Sunday 22 January 2012

Case Study: Alien 'Xenomorph' (Alien Franchise)

The Alien film franchise has been one of the most successful ever created in the genre. It has won numerous awards for various elements of each of the quadrilogy's four films, including one for the design of the main protagonist, the Alien, aka the 'Xenomorph'. The term Xenomorph was used to describe the creature in the second film, Aliens, and is Greek for 'strange form/shape'. For the purposes of this case study, the creature will be referred to as the 'Xenomorph'.The purpose of this case study is to analyse the design of the Xenomorph, and break down the elements which have contributed to it becoming one of the most memorable and popular film creatures ever created.

The original idea for the Xenomorph came from H.R. Giger, who had devised a painting called Necromnicon 5 (Fig.1) from which the alien creature concept was based. Ridley Scott, who was directing the first film, loved the originality of the piece, and the sexual imagery that it blended in to create a monster that appeared strangely androgynous, beautiful yet hideously terrifying. Giger was hired to design the Xenomorph and the other creatures for the film after much reluctance from the film studio, who believed that Giger's designs were too horrifying for the average American audience.


  Fig. 1, Necronomicon IV


The Xenomorph itself has a complex biology, with the Xenomorph itself the product of a birth cycle similar to that of a bee. The Xenomorph Queen lays eggs which contain 'Facehuggers', small bug like creatures which attach to living hosts and implant Xenomorph embryos down their throats and inside their chests. The embryos inside attach to a main artery, and grow parasitically by feeding from nutrients in the hosts blood stream. When the embryo has developed into the baby form of the Xenomorph, aptly named the 'Chestburster' (fig.2) , it pushes its way out of the chest of the victim, killing them in the process. The Chestburster grows into a full size Xenomorph alarmingly fast (within a few hours maximum).


 Fig. 2, 'Chestburster'

The physical traits of the Xenomorph have a few constants, however its final form depends on the host from which is grew. According to the story, due to 'horizontal gene transplant' during the host incubation phase, some of the embryos missing DNA is made up for with the DNA of the host. This allows the Xenomorph to take on elements of the host that were capable of surviving in the hosts natural habitat (for example, the Xenomorphs who come from human hosts are bipedal, plantigrade (walking on the soles of the feet, like a human or a bear), and appear to have inherited some human mental capabilities such as quick learning (Alien: Resurrection) in contrast to the Xenomorph which was incubated inside a dog, (Alien 3) which was digitigrade (walking on its toes and not touching the ground with its heels, as a dog, cat, or rodent), ran on four legs and appeared to be easier to trick than its human spawned counterparts.

However, apart from slight differences in the way the creature behaves and moves, the Xenomorphs from different hosts are fairly similar. (fig. 3) The have a jet black exoskeleton which appears similar to the chitin of a beetle, and has several textured ridges on various parts of its arms and legs, giving it a biomechanical feel. It has an elongated head with what appears to be a humanoid skull but has no visible eyes. It is unclear exactly how the creature sees, but it is speculated during the films that it senses pheromones, explaining why it does not attack and kill humans implanted with an alien embryo. It has sharp, almost translucent teeth and inside its mouth lies another, smaller mouth. This smaller mouth shoots out when the main mouth is opened and acts as the Xenomorphs main close combat weapon, capable of smashing through metal and bone. This process is kept lubricated by the copious amounts of saliva like substance that drip from the creatures maw, which is also used to transform the surrounding environment into one that suits the aliens better. This environment that they create allows them to become camouflaged and also gives them an area in which to store potential human hosts. The Xenomorphs long range attack ability comes in the form of its large tail, which is made up of spines with a large sharp blade like point. The tail is extremely strong and appears to serve no other purpose than for attack/defence purposes (e.g balance) as it is capable of lifting a fully grown Predator off the ground and raising it to eye level. This would mean that the tail is too heavy to be used for the purposes of balance. Also worth noting is that the Xenomorph has a highly acidic yellow substance for blood. This substance is capable of burning through almost any surface it comes into contact with, with the exception of the aliens own chitin like carapace.


 Fig. 3, Xenomorph

The elongated head shape, humanoid body shape, and long spiny tail make for a distinctive and recognisable silhouette (fig.4) . Although the creature is not seen much during the first film in the quadrilogy, it is much more abundant in the second film 'Aliens' directed by James Cameron as there are multiple creatures instead of just one. The swarm like behaviour of the Xenomorphs is displayed much more clearly in the second film, as is the entire life cycle from the Queen laying the face hugger eggs, to the 'impregnation' of the host, and finally the 'Chest Burster' releasing itself and growing into a full sized Xenomorph.

 Fig. 4, Silhouette

Given the genre and target audience of the films, the purpose of the design is clearly to shock and terrify the audience. This is achieved through both excellent design but also skilful filming. The air of mystery surrounding the Xenomorph in Ripley Scott's Alien adds to the sense of terror; we fear what we do not know. The camera play which gives just glimpses of the creatures slavering maws, jet black carapace and deadly tail get the audiences imagination working with the story, as they anticipate the creature in its entirety (fig.5). However, in the second films when the creatures are much more visible they still manage to evoke a sense of fear.

