? Uh...ok.
Manchu wrote:So ... space jockeys lure us to some rock so that they can figure out the way to Earth? To destroy humanity with the xenomorphs?
Thats essentially the story to Aliens 2.5 , the Space Jockey race manipulated Newt's brain and trailed them to earth.
Yeah, I read those novels and the comics they were based on. TBF, it's pretty different from what I was suggesting about Prometheus. Dark Horse retconned Newt into a character called Billie while Hicks became Wilks. The idea was that the government had found out where the xenomorph "home planet" was and sent a few platoons of Colonial Marines to bring one back (facepalm). After everything goes to gak on that planet, Billie and Wilks are trying to escape a swarm of xenomorphs and a space jockey provides the deus ex machina resolution (somehow, it makes the xenomorphs just die) at that curcial moment when our heroes are "all outta hope." The jockey links minds with Billie and she's overwhelmed by its hatred of the xenomorphs. When Wilks and Billie get back to Earth, they discover some corporation already had a xenomorph there and -- as one might expect -- things have gone to gak so Earth is completely overrun. At that moment, Billie realizes that the jockey has re-linked, having used them to find Earth. It seems to be pleased that the xenomorphs are fething over our planet and Billie gets the impression it will come back to clean up the xenomorphs later and claim Earth. But if you read the rest of the Perrys' trilogy, none of this is ever really mentioned again and nothing comes of it. (In all fairness, xenomorphs may still control Earth as the trilogy closes.) In the comics, there's a bizarre scene with the U.S. president assassinating a space jockey come to terraform Earth via chestburster (that is, the jockey is assassinated with a chestburster; not that he's terraforming Earth with one). Talk about an ambush!
Anyway, it's not like the the jockeys actually tricked humanity to coming to find them in the comics or novels, as may be the case in Prometheus. It's just an unhappy coincidence that a being capable of instantly neutralizing a swarm of xenomorphs happened to be around at the exact moment with the human protagonists required its power. Not satisfied with leaving the gakky conceit alone, the writers then used it as a horror twist: and you thought the xenomorph was bad! But apprently subsequent writers didn't find that very convincing and here we are, with Sir Ridley completely free to do whatever he likes.
The idea was that the government had found out where the xenomorph "home planet" was and sent a few platoons of Colonial Marines to bring one back (facepalm).
After the generic 'corporations are evil' schtick, this is the Alien trope I would like to see die second. Can we get a different motivation at at least once?
Sure, that's my whole point. No one not working on the film can say this definitely isn't LV426. There is no real evidence of that. It's like saying the space jockey in Prometheus isn't a real space jockey because it's different from the one we saw in Alien. As to the "fossilization" -- that's an assumption made by the viewers and crew, a conclusion based on brief visual inspection.
Of course this brings up the jump the shark moment in Alien. If the Company new about something on that rock, why did they send the crew of tug boat? Uh...ok.
I thought about this, too. I'd need a bit more information than I currently have to explain it. My guess is that (1) the Prometheus never made it back and the project was dismissed as a failure and (2) the Weyland-Yutani merger saw repriotitizations but that someone like Burke eventually ran across the files and decided to investigate on the sly and without investing anything but disposable resources. That person wouldn't have made any noise when the Nostromo failed to report back for fear of liability -- hence the company setting up Hadley's Hope. And when Ripley turned up, Carter Burke did some digging or had done some digging and connected the dots.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote:After the generic 'corporations are evil' schtick, this is the Alien trope I would like to see die second. Can we get a different motivation at at least once?
There was a possibility here to compare and contrast evil monolithic corporations with the evil monolithic government. But neither Dark Horse or Steve Perry did anything with it.
I vaguely remember those books if they are the first 3 alien novels. Somehow Ripley ended up in them too.....but I don't remember the space jockey bit. Granted it's probably been a decade since I read those books.
Sidenote the novels for AvP were much better than the movie concept since it took place.....well in the future so it tied in with the aliens unlike the AvP movies.
streamdragon wrote:Incorrect. In Alien, a giant hole can be seen in the Space Jockey's chest...
Yeah, it's a fair assumption that the jockey was killed by a chestburster. And before these trailers came out, it was a fair assumption that the space jockeys were nothing like humans. The second notion now seems debatable.
