Question (or plot hole) about the ending...

I wonder about that, but how did David figure out how to fly it..is he god. Really, how does he control navigation, engine trusters, oxygen, etc. I only saw one seat, where is Shaw gonna sit going at that speed? On thing that bother me was, the first juggernaut was slow taking off..but David (godpilot) zoomed out quick. Was he better pilot than engineer? Also, 1 survior engineer, bs..how can they conclude that if they only whet into one temple..there could be others on the other temples/ships.

@ Bo Cherry: doubtful. There are numerous solutions to this question available for the filmmakers should they make another film. If no sequel is ever made then it doesnt matter at all (ie: countless eventualities are possible if its just fans hypothesizing...including her dying from lack of oxygen. its irrelevant if no additional films are made). @sky...surely the filmmakers will simply reveal that the juggernauts contain an atmosphere that is capable of sustaining humans. It wouldnt really be outlandish either, given what we know about the engineers.

If you think too much in the detail, have you noticed that the amount of oxygen that is needed to travel upto that planet is likely to be over by now. Beat this. lol

There's an easy out for the future...the homeworld is right next door, I'm assuming. About a half an hour away.

lol half hour? it will take half hour to get out of the planet :D

I was wondering how the heck she would clean/disinfect that massive wound that was repeatedly torn, bashed and otherwise abused. Again, things I can't dwell on or it ruins the whole movie.

It may not take that long to get to the home world. If we assume that LV 223 is around Gliese 86 (which matches the distance and the star map -thought they are free to take certain liberties of course) then they are probably less than 8 light years from Zeta 1 Reticuli, which appears to be the star that the figure in the Scottish cave drawing is actually pointing at (the centre one, unlike Gliese 86 which is the one furthest left in the map) She grabbed some supplies from the Lifeboat, and the Juggernaut is probably a lot faster than Prometheus, so 8 light years, wouldn't necessarily take as long. And there should be some food on board anyway. Assuming that they actually eat when not sleeping the Space jockeys must have some food, and assuming that they snatch human on their trips, they must feed them too. ( i have elaborated on these points elsewhere... we'd be here all day if you want me to repeat it all in detail here.)

[u]I wonder about that, but how did David figure out how to fly it..is he god. Really, how does he control navigation, engine trusters, oxygen, etc. I only saw one seat, where is Shaw gonna sit going at that speed?[/u] Actually, ask yourself, who is flying? Did she trust the android that killed Holloway? Did she put his head back on his body and let him fly off, with no way of knowing where they are going? Or is the reason that they left 6 days after the prometheus was destroyed (the final sign off transmission was dated Jan 1st 2094) that she got David to give her the (ahem) 'crash course' (and I hope she didn't use those words, cos he'd probably comply!) in flying and navigating. One seat, she's in it, his head is strapped down somewhere, and the speed is not the problem, it's acceleration, and even for that there must be something like inertial dampeners and warp fields, or they could never get up to speed without exceeding fatal g forces.

@ svanya...I wondered the same thing after my initial viewing of the film. However, after subsequent viewings, i noticed that shaw's incision appears to be healing at an accelerated pace. We get a good look at the incision when shaw inadvertently runs into weyland's room. The incision looks markedly better than it did immediately post-op (just moments before). Again we see the incision when she is suiting up to go investigate the remaining engineer. the incision looks to be just a scar at this point. It all happens quickly and i could be wrong, but it looks to me like the events of the film are suggesting that shaw’s recovery time is to be dramatically truncated from what we might imagine.

ALIENS!!!! [img]http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/005/848/ancient-aliens.jpg[/img]

[u]If you think too much in the detail, have you noticed that the amount of oxygen that is needed to travel upto that planet is likely to be over by now.[/u] Indeed, I discussed this as part of [url=http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/7387]the reason that Revel and Chance do not take their chances on the lifeboat.[/url] If you hear that there's 'two years of air and supplies' for Vickers... and then consider how long it would last three people (two of whom would probably fight for 'mating' rights' over Vickers) and recall that it took almost 2 and a HALF years to get there ... Getting into the lifeboat with Vickers is just prolonging death. She would have had 2 years of solitary, no human contact, before running out of food / water / air. (and that's ignoring the whole 'surprise' in the Medpod Room.)

