To everyone that don't want hybrids, such as the dog alien. The xenomorph's DNA reflex is a stable of the xenomorph's biology since the original ALIEN unless you mean an unnatural hybrids like the ones in resurrection?

What I don't in the future ALIEN movies is to ever acknowledge that crapfest that was AVP (2004), that's all I don't want.

If James Cameron is working on an Aliens prequel then it could be a film adaptation of Alien: River of Pain or Alien: Out of the Shadows or both.  

Ellen Ripley Sees a Buried City and a Crashed Alien Ship

The novels are top notch but one exciting thing about Ellen Ripley in Alien: Out of the Shadows is this. below.

“‘It’s a ship,’ he said.
‘What?’ Ripley gasped. She hadn’t even considered that possibility. Buried almost a mile beneath the planet’s surface, surely this couldn’t be anything but a building, a temple of some sort, or some other structure whose purpose was more obscure.'”

Alien: Out of the Shadows, page 167.

“The entire left half of the exposed surface might have been a wing, curving down in a graceful parabola, projections here and there seemingly swept back for streamlining.”

Alien: Out of the Shadows, page 168.

A lot of this sounds familiar and could be a tie-in to Alien: Covenant but this could also signal an entire new direction for the films.

I believe it has to do with each story dk.  Great topic.

Religion was a big part of the storyline in Prometheus and I thought it had a great fit not only with Dr. Shaw but also with Dr. Holloway and Peter Weyland's beliefs.

Peter Weyland quotes above Friedrich Nietzsche with "I am a law only for my kind, I am no law for all."  It seems, Peter Weyland is chanting that he is above religion.

Dr. Holloway said in the Prometheus transmission interview that he wanted to "crush all man-made religions" and made clear his contempt for Dr. Shaw's beliefs.  

I thought all of this fit well with the concept of the Engineers and how they "fit" with what humanity has seen and what beliefs are held by the masses.  The Alien: The Cold Forge and Alien: Echo novels did not reference religion where I remember and those novels were spectacular.

Too bad he ruined his career with that political stunt

I mean its comical seeing it now but when I was a little kid, it terrified me.

I got what your trying to say but the terminology was what was bothering me. Evolution is evolution no matter if its a re-evolve trait or not, its still just called evolution.

This is super late lol but that is definitely Jussie Smollett in the shower scene. This was his first big motion picture scene. 

Ha Ha... Space Balls ;)

Seems that the Intention was for the Chest Buster to have at least Arms....

So to carry that on in Context to the OP.

Then it depends HOW they reveal the Origin of the Xenomorph,  because if we ASSUME as indicated that David's Chest Buster from Oram is a Predecessor to the 1979 Xenomorph than we have to assume the loss of Limbs in Chest Buster Stage is due to some Survival Benefit.

But there are TWO things to consider in Context to the Chest Buster...

1) This is purely Sci-Fi....

2) We are talking about a Engineered Creation.

So when we are talking about Genetic Manipulation to the Advanced Level Implied within the Franchise then Genetically you could DEVOLVE a Organism.

As far as Advanced Genetic Engineering goes... but NOT as far as Natural Evolution.

When i was talking about DEVOLUTION i was referring to that Technically this is considered Impossible, but that SOME Organisms can Revert to Previous Traits of their Ancestors that they had lost over time, this happens if these Traits are suited to Environmental Changes and Survival and in these cases its NOT a case of Devolution but more of a Re-Evolution.

Technically when this happens they could be considered a NEW Species because while they could gain some LOST Traits, they would also keep some of the Previously Gained Traits from Evolution.

So i should have detailed more as when i put "Organism can Revert back to a Prior Stage of Evolution"

I meant as i mentioned earlier in that post that SOME TRAITS can be regained, and i NEVER implied that a Organism would 100% go back to a previous Stage.

Even if a Organism regained a Number of Traits Lost in Evolution, it would maintain a Number of Traits it gained from the Process of Previous Evolution.. so i do apologize i should have elaborated a bit more.

So my comment "

"Lifeforms don't devolve, they evolve"

Typically this is kind of true"

I meant as in its True as far as Lifeforms Evolve and dont Devolve, but then to add that a Organism could gain Previous Traits Losts....  but as i further added this is NOT any kind of Devolution however.

so the Typically Kind of True was the Incorrect use of Words by me....   I should have put (as i meant) this is Technically True but some Exceptions Organisms can revert to previously Lost Traits but this would not be Devolution... 

