Can the show still be good if it contradicts the lore?

[xShadowFoxX]

I'd make the argument that, in context, the mural isn't even specifically a Deacon. Just some depiction of that same general form as the Deacon and the Neomorph, as the Pathogen tends to yield in one way or another.

The Deacon came from a very specific set of circumstances, but it isn't so dissimilar from what other circumstances might create, and the mural is like a big catch-all for the overall general shape.

That's the way I see it as well. It's definitely nothing related to the XX121, but it's certainly showing knowledge of the Alien-like creatures that result from the goo. I need to rewatch some of the Prometheus bts to see specifically what is said on the mural. That could be an interesting editorial itself.

Talking specifically about the question of the thread - while I've stopped caring about whether any specific entries are canon or not, I do think the parameters the stories set themselves about what lore is relevant to them do matter in terms of continuity. So for me, it does depend on if Alien Earth decides the prequels are relevant to it or not, and how well it sticks to its guns with that. 

I think (but I'd need a rewatch to confirm) in the "Furious Gods" documentary it is stated that the mural is intended to be the Deacon but in the movie one can draw their own conclusion as it's not, obviously, made clear.

I'm actually convinced it's the Deacon mostly because of the end result at the end of the film. But the way the Deacon is achieved is such a convoluted mess that it makes the mural feel ?redundant?

I don't know if redundant is the right word..

[xShadowFoxX]

It just seems they blew their load too early in that film, that's what I'm trying to get at.

[Corporal Hicks]

I'm actually convinced it's the Deacon mostly because of the end result at the end of the film. But the way the Deacon is achieved is such a convoluted mess that it makes the mural feel ?redundant?

I used to think the same as well. The Deacon was created by such a random chain of events that seemed a little wild to consciously repeat, that it couldn't be supposed to depict the Deacon. But it does just imply the existance of Xenomorphic creatures and the Engineer's awareness and apparent reverence of them.

[Agoddamnpercentage]

What is it about the way the deacon is created that means it couldn't be the same creature that the pathogen always give rise to (and therefore the same creature shown in the mural)? If the pathogen is supposed to be released into an environment, it presumably then seeps into organisms' bodies, just as it does with Shaw, and could then lead to the same life cycle seen in the movie. Is the idea that, in the movie, the deacon is created in a process that crosses species (human to engineer)? But the two are supposed to be genetically identical, and are definitely physiologically very similar. And we don't know whether the pathogen reacts differently to different hosts.

[SiL]

The Deacon is created by an infected individual having sex with another individual who gives birth to the trilobite which in turn needs to infect another individual.

And the movie shows repeatedly that each individual's infection seems to take a personalised path.

So the chances of A) having the same sequences of events and B ) it having the same reaction in each individual along the chain seem slim.

[Agoddamnpercentage]

I'm not sure about that. If you release the pathogen into the atmosphere of a planet with billions of humans on it, and many billions more other organisms, quite a lot of them are going to have sex.

[Slutty Badger]

I like the explanation given in Heart of Darkness - the Deacon is one of the Proto-Xenomorphs created by the Fulfremmen, and is usually spawned from a host infected by a Trilobite, which is consistent with what we see in Prometheus.

However, the Trilobite itself is spawned from a proto-Ovomorphic pod called a "womb-bat", which in turn is created by the living Proto-Hive by capturing hosts and infecting them with Trilobite genetic material. The pod then produces a Naiad "squid-baby", which grows into a Trilobite.

What we see in Prometheus is an alternate form of infection dubbed the Zygote or "eye-worm", which affects Holloway, and the genetic material is passed to Shaw through intercourse. She then produces the Naiad as a womb-bat normally would.

[Imbrie]

We know that the pathogen, ultimately, alters the DNA of the infected host and that they eventually mutate into something resembling a Xenomorph. Unfortunately, Prometheus, Covenant and, now, Romulus all muddy the water as to how exactly it works as we see a variety of outcomes based upon different scenarios.

The things that Prometheus does show us are the mural, depicting some form of the Xenomorph (perhaps its purest form) and also that there was an outbreak on LV-223 that resulted in some chest-bursting which suggests the alien's lifecycle that we are familiar with. Although, how that came to be is something of a mystery as, presumably, a facehugger or trilobite was required for that.

[SiL]

I'm not sure about that. If you release the pathogen into the atmosphere of a planet with billions of humans on it, and many billions more other organisms, quite a lot of them are going to have sex.

Except the sequel shows us that when you do that you just kill everything.

Also, Shaw herself wasn't infected, as she never mutated. She just got mutant sperm.

[BlueMarsalis79]

Well, it might be the case that it kills everything in the immediate deployment vicinity, and it took longer for everything else to die elsewhere. 

Leading to a lot of specimens for David to collect.

[SiL]

Well, it might be the case that it kills everything in the immediate deployment vicinity, and it took longer for everything else to die elsewhere. 

Leading to a lot of specimens for David to collect.

The deacon still required a very specific series of events to make.

If the pathogen was dispersed in the environment, it would be unlikely for Charlie to get infected but Shaw not to, for example. And would every mutant down make a trilobite?

[BlueMarsalis79]

I mean, depends on the population, depends if it gets diluted in various water sources etc.

Not that the results will be exactly identical, but I can easily see a couple of Engineers on the other side of the planet unknowingly drinking infected water and having intercourse together, then a Trilobite just needs to infect someone.

[Agoddamnpercentage]

I'm not sure about that. If you release the pathogen into the atmosphere of a planet with billions of humans on it, and many billions more other organisms, quite a lot of them are going to have sex.

Except the sequel shows us that when you do that you just kill everything.

Assuming it's the same pathogen... Different levels of exposure to all sorts of substances have different effects on people. See nuclear radiation.

Not only is 'people infected by pathogen have sex' not a moonshot scenario, it's the sort of mechanism you'd be likely to rely on if you were carrying out genocide on a planetary scale.

This was about whether the circumstances leading to the deacon were so unique that it couldn't be the thing in the mural. I don't think they were. But it might also be that the deacon is associated with the pathogen in other ways (perhaps it's the source of the pathogen, and/or the pathogen always breeds true in the form of deacons eventually, even if the precise pathway can differ).

[SiL]

Not only is 'people infected by pathogen have sex' not a moonshot scenario, it's the sort of mechanism you'd be likely to rely on if you were carrying out genocide on a planetary scale.

You're being very disingenuous boiling it down to that when it's been explained repeatedly there's more to it than that.

[Agoddamnpercentage]

Not only is 'people infected by pathogen have sex' not a moonshot scenario, it's the sort of mechanism you'd be likely to rely on if you were carrying out genocide on a planetary scale.

You're being very disingenuous boiling it down to that when it's been explained repeatedly there's more to it than that.

I don't think chucking words like disingenuous around is quite necessary. There's the trilobite part of the life cycle but that doesn't seem to change much. If infected people spawn trilobites, then the trilobites going on and infecting hosts could also be predictable. Again, the issue is just whether this apparently ancient species of engineers would have seen deacons before, or would see an association between the pathogen and deacons, in the way suggested by the mural. I don't think we've seen anything that shows there couldn't be this pre-existing, reliable link between them.