@Hadley's Hope Err....there seems to be a great deal of fancy in all that? Why are they, "probably", less than 8 light years from Gliese or anywhere else? The Juggernaut is, "probably", a lot faster than Prometheus - and 8 light years, "wouldn't necessarily take as long"?...How long do you think it would it take?.. If it's all such a breeze flying Air Juggernaut, what do they need sleep chambers for? They, "should", have some food?....Why? Because we would? By that token, you'd think they'd have more than one chair on that flight deck, or in the whole place, for that matter - but they don't....where would they eat their food, standing up? We don't see any evidence to suggest they have the same priorities of need as us which, it seems, is part of the actual root of the query. For all we know, they get all their nourishment from the sleep chamber, via all those numerous tubes they apparently ram directly into themselves - at least then we could hang a use on them. And, "assuming they snatch humans"?.......Why, are you assuming that?...

[u]@Hadley's Hope Err....there seems to be a great deal of fancy in all that? [/u] Indeed. It is all speculation, with very little conclusive proof. Like 99% of everything written about this film, because the script is deliberately ambiguous. My speculation is built on layers, which has it's foundation in sand. But I don't mind sharing it so long as you remember, that I don't assert it as unassailable fact. [u]Why are they, "probably", less than 8 light years from Gliese or anywhere else? [/u] Because, we know from the first film, that LV 426 is around Zeta 2 Reticuli. This is a real star, chosen for the location of the action in the 1979 film, because of the 'Hill Abduction case'. Betty and Barney hill claimed to have been abducted by Greys, and brought to somewhere orbiting Zeta 2, which is 39 light years from Earth. The starmap associated with their adventures is the same one featured in the film. Of the six stars (all of which exist in space) only one matches the distance travelled as given in the movie Prometheus, and from that, I calculate the distance to Zeta 2 and Zeta 1. (Zeta 2 is the bottom right star of the six, and Gliese 86 the one further left. I did a[url=http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/7487] thread about it.[/url] [u] The Juggernaut is, "probably", a lot faster than Prometheus - and 8 light years, "wouldn't necessarily take as long"?...How long do you think it would it take?.. [/u] I don't know. But humans in late 21st Century, who have been in space less than two hundred years would travel that distance in under 7 months in a ship like Prometheus. How much faster is a ship designed by creatures who have had spaceflight for millenia? [u]If it's all such a breeze flying Air Juggernaut, what do they need sleep chambers for? [/u] a) VERY long trips b) To save on food, boredom and lifespan, the crew members not needed for any part of a journey simply sleep. This may be why there were 4 Space Jockeys on the bridge, while the rest were dead in their bio-suits. We never saw how the dead guys looked under their suits, they may not have had the biomechanical adaptations for hooking up to the pilot seat. Still looking for an image to see if we can tell if the decapitated head has the same adaptations on his neck, or not. I would suggest that while the lab tech boys are prepping their work before the mission, the pilots are sleeping, as they have nothing to do, and so merely wait to be awoken in time for launch prep. (there's no R&R facilities shown there). [u]They, "should", have some food?....Why? Because we would? By that token, you'd think they'd have more than one chair on that flight deck, or in the whole place, for that matter - but they don't....where would they eat their food, standing up? [/u] We haven't seen the whole ship. [u]For all we know, they get all their nourishment from the sleep chamber, via all those numerous tubes they apparently ram directly into themselves - at least then we could hang a use on them. [/u] They are partly organic. Perhaps they get their food through a tube, but then that would make their teeth redundant, and they probably wouldn't have them. It would make sense that they can do both actually. And as I said, I think they'd need some food for the humans. [u]And, "assuming they snatch humans"?.......Why, are you assuming that?...[/u] 1. Because they match the human genome. The easiest way for that to happen is for them to be the result of genetic manipulation of humans abducted / lured under false pretences to LV 223 from primitive cultures who obey/fear them as gods. 2. Because although we are shown Space Jockeys comfortably breathing in atmospheres that would kill us (scene 1) and the hunt for Shaw in the lifeboat, there is an atmosphere generated inside the dome, that is perfect for humans. Furthermore the construction of the tunnels and hangars, not only does it hide the ship from above, but it connects directly the ship to a tunnel with breathable air. This is not necessary for Space Jockeys, they seem to be able to handle Carbon Monoxide a lot better than we can (it would render us unconscious in seconds, and inside of 2 minutes our blue corpses would just litter the place.) So, this seems custom built for humans to go from the ship to the urn chamber 3. because the urn chamber seems set up for human specimens. The spacing between urns matches the spacing for humans to each stand by one (but not Space Jockeys squashed next to each other) and while the Space Jockeys wear sealed suits, and would not set off the climate sensitive urns, humans in loin clothes and bare feet would require oxygen in the room, raise the temperature and moisture content of the room, and their bare feet (or open toed sandals) would ensure that the dripping black go would infect them. And if you've ever read Mary Shelley's book... did you notice the full title? [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/eb/Frank1818.jpg[/img]

