disappointed with the Space Jockey...

I'm glad Space Jockey we see in 'Alien' is just a suit. To me, the 'Alien' franchise universe is very grounded and [almost] everything we've ever been presented in the original 3 films has a very tangible explanation. An elephant-esque species just seems too of a the George Lucas universe and not that of what we've seen before. I also, love it when the 'rug gets pulled from under us' and what we thought we knew ends up being a 'wow, I never thought of it like that' moment..... It's what makes good movies better. Also, by doing the 'it's a suit' way, you open up the opportunity for a whole new universe of ideas and possibilities. I understand why Scott & Company keep trying to say it's not a prequel.... it's not trying to directly tie into 'Alien'.....it's just saying there's a six degrees of separation to the 'Alien' films. The 'suit' is one of those ties.

yes i do indeed :( i hate the new take on this alien............. just one problem with your post though, "actually some sort of armoured suit like Tron" what the hell does that mean? lol :D

I'm giving Ridley a chance on this...I'm with you on this but give the artful dodger a shot here. I never expected a revisit to this mystery either..go ahead Ridley, you're on!

Im in two minds. It is a shame that the mystery is gone, but at the same time Im really looking forward to know more about them. Hopefully I like what is given. And if I dont, I will just somehow force myself to view prometheus space jockeys as completely different to the one seen in Alien.

I totally agree with the coming on this one,I also thought the jockey was some sort of being and not just a suit,but let's just Waite and see what the movie brings.

Well, I dont by it at all... I posted this in other topics, but my take is that the SJ's are NOT even the MASTERS, but are in fact subservant slaves to something altogether different... the "Blue Meanies" hahaha (in other words... the giant Humanoid head statue) I think there are in fact 2 species and the SJ's look very much like their "exo" appearance underneath... but as in the greek myth.. they are also like Titans but "disgruntled" ones. It is actually the SJ's who are the literal "Prometheus" of the myth and its they who are to be punished for what they have done... which is provide us with knowledge we were never supposed to have. But of course, we by extension will have to go down to. But thats just me.

@invader the suit from Tron Legacy, segments kind of fold away, I believe a similar effect is used in the trailer for like 1/2 second

I agree that (on what we have seen so far) the SJ could be a let down. I write these words carefully knowing that many will not agree, as the film is not released and non of us know for sure what the SJ will actually look like. However my basic concern stems from the fact that the whole 'suit' concept has always left me cold. As far as I am concerned the Nostromo crew found a skelelton, NOT a suit. Just look at the damn thing, it is a fossil and being a fossil makes it so much more intriguing. The idea that this ultra advanced being has been dead for thousands (or millions?) of years in the depths of space, probably light years from home, makes the human condition seem totally small and insignificant. The universe is ancient and the premise of finding a fossilised alien out there, somewhere, is genius. The concept of putting a humanoid being in an exotic suit is not so clever, IF of course that is what happens in the film? I will happily eat my words if I am wrong about this.

I would be disappointed if I was for sure that the SJ from Alien is in Prometheus. But I"m not, so I'm not.

I think the idea is actually very interesting. The only mistake i think is in the Trailers they should have left out the chair raising scene, or edit it. Because its from this that we see the Blue Guy. If we had not seen that, then we would have thought the Space Jockey was going to be a Creature but then when we saw the movie it would be a suprise or shock and make us go WTF! Same goes for maybe the scene where we saw Shaw have Squidy pulled out, thats a bit of a spoiler aswell. Either Ridley may have given too much away, or he knew about what he wanted to show in the Trailers because he has plenty more suprises in store for us and ones that maybe be a complete shock to what we may now assume is going on.

I'm not looking at the trailers and leaked/official images anymore because I'm certain they're not going to tell us something I can piece together when at the same time Scott and Lindelof are telling us nothing!! hahaha Actually, they're telling us the themes and concepts in a deliberate abstract way and also some definite facts, but not enough to go on. But I will put my money on an R rating.

i just read tonight...........Right on

@snugs Yes thats one good point, not the point of the SJ in Alien being a creature, it could still be a Big Man in Space suit thats fossilised. (explain latter). But indeed the mystrey that what ever he/it was it seemed as though he had been there a lot longer than 37 years. I am sure that Ridley and others behind the film hinted the Jockey could be a suit way before this movie and like before even Alien 3 etc. The explanation i have if indeed SJ is the same type and thus Blue Man in Space Suit, is that there Technology etc is all Bio Mechanical meaning Organic. Just as a Snails Shell is, Just as a Tree is, and thus a old Log is a dead peice of what was once a living tree. Thats whats happened here the SJ has become mummified. Or to maybe explain Chest Burster, the SJ may have been stuck to his chair by a Alien Organism just as how the Xenos used to fuse/cacoon its victims on the walls so they can not move while the Chest Burster grows inside them. Maybe thats why he looks more attached to the chair, and as both the Suit and Material the Xenos use to Cacoon people are Organic it will eventually die and fossilise/mummifiy. Thats my take and one that i think after the film is out Ridley will explain has happened. Again i could be completely wrong on that.

