I'm Not Sure About Shaw

There are two key pieces of evidence from the trailers that support the idea that Shaw undergoes a C section-type operation in the MedPod. 1) You can clearly see an umbilical cord connecting the squid-like creature to Shaw's abdominal region in the scene where she is struggling in the pod. 2) In the scene when she is stumbling down the corridor in her space underwear, you can see that her abdominal region has been stitched up or stapled.

@Jacques i was going to post the same thing. Indeed all things add up to her having that organism cut out of her. I orginally thought the Squidy was a Proto Face Hugger and i did see the umbilical cord but it looked like she had the Squidy thing held above her face. I thought the above mainly due to lack of Blood. But once other trailers came out it showed a scene looking at her legs it showed the arm that later held the Squidy Organism being empty and moving to inbetween her legs. Combined with the Stapples in the other scene does show that she had somethin taken out of her and that being Squidy. The biggest Mystrey would be how long was that Organism in her, when did the other Crew find out. And how dis it get there. There is one scene where Shaw is hidding behind a Door and you can see a large Tenticle or what apears to be, trying to get her. Is that. 1) That Squidy thing taken from her that escapes and grows? 2) Some Organism that maybe catches her and impregnants her with Squidy? 3) Is it the same kind of Organism that gets into the tear in one of the crews Space Suits? I think that that scene has a lot of unanswered questions. [img]http://www.folko.de/images/tentacle1.jpg[/img] [img]http://cdn.chud.com/7/7d/7d59dbe3_Pho0T.gif[/img] Now when i first saw that creature get inside the suit, i looked at Gigers work and he does have a Art Work where we see a Eel like creature with a Aliens head. [img]http://jfjacobs.com/Gallery/albums/SciFi-05/0uro0010_h_r_giger_alien_monster_lll.jpg[/img] Look at this beasts Tail and it looks simular to what gets into the Crew Members Space suit.

Yeah but the staples could be used either way ... putting it in or taking it out ;) ... Ok ... I'll go with taking it out ... :) ...

Here are the captures from the trailer I was referring to: [URL=http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e85/vibrator1/Shaw2.jpg][IMG]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e85/vibrator1/th_Shaw2.jpg[/IMG][/URL] [URL=http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e85/vibrator1/Shaw1.jpg][IMG]http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e85/vibrator1/th_Shaw1.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

I also came across this.. [img]http://cdn.chud.com/6/65/65f5c536_61671200.jpeg[/img] This could be most likely a fan made Zbrush image and not taken from the film.

Looks like shaw is the fallen hero & vicker's mayb the real one. Ridley alws has an element of surprise. No wonder vicker's has a imp role. Sm1 shouts "cut it out". Could be related to this scene

Yeah, you guys are assuming you know the chronology of these scenes in the story. Why couldn't they be putting it inside her instead of taking it out?

The "cut it out" scream sounds like a man.

Putting it in could be a posibility but then you would see it in the stappled up scene as she would have a bump like being pregnant.

Yeah you're right, UNLESS...ummm...I got nothing. I know Ridley said that he was embarrassed about how gruesome some of the movie was when asked if there were any "treats" like the chestburster scene. So, what would embarrass him more?

I think I've got it: One of the SJs figures out Shaw has daddy issues, so he gets her drunk and plays the role, then lets his worm buddy impregnate her when she's passed out.

^^^^ I think none of this. How is any of that in any way embarassing? I think we have need even had a look at the truly "embarassing" thing yet. And I believe Giger himself when asked if something is going to make an appearance, I think he used a phrase something like.... "There is going to be something new, and it will be very GRAUSLICH". For a certifiable weirdo like Giger to say something like Its going to be very "Grauslich", sort of makes me think we have NOT seen the WTF moment yet.

Well one of the other Giger Art Works that contains a Eel like Organism, does depict a Scene that we cant go posting on here. In that one Art Work lets say we see a Eal that decides to entre a mutating female by a certain passage. Which would make a WTF Scene and 100% make this movie a No Chance PG-13 If i used that Artwork as a basis of a idea, as to a clue. Then maybe that scene with that Tenticle/Eel thats chassing after Shaw ends up catching her and well maybe thats how she gets Pregnant with Squidy?

Ridley likes ideas that are terrifying in and of themselves without the help of visual effects. That's not to say he won't make them visually terrifying as well, but I think for something to be embarrassing for him, it would have to happen to a woman and have some sexual component. I don't think he would be embarrassed by having [i]anything[/i] happen to a male character. What do you think?

Big Dave, That's exactly the kind of thing I was thinking would embarrass Ridley.

Yes... I definately think it will have something to do with an unwanted sexual impregnation type of thing. The eel thingy though... Not sure yet. I do believe everythingn is out of sequence and meant to mislead, but using the prior Alien movies as a guide... The EEL LIKE thing that can burrow or bite was always the aftermath of a CHESTBURST and that eel like thing would in turn grow extremely rapidly into whatever new life form it is. Is it that this EEL will in effect be a "re-surrected" BLUE MEANIE ??

Fantastic ... love the responses to that ;) ... but you see what else you can derive from a weird thought though eh? ... I can lay rest that theory of mine is b*ll*x then ... phew ... damn this is getting harder by the hour now ...