Because when this happens its so these Traits of of Benefit and anything that is Changed for a Improvement/Benefit is a Evolution.

@Leto

I agree. A lot of people think of evolution like its pokemon or digimon but the fact of the matter is that Evolution never goes backwards. There is no such thing "De-evolving" because when an organism regain "primitive traits" its still a different organism than its ancestors and if you could bring said organism back into the past with its ancestor that resembles it, biologically the two creatures are completely different organisms due to the latter's evolution history.

Example: If you take a Human from the 21st Century and send him or her back to the Pleistocene where the first anatomically modern humans evolved. Biologically current modern human had went through several mutations (ex, Europeans gaining the lactose tolerance gene), survived several epidemics and non-african Homo sapiens sapiens absorbing the neanderthal into their genome while african Homo sapiens sapiens continued to evolve in their own way after the Pleistocene.

hox

This is not an evolution. This is ontogenesis and Recapitulation theory.

@hox

Oh yeah forgot embryo had gills

@Leto That's not correct. Evolution often involves switching off genes that no longer serve a useful purpose. For example, when you, I and all other modern humans were floating inside a uterus in the first weeks of life, we had gills in our necks, a legacy from our aquatic past. We are stuffed full of genes that could be re-purposed as nature/evolution sees fit.

Typically this is kind of true.... Organisms can go back to a Previous Stage of Evolution if the Environmental Factors the Organism is in Favor some of the Previous Traits.

No. Evolution does not come back.

For Example if a Organism/Mammal had Thick Fur Coat that it Evolved into having a Small Smooth Coat as the Environment/Climate had become Much Warmer... should the Environment/Climate once again become and stay much Cooler or the Organism Migrates to a Much Cooler Environment then over the Course of Evolution the Organism could go back to its Thick Fur Coat.

It's a delusion. If the "organism" loses wool and then acquires it again - it will be another "organism". Maybe the similar, but not the same.

And further - "organism" (body) can't evolve. Only species.

Although I said ALIEN, my first technical chestbursting experience was SPACEBALLS.

@Big Dave

Yeah but evolution technically doesn't have stages, it might evolve to look similar to its ancestor but its still not a 1:1 because it would have traits its ancestor lacked (such as additional vestigial organs)

I mean every time a terrestrial vertebrate evolves to become aquatic they can't re-evolve gills, they retain the lung adaptation every-time.

Also regarding to the chestburster, wasn't the original supposed to have front limbs but Ridley Scott decided to snip them off?

Welcome back S.M

True, but when Wren unsuprisngly betrays them it becomes even more dangerous to keep Purvis alive. Call may or may not have surgical programing, but the remainder of the crew of the Betty (Johner and Vries) as well as Distephano and Ripley 8 likely don't have surgical training. Call and the rest should know it's a terrible idea keeping Purvis alive after a certain point. 

Even if frozen you run the risk of bringing him to a surgen who might keep the specimen alive.

To me, Covenant chestburster is still a prototype. It grew much more rapidly than any others seen before which looks to have started during gestation.

It'd be Alien for me. Don't know how young I was but it terrified and captivated me as a child.

"ok androids, leave the kissing and flute playing to the humans..."

I think we need to look at John Logan for this... bare in mind his draft had David and Dr Shaw having Sexual Relations... until they arrive at Paradise and then David just Breaks her Neck!

So a lot of this Personality is something Logan added that i feel is Flawed/Wrong.

The "You Blow and I will do the Fingering" is taken by some as a Innuendo it may be intended as that... 

I think that Dialog should not have been needed...

The rest of the FLUTE scene was to show that while Walter Cant Create a Tune on his own... when Taught he Finally could which points to KNOWLEDGE and Knowledge is a Powerful Tool.  Which carries on with David trying to show that Walter can Exceed beyond the Limitations Expected of him.

Ignoring the "You Blow and I will do the Fingering" Dialog.

The KISS could be seen as a JUDAS Kiss before David Stabs Walter in the Back.... Metaphorically Speaking

Another thing to Consider when looking at this RECENT TOPIC is part of one of my Replies...

"could the Natural Environment of where the Chest Buster is Gestated have a effect on the TYPE of Chest Buster?"

I noticed that the ALIENS Chest Buster has like Arms and Hands and Legs and Feet and NOT the Pectoral Fins of the one from ALIEN

If we are talking about what we each had seen FIRST?

Then it was ALIEN Chest Buster 1979 for me....

If we are talking Chronologically in Terms of ALIEN Franchise Time-Line as far as WHAT we had been shown.

