'Continuity Errors' in PROMETHEUS Designs?

Alien Movies Forum Topic

Cervantes

MemberOvomorphJanuary 02, 20123438 Views20 Replies

Okay, I'm an avowed nitpicker where this kind of thing is concerned, but I'm kinda peeved that the 'Derelict' craft shown in the PROMETHEUS teaser seems to be re-designed compared to the one originally seen in ALIEN! If it turns out that this is supposed to be the exact same craft that's eventually found by the Nostromo crew, then these inaccuracies between the designs are going to be very annoying. Here's what I mean. In this first shot, we see the craft from the recent teaser - [img]http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/4458/043jg.jpg[/img] But compare the 'end' section details of the above shot with the ones of the craft seen in ALIEN below, and there are a few definate differences - [img]http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/8264/derelictinworkshop01.jpg[/img] [img]http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/2408/derelictinworkshop02.jpg[/img] Why? Is the craft seen in the recent teaser supposed to be the SAME one as in ALIEN, or not I wonder? If it is, then I wish they'd kept to the same shape/details as the original craft design! Or is it deliberately slightly different due to being a DIFFERENT craft altogether? (and the planet surface that the PROMETHEUS craft crashes down onto in the teaser is suspiciously totally different to the rugged one seen in ALIEN too, of course...)

Other discussions started by Cervantes

Replies to 'Continuity Errors' in PROMETHEUS Designs?

G Vergara
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

G VergaraJanuary 02, 2012

Remember one thing, there's no H.R. Giger in this movie... errors like these are often in prequels or sequels Maybe it's just another space ship

spacejock
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

spacejockJanuary 02, 2012

Giger IS involved in Prometheus, so would be very surprising to do such mistakes.

Rick
Group: Member
Rank: Xenomorph
View Profile

RickJanuary 02, 2012

SJ, There are a few possibilities. 1. Different Ships Different Planets a. Answers both questions 2. Same Ship Different Planets a. Lands to Drop Ampules on one b. Crash Lands on other 3. Same Ship Same Planet a. It crash lands and over time structural integrety decays causing changes on surface of ship making it look different 4. Different Ship Same Planet a. First derelict crash lands where found by Nostromo b. Second derelict crashes on opposite side of planet (never found by nostromo) c. Can send signal through or around planetoid causing signal to be recieved and repeated by derelict on opposite side. All just hyposthesis. Regards, Rick

Guest
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

GuestJanuary 03, 2012

A good range of possiblities there Rick. ...or it could be sloppy, needless alteration to the original design, if it's supposed to be the same craft. I hope it turns out to be your option no. 1...although your option no. 4 manages to account for this too. There's nothing else that would satisfactorily explain the fact that the PROMETHEUS design has a 'flattened' look to it's 'hammer'-shaped tip now, instead of a 'rounded' look...and also has a very different look to it's 'pronged' tip too, compared to the ALIEN design. I hope this doesn't turn out to be a case of careless re-design for the sake of it. I'm gonna remain positive in the meantime about this, and believe that Ridley would care about details like this. So option 1 or 4 it is then, I guess.

Cervantes
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

CervantesJanuary 03, 2012

A good range of options there Rick. ...or it could just be sloppy, needless re-designing of the original design. But hopefully it will prove to be either your option 1 or option 4 proposals...as this would be the only thing that would satisfactorily explain why the PROMETHEUS version has a 'flattened' look to it's 'hammer'-shaped tip, instead of the 'curved' look of the ALIEN version...and also why there's a very different look to the 'pronged' tip too. (Oh, and would also explain why some of the PROMETHEUS 'Spacejockey' seat and base details look very different from the ALIEN ones too!) However, I'm going to remain positive that Ridley would care about details like this to make his movies tie together properly, and that it's not a case of careless re-design for the sake of it. So I'm hoping either option 1 or 4 proves to be the case...

Gavin
Group: Member
Rank: Trilobite
View Profile

GavinJanuary 03, 2012

Personally I don't see what the big fuss is about regards the difference in look between the original and the new look Derelict... 1. So what if it looks slightly different, inside and out, than the original. Who says they have to recreate it exactly, to please some minute detail nit-pickers. 2. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - Ridley Scott never liked the way the original looked, because he felt it looked to much like a model, a sculpture than an actual spaceship. 3. This is 2012, not 1979, times have changed and peoples opinions have changed. Maybe both Ridley and Giger prefer the new look compared to the old. 4. I actually like the new look, feels more practical, more spacecraft-like and technologically feasible, IMO the original (as cool as it was) looked like a painted balloon animal. Get over it, yeah so what they made changes, does it really matter in the grand scheme of things, hell no.

Cervantes
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

CervantesJanuary 03, 2012

You're welcome to your opinion Snorkelbottom, even though I disagree. I don't see how these particular changes in any way make the craft better, more practical, or more technically feasible than the original look...but if you do, then fair enough. It may not be a big deal in the overall scheme of things to you, but if it *is* supposed to be the same craft we eventually see in ALIEN, then I'll certainly find the disparity between the designs to be jarring, regardless.

draekus
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

draekusJanuary 03, 2012

I don't like the changes made when comparing the two ships. However, the changes wont really bother me either. I'm pretty sure the ship in Prometheus is meant to be either the same ship in ALIEN or an identical ship. The changes are more than likely artistic license.