she will most likely eat David's face. Dwell that one over for a minute LOL

Freeze, that strobing profile image should come with a message warning epilepsy sufferers at the top of any page you post to! :) When you said she will eat David's face, I thought you meant they will get hot and sweaty! (talk about betraying Holloway) I doubt there's much nutrition in android flesh.

also, i don't think Shaw intends on surviving this trip... seems like an "end of line" mission to me.

Hahaha, I know HH, I probably should change it soon. Yes, as for android flesh... pretty sure it'd taste awful with no benefits LOL

@Hadley's Hope Yeaa - you may have missed my point a little: but, that's alright. You tell me that you don't assert as unassailable fact and yet, in the immediately preceding sentence you're telling me, "the script is deliberately ambiguous"? I mean....I'm just not sure that's the case: and I'm not sure how anyone can state it with such certainty. Furthermore, it seems, to me, to be an extraordinarily easy claim to make on behalf of a script that, actually, might just not be very good. But...y'know: pff...

[u]Yeaa - you may have missed my point a little: but, that's alright.[/u] Enlighten me what did I miss? [u]You tell me that you don't assert as unassailable fact and yet, in the immediately preceding sentence you're telling me, "the script is deliberately ambiguous"? [/u] There's no contradiction there. One is a result of the other. Because so many thngs are left with double meanings, or open questions, it is very hard to have conclusive proof of anything. Any while I may have missed you point 'kinda' how about acknowledging that I put a bit of effort into the response? You don't have to agree with it, but it would be courteous to respond with a bit more than "Yeaa". A bit like writing a long text message and getting "ok" as a response. I know courtesy is a rare thing on the internet, but I try to encourage it when I can, know what I mean? But more importantly... what part of your point did I miss exactly. You have my attention... go.

Am I the only one that thinks the solution to this question is really simple? David modifies the engineer cryo pod to accommodate Shaw. It works from a logical standpoint, as long as Shaw trusts David enough to put her life in his hands. Which I think she would considering that he is now free of Weyland's directives. It also works from a storytelling standpoint as we were shown that the engineer's stasis was quite similar to our own when he ralphed upon awakening.

[u]Am I the only one that thinks the solution to this question is really simple? David modifies the engineer cryo pod to accommodate Shaw.[/u] Depending on how fast this ship is, she may not need to go into stasis. What needs to be modified is the interaction with the flight system, and this may explain why although the Space Jockey died on Dec 26th, 2093 Shaw and David don't take off until Jan 1st 2093. 6 days later have passed on an unfriendly planet. I can imagine that the seat modification takes a while, and surely there are also some trust issues with David to be worked out, so Shaw (unless she is still the most gullible lead character in the Alien universe) would be wise to leave Davids head off, and instead ask him to tell her how to fix the chair and fly the ship.

I'm guessing the lifeboat had a decent stock of food in it. It's not that much a chore to move the food from there to the other ship.

[u]I'm guessing the lifeboat had a decent stock of food in it. It's not that much a chore to move the food from there to the other ship.[/u] Provoded you find a flamethrower to deal with the Xenomorph that hatched in it... then yes, that would be a good idea. Otherwise, I think I'd take my chances with whatever rations she russled up in the domes.

Flamethrower, chimney and bacon has to be there.

Sorry ive not read every comment on this thread. there's alot. so apologies if this has been asked. but i kinda presumed (and is it not hard to to make that assumption?) that yes David will show shaw how to fly or program the ship for flight. and that she'll just jump into one of the engineer cryo chambers while david monitors the flight? maybe, maybe not. but jeez what happens when she gets there? food? water? oxygen?

