Anyone else hates the xenomorph design on Covenant?

[The Old One]

Incorrect, it's intentional.

"The Protomorph." -Colin Shulver

"The prequels, it's a transition through the H.R Giger aesthetic." -Chris Seagers

Paraphrasing.

"The future isn't organic or synthetic, it's biomechanical." -David Weyland
(Michael Fassbender)

[rafaelgg]

Incorrect, it's intentional.

"The Protomorph." -Colin Shulver

"The prequels, it's a transition through the H.R Giger aesthetic." -Chris Seagers

Paraphrasing.

"The future isn't organic or synthetic, it's biomechanical." -David Weyland
(Michael Fassbender)

They can improvise and quote any excuse for explaining why the creatrue looks different hidding the real director´s purpose:To take adavantage of CGI and modern fx´s and creating a version he considered it much more refined, But before the film release,  when they were created the film, it was called as it was called and that betray them:




  It does not matter the lies the built for answering the claims of fan after watching the film, it´s the original and real intentions what it counts.
  Cause for helping to the film acceptance they don´t have any problemes about lying...Do you remember when they said that all the confusing elements on the plot would be answered on "Alien Covenant"?. We are still wating those answers 2 years after the film premiere. They didn´t explain any dam thing.

[Gash]

Still incorrect.

[The Old One]

"It doesn't fit my narrative so they're liars!" 

[SiL]

You'll get that a lot in fandoms ...

[rafaelgg]

You'll get that a lot in fandoms ...

Many people argueb about the many unanaswered uestions raised on Prometheus as "Why the black lquid effects is so whimsical?", "I´s the planet and the spaceship the same from "Aliens" and in case not how is possible a derelict on another planet virtually identical to the one on Acheron?"., "If the engineers invited us to meet the why one of them attack us?". "Wich is the deacon place on the xeomorph evolution"?, "If the xenomorph is not created yet why there is on depicted on the spaceship walls?"......and the crude thing is in "Alien Covenant" they delete the ingenieers suddenlly and unceremonously and with them all the open questions from "Prometheus".
  Of course if we ask now to Ridley Scott  and the writers, they will ask "Don´t worry we´ll give you the answers on the third one", cause they really thing audience can be easilly cheated. After all the Prometheus main wirter was Damon Lindelof, the guy after "Lost", a guy specialized on smokes an mirrors.
And that´s not a problem about don´t fiting on my narrative, I am a really open minded viewer and on this franchise I have already accepted many thins on "Aliens", "Alien 3", and "Alien ressurrection" tha was not on my book.
  But there is one difference between being "open minded", an acepting all without judgment.

[SuperiorIronman]

I'm going to just point this out, the Deacon would be the proto-Xenomorph. The Deacon is the earliest one in the timeline and not the Covenant Xenomorph.

Not calling the Xenomorph in Covenant a proper Alien is simply being pedantic. Because if we do have to consider the Prequels as the origin, then this is it. This is the earliest the Alien exists in the timeline until the next film screws up the timeline more. There is no baseline in these films so being general about the design is fine.

What do I mean?
It spawns from an egg hosting a facehugger, it attaches and JOs down somebodies throat, out pops a bundle of gross, and it grows up to be a screaming skeleton with a penis head.
If our argument against it is the chestburster.., well the Runner starts formed and we have no idea if this is because it grew inside of its host or if that chestburster merely starts that way. We also got ALIENS which gives them arms, and even the Queen burster had developing arms.So regardless something like this can happen as weird as it is. There is precedent that they don't always start as penis snakes with the Runner being the most developed.
And if our argument is the physical form, well as bad as the design is, there's also some minor precedent for it. We know the PredAlien will typically develop a more fleshy appearance taking on the added muscle of its host. It might not be out of the question for it to do that for a human. And we know that the carapace does develop over time. As boring as the design in Covenant is, we know they eventually gain more shell.

For all intents and purposes it is the Xenomorph, even if the showing isn't great it might as well be seeing as if it wasn't suposed to be we would've just stuck with a Deacon or Neo-morph.

In addition, if this is isn't supposed to be the proper Xenomorph then David has not created the Xenomorph. In Covenant he would've just made a passable attempt no different than the scientists in Alien:Resurrection. However if David did create the Xenomorph then this it, and as weird as the design is, this is what a Xenomorph looks like in some capacity. We can't say that is a Xenomorph and that David made them and then backtrack on that statement by saying it's not totally the Xenomorph.

[The Old One]

The PredAlien's non-canon garbage.

The (Deacon and all) Neomorphs' the Pathogen's result.

The "Xenomorph" is unique, it's autonomous.
The Protomorph's presence's purpose is the Prototype Alien version.

[Samhain13]

And if our argument is the physical form, well as bad as the design is, there's also some minor precedent for it. We know the PredAlien will typically develop a more fleshy appearance taking on the added muscle of its host. It might not be out of the question for it to do that for a human. And we know that the carapace does develop over time. As boring as the design in Covenant is, we know they eventually gain more shell.

