Xeno Cameo?

I have to be honest, I do think we will see a living xenomorph in some shape or form in the movie...no matter how much Ridley denies it lol Although I wont be surprised if we dont and I wont be disappointed either as long as the film is good. Im more interested in learning about the space jockeys and anything new, but seeing a xeno will be great if it happens.

From all the tension and action in the trailer, its clear there is some form of creature. For a movie to "share Aliens DNA" and not have a Xeno (or some form of Xeno) wouldnt make a great deal of sense. I think its almost a 100% certainty theres going to be one of our old chest busting friends in there. Even as a passing scene that sets up the first Alien movie. Also I think its pretty clear from the trailer, either one space jockey still lives or one of the crew transforms into one or gets possessed by one and then goes on to pilot the derelict to go to earth. At which point they fly the human space ship into it to prevent it. The slime, gunk scenes, the shadowy figures etc, theres some sort of alien infection. Now with that said, I dont think the Xeno pilots the ship, but are either some form of mutation or a weapon of some sorts stemming from the ooze you see in the trailer. Perhaps the xeno shares some physical traits with the intelligent space jockeys and the back of its head inserts into its pilots seat obscuring our view of it in the trailer and follows the Giger sexual organ theme of insertion and connection.

Ridley Scott has said, "No xenomorph" - in as many words. He doesn't seem to be a man that well known for lies and pranks, nor with any history of it - so I don't know why people find it so hard to accept.

They've spoken about there being a disinformation campaign. Im almost a hundred percent sure you'll be pleasantly surprised. :)

@Carlosnumbertwo [i]Who,[/i] has spoken about a "disinformation campaign"? And what ultimate purpose would such a campaign be supposed to serve? I'm afraid you'd have to be satisfied with being 100% wrong - because it wouldn't be a pleasant surprise at all, as far as I'm concerned.

With all due respect, I've been watching Ridley Scott and other directors as well for a very long time, as the creative process of films is just as interesting to me as the films themselves. And without a doubt, Scott is just as prone to white lies and pranks on the public as anyone else in film. Having said that, taking into account not only all he has said about Giger's Alien appearing in this film, but the manner in which he has said it, there is no Alien in this film. He won't need it.

Im pretty sure it wont be a main component in the film but I find it unbelievable there wont be some sort of reference or brief scene with one in it. They have to set up the first Alien some how, and that would be an excellent way of linking them together.

The link between Alien and Prometheus is the Space Jockey and it's peripheral world or universe, if you will....that is something Ridley Scott has specifically spoken about. Another direct question he answered was about the Alien, going beyond a simple no and elaborating on why there would be no Alien, words to the effect that the Alien was used up, overexposed. But all that wouldn't preclude a picture or symbol of the Alien in the film, nor the appearance of other creatures..that's Ridley the Merry Prankster, perfectly in character. He's got something better and he knows it.

@ Dutch With all due respect: name one of Scott's "pranks".

Robin Hood trailer....head on view of Crowe on a horse, gets a sword tossed to him...exact same shot from Gladiator...you don't see this shot in Robin Hood. What you see is the shot from another angle, from the side, not the head on recalling Gladiator. Thats just one of the more recent. And then there's the painterly style of RSA's logo and how he whipped that out in the least expected way...thats a whole different branch than this thread.

From what i can make out from ridley is that he pretty much feels the xeno has been used up in its current form and he wants to distance himself from that design, and concept as much as possible, yet retain the universe in which a new story can emerge that allows him to develop new creature concepts, and designs, while expanding on the very neglected aspects of the sj/pilot of the original film. If it does make a cameo it will appear in ways unlike previous incarnations in my humble opinion.

@ Dutch This is your definition of a "prank"? And this, is your evidence for the likelihood that Ridley Scott, when he explicitly tells us there is no xenomorph in this film, is, in fact, withholding the fact that there actually [i]is[/i] a xenomorph in his film and "pranking" us? ?... On the one hand, I have Ridley Scott, (who is a serious Director outside the genre of Science Fiction, not Michael Bay trying to hype Transformers), telling me, quite plainly, via interview in 2011, during Principal filming, on-set, in Iceland, that there is no xenomorph in his film. And on the other hand I have you. Telling me that I should not listen to one word Ridley Scott says: because Ridley Scott, is a "Prankster" - and this is based on something about shot choices in trailers versus actual released prints, when those things are edited at different times from various material, for different purposes and where there may be several reasons for the differences between them beyond a Director "pranking" his audience? I don't seem to have been given a quite good enough reason to not accept what the Director has told me, here - so, for the moment, that is what I'll do.

but there is a god damn Xeno, at least a strong reference...the mural

@ the coming That's what I'm saying is that the closest thing were gonna get for a Xeno in this movie?