Hulksmash wrote:I vaguely remember those books if they are the first 3 alien novels. Somehow Ripley ended up in them too.....but I don't remember the space jockey bit. Granted it's probably been a decade since I read those books.
The Ripley in the Perrys' trilogy turns out to be a synthetic. How or why this is the case is not explained at all.
Sidenote the novels for AvP were much better than the movie concept since it took place.....well in the future so it tied in with the aliens unlike the AvP movies.
Yeah, I love those. Machiko FTW! The Perrys actually wrote the first book, Prey.
Apart from wanting to get one for research, there doesn't really seem to be another explanation as to why Humans would keep encountering the Xenomorph.
Perhaps research of the creature went well for another Company and they successfully deploy their new hybrid Bio-Weapon
Hyrbid Human Alien that infects people to create more of itself, or lesser creatures with it's own DNA or somesuch.
Then were getting into Resident Evil territory, or the unthinkable of a full cycle back to this.
Spoiler:
Seriously, what size was this thing going to be when it was fully grown?
Hulksmash wrote:Sidenote the novels for AvP were much better than the movie concept since it took place.....well in the future so it tied in with the aliens unlike the AvP movies.
Manchu wrote:Yeah, I love those. Machiko FTW! The Perrys actually wrote the first book, Prey.
The worst part about the AvP movie (aside from most of the movie in its entirety) is that it borrowed just enough that Aliens vs Predator: Prey can't really be made into a movie anymore. This is doubly painful, as the original script for AvP WAS the story of AvPrey, featuring Machiko as the main character. The book remains one that I read over and over. Broken Tusk's reaction at her being female still sticks in my mind as a hysterical high point of a fantastic story.
Manchu wrote:As far as Ridley's source material goes, you've only got humans I'm afraid. As I said, your statement is pure supposition.
Incorrect. In Alien, a giant hole can be seen in the Space Jockey's chest...
We assume an Alien did that, but it might have been that he ate Taco Bell. Or it could be that the Jockey was human at one point.
I don't know, I highly doubt that it was anything but a Chestburster. It wasn't just a giant hole...one of the characters who sees it makes a comment about how it appears his chest burst outward.
I also doubt that the planet is LV-426, it isn't a direct Alien prequel, and Scott has said you only start to see 'strands' of Alien DNA in the third act of the movie-and only of the first Alien, not any of the sequels. Having it take place on the same planet as Alien seems like too big and too obvious of a connection to Alien for how much emphasis is being placed on Prometheus NOT being a direct prequel to Alien.
I'm expecting it to be the kind of thing where only fans of the original Alien will recognize it as an Alien Prequel. If you've only seen Alien once, and it was years back, would you recognize the space jockeys and derelict ship again? Probably not, they barely make an appearance in Alien. I doubt there are going to be any more striking similarities.
@steamdragon: This is actually one of the good points of our reboot culture. If you don't like how one version of a film does, you don't even have to wait to get another one going assuming you can find the financial backing. Cf. Spiderman.
imark789 wrote:It wasn't just a giant hole...one of the characters who sees it makes a comment about how it appears his chest burst outward.
The problem with taking things in movies so literally is that the details just don't hold up without having to make up more and more "facts" to support them. Why was the hole so big on the jockey compared to the hole in Kane's chest? You'd have to make it up that whatever came out of the jockeys chest was much bigger than the thing that came out of Kane. Why? Again, making it up: the size of the xenomorph is directly proportional to the size of the host. We don't have evidence for any of this because it wasn't necessary to tell the story at hand. The point of the hole in the jockey's chest was to deepen the mystery, foreshadow Kane's fate, and eventually explain the crash of the Derelict.
Strange that the first one got published the same year as the third movie. It's funny to because the third movie wouldn't have done anything to the plot line. Though Requiem would. Ah, memories!
imark789 wrote:It wasn't just a giant hole...one of the characters who sees it makes a comment about how it appears his chest burst outward.
The problem with taking things in movies so literally is that the details just don't hold up without having to make up more and more "facts" to support them. Why was the hole so big on the jockey compared to the hole in Kane's chest? You'd have to make it up that whatever came out of the jockeys chest was much bigger than the thing that came out of Kane. Why? Again, making it up: the size of the xenomorph is directly proportional to the size of the host. We don't have evidence for any of this because it wasn't necessary to tell the story at hand. The point of the hole in the jockey's chest was to deepen the mystery, foreshadow Kane's fate, and eventually explain the crash of the Derelict.
