Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
I totally agree!!!
...can we just have some form of moratorium on the term 'xenomorph', Gorman uses it in Aliens because he's an asshole...WHY it's been taken as the perfect description of the creature is beyond me.
Everyone keeps talking about a sequel(s). I really, really, really doubt there's going to be a sequel. I just don't see the word of mouth on this to be positive enough to make it a sequel-spawning hit.
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Wrath of the Titans. Men In Black III. Three of which were granted a bigger budget than their predecessor.
Was there supposed to be a difference between the regular blue spacesuit and the one with orange lining everyone began wearing later in the film?
Another thing pissing me off is people on other sites saying, "Well you obviously went into this film expecting an ALIEN prequel..."; when actually the OPPOSITE is true...OK, I had a vague idea about the story, BUT RIDLEY HIMSELF SAID THIS WASN"T A PREQUEL!
I saw the trailers and TV spots and chuckled to myself about all the fan-boys frothing at the mouth and smugly thinking "yeah, I can see where THIS is going...Nice one, Ridley..."
So basically what I'm saying is Ridley pulled a fast-one on people believing what he preached...I realise this makes me sound like the people I'm railing against...but this film died with me due to fan-service.
...I can't stop thinking about the damn thing, though.
Shit.
(sorry...this makes me sound like an absolute cunt...)
Why shouldn't I have thought this was a Alien prequel?
The first trailer SCREAMS Alien. And based on all the reviews they made a huge mistake not making it an Alien prequel. I know that's what I wanted to see. Again, based on reviews I'll wait for Blu.
And with all the secrecy Lindelof is known for, why would anyone believe him?
Some SPOILERish stuff for the first line of this post!
La di la di da!
In regards to the amount of material excised for the theatrical cut to be saved for a director's cut... the Patrick Wilson cameo dream seems like a prime detail that got gutted in editing. Because the way it is now, it played like something they went back for reshoots to give the Shaw character some vague semblance of an arc/motivation. Really really weak.
Pandorum?...Harsh, man...FUCKING HARSH!....
OMG, my heart is breaking (haven't seen it yet).
OMG, my heart is breaking (haven't seen it yet).
For those who've seen it, does it feel like a Kingdom Of Heaven scenario where another cut might reveal a completely different movie?
Also,
Maybe not to the effect of the theatrical and director cuts being like night and day, where night is mediocre and day is incredible. But yeah, I definitely think that the director's cut will improve on the theatrical in significant ways.
Coincidentally, I asked Mr. Beaks the same thing on Facebook (he doesn't like the film) and he said no. His response:
"The script will still be the script. (I've been told that the EC isn't that much longer.)"
Some people here are making this thing sound like Tron:Legacy. I can't see it til friday, so I don't know for sure, but I'm having a very hard time believing it's that bad.
I recently watched and enjoyed GI Jane though, so I'm operating on a different plane of Ridleyxistance than many film fans. Body Of Lies was also badass, recent Ridley is all good with me. Of course I thought Robin Hood sucked as much as everyone else, I'm not completely insane.
What Kyle said. And then some. I'm one of those people who go to see movies due to the director. Be it GdT, Cuaron, and Ridley Scott. What I love about Scott's earlier films is the world building he did in them. Alien, Blade Runner and Legend. I love those films simply for the fact that Scott built a world, inhabited by some wonderfully interesting characters. People who've worked with him have said he's also got quite an artistic ability and oftentimes, draws up his own storyboards. I say he *is* an artist. Through and through and you see that in his films.
Even in Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven. Built worlds that swallowed you up. And...ugh on Robin Hood. And yeah, I'm a fan of GI Jane, as well!
BTW, some of my artist friends across the pond have been saying some good/great things about this. Many of them are concept artists (creatures, environment, characters, etc) and some work "in the biz". Here's what one said:
"true that the ending is a bit rushed and too much an excuse for a trilogy; so lets say we will enjoy it more in its full version... but the new add to the alien's lore is really enjoyable, solid ideas, not enough time to exploit them"
Yeah, I'd love for another classic from Sir Ridley. But I'm more excited to see what new ideas he can bring to the genre.
