Script in the works for PROM Seq

Started by draken161, Feb 27, 2013, 06:59:15 AM

Author
Script in the works for PROM Seq (Read 63,204 times)

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#300
Ridley Scott: "He was perceived, the giant was perceived as skeletal and erm, I kept staring at the skeleton which was kind of a wonderful drawing by H R Giger, and erm, then I thought, twenty, thirty, twenty, actually twenty six years on (1995?), I thought what if this is not a skeleton, but, because we only see it as a skeleton, because of our own, the way we see things in our own indoctrination, and er now I thought, what happens if its another form of protection or a suit? If its a suit then what's inside the suit" ( Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo's Film reviews, BBCRadio 5 live, 01 June 2012.

Thanks to wmmvrrvrrmm

Gash

Gash

#301
There's nothing very specific in Ridley's ALIEN commentaries, he talks about the pilot - part of a military operation - being fused to the chair.

Deuterium

Deuterium

#302
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 13, 2013, 01:21:06 PM
Ridley Scott: "He was perceived, the giant was perceived as skeletal and erm, I kept staring at the skeleton which was kind of a wonderful drawing by H R Giger, and erm, then I thought, twenty, thirty, twenty, actually twenty six years on (1995?), I thought what if this is not a skeleton, but, because we only see it as a skeleton, because of our own, the way we see things in our own indoctrination, and er now I thought, what happens if its another form of protection or a suit? If its a suit then what's inside the suit" ( Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo's Film reviews, BBCRadio 5 live, 01 June 2012.

Thanks to wmmvrrvrrmm

Thanks for the feedback, OmegaZ.

Nevertheless, if I understand this correctly, this is a 2012 quote from Ridley Scott in which he recollects first thinking about the possibility that the Space Jockey = Suit, back in 1995.  Even if we take him at his word (and his memory as accurate), this was still 25+ years after ALIEN.

Here is my personal opinion as to how the Space Jockey concepts stack up:

BEST ===>  The Space Jockey is a totally alien organism, from a highly advanced space-faring civilization.  The Space Jockey's form is more or less as depicted in the original ALIEN, although it has become desiccated and mummifed due to exposure to the atmosphere of LV-426.  It is not a suit. It's physical form represents a surreal, biomechanical design...which may in fact have been "engineered" too perform a unique role in the alien civilization's society (e.g., bad-ass starship pilot).  This "Pilot" may live a sessile life, permanently integrated to it's console, to such a degree that it is a question if the Jockey is an extension of the Ship, or the Ship is an extension of the Jockey.
Lot's of cool possibilities, here.

GOOD (Acceptable) ==>  The Space Jockey may have been an external, exo-suit (although as mentioned in one of my prior posts, this is not consistent with what was displayed on film).  However, the important point, here, is that whatever is "inside" the suit, turns out to be just as alien and inscrutable.

BAD (Execrable) ==> The Space Jockey is just an external suit with a big blue Human inside.

----------------------------

P.S. -- I would still be interested if someone were able to dig up an interview or quote from Ridley, prior to 2008/2009, in which he discusses the possibility that the Space Jockey was a suit.


Gash

Gash

#303
Good job he isn't blue then.

Deuterium

Deuterium

#304
Quote from: Gash on Mar 13, 2013, 05:49:29 PM
Good job he isn't blue then.

Sorry, my bad.  TEAL !!!   :P ;)

Gash

Gash

#305
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 13, 2013, 05:51:19 PM
Quote from: Gash on Mar 13, 2013, 05:49:29 PM
Good job he isn't blue then.

Sorry, my bad.  TEAL !!!   :P ;)

Advantage Deuterium.  ;)

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#306
I was in fact supporting your point Deuterium.

I myself had never heard the suit thing before 2009-2010 -- which would fit with the thirty years thing.

Deuterium

Deuterium

#307
Quote from: OmegaZilla on Mar 13, 2013, 06:39:47 PM
I was in fact supporting your point Deuterium.

I myself had never heard the suit thing before 2009-2010 -- which would fit with the thirty years thing.

I know, OmegaZ. 

I was just trying to emphasize your findings...i.e., that the quote was from 2012, and that Ridley was recounting that he first thought about the "suit" concept in 1995.  IMHO, his "recollection", itself, may be dubious.

