PROMETHEUS post-release discussion - Page 30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

Now that the valid complaints about things like a mapmaker getting lost and why would the pet a penis cobra have been exhusted over the course of twenty some-odd pages, now it's time to nitpick over something as silly as how one should decide to off himself.  Or we could keep going on and on about how one should run away from a falling ship, I guess.

Yeah, logic is for fags.

Really?  You consider that a logic issue?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryoken 

-David infecting Holloway makes sense when you remember the "happy birthday, david" viral ad;

BZZZT.  Sorry, wrong answer.  A film should be comprehensible in and of itself.  I shouldn't have to keep up with all the ancillary, supplemental material to understand one of its core plot elements.  The same argument got tossed around when people were saying you had to have seen The Animatrix to fully understand Matrix Reloaded.  That stuff should add to the enjoyment, not be necessary for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

BZZZT.  Sorry, wrong answer.  A film should be comprehensible in and of itself.  I shouldn't have to keep up with all the ancillary, supplemental material to understand one of its core plot elements.  The same argument got tossed around when people were saying you had to have seen The Animatrix to fully understand Matrix Reloaded.  That stuff should add to the enjoyment, not be necessary for it.

I didn't think it was necessary to have seen that viral ad to understand it. He's an android.  Of course he would have no qualms with unethical tasks.  Hell, even right before he infects Holloway, Holloway makes a crack at him about how he can't be disappointed or whatever emotion they were talking about since he can't feel.  It made sense to me he would experiment on him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

Really?  You consider that a logic issue?

complete logic issue.  I could see it being him wanting to be killed, and Vickers just toasting him, and everyone flipping out that they should have humanily put him down instead of cooking him like a pig.

To want to be BURNED ALIVE is a complete logic issue. 

Either use it as a device to make Vickers look more evil, or add a level to Shaw's relationship with him, and having Shaw pull the trigger.  The entire scene was stupid.

You know it's bad, when the Walking Dead TV shows characters deal with infected people, and how to euthanize them better.  Some guy gets infected, you don't see them lighting them on fire while alive. 

David infecting Holloway is one of the few things debated here that really didn't bother me. It's enigmatic but not preposterous and even the film itself provides enough outs: Weyland's "Try Harder", Holloway's contempt towards him, David's sociopathy and interest in the workings of the species. He even gets Holloway's consent in a roundabout way.

Given a better movie I'm sure we'd be hailing it as an intriguing turning point instead of obsessively parsing the logic of it.

Agree with Dickson; you shouldn't need to catch viral/extraneous shit for a movie to work on its own. That said, David's reason for infecting Holloway is in the film, unless I'm wrong and the "try harder" line comes after he slips Holloway the worst mickey ever. (And I'm not wrong, because it doesn't.) David does stuff because Weyland orders him to. He's a child trying to please his egotistical and selfish asshole of a father.

That's not a defense of quality but this does occur in the film; there's no need for supplementary stuff to explain it.

Also, re: Holloway flambe. I don't think he explicitly wants to be burned alive; I think he just wants to die. Vickers has a flamethrower. It works out. I don't think he's thinking much about how he exits this mortal plane, he just wants his suffering to end, and while it continues on for a few moments after Vickers lights him up, it stops shortly after. If she'd had a pulse rifle, he would have asked for a bullet to the brain. He's not really in a position to be discriminatory about how he dies.

Well, then you remove the subplot of Weyland faking his death, and you have Weyland be in stasis, but giving commands to David like "mother" in Alien. 

They may have been comincating the entire time in this film, but it's never said.  You have to give the film a lot, for anything to work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

 

complete logic issue.  I could see it being him wanting to be killed, and Vickers just toasting him, and everyone flipping out that they should have humanily put him down instead of cooking him like a pig.

To want to be BURNED ALIVE is a complete logic issue. 

 

Either use it as a device to make Vickers look more evil, or add a level to Shaw's relationship with him, and having Shaw pull the trigger.  The entire scene was stupid.

 

You know it's bad, when the Walking Dead TV shows characters deal with infected people, and how to euthanize them better.  Some guy gets infected, you don't see them lighting them on fire while alive. 

