Am I alone ?

[SM]

Sure it could have been a space suit. It wasn't a man inside a space suit though.....

Quite.

The man who created it said it was a skeleton.

Scorpio is making mischief again.

[Scorpio]

Ok, if he said that then that's fine.  But where did he say that?

[Xenomrph]

He says it in the art book for 'Prometheus', in the introduction.

It also says it's a skeleton in the script for 'Alien', and the novelization. Giger's art style aside, it was meant to be a skeleton. Even in the actual prop, it's got gaping eye sockets, teeth, and a tongue.

[Scorpio]

Can you post the exact quote and don't leave anything out.  I don't have that book.

And as for tongue/teeth.... no.  That doesn't make any sense.



I can see how you may mistake that for tongue and teeth, but no.

Eye sockets?  That does not mean skeleton.  Have you looked at any of Giger's art?  They are biomechanoid beings.  He does all kinds of weird things with bones.



You see the arms?  That is clearly not a skeleton dude.  It looks technological.

A skeleton arm would look something like this:



Because it's basically a humanoid arm, it even has 5 fingers.



Eye sockets.  Evidence of skeleton?

[Xenomrph]

Can you post the exact quote and don't leave anything out.  I don't have that book.

And as for tongue/teeth.... no.  That doesn't make any sense.

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/avp/images/e/ee/Space_jockey_004.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20130619052812

I can see how you may mistake that for tongue and teeth, but no.

I think you're going to have to clarify what "doesn't make any sense" means, because they're right there in that picture. If it doesn't make sense to you, it could be a lack of understanding on your part, rather than everyone else "not understanding" Giger's art or something like that. I understand his art style just fine, and I understand why it was so appealing to Ridley Scott for 'Alien' because it's so unique and otherworldly and unlike anything anyone has seen before. But the actual Space Jockey as written on the page was that it was a skeleton, and that's what Giger was instructed to design for the movie and what he interpreted.

Also it's worth pointing out that in Giger's original concept art for the Jockey, not only does it show the teeth and tongue, but it depicts a transparent bubble-helmet that would have gone over the skull. That seems redundant if the head itself is a spacesuit helmet.

The fact that we can even have this discussion is a good thing, it's a testament to Giger's art and talent that it looks so weird that where one person sees a skeleton, someone else sees a spacesuit. One of Prometheus' biggest disservices to his art is that it tries to say "no it's a spacesuit".

As for the Ridley Scott quote, from page 10 of 'Prometheus: Art of the Film':

"I was curious that nobody had ever asked, 'Who was the big guy sitting in the seat?'" Scott says today. "He was fondly called the Space Jockey, though I don't know where that name came from. But somebody called it the Space Jockey, and the assumption was that he was skeletal. Then I thought, "Well, what happens if he's not a skeleton?"

Just for chuckles, I checked the book 'Giger's Alien' (which has quotes from his production diary) to see if he mentions anything, and it doesn't. I don't have a copy of his complete notes to see if he says anything elsewhere, but I'm pretty sure I remember someone on this forum saying they'd bought a copy.

Edit-- went ahead and poked around in the book Alien Vault, and on page 94-95 it says the following:

The derelict's lonely sentinel, nicknamed by the Space Jockey by the film's crew (James Cameron calls him the Big Dental Patient), originates in O'Bannon and Shusset's initial Starbeast draft of the script. He is discovered by the astronauts, a giant skeleton languishing in a dead spaceship: 'a grotesque thing, bearing no resemblance to the human form.'

I'd check what Alien: The Archive says on the matter, but I haven't gotten around to buying a copy yet. I'm confident it'll say what everything else has said, though: the Jockey, as written and designed, was a skeleton.

[Scorpio]

I think you're going to have to clarify what "doesn't make any sense" means, because they're right there in that picture. If it doesn't make sense to you, it could be a lack of understanding on your part, rather than everyone else "not understanding" Giger's art or something like that. I understand his art style just fine, and I understand why it was so appealing to Ridley Scott for 'Alien' because it's so unique and otherworldly and unlike anything anyone has seen before. But the actual Space Jockey as written on the page was that it was a skeleton, and that's what Giger was instructed to design for the movie and what he interpreted.

Maybe I don't understand so help me to understand.  You say there is a tongue yet empty eye sockets with no eyes.  What happened to the eyes, then?  Why is there nothing flesh except for this 'tongue', if it is a tongue?

Also it's worth pointing out that in Giger's original concept art for the Jockey, not only does it show the teeth and tongue, but it depicts a transparent bubble-helmet that would have gone over the skull. That seems redundant if the head itself is a spacesuit helmet.

This is true, but it did not end up in the film.  So how did this creature breathe with no atmosphere?  Assuming it needs respiration to survive.  Perhaps this was a rejected concept, like the headless chicken chestbursters.

The fact that we can even have this discussion is a good thing, it's a testament to Giger's art and talent that it looks so weird that where one person sees a skeleton, someone else sees a spacesuit. One of Prometheus' biggest disservices to his art is that it tries to say "no it's a spacesuit".

