Where is the gymnastic room of the engineers on derelict?

Gene inhibitors. The gene is present, but is blocked from expressing its feature.

The blocked expression of a gene can't result in such drastic changes. I'm familiar with the fundamentals of epigenetics, it doesn't work that way. I've viewed the film twice and spent at least as long thinking about the implciations of the events in said film. If you're holding something back which can explain the plot issues please don't hold back, because I'm too stupid to reconcile them myself(or too unwilling to apologize for a film maker rushing and half-assing the narrative).

Hadley's Hope; Several of your responses seem to simply be vague allusions with no real substance as soon as criticism is directed at the film. Could you please answer how two organisms sharing 100% of their genotype can be so different phenotypically(Engineers are hairless, at least two feet taller than the average person, incredibly developed muscularly, have no skin colour(leucistic?), have a different eye structure, and have no nipples(meaning they're unable to nurse their young)? This makes no sense, it's a gap in the narrative and it weakens the plot. This isn't an issue of the audience not understanding, it's an issue of the film makers not explaining the narrative sufficiently. The same goes for the many other character issues and plot inconsistencies in the film.

the DNA is not 100% match just a match, so.. whatever % corresponds to that(likely 98%-99.something%). We are quite clearly not 100% the same bar environment. I don't think so to be honest. You could put it down to poetic license they may naturally be far more muscular then humans. like most chimpanzees and apes etc. Just down to genetic's.

There's many animals that are naturally muscular and produce more lean muscle mass and less fat than similar species - the cheetah, lions and most breeds of big cat for example. These animals produce high lean muscle mass naturally. Just leave it to dramatic license I guess.

Ahhhh one of the many plot holes and important unanswered questions people are always bitching about lol.

They take steroids and life urns all day : )

This is just a ridiculous, ridiculous post...

"Did IQ's just drop sharply while I was away?"

Engineer's doing training daily? I can't think of that unless they were "formed" into that kind of body size.....??

theres a scene in the film where shaw quite clearly states its 100% match. Not 99 or anything else. Although that would have been much much better. They could have said 99% and stated we're closer to the aliens than we are to chimps on earth. Now thats sci-fi trying to explain this b movie screenplay is futile. A bit like trying to explain how they manage to travel 35 light years in 2 years *facepalm* unless you want to go down the convoluted road of time dialation on the ship and that it was 2 years ship time not 2 years earth time but its just trying to cover up bad writing.

This is just...... We do not get to see the kitchen section either. Would it make the movie better or worse if we actually got to see the engineer do pushups, benchpress and some intergalactic zumba? Let´s focus on what IS in the movie Over and out!

Fluke... I'm talking about your post, not you here. .. Oh, the irony ! In fact the 100% makes PERFECT sense in sci fi, and if you think about it a bit more thouroughly the lightbulb will come on in your head. This is NOT dumbed down sci-fi. This is SERIOUSLY A-game stuff. The 'plot holes' are bear traps for people who rush to conclusions.

also i think the reason they went for 100% match was to make it nice simple & clear for the popcorn eating masses to realise the aliens created us, dumbed down sci-fi folks. not for the hardcore sci-fi nerd like me

[u]also i think the reason they went for 100% match was to make it nice simple & clear for the popcorn eating masses to realise the aliens created us,[/u] Oh you are going to kick yourself, next time you watch this. There is a virtual hell created for people who don't pay attention to all the little traps. The more sure you are right the worse the confusion if you really didn't think things through. [u]dumbed down sci-fi folks. not for the hardcore sci-fi nerd like me[/u] Ah, the pride before the fall. Did you notice that personailty flaw in any of the characters in the 'Alien' movies?

hi hadleys hope. how does it make perfect sense? 100% dna match would mean they would look identical. and the thing is even if the dna is extremely similar it doesnt mean shit. It doesnt mean alien life is conencted to ours it could just mean life in our universe is the same structure everywhere we look. but what made alien good was that the alien life form was geunuinely alien bacuse it had acid for blood. On earth even though we find organisms that live in extremely acidic environments when we test the inside of these organisms they are PH nuetral which means they evolved from the same life as everything else on earth but mutated the traits to survive in acidic conditions. They didnt originate in those conditions yeah but if you can explain 100% dna match that doesnt look like us go ahead.

Easily. You think DNA science is all about removing and adding and swapping genes? You know we ALREADY have the abiity to suppress the 'expression' of a gene, while leaving it in place in the genome. They do it with mice every day of the week. It's not a choice between they are our ancestors/creators and 'maybe it's random and happens all over the place. You've overlooked a very easy possibility, that you will kick yourself for. It's such a classic Sci-Fi theme, that you will regret bragging about the 'team of ultimate sci-fi badasses' that you feel you belong to. All the sharp sticks, and tactical nukes won't help if you're not watching the motion tracker :) I doubt ANY of us here watched this film without being fooled at least once. So don't worry. It's not 'game over'.

it doesnt even matter and the dna connection is a huge plot hole in itself. i said before even if the dna is the same or extremely similar it could just mean life wherever we find it in the universe has the same structure. it certainly does nothing to prove shaws claim these aliens created us like she says in the movie. its terrible science fiction im sorry. now if they put a scene in with some dialogue saying : " weve found alien life before and its nothing like our dna but this is a match or extremely close this is too much of a coincidence and this alien life must be related to life on earth" THEn it might have some merit. this film is about faith and how shaws faith turns out to be right with no supporting evidence. its dire

Shaws faith turns out to be right? How do you figure THAT? She's so wrong it is actually a dark comedy. And you seem to have ignored what I said about the third, very easy explanation that is conspicuous in that nobody ever discussed it. Come one, hardcore sci fi nerds do not need to be spoonfed. You don't want a character to come on screen and just read out the scenarios do you?