Some people here are making this thing sound like Tron:Legacy. I can't see it til friday, so I don't know for sure, but I'm having a very hard time believing it's that bad.
Tron Legacy was boring as fuck. Prometheus has the best manual operation scene of recent memory!
I think I'm more bummed out by peoples opinions in this thread than the actual film, I quite liked it really. As usual there will be a director's cut, the studios love fucking with Ridley's vision, it's quite baffling, I mean haven't we realised this by now?
So many questions about this film though. Spoilers:
1] First scene. WTF is going on? Did the dude kill himself? Was that on primordial Earth? Did he miss his ride and think "shit, might as well off myself, life won't evolve for a billion years yet!"
2] Why is there a mural of the alien in a ship carrying biological weapons that for some reason was meant to head back to Earth to destroy its population? I thought maybe the alien at the end was the first of its kind (and thus Shaw the original mother), but the mural indicates otherwise. Is this 'biological weapon' an offshoot of an existing species of alien that the space jockey's worship/respect?
3] Zombie dude. How? Why? Too random and thrown in.
4] Maybe I was too busy admiring Charlize's flowy hair, but I'm seeing people are saying she's a robot, but I took from the film that she is not. Can anyone clear up? Obviously makes more sense if she isn't, hence her 'sibling' rivalry with David.
5] Is the ship in the first Alien film somewhere else on that planet? Was that LV-426? If it is, then did an outbreak occur on more than one ship? Still unclear on the ties between the Alien and Prometheus.
6] The space jockey 'flashbacks' were way too convenient. Is there a logical explanation for them? I can't believe the writers would be that lazy...
I know some, if not all, of my questions are due to script problems, but for the moment I'm willing to give Ridley a chance and wait for a longer cut. He's been screwed around by studios a lot.
I was worried about Guy Pearce's Weyland character, so I decided to take a look at a few details and, boy, his character in the film sounds pretty awful. Might be that most "We are the Gods!" moments in films are rarely executed well for me. Hope it comes off better than the rather uninteresting mustache-twirling and is at least interesting enough in the context of the larger themes to not be a little too on-the-nose. Anyone who has seen this have any opinions? As worse as it sounds or better?
Why are people looking up plot descriptions and making up their minds? Here's one for you:
An archaeologist has to stop Nazis from finding the lost Ark because of its immense power. After two hours, the hero is tied up, the Nazis open the Ark and are killed by what's inside. Hero really did nothing whatsoever. The end.
Not saying Prometheus is on the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark, but the only thing worse to me than expecting a movie to be brilliant and setting yourself up for disappointment is developing character and plot bias before ever actually meeting the character or experiencing the plot.
Tron Legacy was boring as fuck. Prometheus has the best manual operation scene of recent memory!
I think I'm more bummed out by peoples opinions in this thread than the actual film, I quite liked it really. As usual there will be a director's cut, the studios love fucking with Ridley's vision, it's quite baffling, I mean haven't we realised this by now?
So many questions about this film though. Spoilers:
1] First scene. WTF is going on? Did the dude kill himself? Was that on primordial Earth? Did he miss his ride and think "shit, might as well off myself, life won't evolve for a billion years yet!"
2] Why is there a mural of the alien in a ship carrying biological weapons that for some reason was meant to head back to Earth to destroy its population? I thought maybe the alien at the end was the first of its kind (and thus Shaw the original mother), but the mural indicates otherwise. Is this 'biological weapon' an offshoot of an existing species of alien that the space jockey's worship/respect?
3] Zombie dude. How? Why? Too random and thrown in.
4] Maybe I was too busy admiring Charlize's flowy hair, but I'm seeing people are saying she's a robot, but I took from the film that she is not. Can anyone clear up? Obviously makes more sense if she isn't, hence her 'sibling' rivalry with David.