Then the DEACON would be the First to be shown... HOWEVER it is Highly Likely the Engineers had been Chest Busted prior to 2093, and who knows which was the First Similar Organism that had BUSTED out of a Engineer or Human from the Ancient Past and HOW LONG ago this First Incident had occurred?

Regarding the Chest Busters...

This is a Interesting One...  IF we assume the 1979 ALIEN Organism is a Evolution then the Aesthetic Differences must play a Important Role to the Organisms Survival.

So in this Context we have to Assume the 1979 Chest Buster offers the Xenomorph Greater Survival Rate, we get the Picture a Chest Buster is a Organism Stage of the Cycle where it is at its most Vulnerable.  So the Serpent Chest Buster maybe has Speed on its side to Escape from Threats.

Something to Consider is that David has Drawings of the Previous 1979 Chest Buster, these are likely just Art Work from the Concept Artist that they thought would be COOL to add.

However such Drawings to help some to argue that the Xenomorph of Davids is NOT the Original Ancient One.

Could it be this is the AIM of David the Perfection he Foresees? 

It is just a Oversight IMO....

or we could maybe look at it as a Previous Version that David First Created, before he Evolved it to the one in ALIEN COVENANT.... but after what transpires between ALIEN COVENANT and ALIEN the Evolved ones are gone but the Previous Versions by David get onto the Derelict?

could the Natural Environment of where the Chest Buster is Gestated have a effect on the TYPE of Chest Buster?

EDIT:

I noticed that the ALIENS Chest Buster has like Arms and Hands and Legs and Feet and NOT the Pectoral Fins of the one from ALIEN

Alien Resurrection its not clear to determine if this Chest Buster has Arms or Fins or Neither, but it seems they could have Fins.... The Queen however has Arms.. just as in ALIEN 3 also.

"Lifeforms don't devolve, they evolve"

Typically this is kind of true.... Organisms can go back to a Previous Stage of Evolution if the Environmental Factors the Organism is in Favor some of the Previous Traits.

So it Technically would be to EVOLVE back to a prior Stage if this Stage is more suitable for the Organisms Current Benefit.

For Example if a Organism/Mammal had Thick Fur Coat that it Evolved into having a Small Smooth Coat as the Environment/Climate had become Much Warmer... should the Environment/Climate once again become and stay much Cooler or the Organism Migrates to a Much Cooler Environment then over the Course of Evolution the Organism could go back to its Thick Fur Coat.

So its not quite Devolution but a Organism can Revert back to a Prior Stage of Evolution if the Current Environment is more suited to that Previous Evolutionary Stage as far as Survivability

The initial plan was to get Wren to surgically remove it.  That wasn't possible, so plan B was to freeze Purvis, then get Wren to surgically remove it at a later date.  There was no way Call or the others would've let it live.

Lifeforms don't devolve, they evolve. The evolution from resembling the adult to looking more serpentine must have be advantageous for the xenomorphs to do so. Perhaps their offspring needed to be more maneuverable and having limbs hampered them for a quick escape? 

Here's a video with the birth of some chestbursters...

https://youtu.be/yf61ye6lK7I

Short answer: It seems plausible Call had agenda driven programming of which she was not aware, but I think the intent of the movie was that she was independent and genuine with her actions. Do not forget her mean streak when she summoned the Xenomorphs to hone in on an individual whom worked for YT.

I like AVP too but I doubt many would consider that canon especially with the first burst distinction. I am afraid it would be similar to breaking a loud wind during Communion at a Catholic Mass- voice of experience LOL!

Yeah, @dk. I Saw aliens first too. As for the first burst, maybe that ones in the sacrificial Chamber of alien vs Predator, If we don't consider a sacrilege to include that movie in the alien filmography. I liked alien versus Predator.

In cinema, i watched Alien 3, Alien vs Predator 1, alien vs Predator 2 and Alien Covenant.

I saw Aliens first, so it would be the woman cocooned in the nest with Newt.

If you are asking which was the actual first burst, it would be the back burster from Covenant I think. 

Beautiful photos of the USCSS Covenant, @Ingeniero.

Here are a few more shots of the USCSS Covenant.

Prometheus Concept Art

I think we missed out a little with the Steve Burg concepts (below filtered) left out of production in the film.  I personally would have loved to seen more of Weyland Industries on Mars or in orbit over Earth in Prometheus.

That video is great setaverde.  Thank you for sharing.

At one point in the video...the USCSS Sulaco was my favorite...then it was the USCSS Prometheus....then I remembered how cool the Planet 4 lander was....  