Did anyone out there at that time even have a gun on them?  Was he supposed to go "Hey, I'm rapidly changing into something bad, but I'll just hold on here for a bit while one of you guys run inside and go get a gun.  No, it's cool, I'll hold.  I know I'm about to die, but hey, I sure as hell am not going to do it being burned!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

Well, then you remove the subplot of Weyland faking his death, and you have Weyland be in stasis, but giving commands to David like "mother" in Alien. 

They may have been comincating the entire time in this film, but it's never said.  You have to give the film a lot, for anything to work.

I think the movie all but says outright that they're in communication with one another. But I agree with you-- Weyland faking his death is fucking retarded. It's my least favorite aspect of the movie, and I think it's a twist that's so bad it ends up leaking into other areas of the story and bringing them down. It's just dumb. Having Weyland as an actual figure aboard the ship would have been a dramatic improvement in David's and Vicker's stories, it would have removed the stupid plot twist in the third act, and it would have made the discussion about creators and creations resonate much, much more effectively, as I've said before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

Really?  You consider that a logic issue?

Running out of the very obvious and fairly narrow path of an oncoming ship?  Yes.

Same thing with Southland Tales.  Wasn't there a comic you had to read in order for it to make sense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

Running out of the very obvious and fairly narrow path of an oncoming ship?  Yes.

Holy shit, I'm not debating the logic of that scene.  I was commenting on the fact that it has been beaten to death already, especially when the debate about that scene has devolved into a you're retarded - no you're retarded level of sillyness. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

Same thing with Southland Tales.  Wasn't there a comic you had to read in order for it to make sense?

Not just one, but three!

Oh my bad.  Well, it's hard for me to stomach people who actually think Vickers and Shaw were reacting properly with the falling ship based on the very clear nature of how they knew exactly what was happening (seriously, watch the scene again).  It's defies belief.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

He's an android.  Of course he would have no qualms with unethical tasks.

Why and how are we supposed to make that assumption?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

Why and how are we supposed to make that assumption?

Did we need to know he was unethical BEFORE he infected Holloway, though?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

 

Did anyone out there at that time even have a gun on them?  Was he supposed to go "Hey, I'm rapidly changing into something bad, but I'll just hold on here for a bit while one of you guys run inside and go get a gun.  No, it's cool, I'll hold.  I know I'm about to die, but hey, I sure as hell am not going to do it being burned!"

Yeah, because dieing in one of the most painful ways is the way to go.  We are in the future, I think they could have ethunized him before burning his body.

Two ways they could have went to make that scene better

- Vickers see the threat, and burns him alive with no input.  People critize her, see her as a monster... even bring up, that she could have killed him another way, that BURNING HIM ALIVE, was wrong.

- have Halloway beg to be killed, and have Shaw do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

 

I think the movie all but says outright that they're in communication with one another. But I agree with you-- Weyland faking his death is fucking retarded. It's my least favorite aspect of the movie, and I think it's a twist that's so bad it ends up leaking into other areas of the story and bringing them down. It's just dumb. Having Weyland as an actual figure aboard the ship would have been a dramatic improvement in David's and Vicker's stories, it would have removed the stupid plot twist in the third act, and it would have made the discussion about creators and creations resonate much, much more effectively, as I've said before.

Like I said, make him MOTHER.  He is aboard the ship in stasis, but he is connected to the ship and is able to communicate with everyone aboard.

How creepy, and effective would it have been, to have their boss be this all knowing, always watching presence on the ship? 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

Why and how are we supposed to make that assumption?

Well, I don't know how you are supposed to make that assumption.  I made that assumption because my computer does what I tell it to, with no regard to if it's right or wrong.  He's a robot.  He does what he's programmed to do.  In this case, use the expendable couple as guinea pigs since they are two people on the ship who serve no purpose, other than blaming a failed mission on if there was nothing on the planet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

 

Well, I don't know how you are supposed to make that assumption.  I made that assumption because my computer does what I tell it to, with no regard to if it's right or wrong.  He's a robot.  He does what he's programmed to do.  In this case, use the expendable couple as guinea pigs since they are two people on the ship who serve no purpose, other than blaming a failed mission on if there was nothing on the planet.

Your computer doesn't get up, and walk around on it's own.  Apple and Oranges. 

Obvious, this universe doesn't have HG Wells, or Phillp K Dick novels. 

I never had a problem with David infecting Holloway.  It was how everything else after it was handled that made no sense at all.