It's more than just a spacesuit, though.  We saw the Engineers body being almost completely biomech.



The 'spacesuit' is just part of that.

As for the Ridley Scott quote, from page 10 of 'Prometheus: Art of the Film':

"I was curious that nobody had ever asked, 'Who was the big guy sitting in the seat?'" Scott says today. "He was fondly called the Space Jockey, though I don't know where that name came from. But somebody called it the Space Jockey, and the assumption was that he was skeletal. Then I thought, "Well, what happens if he's not a skeleton?"

The "assumption".

assumption
əˈsʌm(p)ʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1.
a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

Just for chuckles, I checked the book 'Giger's Alien' (which has quotes from his production diary) to see if he mentions anything, and it doesn't. I don't have a copy of his complete notes to see if he says anything elsewhere, but I'm pretty sure I remember someone on this forum saying they'd bought a copy.

Edit-- went ahead and poked around in the book Alien Vault, and on page 94-95 it says the following:

The derelict's lonely sentinel, nicknamed by the Space Jockey by the film's crew (James Cameron calls him the Big Dental Patient), originates in O'Bannon and Shusset's initial Starbeast draft of the script. He is discovered by the astronauts, a giant skeleton languishing in a dead spaceship: 'a grotesque thing, bearing no resemblance to the human form.'

Who said this quote?

I'd check what Alien: The Archive says on the matter, but I haven't gotten around to buying a copy yet. I'm confident it'll say what everything else has said, though: the Jockey, as written and designed, was a skeleton.

Not unless Giger himself said that was his intention.  Too late to ask him now, but if he has mentioned it somewhere.

[Highland]

Scorpio you're doing that whole reverse Engineering thing (pun intended).

[Xenomrph]

I think you're going to have to clarify what "doesn't make any sense" means, because they're right there in that picture. If it doesn't make sense to you, it could be a lack of understanding on your part, rather than everyone else "not understanding" Giger's art or something like that. I understand his art style just fine, and I understand why it was so appealing to Ridley Scott for 'Alien' because it's so unique and otherworldly and unlike anything anyone has seen before. But the actual Space Jockey as written on the page was that it was a skeleton, and that's what Giger was instructed to design for the movie and what he interpreted.

Maybe I don't understand so help me to understand.  You say there is a tongue yet empty eye sockets with no eyes.  What happened to the eyes, then?  Why is there nothing flesh except for this 'tongue', if it is a tongue?

It's an otherworldly biomechanoid organism, unlike anything relateable on earth. Perhaps it literally *is* the spacesuit - not wearing a spacesuit, the creature is itself a biological spacesuit, a fusion of technology and biology. That would allow it to have the appearance of a suit (the arms, as you pointed out) while also having a skull, eye sockets, and a tongue. The Space Jockey isn't "wearing" anything, it literally is the thing you're looking at, fused to the chair. They are one entity - that's one thing Giger *does* say in 'Giger's Alien', that the chair and the Jockey are one biomechanoid organism.

Also it's worth pointing out that in Giger's original concept art for the Jockey, not only does it show the teeth and tongue, but it depicts a transparent bubble-helmet that would have gone over the skull. That seems redundant if the head itself is a spacesuit helmet.

This is true, but it did not end up in the film.  So how did this creature breathe with no atmosphere?  Assuming it needs respiration to survive.  Perhaps this was a rejected concept, like the headless chicken chestbursters.

Just saying, if you're going to go with "Giger's intent", you probably shouldn't shift the goalposts around when it suddenly doesn't suit your argument.
Giger's original Space Jockey artwork, as drawn by Giger, had a dome helmet, negating the need for a spacesuit helmet. That certainly carries as much weight as citing his other artwork that depicts "space suits".

The fact that we can even have this discussion is a good thing, it's a testament to Giger's art and talent that it looks so weird that where one person sees a skeleton, someone else sees a spacesuit. One of Prometheus' biggest disservices to his art is that it tries to say "no it's a spacesuit".

It's more than just a spacesuit, though.  We saw the Engineers body being almost completely biomech.



The 'spacesuit' is just part of that.

I'm not talking about 'Prometheus', I'm talking about what we saw in 'Alien', and what was intended by the filmmakers in 1979 when they made it. Ridley Scott openly admits that "it's a guy in a suit" is a deviation from what they intended in the original film, and that's fine. But pretending that everyone intended it to be a spacesuit all along is some pretty wacky revisionist history.

As for the Ridley Scott quote, from page 10 of 'Prometheus: Art of the Film':

"I was curious that nobody had ever asked, 'Who was the big guy sitting in the seat?'" Scott says today. "He was fondly called the Space Jockey, though I don't know where that name came from. But somebody called it the Space Jockey, and the assumption was that he was skeletal. Then I thought, "Well, what happens if he's not a skeleton?"

The "assumption".

assumption
əˈsʌm(p)ʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1.
a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

That's a pretty silly misinterpretation of the word "assumption". He's not saying the filmmakers "assumed" it was a skeleton when the made the movie back in 1979, they knew exactly what they intended it to be when they made it, because they're the ones who made it. He's saying that the audience assumed it was skeletal when they saw the movie.

