Prometheus 2: Apparently it's happening
- Thread starter RoJoHen
- Start date
I'm alittle confused to how a movie about the people who created the xenomorphs and who aparent use ships like the one found in Alien, isn't a prequel to Alien.
The way I understand the reasoning, it's because the *story* isn't a direct prequel. As in, the events of Prometheus do not directly impact the events of Alien. The ship that crashed in Prometheus wasn't the ship that was found in Alien. The dead Engineer in Alien, isn't the one that was killed at the end of Prometheus.
Of course it doesn't help that that original script was precisely that (hence the over-abundance of correlative plot elements), but there you go.
Put simply: they're part of the same fictional continuity, but not the same narrative. Just as Scott says that both 'Blade Runner' and 'Alien' co-exist in the same universe, 'Prometheus' is simply another instalment, telling it's own story.
Actually, a pretty good analogy just sprung to mind: the View Askewniverse. I don't think anyone would reasonably claim that 'Dogma' is a sequel to 'Chasing Amy'.
I'm alittle confused to how a movie about the people who created the xenomorphs and who aparent use ships like the one found in Alien, isn't a prequel to Alien.
The way I understand the reasoning, it's because the *story* isn't a direct prequel. As in, the events of Prometheus do not directly impact the events of Alien. The ship that crashed in Prometheus wasn't the ship that was found in Alien. The dead Engineer in Alien, isn't the one that was killed at the end of Prometheus.
Of course it doesn't help that that original script was precisely that (hence the over-abundance of correlative plot elements), but there you go.
Put simply: they're part of the same fictional continuity, but not the same narrative. Just as Scott says that both 'Blade Runner' and 'Alien' co-exist in the same universe, 'Prometheus' is simply another instalment, telling it's own story.
Actually, a pretty good analogy just sprung to mind: the View Askewniverse. I don't think anyone would reasonably claim that 'Dogma' is a sequel to 'Chasing Amy'.
That might work if the Engineers hadn't created the xenomorphs in the first place, so obviously the events in Pormetheus leds to Alien.
I understand the point, which is correct, but the above was invented by fans or possibly production humor - not Scott. If you believe you know otherwise, we'll really need a primary source (direct quote from Scott) on that.
For example, this article calls it "cheeky" [production humor].
http://www.slashfilm.com/is-prometheus-set-in-the-blade-runner-universe/
If that counts to tie together the movies into the same universe, then giant space potatoes and Star Fleet vessels exist in the Star Wars universe, as does R2D2 in the Star Trek universe.
I'm alittle confused to how a movie about the people who created the xenomorphs and who aparent use ships like the one found in Alien, isn't a prequel to Alien.
The way I understand the reasoning, it's because the *story* isn't a direct prequel. As in, the events of Prometheus do not directly impact the events of Alien. The ship that crashed in Prometheus wasn't the ship that was found in Alien. The dead Engineer in Alien, isn't the one that was killed at the end of Prometheus.
Of course it doesn't help that that original script was precisely that (hence the over-abundance of correlative plot elements), but there you go.
Put simply: they're part of the same fictional continuity, but not the same narrative. Just as Scott says that both 'Blade Runner' and 'Alien' co-exist in the same universe, 'Prometheus' is simply another instalment, telling it's own story.
Actually, a pretty good analogy just sprung to mind: the View Askewniverse. I don't think anyone would reasonably claim that 'Dogma' is a sequel to 'Chasing Amy'.
That might work if the Engineers hadn't created the xenomorphs in the first place, so obviously the events in Pormetheus leds to Alien.
It may inform the events of Alien, but it doesn't directly lead to them. In this analogy, The Engineers are sort of the Jay and Silent Bob of the Alien/Blade Runner universe.
Like I said though, since the script originally *was* supposed to lead directly into the events of Alien, it muddies the waters a bit.
I wouldn't call it a proto-xenomorph exactly, just another example of the same base technology. Indeed, the goo may be a more advanced type of weapon they were developing to replace the spore/face hugger lifecycle. On the other hand, it could simply be to the xenomorph what a nuke is to a landmine. Different tool for a different job.
So far as I can recall, Scott himself has specifically said (in one of the DVD commentaries I think) he considers them both to be in the same universe. He may not have thought so at the time he made them but going forward it's clearly on his mind.