Cervantes
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

CervantesJanuary 03, 2012

I've only just noticed a while ago that I should have actually posted this in the 'Prometheus Discussions' forum....and that Neurion actually posted a very similar topic there about this the other day! Here's the link to Neurion's related topic, and the responses he got - http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/537

G Vergara
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

G VergaraJanuary 06, 2012

Giger involved, i thought he wasn't, i'm surprised about it 32 years between Alien and Prometheus can forgive design mistakes Scott and Giger they must be more concern with the details the next time, after all, no one has seen the movie yet, we've to wait for the premiere, maybe it's just another ship, not the alien's derelict ship specifically.

Drexlspivey
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

DrexlspiveyJanuary 06, 2012

Don't forget how "biologic" Spacejockey technology appears. If the spacecraft are in fact the same, the damaged ship in the Prometheus trailer may have regenerated itself after the crash. Of course, the pilot didn't make out as well. The more difficult question is explaining the differences between the rugged planet surface where the derelict rests in Alien with that of the barren crash site in Prometheus.

G Vergara
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

G VergaraJanuary 07, 2012

Drexlspivey: does Prometheus take place in Zeta II Reticuli, or LV-426 ???

Spartacus
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

SpartacusJanuary 07, 2012

Lv-426 is right near Zeta2Reticuli

Melkor
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

MelkorJanuary 08, 2012

Why does there seem to be so much assumption that the craft in the trailer is the derelict? There is no reason to think this. It might make a 'cute' tie-in but I sincerely doubt it is. Then it would be a prequel 'proper' and there's no reason to think that this movie has to describe how the derelict ends up there. For one I think that the derelict has been on LV-426 for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of years.

Jockey2016
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

Jockey2016January 09, 2012

Melkor hit it. I've heard through the grapevine that this is NOT the same ship we saw in [i]Alien[/i]. And not the same planet. And I also think that the derelict we saw in [i]Alien[/i] had been there for a very, [i]very[/i] long time. It could be a much older design. Which also explains the difference in the design of the Jockey's helmet, although the rest of the suit appears to be more or less the same. Remember, we don't even know anything about this ship. What's its purpose? Why is it shaped like that? If these are two different ships, why are so many design elements the same? Is there a function to those shapes, and that's why all the ships apparently have them? Think about it.. we don't even know for sure which end is the front! I'm not even convinced that Giger himself bothered to figure out how the thing few, or how it crashed there.. he just made the painting, and that became the model.

Cervantes
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

CervantesJanuary 09, 2012

I really hope your 'grapevine' is correct Jockey2016...as this will account for the various 'ship', 'Spacejockey', 'Spacejockey's seat', and 'planet terrain' differences described here and elsewhere, with no design 'continuity errors' after all. As far as how the 'ship' in the movie will fly...I always liked the idea of it SLOWLY turning round and around (almost 'boomerang'-like) as it travelled forward at whatever speed it moved through space at. I also liked the idea that it might be able to 'hover' and 'rise and fall' like a 'Harrier Jumpjet' too, when it came to landing or taking off, before accelerating...so I'm looking forward to seeing how they really end up portraying it's motion onscreen. And I thought the way the 'ship' was 'parked upright' in the trailer looked awesome. I'd never though of that possibility.

Neurion
Veteran Member
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

NeurionJanuary 09, 2012

astromax
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

astromaxApril 29, 2012

No it's not LV-426. Geeeeezzz can't we get our minds unstuck from the first Alien? In the trailer there is a giant, Saturn like, ringed planet in the background as the crew flees the dust storm. No such planet in alien. No, Prometheus is not about how LV-426 lost it's atmosphere and it's giant ringed neighbor.

Gem]n[
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

Gem]n[April 29, 2012

@astromax ... This thread was posted back in January btw ... so it is OLD ... the last post before yours was 9th Jan ... ;) ..

astromax
Group: Member
Rank: Ovomorph
View Profile

astromaxApril 29, 2012

Why would anyone even imagine it's LV-426 in Prometheus? It sounds flat eartherish. Prometheus takes us to our forefather's home planet. The space jockey is not that alien race. It's not a guy in a chair, it's a guy/chair, a living mechanical device "Giger" with a specific purpose, probably navigation. The big guy seen I think 3 times in the trailer is the alien race who created us. Tight fitting black uniform with softball sized shoulder pads. It's his legs approaching Shaw as she crawls away in terror. It's his face on the cave wall.

Are you an avid Alien fan looking for a dedicated online community of likeminded fans? Look no further! Create your own profile today and take part in our forums and gain XP points for all the content you post!

'Continuity Errors' in PROMETHEUS Designs?

Alien Movies Forum Topic

Cervantes

Other discussions started by Cervantes

Replies to 'Continuity Errors' in PROMETHEUS Designs?

Join the Alien Fan Community!