I'm going to go out on a way out there fan wank limb here.  What if this also turns out to be some sort of robot Pinocchio/AI story?  What if whatever infects everyone (the air/black goo) can also somehow evolve an android?  What if through the course of the movie he slowly becomes self aware, starts to have real emotions (which it definately looks like he has at times in reaction to what someone else says), and in the end overrides his programming of doing whatever it is that Weyland commands him to do, and frees himself, killing his father (I'm pretty sure he wasn't telling the Engineer what Weyland told him to say)?  When Holloway gives him his reason why humans created the androids, he seems genuinely offended.  When Shaw asks if he can pilot the ship to the Engineers home world, you know he can, but he pauses for a bit and looks afraid.  This was a little bit after David says to Shaw over the comm "I'm afraid something something something", and Shaw responds with "You don't know what it's like to be afraid."  I just felt they kept calling back to the fact that he is an android with no emotions .  I would be willing to bet that if they do indeed do three of these, it will wind up being about David more so that Shaw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

 

Like I said, make him MOTHER.  He is aboard the ship in stasis, but he is connected to the ship and is able to communicate with everyone aboard.

How creepy, and effective would it have been, to have their boss be this all knowing, always watching presence on the ship? 

...like Commander Powell in 'Dark Star'!...waitaminute...

Vickers burning a pleading Holloway (not pleading to be burned per see, but to die), kinda mirrors the cut scene from Alien.  Where Ripley stumbles upon an cocooned (and turning into an egg?) Dallas and he then pleads for her to kill him.  And she burns him with the flame thrower.

Funny, I'm realizing all these little beats that recall scenes out of Alien.  I wonder if these are the remaining scenes from the original script when it was just a straight forward prequel to Alien?

ETA:  And Old Man Weyland acting/being like "Mother" is another one.  Ash was receiving instructions from the Company via Mother.  In this case, Weyland has been secretly instructing David.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

Yeah, because dieing in one of the most painful ways is the way to go.  We are in the future, I think they could have ethunized him before burning his body.

Maybe being burned alive starts to sound like a pretty sweet deal when you are slowly succumbing to a horrific alien infection that gradually and painfully morphs your body into a grotesque rage-monster-zombie-alien-thing.  What a weird thing to dwell on.   

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalyn 

 

Well, I don't know how you are supposed to make that assumption.  I made that assumption because my computer does what I tell it to, with no regard to if it's right or wrong.  He's a robot.  He does what he's programmed to do.  In this case, use the expendable couple as guinea pigs since they are two people on the ship who serve no purpose, other than blaming a failed mission on if there was nothing on the planet.

Nowhere in the film is it ever indicated this is his programming.  I mean, it's great the film is sparking all these ideas for you, but none of this supported by what's on screen, not without making gigantic leaps that we shouldn't have to be making in the first place, since all of this should be made clear by character and dialog.

    Quote:

Originally Posted by fuzzy dunlop 

 

Maybe being burned alive starts to sound like a pretty sweet deal when you are slowly succumbing to a horrific alien infection that gradually and painfully morphs your body into a grotesque rage-monster-zombie-alien-thing.  What a weird thing to dwell on.   

Yeah, I agree. I don't really get why that's a sticking point; there are much bigger, much more tangible issues in Prometheus over Holloway begging to be burned alive by Vickers. Like I said, I don't really think he has the luxury of being choosy in regards to how he dies, and the idea of having him writhe in agony outside of the ship while everyone else fucks off to find anesthetic or a pistol seems astronomically sillier than having Vickers torch him when he asks to be torched.

Re: David. The only objective thing we can draw from the film is that he was taking orders from Weyland. I agree that it's easy to extrapolate on that (he's basically a computer in a humanoid frame, he's designed to follow directives, etc), but the big motivation the film provides is that he was following Weyland's commands. No other motivation is tangible based on what the film gives us (though one might argue that it's kind of boring to only go by what the text provides).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

Nowhere in the film is it ever indicated this is his programming.  I mean, it's great the film is sparking all these ideas for you, but none of this supported by what's on screen, not without making gigantic leaps that we shouldn't have to be making in the first place, since all of this should be made clear by character and dialog.

Like I said, it's an assumption on my part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

Nowhere in the film is it ever indicated this is his programming.  I mean, it's great the film is sparking all these ideas for you, but none of this supported by what's on screen, not without making gigantic leaps that we shouldn't have to be making in the first place, since all of this should be made clear by character and dialog.