@snugs yes the original space jockey is a species in my opinion too..It makes a silly impractical suit...I know they like biotech but why choose the elephant design, and the breathing apparatus will need to be explained too for any credibility to be given to it someone earlier mentioned Ridley imagined it to be a suit all along, dating back to 'Alien', is this true? I will forgive the suit idea IF once the suit is worn, it then becomes a new species, basically a deep fusion of Quan Chi from Mortal Kombat *cough* excuse me the Space Jockey and the chair/suit but overall cannae wait, just dont go Reloaded on us please god

Take what Ridley Scott says with a grain of thought. He thinks Deckard is a replicant too. But think about this, can you see the muscular blue guy fitting into one of those slim suits? Unless the blue guys come in different body types, like regular people, that skinny SJ corpse on the floor in the ampule room could be another race or species in the suit.

Indeed.... See this thread [url=http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/2743&page=3]Head/Mask Debate[/url] You have to remember that nearly all things none Human in the Alien movie and Aliens are all based and finished products look simular to ones in the Art Works of HR Giger. Look at the Alien Cycle Artwork, and tell me does that look like a Suit? It does and while the Jockey in Alien looks different to this Artwork, take a look at the one in Prometheus and you can see its near the same idea.

I agree with AlsoKnownAsNate, the Alien universe is tangible and grounded. Ridley Scott said he believes in the theory of other lifeforms not exactly like humans but [i]similar[/i] in the universe, so the Blue Guys we see in the trailer make sense. Rather they be mankinds creators, or a step between mankind and its creators.

@Biehn_Bandit....so glad you brought Deckard up cos I was looking for an opening on that myself. I go years and years loving that movie and out of nowhere all of a sudden Deckard is a replicant.....like, POOF..he's a replicant, just like that. Harrison Ford says hold it not so fast...no way I played a replicant. So on this movie I'm not so surprised at this seemingly sudden new view that has surfaced about the Space Jockey. My take on Deckard The Replicant is that Ridley may have wanted Harrison to play the role as a replicant, but Harrison refused...and he had the star power to refuse and saw how it wouldnt work. So years later Ridley( stubborn bugger that we love) tried to sneak it anyway. The tension and clashes between those two is part of film history now. I have an even further theory on why Ridley was so hardheaded about this and like the Deckard replicant theory, its probably been thought of before....a crafty in-movie plug for "Legend"

I have to say, SJ in Alien - dark, gothic, fossilised, unknown, haunting, disturbing.. and then we see this fluid, CGI, humanoid - true, this is the one thing that has disappointed me amidst all the hype

From the limited information in the trailer i can't be for sure. But the Space Jockey in both the comic series and graphic novels depict him as a large elefantoid creature and not in anysort of a suit. Now i know its possible that in the various issues in which the space jockey is referenced there could be differnt takes on his appreance through the different artist, but the common theme was said suit-less creature.

the coming...earlier you asked this..."someone earlier mentioned Ridley imagined it to be a suit all along, dating back to 'Alien', is this true?" This is Ridley in Filmophobia about how he's always looked back at 'Alien'... "...Alien. It’s fairly pure. And this one does actually raise all kinds of other questions, because if someone could, a being, could be as monstrously clever to create something like we experienced in the very first one – I always figured it’s a weapon, and I always figured that [the ship in the first Alien] was a carrier of weapons. Therefore, who is that, inside that suit? That wasn’t a skeleton, that was a suit. And if you open up the suit, what do you get inside it? And why were they going, where were they going?" I look at it this way...I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and not because he's Ridley, but because we haven't seen Jackdidleysqaut yet......and if [b]he[/b] always saw it that way, what's the big deal? As to Deckard being a replicant...this is a complicated issue...Now, the following is from Philip K. Dick who wrote 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?' upon which Bladerunner is based.. "The purpose of this story as I saw it was that in his job of hunting and killing these replicants, Deckard becomes progressively dehumanized. At the same time, the replicants are being perceived as becoming more human. Finally, Deckard must question what he is doing, and really what is the essential difference between him and them? And, to take it one step further, who is he if there is no real difference?" It would seem pretty clear how he viewed Deckard in the novel. However, When Ridley says that he is a replicant in the film, I can believe and agree with it soundly for a few reasons.... 1) Ridley says Deckard is a replicant.....if the man who directed it says he is, well then, he is.....it's kind of simple 2) You have to go back to the history of 'Bladerunner' and understand what happened to it back when it was about to be released. The studio, unhappy with early screening results forced the awful and redundant Ford voiceover on Scott because they didn't believe audiences would understand the film or that Deckard was a replicant...as a result, Deckard film identity as a replicant is lost intranslation. Deckard as replicant was always the intention as can be seen here from an article detailing the film's lost script pages.....[url=http://io9.com/5181048/blade-runners-original-ending-yes-deckards-a-replicant]Blade Runner’s Original Ending: Yes, Deckard’s A Replicant[/url] "As Deckard stares at the sky, he concludes his voiceover: The great Tyrrell hadn't designed me, but whoever had, hadn't done so much better. 'You're programmed too,' she told me, and she was right. In my own modest way, I was a combat model. Roy Batty was my late brother." 3) The director's cut brings back and highlights specific elements that make it clear That he was a replicant...the following article helps explain this as well....[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/825641.stm]Blade Runner riddle solved [/url] "In the Director's Cut version, the biggest clue for analysts was the appearance of a unicorn on screen while Deckard is lost in thought. The image of the mythical creature appears again towards the end of the film when he picks up an origami model discarded by another character, Gaff. As the replicants had no memories of their own, they had to be implanted, and fans interpreted the appearance of the model as a sign that Gaff knew what Deckard was thinking because it was an image shared by other non-humans. " There you have it fellas....have at it...