5] Is the ship in the first Alien film somewhere else on that planet? Was that LV-426? If it is, then did an outbreak occur on more than one ship? Still unclear on the ties between the Alien and Prometheus.
6] The space jockey 'flashbacks' were way too convenient. Is there a logical explanation for them? I can't believe the writers would be that lazy...
I know some, if not all, of my questions are due to script problems, but for the moment I'm willing to give Ridley a chance and wait for a longer cut. He's been screwed around by studios a lot.
1) We're meant to infer that that is a planned process. Sacrificing himself to create life.
2) Don't they say that the pile of Engineers they find had wounds in their chests. Sounds to me like they've been breeding the traditional aliens for a while. The critter at the end looks unique because of the unique nature of its parent.
3) Zombie dude makes no sense in regards to what else we've seen within the complex. The creatures either require a living host to function or are simply predatory. As such that seems a little odd, unless the black goo is like a form of ever changing DNA creating the worm things at will, but also bending any existing DNA for another purpose.
4) Meredith Vickers is most likely not a robot. She's Weylands natural heir, but feels displaced by the affection and attention Weyland shows David.
5) PROMETHEUS is not set on LV-426, the planet designation is something like LV-222.
6) Yeah, that makes no sense whatsoever. Guess it's kind of a security feed, but it feels really trite.
So many questions about this film though. Spoilers:
1] First scene. WTF is going on? Did the dude kill himself? Was that on primordial Earth? Did he miss his ride and think "shit, might as well off myself, life won't evolve for a billion years yet!"
3] Zombie dude. How? Why? Too random and thrown in.
4] Maybe I was too busy admiring Charlize's flowy hair, but I'm seeing people are saying she's a robot, but I took from the film that she is not. Can anyone clear up? Obviously makes more sense if she isn't, hence her 'sibling' rivalry with David.
5] Is the ship in the first Alien film somewhere else on that planet? Was that LV-426? If it is, then did an outbreak occur on more than one ship? Still unclear on the ties between the Alien and Prometheus.
6] The space jockey 'flashbacks' were way too convenient. Is there a logical explanation for them? I can't believe the writers would be that lazy...
1. Yeah, I'm unclear on this too.
3. I didn't realize they dragged him back with them. It feels like people are teleporting every once in a while in this movie. Also, I wasn't clear as to who the zombie was until they ran him over a few times. I thought it was Shaw's Tom Hardy-ish beau for a while.
4. I think people are saying that simply because she plays it so icy and cold at the beginning of the movie. I think the film was knowingly winking at this when Elba asks her if she's a robot/android.
5. I think the exposition diagram shown early in the movie says that the planet is called LV-222 or something.
6. I can believe it. It was a really cool image though. That seems to be the general thrust of this movie's existence. Not making much sense, but looking great doing it.
Also, in regards to the final shot. My first reaction was (and the guy behind me seemed to share my sentiment), "Awwwwwww, it's so cuuuuuuute!!!"
1) We're meant to infer that that is a planned process. Sacrificing himself to create life.
Ah, that does sound better than my "poor suicidal guy stranded on a planet" theory.
5. I think the exposition diagram shown early in the movie says that the planet is called LV-222 or something.
Also, in regards to the final shot. My first reaction was (and the guy behind me seemed to share my sentiment), "Awwwwwww, it's so cuuuuuuute!!!"
Right, I remembered Alien is indeed set on a different planet, which in a way saves us from the "prequel raped my childhood" complaints, and keeps the dude with the burst chest a mystery. Though I suppose we can just chalk that up to dangers of the risky Engineer profession.
First reaction at the end of my screening was half a clap, which made my pal and I chuckle. Then we started (admittedly childishly) laughing in remembrance of the scene where Shaw is being slapped to see if she was still sedated. We were hoping Leslie Nielsen and a queue would be forming up beside her.