Last edited:
To further muddy things, "The Goonies" exists in the same universe, as R2D2 is on the Inferno model at the end of the film.
In DVDs commentary, Scott did not specifically say Bladerunner and Alien exist in the same continuity or universe or whatever. He did say that when designing future LA, he wanted it to look like the place Ripley and crew would return home. Make of that what you will.
That sounds more realistically vague. What I make of such a statement is classifying them both a similarly dystopian design - not in the same universe or he would say so. But I would still call that and this ...
...hearsay until a quote from Scott himself saying so is given or a video title or link produced with a time index.
Which is why it's really just...annoying. It's not even bad. It's just way too obvious when watching the movie that "Prometheus" was meant to be a direct prequel to "Alien," but then it isn't, and it's weird.
Yes, in that sense, it felt like a big "Fuck You" to the audience who wanted something and were intentionally frustrated with malice toward those expectations.
That said, the recent news that Scott would like to, perhaps in retrospect of the Prometheus failure, redeem the series and eventually loop back around to what we want after all. That is, with an interesting story Scott wants that includes the big questions, tie up the original question and inspiration of the Space Jokey - and his ship - we all met in Alien.
That said, the recent news that Scott would like to, perhaps in retrospect of the Prometheus failure, redeem the series and eventually loop back around to what we want after all. That is, with an interesting story Scott wants that includes the big questions, tie up the original question and inspiration of the Space Jokey - and his ship - we all met in Alien.
Last edited:
I didn't think of it that way. I just assumed since it looked quite a bit like a simpler version of the Xenomorph that it was the first step in the development of the Xeno, but I like the idea of it being simply being a similar being too.The way I understand the reasoning, it's because the *story* isn't a direct prequel. As in, the events of Prometheus do not directly impact the events of Alien. The ship that crashed in Prometheus wasn't the ship that was found in Alien. The dead Engineer in Alien, isn't the one that was killed at the end of Prometheus.
Of course it doesn't help that that original script was precisely that (hence the over-abundance of correlative plot elements), but there you go.
Put simply: they're part of the same fictional continuity, but not the same narrative. Just as Scott says that both 'Blade Runner' and 'Alien' co-exist in the same universe, 'Prometheus' is simply another instalment, telling it's own story.
Actually, a pretty good analogy just sprung to mind: the View Askewniverse. I don't think anyone would reasonably claim that 'Dogma' is a sequel to 'Chasing Amy'.
That might work if the Engineers hadn't created the xenomorphs in the first place, so obviously the events in Pormetheus leds to Alien.
It may inform the events of Alien, but it doesn't directly lead to them. In this analogy, The Engineers are sort of the Jay and Silent Bob of the Alien/Blade Runner universe.
Like I said though, since the script originally *was* supposed to lead directly into the events of Alien, it muddies the waters a bit.
I wouldn't call it a proto-xenomorph exactly, just another example of the same base technology. Indeed, the goo may be a more advanced type of weapon they were developing to replace the spore/face hugger lifecycle. On the other hand, it could simply be to the xenomorph what a nuke is to a landmine. Different tool for a different job.
What is the time gap between Prometheus and Alien?
Prometheus was set in the last week of 2093, Alien is somewhere in 2122. So just shy of thirty years.
Which, ironically, is the same age Sigourney Weaver was in Alien. (Don't even think it, Ridley.)
Which, ironically, is the same age Sigourney Weaver was in Alien. (Don't even think it, Ridley.)
The only problem with that being, there was already a conventional Xenomorph sculpted into a wall relief in the Engineer's Temple, which is what happens when you have a movie that's designed to be one thing from the outset but then halfway through you decide you don't want it to be about that anymore but do a piss poor job disconnecting it from its origins.
That's my biggest problem with the film other than the terrible characterization and plot logic; the half-assed way they handled the connection to rest of the Alien universe.
We don't want to do a direct prequel to Alien anymore, so to "change" things now LV-426 will be the nearly identical LV-223, and the Facehugger will be a space cobra or a super-sized Facehugger, and the Xenomorph will have a Woody Woodpecker beak, and the shitty punk rock geologist will begin changing into a Xenomorph, and instead of a temple full of Facehugger eggs they'll encounter a temple full of egg-shaped jars and an identical looking ship which crashes on the planet, just like the one on LV-426 did.