Personally, as a woman, I am not comfortable with this idea, and one of the reasons I like the original Alien is because it is an equal-opportunity....impregnator, if you will. I don't foresee an overtly violent rape scene of a female in this film. It would be in bad taste. Certainly, Alien has always had sexual symbols and I don't think that will ever change (nor should it), and yes, the facehugger/chestburster is invasive in a sexual way and symbolic of rape of women AND men, but that is completely different than a straight-up graphic sex or rape scene of a woman. I hope this is not something ANYONE in their right mind would want to see, nor should we expect it in a big-budget film. Plus, if they are even considering it to be PG-13, you can bet your ass it won't be something like that. Now, as far as what they're doing to her on that medical table, don't have a clue.

You can see these eel-like creatures on a mural-like set seen in a picture taken during the Iceland filming last summer.

You can see many of these eel-like creatures on a mural-like set, seen in a picture taken during the Iceland filming last summer. I agree that these creatures are likely the same as those on the Giger painting. It seems that a lot in the film is based on the original Giger's work on Alien (and I think that is appropriate because it is Giger's mind who was the source of all of this). I personally believe that the creature may feed on Shaw's liver (stiches on picture are on the right side) through an umbilical and may grow outside the body . In the Greek myth the eagle was eating the liver which was growing again and so on every day.

We are talking of Sir Ridley Scott ...... Giger have done a mural ...the squid removed from the belly of shaw is the "embarassing" thing ... dont worry there will not be any tentacle hentai sex scene , that things are only in crap'adolla style movies .

@Prom ... Oh God no ... not at all ... that would be cinema suicide on this movie ... no ... just tryin' to throw ideas out that 'may' expand on the theories that we all have here ... ;) ...

BUT in the same respect though ... and even weirder ... hold ya breathe ... that's not a MALE on the table is it? ... those legs look a bit 'muscley' don't they? ... what's to say they are not trying to use both sexes (for experiements) ... in other words may not be just ONE person on the MedLab tables ... we only see one in the trailers ... Also ... are we're not really going down the route ... 'And God (Male) Made Man' ? ... I tryin to get into Giger's mind here ... don't want to go any further really ... lol ...

@Darwin Nice theory about the organism growing outside her belly. But the leaked trailer footage of Shaw's belly rapidly expanding leads me to believe it grows inside her. Either way it would be interesting. @Prom_queen Have you seen the American version of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo"? If so, do you feel that the violent rape scene was in bad taste or made the film worse? (Just curious at a woman's perspective...not trying to argue or prove any points.)

Whoa ... nice one Darwin ... that's close enough for me lol ... but as Draekus has just reminded me about the belly ... Not that I'm taking ANYTHING seriously on this forum but you got to love the theories/ideas ... wicked ...

Hey, I'm all for the weird Giger stuff, don't get me wrong. But from a mainstream or business point of view, Fox nor Ridley would never go for the really out-there stuff. Like you said, suicide. Darwin, Got to be honest, I haven't seen it! Rape in film is typically used as a major part of the plot and the character's motivation, but it all depends on execution. I know "tasteful rape scene" sounds unnatural, but a good director can do it in a way that makes it clear to the audience what's going on, even so far as showing the actors' faces during the act, without trying to sadistically shove it in our faces. It is such a sensitive issue (I know this has been discussed on here before, so I apologize), that it really takes a good director to handle it in a way that is powerful and leaves a lasting impression on the audience without being vulgar. That being said, impregnating an anesthetized Shaw on a medical table would be a more clinical medical procedure and so less violent, but obviously "she ain't sleepin" during that scene. But like I said, I don't have a clue as to what that scene's all about. I think it is probably a removal and not an insertion, though.

I don't pretend to know what seeing a rape scene feels like from a woman's perspective, but I do think that part of the reason men often don't seem to understand how horrible it is for women (ie: jokes about rape) is because it's not depicted realistically in many forms of entertainment and they never have it "shoved in their face." I almost think it's doing society a disservice when it's "softened" to make it more palatable for audiences, while at the same time I think making every movie that includes an element of rape unwatchable for most women also does them a disservice. I don't know what the solution is, but I disagree that it should always be depicted in a non-vulgar way because, for me at least, the more disturbing a scene like that is, the more I am disgusted by and hate the character I'm supposed to hate. It's a tool to move a character further over on the evil spectrum. That being said, if you think Ridley Scott is not capable of dreaming up a situation in which a female is impregnated via the traditional orifice by the mechanical pod she is in, or by a creature on it's own, I'd have to disagree. Having someone impregnated orally and have the fetus eat it's way through the abdomen was pretty out there in 1979. People were throwing up in theatres. I wouldn't put it past him, although I think he would be selective about what was shown on the screen.

Before this whole thing gets derailed everyone calm down... There is NOT going to be ANY depiction of a graphic rape. This is not XXX pornography.... But the suggestion that something vile happening is what is going to happen.

I totally agree with you, whiskuz. I wish so many films wouldn't rely on female rape for shock value and to get male asses in seats, because that just seems wrong. But that's the way it is oftentimes. Sex sells, even the violent kind (maybe even more so). I get what you're saying, though. The more disturbing the rape (or whatever violent event), the more we are invested in the character's/victim's plight to succeed or overcome the enemy in the movie. Also, I know Ridley and Giger and the rest of them would love to push the boundaries as far as possible (that's why I like them). I am all for pushing boundaries. And this is not really about Alien or Ridley, but some other directors/writers seem to feel that boundary-pushing only involves violating a woman. I don't want Prometheus to go that route, and I really don't think it will.

Sorry guys! I'm not trying to be a Debbie-Downer. Carry on!