I agree that the SJ being just a tall blue guy is kinda off. Just like the Alien being a bio weapon, if you ask me! It throws away a lot of its magic; if it's a naturally occurring organism, then it could occurr right in our back yards, and that's scary stuff! I think one of the things that got under everyone's skin back in '79 was that everything was just so out of the order we came to apreciate. The Alien is just an animal that can mop the floor with us. It's not an alien with fancy tech, it can literally kill us all with it's bare hands just for the sake of breeding. It can't be bought or convinced to do otherwise. It has no notion of moral. Only the survival of the species matters, above all. And (sorry @AlsoKnownAsNate) I think the SJ fit perfectly into that. Assuming alien life forms share morphology with us, let alone values of morality, is just waaaaay off and has a big component of "man being the center of the Universe" to it. Plus, I agree @the comming, it makes for a silly, impractical suite. Also I've just been checking the scene where the SJ is found in Alien and I can swear there are teeth in the "mask"... what's with that if it's just a suit? Ok, some will argue it could allow the SJ to feed on alien grounds and the suit would process the food into something usable. But still, just seems plain silly. On the other hand, a while back I posted somewhere (can't really remember where) that what is found in the Alien ship is JUST THE SUIT. If it's a bio-suit, could it be impregnated by the facehugger, even without a actual host? Just my 2 cents...

The unicorn footage was actually taken from "Legend." Scott added it into the Director's cut, long after Bladerunner was in the can. Dick never categorically states that Deckard is a replicant. Is it possible that Deckard was a replicant and not a human? Sure, but the entire point of this particular story, is that in all the ways that matter, the answer to that question, doesn't.

Oh craigmore, craigmore,....the coolest craigmore I could sincerely hope to encounter... I'm stuck with what is up on the screen, what I see working, the original finished story. Woulda, coulda, shoulda, meant to...just ..isn't. For me, it is what it is. I read all that, everything I could find at the time and as hard as I tried......it was still no. So here comes Prometheus, I've seen a few things, and.....we'll see. Got faith in the Guv'nor still, regardless.

I think it's important not to put Ridley or anyone else working on this film on a pedastal. Everyone is capable of coming up with less than brilliant ideas, or ideas that aren't as good as someone else may come up with. No one is a master of all that's creative. I think a lot of people are overestimating what the filmmakers can come up with, or how deep they are thinking about the themes and images in the film. Plus, the SJ being a suit is disappointing, but less important than the overall picture.

Exactly, Biehn-bandit. It's what they've done and what they do that matters, not what they look like. Besides, there's obvious dark irony in the idea that SJs are malevolently ruthless, technological "Gods" who engineered us in their own image.......and that dovetails pretty neatly with the way we've turned out, as well.

I feel the trailer is way too revealing. We know now that Shaw gives birth to the squid like creature, her boyfriend gets infected, the mohawk guy mutates into something and they're trying to torch him, prometheus crashes into space jockey vessel, that the space jockeys leave for earth, and that Shaw will most likely survive. I can pretty much see where the story is going. I didn't want to know these details before seeing the film. Plus, when I saw the teaser, I had the impression it was an R film. But seeing the full trailer, it looks PG-13ish. So I'm still looking forward to the film, but I'm not as stoked as I was originally.

Right, Biehn_Bandit, you're correct. I mean come on! Legolas under the weight of the lead with the gravity of both Irons and Neeson in close proximity? ooops..that was kinda uncalled for, I guess.

Oh, but I'm not disappointed wih the look of the space jockey. I'm tired of aliens looking like insects, octopuses, and all that crap. I think an intelligent sophisticated alien life form would have a beautiful symmetrical form, so I'm with ridley on this one. No elephant looking creatures PLEASE. The only thing that gets me is the hair. Why are aliens with a human like body always bald.

I didnt see the jockey as malevolent in the first film, I just. Thought it was a victim trying to help others avoid his fate. If he didn't send the warning who did? Why would he send the warning?