If you're trying to avoid doing a direct prequel, then avoid doing a prequel. Don't make a prequel as seen through a funhouse mirror. They could have done an Engineer's movie with no connection to the Xenomorphs or similarity to the events of Alien, but they didn't do that.
In some of those cases, I can use my imagination to come up with solutions.
For example, the giant face hugger wasn't typical of what we're used to seeing. It didn't come out of an egg. It was the result of a crazy pregnancy. Mix it with some human DNA and the healing powers of that super bio-bed, and maybe it mutated.
And the Xenomorph we see at the end isn't typical either. It was born after the face hugger infected the Engineer. As we know from previous Alien movies, the Xenomorphs take on traits from the host body. Since we had never seen an Engineer Xenomorph before, it stands to reason that it would look different. (or, maybe, they just decided to give the creature a bit of a makeover)
Following those events, that Xenomorph could have run off, made a home in the crashed Engineer vessel, and laid all the eggs we see at the beginning of "Alien."
For example, the giant face hugger wasn't typical of what we're used to seeing. It didn't come out of an egg. It was the result of a crazy pregnancy. Mix it with some human DNA and the healing powers of that super bio-bed, and maybe it mutated.
And the Xenomorph we see at the end isn't typical either. It was born after the face hugger infected the Engineer. As we know from previous Alien movies, the Xenomorphs take on traits from the host body. Since we had never seen an Engineer Xenomorph before, it stands to reason that it would look different. (or, maybe, they just decided to give the creature a bit of a makeover)
Following those events, that Xenomorph could have run off, made a home in the crashed Engineer vessel, and laid all the eggs we see at the beginning of "Alien."
I think that was supposed to be what Scott called the "dragon", a "patient zero" version of the xenomorph based on Engineer-contributed DNA like what was seen at the films ending - what some people refer to as a "protomorph". Same smooth head that was more pointy than the human-version xenomorph that we all know and love. Definitely not the same thing, but distantly related.
The only problem with that being, there was already a conventional Xenomorph sculpted into a wall relief in the Engineer's Temple, which is what happens when you have a movie that's designed to be one thing from the outset but then halfway through you decide you don't want it to be about that anymore but do a piss poor job disconnecting it from its origins.
That's my biggest problem with the film other than the terrible characterization and plot logic; the half-assed way they handled the connection to rest of the Alien universe.
We don't want to do a direct prequel to Alien anymore, so to "change" things now LV-426 will be the nearly identical LV-223, and the Facehugger will be a space cobra or a super-sized Facehugger, and the Xenomorph will have a Woody Woodpecker beak, and the shitty punk rock geologist will begin changing into a Xenomorph, and instead of a temple full of Facehugger eggs they'll encounter a temple full of egg-shaped jars and an identical looking ship which crashes on the planet, just like the one on LV-426 did.
If you're trying to avoid doing a direct prequel, then avoid doing a prequel. Don't make a prequel as seen through a funhouse mirror. They could have done an Engineer's movie with no connection to the Xenomorphs or similarity to the events of Alien, but they didn't do that.
Yep. Very true. Even though I despised the film, I loved the dog-based xenomorph in Alien 3. Opened up a whole new concept of the alien using the host body as more than just an incubator, but also a genetic contributor. If evolution or intentional engineering were to determine this, I would say it was to make the xenomorph more readily adaptable and resilient to the host's habitat, allowing it to outlast anything nearby. AVP's "Predalien" was another good one, positively badass, taking on the deadliest traits of both species. The "hybrid" in Alien 4 was, I guess, in a similar vein but, IMO, too ridiculous for words.
Last edited:
Yeah, I didn't care for the "childbirth'd" creature in Alien Resurrection either.
^To be fair, the Newborn was supposed to be the result of an imperfect cloning process. It was clearly a twisted cronenbergian freak, not a successful mating of human and xeno-DNA (apparently the engineers installed copy-protection in their weapon's DNA.) It was Ripley-8's equal and opposite. Still looked very silly, but the logic of the design was at least consistent. All the aliens in that movie had a similar texture to their skin as if it was always peeling instead of the usual shedding.