He's ordered by his boss to 'try harder'; his vague antagonist Holloway says he'd be willing to try 'everything and anything' directly before David infects him. It's hardly a gigantic leap to assume there's a sociopathic leap of logic going on.

I'll be seeing this movie a second time this weekend.  More than likely, a matinee tomorrow.  Totally looking forward to it, too.  Besides the visual feast, wanting to see what is noticed via all the plot issues.

there's some more engineer photos popping up online in addition to the other ones posted a page or 2 back....

http://www.prometheusforum.net/discussion/2118

I think this photo definitely confirms a "director's cut" 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

So the Engineers at the beginning were just seeding a planet, then planning to come back 2000 years later for their next step in creating a planet full of face snugglers.  Earth is just a planet sized weapons factory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTRan 

there's some more engineer photos popping up online in addition to the other ones posted a page or 2 back....

 

http://www.prometheusforum.net/discussion/2118

 

 

I think this photo definitely confirms a "director's cut" 

So we're at robes now? Their idea of what our technologically advanced creators are like is seriously unimaginative.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

So we're at robes now? Their idea of what our technologically advanced creators are like is seriously unimaginative.

they are not just 'robes', they most technologically advanced color of robes...."gray" robes

What's wrong with robes?  It looks like ceremonial garb.  Would you have been happier if he were dressed like Tron? 

Again, things like the chosen garments of the Engineers represent the very least of Prometheus' problems.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

So we're at robes now? Their idea of what our technologically advanced creators are like is seriously unimaginative.

Um, you mean besides the weird biosuits that seem to blend into the flesh of the Space Jockey that was in stasis?  Or their organic looking environmental/space suit?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

So we're at robes now? Their idea of what our technologically advanced creators are like is seriously unimaginative.

They're not robes, they're proto-robes.  We are genetically predisposed to creating and wearing robes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

Again, things like the chosen garments of the Engineers represent the very least of Prometheus' problems.

This. The film is stupid on so many higher levels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

Again, things like the chosen garments of the Engineers represent the very least of Prometheus' problems.

And I don't remember saying that robes were the biggest issue with Prometheus, but it's a symptom of one of them, which is the lack of imagination. When I think of what the humanity's engineers would be like,  I think of something truly awful and awe-inspiring. It might be a bit much to expect someone to be able to capture that feeling but I figured if anyone could it would be Scott. Instead we get these boring (and by the looks of it pretty stupid) things. The movie tackles these huge potentially amazing ideas without any panache.

No, that's true, you didn't say that, but I'll be blunt-- you're here in a thread about a film which happens to boast one of 2012's most idiotic scripts and you're criticizing the use of robes. Imagination being an issue here, there are far greater offenses of creativity on display here, and in a film where those flaws aren't present, I could see that clothing choice as more of an issue. But I'm much more concerned with the fact that Lindelof can't imagine a story where there isn't a big, stupid, "gotcha!" moment (and while I'm not blaming the script on him, I am 100% confident he's the guy who thought up the Weyland reveal) at a critical point in the film's structure.

Besides, is it really all that weird for them to be wearing robes in what's clearly something of a ritual for them? Our own holy people wear robes when conducting religious services. Doesn't seem all that odd to me. Regardless-- there are bigger fish to fry here, I think.

FOX is releasing these images to give us more to fight about amongst ourselves, trying to turn or attention away from the Prometheus screenplay!

We are not our enemy...

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

No, that's true, you didn't say that, but I'll be blunt-- you're here in a thread about a film which happens to boast one of 2012's most idiotic scripts and you're criticizing the use of robes. Imagination being an issue here, there are far greater offenses of creativity on display here, and in a film where those flaws aren't present, I could see that clothing choice as more of an issue. But I'm much more concerned with the fact that Lindelof can't imagine a story where there isn't a big, stupid, "gotcha!" moment (and while I'm not blaming the script on him, I am 100% confident he's the guy who thought up the Weyland reveal) at a critical point in the film's structure.

 

Besides, is it really all that weird for them to be wearing robes in what's clearly something of a ritual for them? Our own holy people wear robes when conducting religious services. Doesn't seem all that odd to me. Regardless-- there are bigger fish to fry here, I think.

