Alien Prequel Plot News
"It's set in 2085, about 30 years before Sigourney [Weaver's character Ellen Ripley]. It's fundamentally about going out to find out 'Who the hell was that Space Jockey?' The guy who was sitting in the chair in the alien vehicle--there was a giant fellow sitting in a seat on what looked to be either a piece of technology or an astronomer's chair. Remember that? ...
And our man [Tom Skerritt as Captain Dallas] climbs up and says "There's been an explosion in his chest from the inside out--what was that?" I'm basically explaining who that Space Jockey--we call him the Space Jockey--I'm explaining who the space jockeys were."
(source: SciFi Wire)
The funny thing is that eyes have been rolling because there's an Empire magazine bit from back in October that supposedly says that Scott explicitly said that the film had nothing to do with the Space Jockey. Um, except, well, the Empire article that everyone cites as saying that doesn't really say that. Or rather, it says that, but Scott doesn't ever say what they say he's saying:
Since the prequel was announced, it's been assumed that it would tell the story of how those nasty, slavering xenomorphs came to land on LV-426 in the first place. But after listening to Sir Ridley, suddenly we're not so sure...
"It's a brand new box of tricks," said Sir Ridley. "We know what the road map is, and the screenplay is now being put on paper. The prequel will be a while ago. It's very difficult to put a year on Alien, but [for example] if Alien was towards the end of this century, then the prequel story will take place thirty years prior."
Interesting. And damned intriguing, to boot. Presumably, rather than make a film about how those massive elephantine aliens (remember the giant pilot with his chest blown outwards in Sir Ridley's original?) were decimated by the acid-blooded bastards, Sir Ridley and his writer, Jon Spaihts, have decided to reboot the story in an attempt to give it a human focus.
So, not to be all like journalistic or anything, but that sounds like a speculation out of the blue, followed by a quote that has nothing to do with the speculation, followed by further speculation speculating that your speculation must therefore be correct. OK, fine, maybe there was further conversation that just didn't get quoted, but the piece as it reads makes no attempt to actually connect Ridley Scott's words with the conclusions being drawn from them. It's actually quite a fun exercise in which to indulge:
Me: "It's been assumed that the Alien prequel will be set in Narnia and feature a showdown with Manbearpig in a palace built of candy canes and the souls of children killed by clowns.
Ridley Scott: "It's a brand new box of tricks. We know what the road map is, and the screenplay is now being put on paper. The prequel will be a while ago. It's very difficult to put a year on Alien, but [for example] if Alien was towards the end of this century, then the prequel story will take place thirty years prior."
Me: "Interesting. And damned intriguing, to boot. Presumably, you won't mind if I quote you out of context and pretend that it proves everything I've ever wanted to prove."
I've got to run. Fox News just called with a job offer.