 Fig. 5


The acidic blood gives a plausible way for the creature to essentially be 'unkillable'. The protagonists of the films are generally unable to kill the creatures using conventional means, as being set in space they are usually on a spaceship or pressurized area, and the acid melting through the hull would have disastrous consequences. We are happy to accept that the xenomorph has acidic blood, which is both a cool idea and makes the creature a lot more scary and dangerous.

The fact that the Xenomorph creates its own environment is an interesting and scary idea. The idea that humans could 'terraform' other planets into a more earth like planet that we could inhabit has been around for some time. The Xenomorphs ability to do transform any environment into one that suits it in terms of camoflage and incubation makes the creature essentially able to thrive in any environment. (Fig. 6)

 Fig. 6, Hive Webbing


Any implausibilities regarding the design of the Xenomorph are mainly explained during the story and are generally acceptable, such as the 'horizontal gene splicing' of the alien embryo which allows it to take on attributes of the host. Whether such a thing is possible or not, the film plays on the general populations cognitive estrangement from such subjects to encourage them of its plausibility.

In conclusion, there are a lot of different elements which make the creature a success, including the originality of the design, the story context within which it is set, and the way it is presented in the films.

(The pictures on this post are not mine and have been sourced from google images)

Thursday 19 January 2012

Question posed to experts on Creaturespot.com

I am doing a project for my 4th year honours degree about the design of creatures which sustain the audiences suspension of disbelief. The specific question asks what the relationship between form and function in creature design is, and whether a balance can be found between the two in order to create creatures that are visually exciting and memorable yet also appear that they could actually exist in this world or perhaps an alien world or another dimension.

“It is a creature designer's responsibility to invent imaginary life forms believable enough that the audience is ready to accept that they must have seen it, or could see it, on this planet, in a universe far far away or perhaps in another time or dimension.” (Whitlatch, T. 2010).

I have come up with a set of criteria that could lead the development of a set of guidelines through study of the work of creature designers such as Terryl Whitlatch and Neville Page, and was hoping I could get some professional opinions on the subject. What I have come up with so far is as follows:
Functionality in terms of anatomy; The creatures anatomy makes sense in terms of the muscles and bone structure, and appears as though it would function properly. "The most important thing to have is familiarity and plausibility anatomically." (Page, N. 2004).

Proportional functionality; The proportions of the creature are balanced and appears adhere to the laws of physics. "I firmly believe that to retain the suspension of disbelief, you still need to adhere to the laws of nature and physics." (Page, N. 2009).

Behaviour; The creature has a purpose for it's behaviours, and they are shown through visual cues and body language showing the intent of the creature. “The menacing stares, frowns, and tensed body postures of the creatures … all indicate hostility.” (Ibister, K. 2006)

Colour; The colour scheme of the creature makes sense in the context of it's environment and the type of creature it is (polar bears being white to blend in with the environment to help with hunting, poison arrow frogs being brightly coloured to indicate danger, cows being black and white because of thousands of years of domesticated breeding etc) “As we continue to look at aesthetics, one of the most important features is colour. Colour says a lot about a character and his story.” (Tillman, B. 2011).

Surface detail; the amount of detail is balanced to create visual interest but not draw too much attention from the overall form. Also the details make sense in terms of the environmental context. “Detail can make or break a character design. Knowing how much detail to put in your character designs will make the difference between a believable character and one that couldn’t possibly exist.” (Tillman, B. 2011).

Silhouette; most people can identify an animal from its silhouette, so when designing a new creature, creating a silhouette that is easily recognizable but not too similar to existing designs or overly complicated can help to make it more memorable. "One attribute that all good character designs share is that the subject is recognisable even in silhouette. From Godzilla to Homer Simpson, the best characters are identifiable by their mere outline." (unknown)

Suitability to the environment; A creature designed for a desert world would look jarring if it was discovered in an ice world and vice versa, rather than compelling. "The most compelling creatures have a purpose. They're compelling because even though they are not real, they make sense." - Creature Designer Bobby Chiu.

Story context; a creature that can use magical powers such as levitation or other things that arent physically possible in our reality (as far as we are aware) must make sense in the context of the story which they are in. For example, a mutated cow such as those found in Bethesda Softworks Fallout 3 wouldn't make much sense without the context of its story. "Story is the most important aspect of character design." (Tillman, B. 2011)

I would like to know your thoughts regarding these criteria that I believe can help towards creating plausible and compelling creatures for media such as film and games. I am aware that developing a set criteria such as this can stifle creative spirit; "To produce an established formula for character design discourages creative spirit. However, this scientific generalization does provide certain biological guidelines for the character designers." (Su, H. 2011). But I have to do my project on something, and it's hard to take a scientific approach to something as subjective as creature design! Any and all comments are greatly appreciated, whether its to contribute something that I may have overlooked, or just to comment on the criteria I have already put together. Thanks for taking the time to read this!