Derelict a bomber re-arming in A L I E N

it would seem the area underneath was built Specifically For The Derelict !

sorry, I am NOT convinced there is more than ONE Derelict though!!!

i THINK AND SAY THE ORIGINAL POST BY BIRDMAN IS 100% DEAD BANG ON THE MONEY !!! WANNA GO? LMFAO "I'LL DROP THE GLOVES SUNNY AND GO OPRAH ON YOU" [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/LT.HIGHTIMES/avery.jpg[/img] LOL...CHEERS MAN WHO CARES?...WE'LL FIND OUT EVENTUALLY AND THEN YOU CAN TELL ME HOW WRONG I AM...

Huh?? Are you talking to me Spart? lolz. Im not saying about the number of ships, its this ship or that ship. The only thing I mean is that it has been confirmed by all concerned in the original production that the "EGGS" are within the lower area of the ship itself. Nothing more.

ooooooooooooooooooo000000000000000000000000000000000 .................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................... [b]Sorry[/b] [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/LT.HIGHTIMES/sorry.gif[/img] {P.S. Thought you were saying it was a diff Derelict when you said "Different shape".}

[quote][b]The actual look and shape of the Derelict from '79 is quite different to the one depicted in Prometheus.[/b][/quote]

Yeah.. but I just meant that these are simply Art Direction choices.. just like the addition of another "pilots chair" and 4 sarcophagi. Since Scott is using a combination of REAL sets & CGI ((what I think makes the film look so beautiful btw)) he would had had to have an freaking ENORMOUS set for the Turntable in Prometheus for it to match the proportions in '79. So they have scaled backed the overall proportions to make it more reasible in real world construction, and it still basially looks like it did then... Just not as big. With respect to the exterior, i think they have simply gone with a somewhat more symetrical "horseshoe" now. I guess they probably thought the fight sequences have a better overall look with newer slighty revised shape. I

That's alot of Art Direction changes. Completely different textures, scale, chair design, added sarcophagi. And none of it looking as good as the work in Alien. Seems pointless. No, I think I'll stick with there being two different ships for now.

Well, they are 33 years apart and back then, they never thought they were going to have to explain any of the backstory. They thought there were making a one-off movie, not a 3 decade long multi-movie franchise. Was "sequel" even in the movie-making vocabulary back in the 70's?? They have a much deeper story to tell now, and obviously the EXACT function of the ship & the internal mechanism are going to be part of it. I for one think it would be ludicrous for this civilization that has mapped almost the entire freaking Universe not to actually have 100 or even 1,000 ships!!... But who nows... 2 more months. PS: OH.. I for one am in the giant buried saucer camp !!!

I agree with Canadaphil on this point - there is no reason to think that the Space Jockey's race only has [i]one[/i] ship. I mean, that would make them pretty crappy spacefarers if they put all their eggs in one basket (sorry for the pun). However, I also have to come down firmly on the side of those who have stated here (as I did in a different post) that the dimensions of the 'cargo hold' as depicted in the matte painting from the '79 Alien just don't match up. Between the layout of the 'chamber' and the size relative to the ship as shown, etc. etc., it's a lousy match. I'm sure Ridley's intention was for it to be the ship's hold; it just doesn't look convincing size-wise. (EDIT: I'd also point out that by the time "Aliens" was released, it seems to have been generally understood that the eggs were meant to be on the ship; there's at least one interview out there where Cameron states the reason the Jordens didn't encounter the space jockey was because they entered through the damaged hull "directly into the egg chamber." That said, that matte painting from '79 still doesn't really work for me.) (EDIT #2 - @CanadaPhil, you said: "There is NO reference of any kind in '79 to caves, caverns...by ANY of the Nostromo crew. This is incorrect. Watch the movie again. As Kane is being lowered, Dallas asks "Kane, can you see anything?" And Kane replies "A..a [i]cave[/i]...a cave of some sort, I... I dunno but it's like the goddamn tropics in here.." Just wanted to point that out.)