I'm not trying to use facts so much as point that it seems like far too much of a coincidence. The size could be due to any number of filmmaking reasons- it could have been difficult to create a larger hole and alien for the chestburster scene with Kane, for instance. IMHO, the point of the chestburster is yes to foreshadow Kane's fate, but realize that that is what also happened to the space jockey.
Which sounds more probable- that Scott included the space jockey with a chestburster-esque hole in its chest because a chestburster popped out of it, or that it was some totally unrelated incident?
Manchu wrote:I don't think it was unrelated. As I mentioned, it was also meant to explain the crash of the Derelict.
What it was not meant to do was given scientific insight into the ecology of the xenomorph.
I definitely agree with you there. Ecology of the xenomorph...we all know that no one writing the Alien movies was putting much thought into that when they were wrote, therefore making debating it endlessly pointless. Half the people in this thread have put more thought into it than the directors did.
I just meant that I think it's a safe assumption that the space jockeys chest hole can be attributed to a chest burster.
@imark789: Oh, I definitely agree with that. When talking about really compelling fictional settings, people often make arguments based on assumptions or competing sources. Yes, we were certainly meant to assume a chestburster killed the space jockey. But that means close to zero regarding what we'll see in Prometheus. At most, we know that whatever was in that chair eventually dies, probably of major trauma originating within its chest.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You know, it just hit me. If an xenomorph does kill the space jockey, and the space jockey was on its way to destroy Earth, doesn't that mean that a xenomorph helped save the Earth?
Manchu wrote:@steamdragon: This is actually one of the good points of our reboot culture. If you don't like how one version of a film does, you don't even have to wait to get another one going assuming you can find the financial backing. Cf. Spiderman.
I continue to hope that we get a real AvP movie. The two we have have been ... lackluster, at best.
If I recall that game correctly, it had the distinction of actually having a useful motion sensor. The first game that I recall, would basically go "beep" right as you were having your face chewed off.
Me, too! I was sad that they pushed back to fall but better it be right than another nail in a potential franchise coffin. I played Infestation back when it first came out and absolutely loved it. If (1) have a DS, (2) like old-style games, and (3) don't expect too much out of a SNES-era sidescrollers, I'd really recommend it, too.
I'll have to look into that. The old capcom Aliens Versus Predator arcade game remains a favorite of mine. I've been trying to find an old cabinet of it, but have had no luck so far. :(
@Ahtman: I thought it was especially awesome how all the Marines have backstories. That's a recurring technique in the films and seems to be something that will be done in Prometheus.
Manchu wrote:@Ahtman: I thought it was especially awesome how all the Marines have backstories. That's a recurring technique in the films and seems to be something that will be done in Prometheus.
That and the way they handle your 'lives' make it fairly inspired.
Looking at the materials given us so far I think Scott is going to explore synthetics more than the other films. In Alien and Aliens they were just sort accepted as normal but the implications never were explored as to what being a synthetic human meant or it's impact on society. Resurrection sort of attempted to expand on the machines a bit was a bit clumsy, and ended up being more about cloning really.
Like I said, there is some of that in the Perrys' trilogy, what with a synthetic Ripley leading the team in Book 3. Of course, she doesn't know she's synthetic until midway through. Then the existential questions come rolling out -- which I really hope we don't get too bogged down in regarding Prometheus. So far we've got a giant evil corporation and robots who want to be humans. It's turning into a minefield for anyone who wants to make a fresh sci-fi movie. I mean Ridley Scott already did all of this stuff ... oh wait.
Manchu wrote:Like I said, there is some of that in the Perrys' trilogy, what with a synthetic Ripley leading the team in Book 3. Of course, she doesn't know she's synthetic until midway through. Then the existential questions come rolling out -- which I really hope we don't get too bogged down in regarding Prometheus. So far we've got a giant evil corporation and robots who want to be humans. It's turning into a minefield for anyone who wants to make a fresh sci-fi movie. I mean Ridley Scott already did all of this stuff ... oh wait.
I read the comics for a bit but keep them generally in the same regard as the Star Wars EU when it comes to their role in the series.
I don't want to get bogged down in it either, but I would like to see some indication that having fake humans running around might have an effect people. I think the fact that humans created synthetic human beings is actually going to be somewhat pivotal to story.
