Scientific inaccuracies in Alien

[OmegaZilla]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

thanks


SO MANY people don't get this and--

it's quite frustrating tbh

[Local Trouble]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

Wait a minute...

Are you insinuating that the Space Jockey and his ship full of eggs was already there before the events of Alien Covenant? 

[Xenomrph]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

Wait a minute...

Are you insinuating that the Space Jockey and his ship full of eggs was already there before the events of Alien Covenant? 

According to the first movie, it's "old". Whether that's a thousand years or a million years we don't know, but it's likely more than 20.

[Local Trouble]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

Wait a minute...

Are you insinuating that the Space Jockey and his ship full of eggs was already there before the events of Alien Covenant? 

According to the first movie, it's "old". Whether that's a thousand years or a million years we don't know, but it's likely more than 20.

Does time travel count as a scientific inaccuracy?

[Xenomrph]

In what capacity?

[Local Trouble]

In what capacity?

Taking David's creation to the distant past so they wind up on LV-426 in an ancient derelict spaceship.

[Xenomrph]

In what capacity?

Taking David's creation to the distant past so they wind up on LV-426 in an ancient derelict spaceship.

That's kinda convoluted but I guess it works.

Edit— as a narrative device I imagine an average audience member would buy it, and I suspect a franchise fan might roll with it but say "what's this time travel doing in my Alien franchise?", but going by "hard sci-fi" I think time travel into the past is considered impossible.

[Immortan Jonesy]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

thanks


SO MANY people don't get this and--

it's quite frustrating tbh

Oh! How about accuracy between the movies itself. Fictional worlds have rules. The current retro-continuity (which is subject to change anyway), makes this "what the artist wanted to tell you 42 years ago" excuse somewat irrelevant. It can be changed in future for sure 

According to the first movie, it's "old". Whether that's a thousand years or a million years we don't know, but it's likely more than 20.

It's likelly what you chose to belief, and that's fine 

[Local Trouble]

According to the first movie, it's "old". Whether that's a thousand years or a million years we don't know, but it's likely more than 20.

It's likelly what you chose to belief, and that's fine 

[Immortan Jonesy]

In what capacity?

Taking David's creation to the distant past so they wind up on LV-426 in an ancient derelict spaceship.

That's kinda convoluted but I guess it works.

Edit— as a narrative device I imagine an average audience member would buy it, and I suspect a franchise fan might roll with it but say "what's this time travel doing in my Alien franchise?", but going by "hard sci-fi" I think time travel into the past is considered impossible.

All this mental gymnastic it is all because you don't like the Alien as a modern creation. I understand you, anyway, because this direction upset people, including me 

[SM]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

thanks


SO MANY people don't get this and--

it's quite frustrating tbh

He thinks it's old.  He explicitly says this.

Other events suggest otherwise.

[Xenomrph]

It's not that he's "wrong", it's audience shorthand. The Space Jockey isn't *literally* fossilized, but Dallas is conveying to the audience that it's "old".

thanks


SO MANY people don't get this and--

it's quite frustrating tbh

He thinks it's old.

He's telling the audience and characters that it is old, there's a difference.

In what capacity?

Taking David's creation to the distant past so they wind up on LV-426 in an ancient derelict spaceship.

That's kinda convoluted but I guess it works.

Edit— as a narrative device I imagine an average audience member would buy it, and I suspect a franchise fan might roll with it but say "what's this time travel doing in my Alien franchise?", but going by "hard sci-fi" I think time travel into the past is considered impossible.

All this mental gymnastic it is all because you don't like the Alien as a modern creation. I understand you, anyway, because this direction upset people, including me 

it also contradicts the first movie, as per above.

[Kradan]

This thread gives me a headache 

[BlueMarsalis79]

It does not contradict anything actually.

[Local Trouble]

it also contradicts the first movie, as per above.

I don't know if it's a contradiction, but it's certainly upsetting.