Re: Conspecies Biology
From: | Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, August 10, 2004, 3:57 |
On Mon, 09 Aug 2004 20:15:45 -0700, B. Garcia <madyaas@...> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 18:12:33 -0700, william drewery <will65610@...>
> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, I later found that
>> the fan lit from "Aliens" has proposed "organic"
>> batteries as part of Xenomorph physiology. Oh well,
>> Travis
>
> I've always wondered if anyone fleshed out the physiology of the
> aliens from the "Alien" movies.
There exists a large graphic novel canon, with which I am almost totally
unfamiliar. This is due largely to my never really locating a good comic
store (while I had money to burn), since I enjoyed the couple that I
managed to read.
I'm going to nit-pick your facts below, since they don't all jive with my
understanding. I shall speak in a highly-authoritative tone, since it's
easier for me to spit out a brain-dump that way, but you should read a lot
of IMO's interspersed in the comments.
> We know that:
>
> - two mouths
Well, a mouth with additional exterior mandibles, perhaps.
> - They incubate within other organisms, and have two stages: a face
> sucking egg layer, which implants eggs for the drones, and at least
> one of those drones can become a queen, which lays the eggs for the
> face suckers.
I'm not part of the fandom, but I'd always understood that the
chestburster (and subsequent warrior) takes on some of the DNA of the host
(my guess is that this is to better adapt to the local environment). This
explains the basically four-legged appearance of the warrior in Alien^3,
which hatched from a dog.
> - At least partly biomechanical (as evidenced from the first movie
> where the crew of the Nostromo enter the crashed ship and see the
> "pilot/navigator")
Notice that the pilot/navigator had a big, gaping hole in its chest, and
that it lacked a lot of the characteristic look of the Aliens (aside from
being black and chitinous). To me, that suggests it was a victim, rather
than an Alien. Nowhere else do the Aliens use technology.
> I think those were the best mostly non-anthropomorphic aliens i've seen.
Agreed.
> Anyone know anything else about those aliens?
Yes, but I'm having a hard time formulating it. I habitually watch the
movies, and if I do so while the topic is still active, I may have some
suggestions.
Paul