Gash

Gash

#308
He certainly said it very publicly a couple of years before Prometheus came out. I doubt he gave it that much thought before he considered a prequel, unless whilst interviewed about ALIEN where he's talked about being amazed that none of the sequels addressed the question of 'who's the big guy in the chair'. My guess is that he always had vague ideas about the bomber pilot and when the prospect of a prequel became a reality those ideas became something more solid based on the practicalities of how you could tell his story.

Deuterium

Deuterium

#309
Quote from: Gash on Mar 13, 2013, 07:22:13 PM
He certainly said it very publicly a couple of years before Prometheus came out. I doubt he gave it that much thought before he considered a prequel, unless whilst interviewed about ALIEN where he's talked about being amazed that none of the sequels addressed the question of 'who's the big guy in the chair'. My guess is that he always had vague ideas about the bomber pilot and when the prospect of a prequel became a reality those ideas became something more solid based on the practicalities of how you could tell his story.

Hi Gash,

I agree that your thoughts on this are, in fact, quite reasonable, and certainly possible.  It is just that I have yet to find a concrete example of Ridley being on-the-record with the "suit idea", prior to
the 2009-ish period...which puts this in the same time-frame of when Alien5/Prometheus was in the conception/pre-production phase.

I admittedly may be overly cynical, here, but I am sensing a direct correlation between the adoption of the "Von Daniken/ancient astronaut" angle, and what I have characterized as the "shoe-horning" of a glorified human into the Space Jockey suit.  In other words, it "conveniently" became a suit, in order to accomodate the script's revelation that the Space Jockeys/Engineers are in fact large, human beings.

Now, I certainly understand that many people have no problem with this particular issue, and I of course respect their views.  For me, however, this particular narrative decision was perhaps the single most aggregious mis-step for the film.

P.S. -- I like your hypothesis regarding Ridley perhaps thinking about and identifying the Space Jockey as some sort of interstellar "bomber pilot", and hence the chair/cockpit/suit metaphor.  If this was the case, I wish Ridley went with my "good" scenario (see earlier post), and at least kept the being inside the "suit" completely alien.  And of course, my three scenarios and rankings are just my humble opinion.

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#310
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 13, 2013, 09:27:49 PM
For me, however, this particular narrative decision was perhaps the single most aggregious mis-step for the film.
I agree.
The Derelict scene was basically an enormous imagination trigger. It was intellectually and creatively stimulating, regardless of how much knowledge you had on the actual ideas and themes behind it.

With Prometheus, it all became devastatingly dull and uninteresting.

IMHO of course.

ChrisPachi

ChrisPachi

#311
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 13, 2013, 09:27:49 PMI am sensing a direct correlation between the adoption of the "Von Daniken/ancient astronaut" angle, and what I have characterized as the "shoe-horning" of a glorified human into the Space Jockey suit.

Perhaps not a direct correlation, but an accumulative one. As Gash properly says, the suit idea might of taken form in his mind decades ago when thinking about the 'practicalities of how you could tell his story', and it was always an interesting idea with great possibilities IMO.

BUT, add in the original pitch from Spaihts about making the Jockey 'relatable' and it's all aboard the god-damned woohoo train.

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#312
Quote from: ChrisPachi on Mar 14, 2013, 09:40:50 AM
about making the Jockey 'relatable'
UGH

Highland

Highland

#313
Quote from: Deuterium on Mar 13, 2013, 09:27:49 PM


I admittedly may be overly cynical, here, but I am sensing a direct correlation between the adoption of the "Von Daniken/ancient astronaut" angle, and what I have characterized as the "shoe-horning" of a glorified human into the Space Jockey suit.  In other words, it "conveniently" became a suit, in order to accomodate the script's revelation that the Space Jockeys/Engineers are in fact large, human beings.

Now, I certainly understand that many people have no problem with this particular issue, and I of course respect their views.  For me, however, this particular narrative decision was perhaps the single most aggregious mis-step for the film.


Not really. Tell me how you put the Space Jockey into the film in any other way without busting up the Alien Franchise?

It has to be either before Alien or after Resurrection. If it's after, that leaves a whole bunch of questions on why they were never found before. So you make it before, but you need the humans to find the base so how do you do that ?

You can see the thought process behind it all. It makes perfect sense.

Alien³

Alien³

#314
I might be the only one who found the Engineers to be a scarier idea than what was previously thought. The idea that we might be alone in the universe with a species of creatures that want to kill us.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News