In fact she is so wrong, that it might make a sequel impossible or unecessary. And I'm starting to lean towards unecessary actually. I don't know how I could keep a straight face through a second film unless they have got an amazing idea to keep the little 'multiverses' from colliding ;p

C'mon red leader stay on target... Use the force Fluke... (sorry, couldn't resist.) I'm not going to spell it out for you because I came out of this film confused and it took me a while to figure it out. I think I would have been unhappy for someone to simply tell me though, cos I like figuring stuff out. Had I know that this was a sci- fi in the who-dunnit genre, I would have been far more alert going in.

hi hadleys hope, if she's wrong what does the opening scene of the movie relate to if its not creating or engineering life. unless your saying this is a red herring and it has nothing to with life on earth or humans coming about?

my theory the Engineers, Engineered themselves using DNA manipulations to create the optimal muscle to body mass ratio.

Did the Greek Gods pump iron? I guess that's what's being asked here? Pumping Olympus, another new Arnie film?

There's more red herrings in this film than the classic swedish film "Attack av den Roda Sill" a tense disater movie where a trawler collides with a tanker carrying industrial dye.

[u]hi hadleys hope, if she's wrong what does the opening scene of the movie relate to if its not creating or engineering life.[/u] It may well be creating life... but where? and just as importantly... when? And think of the implications for every single action she and Holloway took, and asked others to undertake, if that was a red herring. You will hurt from laughing. Ridley Scott has a dark sense of humour, that I didn't see coming.

so whats the answer?

As far as I understand the DNA was in fact a 100% match. Even a 99% DNA match would create a drastically different species, Ex- Chimpanzees have nearly 99% of their DNA in common with humans. Of course this begs the question, how can a 100% identical genotype create a far different phenotype? If the DNA is a 100% match I find it difficult to believe the Engineers would be two feet taller and have far more muscular development than humans(in addition to having different eye structures, seemingly no/very little skin pigment(Leusistic?) and no hair?

Hi terach42, his theory is another race of aliens took humans from earth a long time ago and created the "engineers" as a slave race. Then the slaves rebel and do their own thing or something along those lines. So that would explain the dna being a "match" (smirk) they're actually just mutated humans It would make the scene at the start not earth but some other planet after humans appeared on earth. Its obvious things in this movie are not what shaw envisages as they find a hostile alien who isnt interested in chatting to them. But it would have made a much better stand alone movie if they had actually found out soemthing or at least a piece of the story behind the engineers. As it is you can create any story you like around what they found but there's practically nothing to support any theory.

I will only say this. When the Aliens in the movie Prometheus, or in real life, God, or whatever created us, you have to consider the fact that maybe they were intelligent enough to understand evolution itself. The fact that in every environment, the same species are proliferated into reality. In Africa Monkeys became the tree dwelling species, but in Madagascar, Lemurs took on the same task. In most of the world, wolves became the dominant canine species, as pack hunters, but in Africa a species more related to weasels would fill that same void, the Hyenas. This has repeated it's way through the history of the world, where the Triceratops mirrors the Rhino, the Erpotesuchus (ancient alligator) looked more like a dog, etc. People argue all the time that God couldn't have made man from the chimpanzees, and the truth is, that's more of an issue that PEOPLE have, then God (or the Aliens in Prometheus). Our creator did whatever he had to, to yield the results he wanted, and that includes creating evolution itself, in an attempt to yield a bipedal creature, with a large brain, and two hands that is, in itself capable of changing it's own environment (in our case, to our own demise). It's people (most of the time - very religious, but unfortunately, ill informed idiots) that don't want to admit that humans evolved from our monkey brethren, but alas, Science is hard to argue with, and yet, even though nobody has ever seen real "magic", and things just "poofing" into existence, people want to claim that's what happened, because they don't like math. That's why they have the "Creation Museum", where people frolic with Dinosaurs, in Petersburg, Kentucky. Clearly how our creator "created us" is his knowledge only, and yet people feel the need to write their own concept of history. Chances are, the creators from the movie Prometheus, and the real creators understand a biologic programming language that we humans haven't evolved enough to understand. Chances are, it's far more complex than we can understand, and it was obviously created that way, to prevent "tampering with". It was designed to yield "intelligent beings", that could "think" like it's creator. However, considering the carnage our species creates (destroying the planet, killing each other, lying, cheating, etc), I would have scrapped this species, and started over again. P.S. The only thing that "didn't make sense to ME", was the fact that we have the same kind of DNA as plants. When the "creators" of the movie Prometheus came to add their DNA to the planet, it had to be "trip #2", because there were plants EVERYWHERE. Seems like they would have caught that.

How is 100% DNA match far-fetched? They were thousands (millions?) of years ahead of us. They look different from us because: a) They've had a lot more time to evolve b) They've had a lot more time to alter themselves to suit (pun intended) their civilization.

They are a slave race engineered by the elders to do the manual labor.

They create Xenos to wrestle! By the way I cannot imagine the last engineer's expression if he was asked something like that to the last engineer.