If it's one thing that bothers me about speculation in forums, is that there are so many people who can't accept the information that is given to them. They imagine these convoluted explanations for things that are easily observed. This applies to visual information as well as verbal. They are weak in basic powers of observation. Just the way it is I guess.

@ allinamberclad You seem to be so against seeing one of those iconic creatures in it. Why? Just the fact the mural exist with what appears to be a Xenomorph solidifies my thoughts on there being one in the movie, if just a brief glimpse at the ending at the least. I think it'll tie the aliens movies together for the regular person out there that isnt a super fan like a lot of us are. I for one know theres a lot more to the Alien/Ripley/space jockey universe but the average movie goer will need more to bring them all together. What better tool than a xenomorph! I for one agree with Scott saying theyve been over done and over used, especially in all those crappy AVP movies, but its such an awesome part of that universe Im not swayed by all the comments hes made saying there wont be. Perhaps there will be one that isnt quite like the one we remember, but an earlier version thats different in some way to the original.

@Carlosnumbertwo Exactly maybe some sort of proto-xeno?

@allinamberclad I mentioned Robin Hood as one example of where Ridley Scott pranked or misdirected us. But if you think back to the orignal trailer for Alien, there are numerous instances of this. First, he prominently uses the image of a chicken egg which does not appear in the final film in any way. Second, he also uses a low tracking shot of caked or dry mud; again an image which does not appear in the film. There is also a distinctive wailing sound or siren which does not appear in the film, such as in the self-destruct sequence of the nostromo. The main reason for this misdirection was not to lie to us, but to avoid spoiling any surprises which would have lessened the shock moments in the film. A necessary white lie. PS Does anyone notice the resemblance of the wailing sound in the original trailer(1979) to the one in the Prometheus trailer?

@ Carlosnumbertwo No, I'm not necessarily against a xenomorph being in this, however I am overjoyed at the thought it seems that it won't be - because that means this will [i]all[/i] be fresh new territory - and the fact is the xenomorph has been [i]done.[/i] To DEATH. @ Dutch We're going to have to agree to disagree and wait 'til June. But I can tell you one thing before then: none of this is "pranking". I think you may need to revise what you think that it is. I did just comment on the relationship of trailers to the actual movie: they perform a related, but different function - and they are manufactured from what's available. He, (or 2nd unit) shot eggs and mud because that's what he had at the time - the featured eggs weren't available or even finished at the time - if you watch some DVD extra or other, you can listen to him say all of that to camera for yourself. [i]That[/i] is not a "prank", that is the nature of trailers and working with what you have. Neither is it, "misdirection", nor anything like anything to do with "misdirection" - you are completely mis-using terms. None of this constitutes a public declaration that a major character is not in his movie, when it is - in order to mislead his audience? He has no history of that kind of huckster behaviour and to suggest it is just ridiculous. I still have been given no sensible reason to not take the man at his word and that suits me very well indeed.

@ Carlosnumbertwo I am not against seeing the xenomorph. I am just happy that it seems I won’t be seeing it – and that is because that will mean all of this will be completely new territory: and because the xenomorph has been done to death. You’re “not swayed by his comments”?... OK. @ Dutch We’re going to have to agree to disagree - but I can tell you one thing: none of this is “pranking”. I think you may need to revise what you think that is. What you describe is just the nature of trailers – as I said, the relationship of trailers to the Feature is that they perform a related, but different, function and they are often manufactured from what’s available and in advance of the completion of the Feature. Scott, or some Effects Unit or other, shot hen’s eggs and mud for the Alien trailer, because hen’s eggs and mud were what they had at the time. The Talent eggs weren’t available or even finished - if you find the right DVD you can witness him say that to camera yourself. That, I’m afraid, is not “pranking” – that is trailers; and working with what you have. Neither is it, “misdirection”, nor anything like anything to do with “misdirection” - you are completely mis-using terms. This example is as invalid as the first and is it quite hard to take seriously. None of this is an example of Scott deliberately claiming a character is not in his film, when it is in his film, in order to mislead his audience in advance. He has no history of that kind of absurd and huckster-ish behavior and the suggestion seems ridiculous. I can’t think what would motivate a man at this stage of his career to begin the playing of silly games. Of course, you must believe what you think is sensible, but [i]I[/i] have still not been given one sensible reason to doubt what the Director has had to say on this matter - and that is more than good enough for me.