@Med_of_D: That's a tough question. The ones in Alien and Aliens don't have red blood. Instead, they seem to have a kind of thick, milky fluid circulating around in there. That doesn't really answer your question but that's really all we know. Some of the synthetics in the novels are less distinguishable from humans and there is some mention of natural tissue being used (real, growing skin and hair, for example) but analysis of their red-colored blood under a microscope is apparently a give-away.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote:I don't want to get bogged down in it either, but I would like to see some indication that having fake humans running around might have an effect people. I think the fact that humans created synthetic human beings is actually going to be somewhat pivotal to story.
Agreed. Way back on page one, I asked whether anyone thought the Bald Man was David. I don't think that's probable now, but the underlying point stands.
Lets not forget that the aliens don't recognize synthetics as threats, or at least they didn't in Aliens when they ignored Bishop. It wasn't until the angry queen dramatically made an entrance that they showed them really take notice of them.
Again, this is ignoring the comics and only looking at Alien and Aliens, since that is what Scott supposedly is doing.
When do they ignore him? Did he go into the nest? I thought he was driving. In Hive World, IIRC, the xenomorphs ignore the Colonial Marines (who are actually synthetics) until they start to threaten the nest.
Manchu wrote:When do they ignore him? Did he go into the nest? I thought he was driving. In Hive World, IIRC, the xenomorphs ignore the Colonial Marines (who are actually synthetics) until they start to threaten the nest.
When he is heading to array through the tunnel an alien sticks it head in the tube, then just goes about its business. Putting both instances together they ignore synthetics unless they see them as a threat, but will go after humans for pretty much any reason. It also shows that they don't go by site alone as they can tell the difference even when people cannot.
I don't think we have anything but circumstantial evidence that xenomorphs can even see.
The last time I saw Aliens (three weeks ago), it was the '91 special edition cut and there was definitely not a scene with Bishop being spotted by an Alien. I'll look for it in the theatrical edition when I get the Anthology set back from my dad, who is currently borrowing them.
Manchu wrote:When do they ignore him? Did he go into the nest? I thought he was driving. In Hive World, IIRC, the xenomorphs ignore the Colonial Marines (who are actually synthetics) until they start to threaten the nest.
When he is heading to array through the tunnel an alien sticks it head in the tube, then just goes about its business. Putting both instances together they ignore synthetics unless they see them as a threat, but will go after humans for pretty much any reason. It also shows that they don't go by site alone as they can tell the difference even when people cannot.
Thats not in the movie Aliens however. It wasn't in the Director's cut I have either. That was the novelization.
Manchu wrote:When do they ignore him? Did he go into the nest? I thought he was driving. In Hive World, IIRC, the xenomorphs ignore the Colonial Marines (who are actually synthetics) until they start to threaten the nest.
When he is heading to array through the tunnel an alien sticks it head in the tube, then just goes about its business. Putting both instances together they ignore synthetics unless they see them as a threat, but will go after humans for pretty much any reason. It also shows that they don't go by site alone as they can tell the difference even when people cannot.
Thats not in the movie Aliens however. It wasn't in the Director's cut I have either. That was the novelization.
It has been awhile since I watched Aliens and even longer since I read the novelization, so I wouldn't be surprised if I mashed them together. I wonder if it was in the original script but got cut.
Probably so, as often the novelizations are from versions of the script.
The novelization of Alien has the scene where Ripley runs into Dallas and the other guy (with the other guypartially turned into a new egg launcher thing..ichy!!!), which is in the Director's Cut.
It stands to reason that a synthetic like Ash or Bishop would register differently than a human being but the main problem is we don't know how the xenomorphs perceive anything. Taste, touch, smell, sight, hearing -- we have no idea to what extent if any they possess these senses. The idea that the xenomorphs would ignore synthetics says more about human anxiety regarding the uniqueness/irreplaceability of human life than it does about the xenomorphs -- who are after all a fictional race embodying other aspects of human self-reflection.
Manchu wrote:
You know, it just hit me. If an xenomorph does kill the space jockey, and the space jockey was on its way to destroy Earth, doesn't that mean that a xenomorph helped save the Earth?