Edit-- went ahead and poked around in the book Alien Vault, and on page 94-95 it says the following:

The derelict's lonely sentinel, nicknamed by the Space Jockey by the film's crew (James Cameron calls him the Big Dental Patient), originates in O'Bannon and Shusset's initial Starbeast draft of the script. He is discovered by the astronauts, a giant skeleton languishing in a dead spaceship: 'a grotesque thing, bearing no resemblance to the human form.'

Who said this quote?

The author of the book. He's citing the Starbeast script, which refers to it as a skeleton.

I'd check what Alien: The Archive says on the matter, but I haven't gotten around to buying a copy yet. I'm confident it'll say what everything else has said, though: the Jockey, as written and designed, was a skeleton.

Not unless Giger himself said that was his intention.  Too late to ask him now, but if he has mentioned it somewhere.

Giger was not the only person who worked on 'Alien' - he was the artist, and he was drawing what other people told him to draw. If the script said "the crew finds a skeleton in a chair", he drew his interpretation of that in his own biomechanoid style. His intention isn't the sole deciding factor on what was going on in the design and writing process, and even if he did explicitly intend it to be a spacesuit and not a skeleton, he'd be the only person working on the movie who felt that way.

As for Giger's personal intent, his complete diary might expand on it. If I had a copy, I'd check it. Unfortunately it's a $100+ book and not exactly in the budget right now, but I might buy a copy eventually.

Scorpio you're doing that whole reverse Engineering thing (pun intended).

Exactly this: just because a sequel/prequel/whatever introduces a new idea doesn't mean it was suddenly always intended to be that way from the beginning. Reminder: per Scott's quote, it was his decision to change the Space Jockey to be a spacesuit for 'Prometheus', not Giger's. It's not like he's saying "Giger always meant this to be a spacesuit, and I wanted to expand on this for Prometheus"; no he's literally saying "we intended it to be one thing, and I chose to change it".

[Scorpio]

Perhaps it literally *is* the spacesuit - not wearing a spacesuit, the creature is itself a biological spacesuit, a fusion of technology and biology.

It is clearly both a skeleton and a spacesuit.

The original design by Ron Cobb looks more like a skeleton (and it is referred to in the script as such as you mention), but the Giger design looks like a skeleton fused with a spacesuit.

[Xenomrph]

Perhaps it literally *is* the spacesuit - not wearing a spacesuit, the creature is itself a biological spacesuit, a fusion of technology and biology.

It is clearly both a skeleton and a spacesuit.

The original design by Ron Cobb looks more like a skeleton (and it is referred to in the script as such as you mention), but the Giger design looks like a skeleton fused with a spacesuit.

....and now I think you've begun to understand.

And like I said, that's why I think Prometheus not just coming down hard on the side of "it's a spacesuit", but also saying "and the thing inside the spacesuit is a giant albino human", does a huge disservice to Giger's artwork and to 'Alien' as a whole.

I like 'Prometheus' a lot and I think it has some neat ideas and visuals, but as an 'Alien' prequel it falls flat. I think saddling it with the Alien baggage only drags both movies down, and Prometheus could have been a lot crazier and more original (and scarier) without being linked to 'Alien'.

[tleilaxu]

Perhaps it literally *is* the spacesuit - not wearing a spacesuit, the creature is itself a biological spacesuit, a fusion of technology and biology.

It is clearly both a skeleton and a spacesuit.

The original design by Ron Cobb looks more like a skeleton (and it is referred to in the script as such as you mention), but the Giger design looks like a skeleton fused with a spacesuit.

....and now I think you've begun to understand.

And like I said, that's why I think Prometheus not just coming down hard on the side of "it's a spacesuit", but also saying "and the thing inside the spacesuit is a giant albino human", does a huge disservice to Giger's artwork and to 'Alien' as a whole.

Because it didn't fit your headcanon? I doubt Giger himself cared about it.

[Xenomrph]

Perhaps it literally *is* the spacesuit - not wearing a spacesuit, the creature is itself a biological spacesuit, a fusion of technology and biology.

It is clearly both a skeleton and a spacesuit.

The original design by Ron Cobb looks more like a skeleton (and it is referred to in the script as such as you mention), but the Giger design looks like a skeleton fused with a spacesuit.

....and now I think you've begun to understand.

And like I said, that's why I think Prometheus not just coming down hard on the side of "it's a spacesuit", but also saying "and the thing inside the spacesuit is a giant albino human", does a huge disservice to Giger's artwork and to 'Alien' as a whole.

Because it didn't fit your headcanon? I doubt Giger himself cared about it.

Having an opinion about how Prometheus was handled has nothing to do with "headcanon".

[Scorpio]

It's a brilliant idea, actually.  The fact that some fans hate it just means they can't accept any new ideas.

[reecebomb]

It's a brilliant idea, actually.  The fact that some fans hate it just means they can't accept any new ideas.

Lol, classic Scorpio.

[Xenomrph]

It's a brilliant idea, actually.  The fact that some fans hate it just means they can't accept any new ideas.

Which idea?