A portion of the Alien: Covenant Origins novel is spent in the USCSS Covenant while in orbit over Earth.  

In the novel, there are two terrorist attacks on the ship and we learn there was another freight lift like the one below used to rescue the remains of the Covenant crew from Planet 4.

I want Jessica Chastain in every movie setaverde.

"Approaching the rock the figure is revealed to be a middle-aged Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce). Driven forward by further hallucinations of Weyland, Shaw and Niander Wallace"

Yes, if there is a small audience for this direction, then I'm in it.  

One thing I really liked about Alien: Covenant Origins and Alien: The Cold Forge was the corporations competing with each other for exotic technology.  So, I would be the last to be upset with a tie to Wallace to fill out the last part of this century's storyline.  

Great work Gavin.  

Kage, yes, bring on Ash.  

In The Weyland-Yutani Report, artificial intelligence is discussed with David and Ash on the same page with an explanation on how a "personality" can be transferred.  

Is Ash David's Personality?

I am not alone in wondering if Ash is David because Ash clearly lives on inside of Mother and speaks to Ripley when she addresses him directly.

"Hello Ash, she typed.  The words appeared on the screen.....

Hello Ripley."

Alien: Out of the Shadows, page 85.

"Well I am more interested in the Xeno and the SJ compared to David, he is not that important compared to them at least that is how I look at it. My preferred way when it comes to what is important to the franchise. Some people are interested in it but I am not."

I've seen your comment above echoed in another topic, seen below, Thoughts_Dreams and it really has made me laugh.  

I am not mocking you, even in the slightest, when I write that...I just believe that if the flute lessons and the kiss/kill scenes had been pulled then we might have had an entirely different response to Alien: Covenant. 

"Like I have said before we need human characters to sympathize with and that work or else it will fail, again. Making David the creator of the Xenos is trash so they got to get rid of that.

What ever they might choose I want it to focus on the human journey with well-made human characters. I am really tired of the android thing but then if there is anyone that finds that interesting then good for them."

After watching Alien: Covenant's deleted scenes again, I just can't help but wonder if these two scenes affected the overall film for many.  

I can see where many could assess this aspect and say:

"ok androids, leave the kissing and flute playing to the humans...and why are you both in the same room barking sonnets and not on either side of the planet turning over rocks looking for hammerpedes or running into the opening of a cave looking for xenomorphs...!?"

This may oversimplify concerns voiced over the direction of Alien: Covenant but I'm skimming over the lack of Engineers info and other complaints to ask about the overall film review due to the inclusion of the two scenes above.

Time constraints were cited in editing, so if these two scenes were replaced with Daniels and Branson in their hotel room and the Covenant crew stopping to look at the juggernauts in the cavernous recess, then the film might have been received quite differently.

With these changes taken into account, I believe we might have had an entirely different response to the film.  

Does anyone agree?  Flute or no flute?

The questions above are not meant to disrespect Pietro Scalia but rather to document how much others respectfully, greatly disagree with Alien: Covenant's editing in regards to these two scenes.  

In the flute scene, I certainly got the Mermaid's Purse reference (and believe David was carrying the 2 facehugger embryos already here thus acting as a Mermaid's Purse), the Carl Sandburg Fog adaptation of "little cat feet" when David walks up on Walter, and why David was trying so hard to get Walter to create a tune.  

David was trying to resurrect something Walter's designers had worked very hard to suppress, his ability to create.  To me, a lot people understand these points but just don't care after the argued over-focus on androids in Alien: Covenant.

Fog

BY CARL SANDBURG

The fog comes
on little cat feet.

It sits looking
over harbor and city
on silent haunches
and then moves on.

"How does this even make sense? They stopped using the black goop for at least 2000 years but they seem to be able to do space travel without." 

David's notes written in the King's English were a major contributor to this part of the story making sense to me ignorantGuy."

I apologize ignorantGuy.  My above response was disrespectful and I regret writing it.  Your comments are appreciated, especially by me, and I do not sign on here to disrespect anyone.

I missed the connection on the first pass daliens. 

Olivia Shipp is the central character in the novel Alien: Echo by Mira Grant on the planet Zagreus.  This is excellent news.  

The novel was really hard to put down.  

Zagreus has banned androids.  Those on this planet had no idea of the horrors hidden in the spaceship purchased on the cheap in order to dismantle and expand the colony.  Olivia Shipp is a great character and certainly fits in her protagonist role in the story.