The Predalien design changes a lot from each entry they appear, some were less fleshy and more biomeachanical, its more of a design choice by those in charge. Some thought that making it more predator like would be cool. I doubt Ridley noticed the difference between Covenant's design and the original, for him they are probably the same.

[rafaelgg]

I'm going to just point this out, the Deacon would be the proto-Xenomorph. The Deacon is the earliest one in the timeline and not the Covenant Xenomorph.

Not calling the Xenomorph in Covenant a proper Alien is simply being pedantic. Because if we do have to consider the Prequels as the origin, then this is it. This is the earliest the Alien exists in the timeline until the next film screws up the timeline more. There is no baseline in these films so being general about the design is fine.

What do I mean?
It spawns from an egg hosting a facehugger, it attaches and JOs down somebodies throat, out pops a bundle of gross, and it grows up to be a screaming skeleton with a penis head.
If our argument against it is the chestburster.., well the Runner starts formed and we have no idea if this is because it grew inside of its host or if that chestburster merely starts that way. We also got ALIENS which gives them arms, and even the Queen burster had developing arms.So regardless something like this can happen as weird as it is. There is precedent that they don't always start as penis snakes with the Runner being the most developed.
And if our argument is the physical form, well as bad as the design is, there's also some minor precedent for it. We know the PredAlien will typically develop a more fleshy appearance taking on the added muscle of its host. It might not be out of the question for it to do that for a human. And we know that the carapace does develop over time. As boring as the design in Covenant is, we know they eventually gain more shell.

For all intents and purposes it is the Xenomorph, even if the showing isn't great it might as well be seeing as if it wasn't suposed to be we would've just stuck with a Deacon or Neo-morph.

In addition, if this is isn't supposed to be the proper Xenomorph then David has not created the Xenomorph. In Covenant he would've just made a passable attempt no different than the scientists in Alien:Resurrection. However if David did create the Xenomorph then this it, and as weird as the design is, this is what a Xenomorph looks like in some capacity. We can't say that is a Xenomorph and that David made them and then backtrack on that statement by saying it's not totally the Xenomorph.

We can use our imagination to elaborate the answers and spare the filmaker´s job.
O we can asume they made a clumsy  and neglected work thinking that being the 90% of the audience casual and no very well versed on the alien mithology and timeline, it would not affect the film success.

[rafaelgg]

I disagree. The film's professionals expressed it's intentional.

Say what you will about the man, but Ridley Scott's eyes are the best in the business.

Well then put me the link where is answered all those questions about Prometheus.
  It would be the best eyes when he made "The Duelist", "Alien", "Blade Runner", "Thelma & Louise" or even "The Gladiator" and "Kingdom" of Heaven
  And maybe when he made on 1979 "Alien" he was a young director willing to make himself a name and to prove his talent.
  Now is´an elder man a 81 old directo whose status is perfected set on the industry as producer an director, who has not future to assure ad have fallen on self-indulgence, and instead good flicks now they give us mediocre movies as "Robin Hood",, "The Counselor" or "Exodus". The only exception is "The Martian", that is good but not great.
At least the Blade Runner sequel was directed by Denis Villeneuve Thank God.

[SuperiorIronman]

The PredAlien's non-canon garbage, inconsequential.

The (Deacon and all) Neomorphs' the Pathogen's result.

The "Xenomorph" is unique, it's autonomous.
The Protomorph's presence's purpose is the Prototype Alien version.

So then the Alien can't have been created by David because what we see in Covenant is a work in progress.

[The Old One]

Or... it's David's Prototype. The perfect version and the Derelict's crash is consecutive.

[rafaelgg]

  So there is a derelict  exactly similar one to other in all planets of the alien universe except on  "Fury 161" and Earth?
  It´s a little preposterous and hard to believe Isn´t?.
  The prequels is a set of ideas and concept disjointed and without any coherence, a total messed not even the most talented screenwriter could fix and integrate right now. Kudos to mister Landelof and mister Scott.
  That´s what happens when you start to create a prequel alien movies, in the middle of the development progress you say "Ey, wait a moment, we have decided we are going to make a phylosofical hard science ficition movie set in the Alien Universe but without the xenomorph about mankind origins, and in the last moment you decide that "Prometheus" need some xenomorph hints and you ada xenomorph form on wall, the trilobite and the deacon birth without bothering about making any explanation.
  They never made up their mind about if they wanted to make a stragiht Alien horror movie or  "2001" type flick, finally what they delivered neither of those things.
  Then for the sequel, they say: "Ok, many people where disapointed with "Prometheus" in the sake of the box officce success we are going to give them what they always wanted: A straight and pure Alien film.....yet but one who bassicaly is a remake of the first one with some bits of the second one in the form os a little action sequence with guns and shooting.......
  And now the cinematography alien franchise is sunk people are regreting Fox didn´t prefer the "Alien 5" Neil Blomkamp´s project and they only hope for the Alien franchise could be television.

[P-Rock]

Maybe you should take some valium for all that hate you seem to have for Ridley Scott.

And all of the points you are trying to make are factually wrong.