That is a really cool idea...but I doubt that that is the space jockey we'll see in Prometheus. I don't know I'm expecting them to just be of the same species but unrelated or different individuals. I still don't expect it to have that much to do with Alien.
Manchu wrote:
You know, it just hit me. If an xenomorph does kill the space jockey, and the space jockey was on its way to destroy Earth, doesn't that mean that a xenomorph helped save the Earth?
That is a really cool idea...but I doubt that that is the space jockey we'll see in Prometheus. I don't know I'm expecting them to just be of the same species but unrelated or different individuals. I still don't expect it to have that much to do with Alien.
I actually hope they are tied together. Obviously at this point, It seems they are. Perhaps only revealing the mystery/background of the Space Jockey.
Hulksmash wrote:I vaguely remember those books if they are the first 3 alien novels. Somehow Ripley ended up in them too.....but I don't remember the space jockey bit. Granted it's probably been a decade since I read those books.
The Ripley in the Perrys' trilogy turns out to be a synthetic. How or why this is the case is not explained at all.
Sidenote the novels for AvP were much better than the movie concept since it took place.....well in the future so it tied in with the aliens unlike the AvP movies.
Yeah, I love those. Machiko FTW! The Perrys actually wrote the first book, Prey.
They need to make AVP movie of that, because I have the comic and I have NO IDEA what im reading lol....
Byte wrote:
I actually hope they are tied together. Obviously at this point, It seems they are. Perhaps only revealing the mystery/background of the Space Jockey.
Theyre tied together in that they are from the same universe, and obviously were dealing with the same species of the space jockys, (jockies?) but it won't lead directly into Alien.
Byte wrote:
I actually hope they are tied together. Obviously at this point, It seems they are. Perhaps only revealing the mystery/background of the Space Jockey.
Theyre tied together in that they are from the same universe, and obviously were dealing with the same species of the space jockys, (jockies?) but it won't lead directly into Alien.
killykavekommando wrote:I don't give a crap what the movie is about. If Ridley Scott directed it, it's worth seeing.
So you're a massive fan of Robin Hood, Body of Lies, American Gangster, A Good Year, Kingdom of Heaven and Matchstick Men?
Because that's his last six movies, and I'd be really surprised if anyone out there would claim that's a particularly impressive list.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:That was me and I expect progress on that front, mister.
It's getting to the point with the wedding where my primary duty is to get out of the damn way, so I should be able to watch in the next few weeks. Honest.
imark789 wrote:I'm expecting it to be the kind of thing where only fans of the original Alien will recognize it as an Alien Prequel. If you've only seen Alien once, and it was years back, would you recognize the space jockeys and derelict ship again? Probably not, they barely make an appearance in Alien. I doubt there are going to be any more striking similarities.
I think you're probably underestimating the impact Alien has had among nerd circles. Almost everyone my age that I know would recognise the Space Jockey, though probably a lot less would recognise the derelict space craft.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote:It has been awhile since I watched Aliens and even longer since I read the novelization, so I wouldn't be surprised if I mashed them together. I wonder if it was in the original script but got cut.
Makes sense. That's the part of the film where the pacing is getting tighter and tighter, I could see the decision being made when they were building the storyboards that it was unecessary detail. If it had been shot but cut from editing then I suspect we would have seen it in one special edit or another.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:It stands to reason that a synthetic like Ash or Bishop would register differently than a human being but the main problem is we don't know how the xenomorphs perceive anything. Taste, touch, smell, sight, hearing -- we have no idea to what extent if any they possess these senses. The idea that the xenomorphs would ignore synthetics says more about human anxiety regarding the uniqueness/irreplaceability of human life than it does about the xenomorphs -- who are after all a fictional race embodying other aspects of human self-reflection.
I think it says a fair bit about human perception, that when making synethetic people we build a robot that can trick our senses into believing it is human, but to any other species they might perceive it so differently that it wouldn't even occur to them that's what we were trying to do.
sebster wrote:
I think you're probably underestimating the impact Alien has had among nerd circles. Almost everyone my age that I know would recognise the Space Jockey, though probably a lot less would recognise the derelict space craft.
Well yes, nerd circles and fans are one thing, but consider the average moviegoer who saw the movie once or not at all. There's nothing blatantly obvious showing it is technically an Alien prequel. It isn't titled Aliens: The Beginning, there won't be the same memorable xenomorph, Sigourney Weaver isn't in it, etc etc etc...
alarmingrick wrote:I actually liked Kingdom of Heaven. That lead actress is so hot. You know the one that was in the LoTR movies...