As for the prequel/not a prequel argument: while they certainly half-arsed the script in terms of removing direct plot ties to the original film, the fact remains that the ties were always going to be tenuous since the origin of the derelict and the Beast were incidental to the plot of 'Alien'.
Indeed, in earlier versions of the script there was a lot more backstory and a somewhat elaborate set-up. IIRC the initial idea was that the "space jockeys" were ancient explorers and that stumbled on the egg chamber not on their ship, but in a nearby pyramid structure and the beacon was meant to warn people off from falling into the same trap.
All that got jettisoned because none of it mattered. For the purposes of that film's plot, the set-up needed to be simple and the more mystery that surrounded the Alien, the better.
Plus, even if they hadn't have changed the script I think it would make even less sense. The derelict in 'Alien' had supposedly been there for thousands of years, as evidenced by the fossilised remains. Also, if that had been the same ship then why didn't the team from the Nostromo find left over human artefacts on the bridge? A few human corpses in enviro-suits and a decapitated android body should be a bit hard to miss, no? Also there was no evidence of the supposedly nearby complex in either 'Alien' or 'Aliens'.
Honestly, as it stands is the version that makes the most sense. If we go with the idea that the derelict crashed around the same time as the containment breach at the complex then it lends itself to a larger narrative. One of the Engineers pushing the envelope too far and their weapon systems spinning out of their control and turning on and destroying them all.
This also plays into the question of "if the eggs and goo were weapons, then who were they fighting?" The simple answer is "another alien race", but that's boring and not in keeping with the themes. Personally I suspect it was a civil war of some sort. If they're really going for the 'Chariots of the Gods' angle then this is the War in Heaven. Angel against Angel in an effort to storm the gates of Paradise and take the throne. Indeed, that could also play into why they were out to destroy us if we're seen as a potential genetic resource for the other side. Genocide as asset denial. Whether the one's on that planet were the rebels or the authority is pretty much academic from out POV.
Honestly, I think that makes way much more sense than the "we killed space Jesus" argument.
As for the prequel/not a prequel argument: while they certainly half-arsed the script in terms of removing direct plot ties to the original film, the fact remains that the ties were always going to be tenuous since the origin of the derelict and the Beast were incidental to the plot of 'Alien'.
Indeed, in earlier versions of the script there was a lot more backstory and a somewhat elaborate set-up. IIRC the initial idea was that the "space jockeys" were ancient explorers and that stumbled on the egg chamber not on their ship, but in a nearby pyramid structure and the beacon was meant to warn people off from falling into the same trap.
All that got jettisoned because none of it mattered. For the purposes of that film's plot, the set-up needed to be simple and the more mystery that surrounded the Alien, the better.
Plus, even if they hadn't have changed the script I think it would make even less sense. The derelict in 'Alien' had supposedly been there for thousands of years, as evidenced by the fossilised remains. Also, if that had been the same ship then why didn't the team from the Nostromo find left over human artefacts on the bridge? A few human corpses in enviro-suits and a decapitated android body should be a bit hard to miss, no? Also there was no evidence of the supposedly nearby complex in either 'Alien' or 'Aliens'.
Honestly, as it stands is the version that makes the most sense. If we go with the idea that the derelict crashed around the same time as the containment breach at the complex then it lends itself to a larger narrative. One of the Engineers pushing the envelope too far and their weapon systems spinning out of their control and turning on and destroying them all.
This also plays into the question of "if the eggs and goo were weapons, then who were they fighting?" The simple answer is "another alien race", but that's boring and not in keeping with the themes. Personally I suspect it was a civil war of some sort. If they're really going for the 'Chariots of the Gods' angle then this is the War in Heaven. Angel against Angel in an effort to storm the gates of Paradise and take the throne. Indeed, that could also play into why they were out to destroy us if we're seen as a potential genetic resource for the other side. Genocide as asset denial. Whether the one's on that planet were the rebels or the authority is pretty much academic from out POV.
Honestly, I think that makes way much more sense than the "we killed space Jesus" argument.
Last edited:
Careful or you'll get accused of being a hater, even though your points are PERFECTLY valid and salient!
Similar threads