Half this thread is about nitpicky little things and really dude, if you don't think a comment is adding to the conversation just ignore it and it'll disappear down the page, but leave your "bigger fish to fry" nonsense. This isn't the CHUD committee to fix Prometheus and you're coming off as seriously condescending.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

Half this thread is about nitpicky little things and really dude, if you don't think a comment is adding to the conversation just ignore it and it'll disappear down the page, but leave your "bigger fish to fry" nonsense. This isn't the CHUD committee to fix Prometheus and you're coming off as seriously condescending.

SO much of this thread has been the CHUD committee to fix Prometheus.  I don't know how many posts were of the "I don't know why they did it this way, they should have done it like this" variety.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

Half this thread is about nitpicky little things and really dude, if you don't think a comment is adding to the conversation just ignore it and it'll disappear down the page, but leave your "bigger fish to fry" nonsense. This isn't the CHUD committee to fix Prometheus and you're coming off as seriously condescending.

If I don't like a comment, or if I think it's not adding anything to the discussion, I'm also free to respond to and articulate why, too. That said, I'm sorry that I'm coming off as condescending, because that's not my intent at all. I just don't get nitpicking Prometheus to this degree when the film's biggest problems derive from its bones and not from its veneer.

This thread has become an echo chamber of hate about this film.  Once every scrap has been picked apart, then something new has to be found to keep the anger going.  Like robes, for instance.

I've read the whole thread... very entertaining.

I haven't seen Prometheus myself. 

I did however see Alien when it came out in 79. I was 7. My mom new the owner of the local Odeon Cinema.

See I loved scifi films like forbidden planet and war of the worlds. So I thought "Mammy... a film about an alien... I want to see it".

The film fuelled my nightmares for the next 5 or so years. Usually involving the Space Jockey and a spider legged dolphin with metal teeth chasing me around corridors. 

I currently work at Bray Studios, where, back in the 70's, the derelict was built and a few other scenes were shot. I also worked at pinewood when Prometheus was being filmed. Saw all these weird and wonderful designs. Monks with white silicone masks walking around... Fassbender crashing his golf buggy into the bond stage and looking rather embarrassed... Therone walking around in her skin tight suit... mmmmmmmm, The space jockey, the big head room... etc. 

So all the 'designs' were spoiled for me well before the film was out.

They had to rebuild the personnel carrier because it was too small to begin with. also... some of the 'xenomorph' concept designs that didn't make it were phenomenally better than the one that did. One of them looked like a baby goblin.. glad that didn't see the light of day. 

Some of the things I was perturbed about... The size of the space jockey/engineer... too small. The mould maker where I work had a few casts of various 'things' like the space jockey helmet... HELMET???? cop out. I know they used the crew's children in miniaturised space suits for the SJ scene in the original... but come on!! 

I was also a bit deflated to find that the Jockey was a suit worn by translucent skinned giant humanoids. They could have got away with having the jockey as a specifically engineered version of themselves that was say...  the CPU, control module and engine.... like it WAS the ship. It would have made so much more sci-sense. My disappointment is due to the fact that it is blatantly obvious the Jockey was part of the chair in the original. It would have been much better if these engineers, engineered themselves to suit the situation. The whole idea of Biomechanoids that originally drew Scott to do the original has been thrown out of the window along with the dirty bathwater it seems. 

Few points... about posts on this thread. I won't directly quote because it would take ages to find the post...

The music used in the trailer is the same music used in the original A L I E N trailer; the high pitched drone. So this is markedly obvious that he wished it to be like A L I E N or rather have the nostalgic feel of the original.

In A L I E N... it was originally Weylan. James Cameron changed it to Weyland. Why? Who Knows... and why Scott kept Cameron's change is surprising. But this puts a bit of the confusion about some of his decisions into more befuddlement. 

Old age makeup is a difficult one to carry off. Especially if the actor is known to be young and as sucky cheeked as Mr Pierce.

Most of the ones you don't notice are when the actor/actress is relatively unknown. For instance the old woman in Titanic, Dorothy Gibson, was in her 50s at the time of filming... subsequently the makeup won an academy award.

I am happy that he seems to have got rid of a queen alien idea. Don't get me wrong... I love the Queen alien... but it sort of pushes away the idea of the creature to be less 'alien' and more like "There are many of them so lets make them like ANTs". The idea an alien can engineer another organism into an egg is so much more disturbing. 

I might go to see it tomorrow.

Please, let's not confuse "They didn't like it but I did" with "HATERZ GONNA HATE".