So am I the only one wishing tomorrow was opening day for Prometheus already?
I seriously haven't been this excited about seeing a new movie in sometime.
I'm not really excited as much as just plain nervous. I mean, it's Ridley Scott returning to Alien... but then again it's post Blackhawk Down Ridley Scott and that guy has made some really flashy, but ultimately pretty damn crap movies. So I was interested but not hopeful, and then I saw the previews and thought they looked really good. So now I'm just nervous, and really hoping this'll be good, and we'll finally get a third decent movie out of the Alien franchise.
sebster wrote:
I think you're probably underestimating the impact Alien has had among nerd circles. Almost everyone my age that I know would recognise the Space Jockey, though probably a lot less would recognise the derelict space craft.
Well yes, nerd circles and fans are one thing, but consider the average moviegoer who saw the movie once or not at all. There's nothing blatantly obvious showing it is technically an Alien prequel. It isn't titled Aliens: The Beginning, there won't be the same memorable xenomorph, Sigourney Weaver isn't in it, etc etc etc...
I'm pretty sure that's the whole marketing approach. To not "alienate"(hehe) those not familiar with the story line. I hear it all the time from my wife. She'll watch sci fi prequals, but never the older stuff, i.e. the newer Star Trek, Rise of the Apes, and so on.
See, the way I see it is it's more Ridley Scott is aiming for something bigger and better than a mere prequel. It isn't going to be a movie that relies on cheap exposition of Alien's backstory and revealing the things us fans have wondered about for years, but more will deal with it's own themes and explore a completely new area of the universe.
That's what I'm anticipating and hoping for, at least.
imark789 wrote:Well yes, nerd circles and fans are one thing, but consider the average moviegoer who saw the movie once or not at all. There's nothing blatantly obvious showing it is technically an Alien prequel. It isn't titled Aliens: The Beginning, there won't be the same memorable xenomorph, Sigourney Weaver isn't in it, etc etc etc...
But, again, I think people are understanding how massive diffused the alien mythology is. Probably most people don't know the term 'Weyland Yutani' or what LV-426 is, and they mightn't even know the term 'space jockey', but when they see that chair in that room they know what it means.
Think of it this way, a film like this is going to find it's core audience among boy 18-35, give or take. Out of all the boy 18-35 that you know, how many wouldn't recognise that room?
killykavekommando wrote:I don't give a crap what the movie is about. If Ridley Scott directed it, it's worth seeing.
So you're a massive fan of Robin Hood, Body of Lies, American Gangster, A Good Year, Kingdom of Heaven and Matchstick Men?
Because that's his last six movies, and I'd be really surprised if anyone out there would claim that's a particularly impressive list.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:That was me and I expect progress on that front, mister.
It's getting to the point with the wedding where my primary duty is to get out of the damn way, so I should be able to watch in the next few weeks. Honest.
Frazzled wrote:American Gangster received really good reviews.
It was completely pointless. Slickly produced, good performances from the two leads, but without anything interesting to say about the drug trade that 50 movies before it hadn't already said.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote:American Gangster, Robin Hood, and Kingdom Of Heaven--while not being cinematic revolutions--were certainly not "bad" films in my opinion.
Really? They were all technically very accomplished, particularly Kingdom of Heaven which just looked amazing, and told their stories without any major plotholes, but were ultimately completely forgettable.
Maybe that doesn't make them bad movies, but I don't think anyone here would be happy if that's all we got out of Prometheus.
Kanluwen wrote:American Gangster, Robin Hood, and Kingdom Of Heaven--while not being cinematic revolutions--were certainly not "bad" films in my opinion.
Really? They were all technically very accomplished, particularly Kingdom of Heaven which just looked amazing, and told their stories without any major plotholes, but were ultimately completely forgettable.
Maybe that doesn't make them bad movies, but I don't think anyone here would be happy if that's all we got out of Prometheus.
Yeah, it would be a disappointment if Prometheus was just a "pretty flick". Kingdom of Heaven was--well, in my own opinion it still is--a really good looking movie...but like you said, it was "completely forgettable".
