Noah Hawley Explains Why ‘Prometheus’ Isn’t “Useful” for His ‘Alien’ Prequel

[The Cruentus]

Later stories cannot change the intent of an earlier story; that intent is set in stone when it comes out.

Later stories can recontextualize what the earlier story shows us (that's what a retcon is), but that does not change its original intent. The intent of 'Alien' absolutely was that the Derelict and its contents were ancient, and Dallas uses narrative shorthand to convey that even if the precise words he's using aren't scientifically accurate. He's using a term the audience will understand to convey "this is old". Just because he didn't use the precisely correct scientific terminology doesn't mean the intent wasn't "the audience is meant to conclude this is old". Up until Alien Covenant came out, no one thought the Derelict might not be ancient.

Intentions can change, and what ever it was before does not matter to current intent. 
Scott changed his intent and for good or bad, newer stories do overwrite old ones (unless otherwise stated or a sequel-reboot is made such as Dark fate not counting T3, TS, TG as ever happened) that is why is it called retroactive continuity and not futureactive continuity.
It does not matter what the intent was in the original because scott changed his mind and made intent clear in the prequels. The intentions behind the first movie no longer exist in the current franchise. If you have any respect for the director's intent as you seem to bring up his old intention, then you need to acknowledge what his intent was for Coventnent. It sucked for sure but the director made it clear.

[Xenomrph]

Later stories cannot change the intent of an earlier story; that intent is set in stone when it comes out.

Later stories can recontextualize what the earlier story shows us (that's what a retcon is), but that does not change its original intent. The intent of 'Alien' absolutely was that the Derelict and its contents were ancient, and Dallas uses narrative shorthand to convey that even if the precise words he's using aren't scientifically accurate. He's using a term the audience will understand to convey "this is old". Just because he didn't use the precisely correct scientific terminology doesn't mean the intent wasn't "the audience is meant to conclude this is old". Up until Alien Covenant came out, no one thought the Derelict might not be ancient.

Intentions can change, and what ever it was before does not matter to current intent. 
Scott changed his intent and for good or bad, newer stories do overwrite old ones (unless otherwise stated or a sequel-reboot is made such as Dark fate not counting T3, TS, TG as ever happened) that is why is it called retroactive continuity and not futureactive continuity.
It does not matter what the intent was in the original because scott changed his mind and made intent clear in the prequels. The intentions behind the first movie no longer exist in the current franchise. If you have any respect for the director's intent as you seem to bring up his old intention, then you need to acknowledge what his intent was for Coventnent. It sucked for sure but the director made it clear.

The intent for 'Alien' and the intent for 'Covenant' are two different things that exist at different points in time, and I don't think one has to override the other. That's the point. Covenant produced a retcon, but pretending that the Derelict was never meant to be old is bizarre revisionist history.

[The Cruentus]

@Xenomrph
No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

[Local Trouble]

No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

I want ancient elephant man!

[SM]

No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

I want ancient elephant man!

Everyone knows it was originally supposed to be old.  The key word is "supposed to be". Alright three key words.

The film doesn't definitively state this though, which allowed Ridley to change it.  If Ash had stabbed one of them dating devices they have in Prometheus and said 'This dude has been dead for thousands of years. And he has elephant DNA' then David creating the Aliens would be an obvious contradiction.

Nothing like that happened though.

[Local Trouble]

No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

I want ancient elephant man!

Everyone knows it was originally supposed to be old.  The key word is "supposed to be". Alright three key words.

The film doesn't definitively state this though, which allowed Ridley to change it.  If Ash had stabbed one of them dating devices they have in Prometheus and said 'This dude has been dead for thousands of years. And he has elephant DNA' then David creating the Aliens would be an obvious contradiction.

Nothing like that happened though.

Doesn't change the fact that I want ancient elephant man.  Pander to me.

[The Cruentus]

No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

I want ancient elephant man!

Everyone knows it was originally supposed to be old.  The key word is "supposed to be". Alright three key words.

The film doesn't definitively state this though, which allowed Ridley to change it.  If Ash had stabbed one of them dating devices they have in Prometheus and said 'This dude has been dead for thousands of years. And he has elephant DNA' then David creating the Aliens would be an obvious contradiction.

Nothing like that happened though.

Doesn't change the fact that I want ancient elephant man.  Pander to me.

"Gives Local the Panderstone of doom"

[xShadowFoxX]

No one is pretending that the derelict and the alien wasn't meant to be old, people are just saying that now its not old, a fact that not many folk like because the original intent was far better.

I want ancient elephant man!

Everyone knows it was originally supposed to be old.  The key word is "supposed to be". Alright three key words.

The film doesn't definitively state this though, which allowed Ridley to change it.  If Ash had stabbed one of them dating devices they have in Prometheus and said 'This dude has been dead for thousands of years. And he has elephant DNA' then David creating the Aliens would be an obvious contradiction.

Nothing like that happened though.

The first film ultimately conveys that it's old, ancient, hence the dialogue from Dallas. Even if people think he's incorrect, the point is driven across to convey that assessment that the derelict is ancient for some great world building and the prequels retcon that immediately.

To say that the derelict crashed recently is, in a word, uninteresting.

[SM]

Then I hope it gets changed and helps you deal with the trauma.

[xShadowFoxX]

Then I hope it gets changed and helps you deal with the trauma.

Hey, if the prequels get retconned.. it'll be like these retcons never happened.

[KranfordTButcher]

I think Noah makes some solid points, all things considered. The "futurized" (for lack of a better term) look of Prometheus and Covenant clash pretty bad with the retro-future look from the first two movies, and making the aliens a much more recent creation is just plain silly.

I seem to recall the novelization of Covenant had it that David's version was essentially a cheap knockoff of the original.

[Xenomrph]

I seem to recall the novelization of Covenant had it that David's version was essentially a cheap knockoff of the original.

This is correct, but apparently it was a unilateral decision by ADF (which his editor and the studio were evidently okay with).

[SM]

Veering back on topic. I think Noah makes some solid points, all things considered. The "futurized" (for lack of a better term) look of Prometheus and Covenant clash pretty bad with the retro-future look from the first two movies, and making the aliens a much more recent creation is just plain silly.

I seem to recall the novelization of Covenant had it that David's version was essentially a cheap knockoff of the original.

There's easy ways to make the tech differences fit.

[SiL]

Literally just show them existing in the same film in their different uses. It doesn't really need to be explained.

[SM]

Yep.  And if it really needs explaining to get something across to the audience, there a bunch of simple ways it could be done.

I can't for a second imagine they will.