[u]Sorry ive not read every comment on this thread. there's alot. so apologies if this has been asked.[/u] This is only the second page :) You can't be bothered to read a dozen comments before asking someone to repeat themselves? I'm yanking your chain, a bit, but you remind me of a dude I once worked with :p [u] but i kinda presumed (and is it not hard to to make that assumption?) that yes David will show shaw how to fly or program the ship for flight. and that she'll just jump into one of the engineer cryo chambers while david monitors the flight? maybe, maybe not. [/u] She's just go off to sleep, with no worries about the guy who poisoned her boyfriend? He could fly home, with her dead body ejected into space... and present the juggernaut to Weyland Corp in return for a small change in the law allowing androids to inherit... Or he could fly to the Engineer home world, presenting her as a gift. Remember he has no programmed loyalty to her, that only applied to Weyland, who is now dead. I think her first priority has to be to get some modification so that the ship can be flown by someone who's not a giant with biomechanical implants. After that, I'd say she demands that David teach her the basics of navigation and flight systems on board. She's a quick learner for things like skills, (it's the more advanced interpersonal and situational interpretation stuff she's naive about.) Hence the 6 day delay before departure. She's more interested in answers than her long term survival.

Ah Apologies im just reading down the 2nd page now and see my question has already been addressed. bit of speculation about this. dont get me wrong i like a bit of speculation but theres speculation and then just making stuff up. given what we know already and whats there in the film. i think some simplistic evidentual and kinda blatant examples are being trod upon. for the sake of overblowing the plot lines....its fine its a good read but....wow! its alot more simple than that.....i remember this happened with the matrix. and there where soooo many dissapointed people out there.

Hadleys hope to be honest i didnt read all the comments as you put me off with your constant ramblings you seem to be on every thread in every room ...with these giant long winded sometimes unfounded examples of putting your own kinda obsessed theory on every one elses take. i didnt want to be rude about it but you must sit on this stuff night and day. what did it take you minutes to reply back....look i dont mean to diss. but i could pick your stuff apart too. but i choose to keep things predominantly based on what i saw in the film and put parts together that way....as much as admire your enthusiasm. your not the all mighty presence on this subject. though you seem to think you are there's alotta flaws in your stuff too. but ultimately you seem to want to try and make up your own points to answer some one elses point... maybe this maybe that.... if there this and that....and ultimately i just find you boring.....and thats why i didnt...though i have now read most of all the posts here. you need to get a life man.

AND also HH there wasnt a dozen comments there was 24 or 25. but i lost the will to live half way down yours.

[u]Hadleys hope to be honest i didnt read all the comments as you put me off [/u] Don't look for excuses for laziness. Be big enough to admit it, rather than getting personal. I made a mild joke at your expense for not reading comments, and you come back with this? Childish Nickell, imho [u]with your constant ramblings you seem to be on every thread in every room ...with these giant long winded sometimes unfounded examples of putting your own kinda obsessed theory on every one elses take. [/u] I didn't know I needed your permission before posting anything. My stuff isn't unfounded. It's conjecture, but all based on something, and it's what's on the screen. I've said in most of those long winded posts that there's little conclusive evidence in the film for anything. It's one of the reasons that they are long winded posts, I not only state what I suspect, but why... for people who are interested.... for people who have the attention span. [u]i didnt want to be rude about it but you must sit on this stuff night and day. what did it take you minutes to reply back.... [/u] I've actually been confined to bed sick, so the computer is right here. If you don't want to read, you don't have to. Some people enjoy the discussion and have told me so and posted it on the thread. [u]look i dont mean to diss. but i could pick your stuff apart too. [/u] Go ahead, but remember, 'none of it is proven' is hardly picking it apart when I've repeatedly stated that it's based on circumstantial evidence. [u].as much as admire your enthusiasm. your not the all mighty presence on this subject. [/u] Show me where I asserted that my interpretation is unquestionable fact, and nobody can disagree? I can show you exactly the opposite in my discussion with Snorkelbottom in another thread. I lay out where I think many interpretations are plausible. [u]though you seem to think you are there's alotta flaws in your stuff too. [/u] Fine, discuss them. I won't [u]take[/u] it personally, if you don't [u]make[/u] it personal. It's just a discussion. [u]but ultimately you seem to want to try and make up your own points to answer some one elses point... maybe this maybe that.... if there this and that....and ultimately i just find you boring.... [/u] You can't have it both ways... either I think I'm the supreme source of fact, or I am phrasing everything with conditionals and conjecture. One or the other. Boring? That's your opinion, and your entitled to it. Everybody has one, just like they have one of something else, and you know what your opinion or mine is worth at Starbucks. It won't get you coffee without some money to back it up. [u].and thats why i didnt...though i have now read most of all the posts here. you need to get a life man. [/u] That's not only personal but terribly ill informed. Ask Ingwar, who I've corresponded with in fluent Polish, or Gimmeafacehug, who I wrote to in Dutch, or anyone I replied to in French if they think I don't get out much. I may be on my back in bed this weekend, but I'll be at work on Monday, and I'll be hiking in the mountains this summer. But you, guess at my life from my interpretation of a movie on the internet. I'll take a guess at your life. You are not employed anywhere as a detective.... am I right? [u]AND also HH there wasnt a dozen comments there was 24 or 25. but i lost the will to live half way down yours. [/u] You took the time to count eventually. Well done. If you lost the will to live over a bit of writing, I can't help you. You'll just have to get a better attitude to life. If you can't follow an argument - not my problem If you can't take a gentle joke about not reading 2 pages of comments without getting overly defensive and personal - not my problem. I look forward to your detail analysis... and don't forget to explain where your ideas come from so nobody thinks it's 'flawed' or taken from something not seen on screen.