I have a strong feeling that the movie title "Prometheus" refers not to the spacecraft of the same name, but to the Prometheus Project (aka Project Prometheus) that I have seen referenced in one or two places, and in Weyland's speech. In fact, that is more or less a given. The bit that interests me is what Project Prometheus is. I suspect it is closely related to the creation of Artificial People, although I admit I have not done a whole lot of research yet. I have a feeling that whilst the other movies hinted at AI being bad, this one will make it explicit, and the bulk of humanity will never even find out whatever it is that the AI does in the film, thus meaning there are still AIs later. I think the AI angle might turn out to be as important as the Space Jockey angle, which is clearly fairly central.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Project Prometheus Underway
Based on recent classified findings by Weyland researchers, the company determines the exact coordinates of a new destination for long-time pet project: Project Prometheus. New round of investment is immediately opened and mission planning enters full-swing.
January 1, 2073
Weyland revives JIMO
Using capital from his 2015 success, Weyland acquires copyrights to technology developed by NASA’s innovative but poorly funded Project Prometheus. With Weyland’s significantly augmented funding for the project, JIMO became a reality and proves the existence of simple life in Europa’s ocean.
December 19, 2017
That is the only stuff on the Weyland Industries website...
I guess the ship Prometheus is so named because it is taking the project to its new home...
Kanluwen wrote:Kingdom of Heaven was--well, in my own opinion it still is--a really good looking movie...but like you said, it was "completely forgettable".
I disagree. I think of it quite a bit and find it increasingly charming with every viewing.
If you look through the pattern of acquisistions by Weyland on that Timeline, everything seems to move towards either improving Biotech, or doing more Space Exploration... as if there is some final objective in mind all along..
I stand by my earlier theory that such an objective officially died with Weyland or with the merger and was rediscovered by individual executives. The first executive or cabal of executives to rediscover the true significance/potential of the (presumably failed) Prometheus mission conspired to risk little for much gain by placing Ash on board the Nostromo/conspiring with Dallas. But this resulted in the exact opposite result, a huge loss with no definitive gain, so the rediscovery was hastily covered up, terraforming began on LV-426, and Carter Burke rediscovered the issue, either from files about Ash's mission or about the Prometheus, half a century later.
My theory is built around Burke seemingly working on his own or within a limited group within W-Y. My theory is undermined by the fact that no one working on Hadley's Hope seemed to notice the distress signal that drew the attention of the Nostromo. My further conclusion is that Burke's group either managed to cover up the signal (this seems unlikely; the colony administrators don't even seem to know about it) or that the signal itself was not actually from the Derelict but a decoy programmed into MU-TH-R by whoever got Ash transferred onto the Nostromo.
Some thoughts - Frankenstein was subtitled The Modern Prometheus, and created artificial life.
Prometheus, in later Greek mythology, saved humankind from being destroyed by Zeus.
Prometheus has strong associations with liver regeneration, which is a little bit like shape-changing, which has been ginted at during the movie...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Manchu, the geographical evidence and breathable atmosphere in Prometheus don't rule out the possibility of it being LV426, but I think it makes it unlikely. I've also seen suppositions that the two ships are not even the same ship - they are just same or very similar models. As evidence, there is a collision between Prometheus and the Space Croiassant in the trailer, but you can see no evidence of this collision in Alien, apparently (at least according to some fairly thorough researchers on another site...)
Automatically Appended Next Post: "A King has his reign... and then he dies" is the opening line of the trailer. I am willing to bet someone is saying that to or about Peter Weyland.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I don't think it is the Space Jockey ship that is leaving to go to Earth, as I think they are on the Space Jockey ship when they say that line - that means it is either the rest of Promotheus' crew, some aliens, or another faction of humans all together...
There is at least one shot of someone inside a holosuite in the trailer, IMO, and holosuite's are referred to on the website...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote:What? There's a huge hole in the Derelict. That's how Newt's parents get into it.
They get in through a tiny crack in the side! I am talking about a major impact point with the Promoetheus, that you see in the trailer. Assuming it is the croissant and Prometheus that collide, and not the Prometheus and the Saucer... which actually seems more likely...
Automatically Appended Next Post: In the room with the cannisters that is reminiscent of the eggs, the thing Shaw is looking up at is a human face...
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've seen two versions of the bit where David is pulling out what looks like an Alien Egg. In one it is black, with luminous green at the tops. In the other it is almost white. CGI shenanigans going on there, but why?
