Originally Posted by Andy Bain
that's my biggest issue with this movie, and where my turmoil comes in. Usually I like anything if it looks pretty/is entertaining. Thus love for Tron:Legacy, John Carter, The Thing (2011). This is causing me to really mull this one over in my mind, as I'm not sure why those plot holes and shoddy lines rip me so completely out of this one (and they do) when they didn't the other 3.
I wholeheartedly agree.
I loved "Tron: Legacy," "John Carter," and "The Thing (2011)." To me, they're infinitely more entertaining than "Prometheus" solely on the basis that those films made me get lost in them, despite their flaws and plot holes. "Prometheus" made me an active "critic" instead of a mesmerized audience.
I'm going to list down the factors that led to my shattering disappointment...Trailers that gave everything away
All of the trailers I've watched numerous times hyped me up for the film. I was prepared for mind-blowing sci-fi and everything that I saw in the trailers were just icing to an extremely delectable sci-fi/horror cake. No way that ship crashing to that alien ship is a big climax to this film. No way that alien ship rolling/crashing down was one of the biggest and final scenes. Then I watched the movie. It's as if I just read through a short summary of the film in Wikipedia.Simple, yet messy plot structure
The ideas presented were definitely not your typical summer blockbuster fare. The three movies that I loved above had ridiculously simple plots. But their plotting made me lose myself in the moment. The plotting that occurred were based on "sensible"/"logical" character beats that are not overtly obvious. No film is perfect in regards to plot holes. Even the best of films can be scrutinized for having them. But that's the filmmaker's magic trick: the film has to make us ignore such gaping plot holes. "Prometheus" was blatantly showing its plot holes. Like a drunk magician not caring that you're seeing how the trick is done. Or like David just pushing your buttons just because he can.Confusing character actions
This has been discussed a lot already (Milburn & Fifield Go To White Castle
, The Shaw Shanked Abortion
, and Idris, Thelma, & Louise
), so I won't elaborate on this further. But I just want to add that agracu already informed us that Milburn was a "botanist" and not a "biologist." Anyway, it was completely depressing that these "selected" hightly-specialized few were no different from frightened teens of an '80s slasher flick. I expected more from them. In fact, I wished I knew any of them! And perhaps I'm to blame for that. However, I probably would have ignored such cliched horror tropes if the "mysteries" had a satisfying payoff. Which brings me to...Confusing/contradicting mysteries which never revealed anything
In a nutshell, the film is about aliens who created life on our planet (and possibly other planets); our future selves then finally found our "Creators" only to find out that they had plans to wipe out humanity two thousand years ago but such a plan failed because of a mishap in LV-223... See, that is a very simple plot structure, but the mysteries that were brought up did not allow us to find answers, but, rather create more questions and mysteries.
Folks here have called this a TV Series Premiere, an expensive TV prologue, and a LOST in Space. The thing is, that is exactly what I felt I was watching. As a standalone film, it was not a satisfying one. If anything, it's probably part one of a two-part film (ala "Kill Bill"). I'll even accept it as that. But the mysteries presented just seemed so random and the clues that I was paying attention to did not seem to have any correlation with each other, specifically the proto-alien at the very end. Yes, I had goosebumps seeing it and wanted to clap, but that did not even happen because I only imagined being excited at that point. I felt that I was more focused in wondering what I just watched and that nothing really made sense. Specifically that proto-alien:
- Proto-alien is in the mural
- Proto-alien's "birth" can only come from a giant facehugger and Space Jockey.
- Why is this the "first" when such an alien already existed two thousand years ago and even longer?
- Maybe the Space Jockeys were kidnapping humans and would let their baby facehuggers rape their kind?
- But if so, what happened to the Prime Directive of wiping out humanity from two thousand years ago?
- Stop fucking thinking. Ridley Scott probably doesn't know what the answers to that was. He just thought that it was really awesome for humans getting obliterated after meeting with their maker. I get it, Ridley. You hate religion.
After all that, I forgive Ridley Scott. My top three films are "Alien," "Blade Runner," with "2001: A Space Odyssey" being my number one. Maybe it's his old age. He probably hasn't seen "Event Horizon," "Sunshine," and even "Pandorum" (yes, I went there). He probably hasn't played games like "Dead Space." These are copycats/homages that managed to have improved upon Ridley Scott's sci-fi/horror opus.
I do want to see what happens next. Noomi was an amazing heroine and I want to follow her further adventures with David. Fassbender, definitely, was a stand-out. Charlize I loved as well; though she was a hard-ass brat princess, she had the most common sense compared to all of them -- inluding Shaw and her boyfriend. It's unfortunate that she got killed in an overdramatic bad guy death (as someone has said). I did not have a problem with the overdramatic, Shakespearean reveal of Weyland. If you're a trillionaire and know that you just might find the secret to eternal life, why will you share it with anyone? Faking his death so that he alone can selfishly live forever is a very "trillionaire" mindset thinking. Not like I'd know.
Anyway, I will force myself to love this film. It is an honorable disaster and I just hope that its sequel (if it happens) gets better and sheds better light on the mysteries it had opened up.