My longest post on page 1 was a response to someone who asked me why I assume something. Seems that they found it interesting enough to ask, and I was courteous enough to give my reasons for my opinions. That's a pleasant discussion, unlike yours. Just like answering your question, I gave my opinion and why I thought it made sense. I didn't simply write 'pfff ... David's not gonna fly it' did I ? I did make a little joke at your expense, and I put in smileys and statements to show it was meant in jest. If you have a sense of humor deficiency or low self esteem then I'm sorry for offending you, but it's meant as gentle humor. You didn't seem able to come back with anything witty in response I note. But don't worry, it won't ruin my Sunday any more than being unwell will. In fact, I'll probably be up and about in the afternoon.

@Hadleys hope. Thankyou for proving my point.

You are welcome to your ill-formed opinions. I notice you haven't put up the detailed picking apart that you boasted about... so I'll draw my own conclusion from that shall I?

haha my opinions arent ill informed. if you can't see whats wrong thats your problem. i think you need to get over yourself. maybe its me though i do now have a burden of knowledge about this film. so when i see things completely of on a random tangent and overblown explanation and i know that it wasn't even a consideration in the film ....it makes me go...jesus some people are obsessed. let me tell you something this film is way more simple than what you've come up with. dont get me wrong ill admit despite this recent correspondance i have enjoyed reading your posts from time to time. but alot of what you've written wasnt even a consideration for the film or the sequel. it just didnt exist....if you want to know how i know this then DM me. its not something im going to put on in public. so when i keep reading especially your input to things that arent even a consideration and see how obsessed you are with responding to people assertions and good points with your own emblasoned conjecture. i think jeeezo. look ultimately i wish you no ill feeling. your obviously very passionate and into this in a big way. and thats fine. really. but ultimaterly your ramblings especially those going on outside the film i have no interest in. i dont really feel the need to be witty or condescending. its just not that interesting....to much detail too much out of balance and kilter. i mean in regards to the actual film. im sorry man but you seem to have fallen for the ultimate viral campaign getting into this so much. so get well soon wish you all the best.

Thanks, but I didn't even see the viral marketing until after the movie. I haven't had a TV set since... well before my kids were born actually. I just spot a lot of things in Ridley's Blade Runner, and Kubrik films (of which Scott is a huge fan, and often imitates) so I don't think I'm out on a limb seeing deliberate reasons for things that may appear trivial in the film. Sure PM me about how I've missed the simplicity of the film. That could be an interesting discussion for us (but boring for everyone else if they had to read it here perhaps).

i will. i'll PM you now. and then i'm off to London. :)

Okay. have a nice journey.

I love how my simple question turned into somewhat of a fight haha. But no one has seemed to flat out answer my question yet...

Sorry double post.