How SJ becomes Fossilised??

BellaisanAlien
MemberOvomorphJanuary 17, 20122587 Views41 RepliesI thought this would be good to start as a seperate discussion.
I'm wandering if the fossilised space jockey in Alien could be explained by the fact that the person in the chair is mutating. My thoughts are:
1. The character (who I belive is in the wheelchair scenes) mutates into the big blue guy, sits in the chair, but continues to mutate and appears to be fossilised into the chair.
2. Or, the chair isn't designed to be used for extended periods, the Derelict crashes and the Engineer gets trapped in the chair, the technology starts to absorb him and he appears fossilised.
3. Or, once the derelict crashes a safety system is initiated and the ship seals vital components, thus the Engineer appears to be fossilised......
I'd welcome any thoughts on this, pure speculation as it is.............
January 17, 2012
near speed of light travel would ensure that the events of prometheus happened thousands, or millions or years before nostrum finds it...
January 17, 2012
The space jockey had a chestburster which killed it in the seat - and perhaps this event caused the crash. Some speculate that that chestburster was a queen which was responsible for the eggs.
But to return to the point, I don't believe the space jockey is fossilised - which implies hundreds of thousands of years in isolation. Afterall, what of the eggs then? Or does that blue light preserve eternal youth of the eggs etc.
In any case, Sir Ridley has already stated that "that's not a skeleton, it's a suit".
January 17, 2012
We know that SJ had a chestburster in him as the injuries obviously showed when it was in the chair, which means this -
1. We DO see something very much xenomorph related in Prometheus as, how else would SJ have a a chestburster inside him.
or 2. During Prometheus, that SJ goes to another planet where xenomorphs are.
Surely it HAS to be one of those scenarios??
January 17, 2012
I don't think Ridley Scott & his creative team spent too much time thinking about the scientific basis for the Space Jockey. The Space Jockey is designed to look incomprehensible, it is not supposed to make sense, it's alien. I fear if the new movie seeks to jump-start a new franchise, and start explaining the whole Alien Mythology like Richard Attenborough doing his PLANET EARTH series, it will just collapse under its own pretentiousness. Just like LOST the TV Series. ALIEN is a tiny nasty shocker of a movie, with a precise knowledge of horror movie rhythm (start slow, subvert expectations, build suspense, and then "Krreeeeech!!!"). Its minimalism, budget and storytelling, is its strength.
January 17, 2012
I agree with you Engr101 - I think the things that worked best in the original movie were the things that didn't make sense and were not explained. Finding out that they've decided the Space Jockey's outer appearance was just a suit is a bit of a letdown. Still I'm willing to give the movie a chance.
January 17, 2012
@Engr101
-"I fear if the new movie seeks to jump-start a new franchise, and start explaining the whole Alien Mythology like Richard Attenborough doing his PLANET EARTH series, it will just collapse under its own pretentiousness"
Could you explain this mumbo jumbo please.
January 17, 2012
If the movie turns into lost it will fail - lost became a mess. It did start out good though.
Could be when the suit dies, and the ship for that matter, assuming they are alive, it decomposes fast like a body, or at least the "living" part does. It will be interesting to see how far the living-machine biomechanical stuff is taken.
I hope the blue guy is not a mutated person. Seems dorky, but thats only because I don't know all the details. I won't loopse faith.
January 17, 2012
@Macs
I hate it if a movie relies too much on exposition. Have you been to INCEPTION forum where fans complain about too many boring lectures by Leo on how Dream Levels work? Have you seen the last 5 minutes of MISSION TO MARS? It plays like a Children's Guide to Birth of Universe by Assoc. of New Age Teachers. I hope Ridley has a more elegant solution, you know: show more, tell less. Remember how Ridley Scott dislikes the voice over at the start of BLADE RUNNER? I can't imagine him doing the same thing in PROMETHEUS: "In a time before time..."
January 17, 2012
In the original script there was also an alien fossilized, standing in a corner, that crew don't see.That quote by Dallas "Looks fossilized" was always a nod to the audience to explain the fact that the Jockey had been there for a very long time.I just don't get why else it would be in the script?I mean he doesn't say "Looks fossilized, but it might be this crazy LV426 atmosphere and it probably has only been here a couple of decades."The whole point on him saying "fossilized" was to give the impression it was very,very old - imho of course.
January 17, 2012
[quote][b]Dallas didn't know what a digit was either though lol[/b].[/quote]
You've lost me?!?
But what I was trying to say was it was in the script to give the impression of something ancient.
January 17, 2012
I understand where your coming from theusprom, I really do. we all believed that the Derelict had been there a long time. but it seems prometheus may say otherwise, in which case the over-analysers will demand an answer, of which there are many (which have been covered here), but at the end of the day it comes down to two things...
1. Dallas was the captain, not the science officer, thus his frame of reference would be limited regards fossilisation.
2. He said it looked fossilised, not that it was fossilised.
January 17, 2012
@Macs
What I am afraid of is that 20th Century Fox, upon seeing the wild success of scifi action movies like AVATAR and the new APES prequel/reboot, saw a commercial opportunity with the ALIEN franchise and decided on a reboot complete with exposition scenes on how Earth was formed by Celestial Beings with soothing New Age voice-over, kinda like these Nature Documentaries I mentioned (I love those BBC Nature shows by the way, nothing against them) . Often times, when a studio enthusiastically backs a tent pole from its conception, the movie either becomes blah or fails completely.
It's late, I am on caffeine, so sorry if my thoughts read like mumbo-jumbo.
January 17, 2012
When Ash and Dallas are discussing what to do about Kane and his facehugger Ash says something like "I am going to try to remove one of the digits..." and Dallas says "You're gonna do what?" A frustrated Ash lashes back "Finger!... I am going to try to get his finger off."
Dallas was not chosen to be captain for his smarts he was chosen to be captain because he was controllable and maybe a bit naive.
January 17, 2012
Ahh, I see lol....but.....That doesn't come across in the movie very well, at least I didn't pick up on it (Dallas being stupid I mean) and I don't think the Jockey scene reinforces it.I've always just thought that scene was the filmakers way of trying to get over the point of it being old.
January 17, 2012
The digit thing is definitely not about him being dumb. I always took it as him being surprised Ash would want to try to remove one digit and not that he didn't know what a digit was. Jesus.....even a 9 year old kid knows what a digit is, numerical and biologically.
This is again, as stated previously, way too much analysis and thought about nothing.
January 17, 2012
I feel that the scene is supposed to distinguish the 2 characters from each other. A scientist would use proper technical jargon, "digit" as opposed to simply "fingers." Dallas is more like a typical gung-ho captain/leader character: "That's just a bunch of BS [ ..] I just run the ship!"