Manchu wrote:My theory is undermined by the fact that no one working on Hadley's Hope seemed to notice the distress signal that drew the attention of the Nostromo. My further conclusion is that Burke's group either managed to cover up the signal (this seems unlikely; the colony administrators don't even seem to know about it) or that the signal itself was not actually from the Derelict but a decoy programmed into MU-TH-R by whoever got Ash transferred onto the Nostromo.
It could be that when they broke the laser plane on the derelict it shut off the signal as well.
"A King has his reign... and then he dies"
This also could refer to whatever aliens were on Earth and helped manking, seeded the planet, ect dieing off at some point in the future, thus leaving remnants behind. Being more advanced doesn't necessarily mean you don't die off or can't be wiped out.
sebster wrote:Think of it this way, a film like this is going to find it's core audience among boy 18-35, give or take. Out of all the boy 18-35 that you know, how many wouldn't recognise that room?
I'm not quite 18 yet (nine days to go ) and I'd recognise it, but thats only because my uncle lent me his director's cuts of Alien and Aliens So I only actually watched them both for the first time last wednesday...
Still, I'd recognise them
Ahtman wrote:It could be that when they broke the laser plane on the derelict it shut off the signal as well.
I considered that but why would the laser plane shut off a warning signal (or a distress signal)? You'd have to assume that the signal was in fact a lure, which dovetails nicely with some of what we see in the Prometheus trailer ("Not a map; an invitation" at first and then "we were so wrong"). The lure explanation also makes sense in light of the theory that the Derelict is a "bomber" of biological weapons -- if you can't make it to the target, have the target come to you.
But you are right in that it's a good explanation as to why Hadley's Hope might not have detected the signal.
gorgon wrote:Almost 80% on Rotten Tomatoes. Perhaps it needed more androids for this crowd?
Have you actually seen it?
Anyhow, that reflects the basic flaw in Rotten Tomatoes, that films which are well made but ultimately unremarkable will score pass grades from most critics, resulting in a higher pass/fail ration than more ambitious films that are more likely to divide crowds. I mean, watching the movie or just reading the reviews will reinforce what I'm saying... these are all comments from reviewers who gave the film a passing score;
"Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe create interesting, rounded characters out of potential clichés."
"American Gangster an epic, true crime drama, although not entirely original in its premise"
"An entertaining romp through familiar cop-and-crim cat-and-mousery, bolstered by strong star turns from Washington and Crowe. Still, it has neither the intelligence nor the grip to jump from the merely good to the truly great."
"Ridley Scott's gangster flick aims high and mostly measures up"
"It feels familiar, even Washington's performance of real-life Frank Lucas feels like something we've seen before."
And again, that's from the people who gave it positive scores. It really is just a slickly made, enjoyable but entirely forgettable film. And that's Scott's best film in about 8 years (since Blackhawk Down).
All I'm saying is that based on Scott's recent reputation there's a decent chance we're going to get something that looks great but is ultimately just kind of forgettable. And that'd be a damn shame.
sebster wrote:Think of it this way, a film like this is going to find it's core audience among boy 18-35, give or take. Out of all the boy 18-35 that you know, how many wouldn't recognise that room?
I'm not quite 18 yet (nine days to go ) and I'd recognise it, but thats only because my uncle lent me his director's cuts of Alien and Aliens So I only actually watched them both for the first time last wednesday...
Still, I'd recognise them
Lol I'm not 18 yet, but the Aliens movies are some of my favorite movies. Though I think this will find it's audience among basically anyone who likes science fiction. But I'm not watching any trailers until this movie comes out, so I have no clue what people here are talking about.
When I said they, I meant the critics they draw from. And yeah, it's possible, but when they criticize comedies for being brainless and stupid but go on to praise action movies like Captain America, I'm left a little confused. They're both popcorn entertainment, one is funny and one is action, but the comedies get criticized for not being better.
They are parasites that looks like Tentacles
They leave parasites into the body
Human gets infected.
One of the human turns on the team.
They roast + burn him as he pounces the team.
The space Jockey is a integrated pilot suit + chair, the content of the suit is tiny human sized.
The guy in the space jockey = the infected human.
Hopefully it's really eerie and unnerving, and a million times better than Pandorum.
