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