Some people here are making this thing sound like Tron:Legacy. I can't see it til friday, so I don't know for sure, but I'm having a very hard time believing it's that bad.
I recently watched and enjoyed GI Jane though, so I'm operating on a different plane of Ridleyxistance than many film fans. Body Of Lies was also badass, recent Ridley is all good with me. Of course I thought Robin Hood sucked as much as everyone else, I'm not completely insane.
I enjoyed it well enough when watching it, with my main concern (as I said on the previous page) being that it felt like a lot was missing. It looks gorgeous, and that alone will keep you glued to the screen.
Having slept on it, though, it's staring to look worse in the cold light of day.
There's some horribly ham-fisted foreshadowing. Even if you've avoided the trailers you'll see certain things coming a mile off.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Two I can remember off-hand ...
Shaw drawing attention to the medpod right at the start.
"I can't have babies" ... ooooh, I wonder what will happen?!
I was expecting a smart sci-fi movie, but it's obviously been dumbed way down.
The Space Jockey, which Scott has apparently been wanting to tell the story of for 30+ years is less an ancient god and more
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Jason Voorhees. A total non-dimensional character after 30 years is just poor.
And of course there's characters being idiots just so we can get to the next plot point.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Milburn and Fifield continuing to explore and interfere with things despite being terrified of being inside the structure and wanting to get out. A sensible person would have just stayed put and waited to be rescued. Just lazy storytelling.
Then there's the plain weirdness. None of the people on Prometheus seem to know each other. Really? There wouldn't be at least some sort of meet and greet with your fellow crew members before setting off on a four-year return mission? It's not a major issue, but it just adds to the feeling that there's a lot missing.
And the final scene? It cheapens both Prometheus and the Aliens films. It's on the level of Aliens vs Predator. I hope it pleases the fanboys.
It's not the Phantom Menace, not by a long chalk, but I was hoping for a degree of quality that just isn't there in certain aspects of the film.
Doh, just realised the dude in the beginning can be 'Prometheus'. This gives the space jockeys motivation for going back to punish humans. Something like that anyway. Must mull on this film some more.
This thread makes me very sad. :(
Damn you effective marketing, damn you to hell!
Why are people looking up plot descriptions and making up their minds? Here's one for you:
An archaeologist has to stop Nazis from finding the lost Ark because of its immense power. After two hours, the hero is tied up, the Nazis open the Ark and are killed by what's inside. Hero really did nothing whatsoever. The end.
Not saying Prometheus is on the level of Raiders of the Lost Ark, but the only thing worse to me than expecting a movie to be brilliant and setting yourself up for disappointment is developing character and plot bias before ever actually meeting the character or experiencing the plot.
Er...what? Wasn't really making up my mind as much as I was expressing concerns from how it read, just not much of a Lindelof fan and I've been worried about the character since that weirdly bad TED promo. And I asked if it was an idea served better in execution precisely because plot descriptions aren't always an indicator of quality, so I'm not sure what you're getting at there. Thanks for the concern, but I can assure you that I haven't developed too strong of a bias for all of the worries that I have. *shrug*
Mostly, I just hate the idea of Pearce being underserved. Apparently Elba and Theron are as well, but that's just from what I've heard from a fair amount of people.
Er...what? Wasn't really making up my mind, just not much of a Lindelof fan and I've been worried about the character since that weirdly bad TED promo.
I think you're alone on your opinion of that, pretty much everyone I know that saw it loved it and it totally added to their reasons for wanting to see this film. It was a very affective piece of marketing.
What was worrying was the rumors that he would be played by Pierce in bad make up in the film.
I have never understood criticism of 'old man' makeup in movies. I mean in this case it's Guy Pierce with a shitload of wrinkles. What more do people want in makeup!? Pulsating varicose veins? Also, it's Guy Pierce! He's always good.
Only thing I can agree on is that major characters and their relationships towards one another do feel truncated, but their performances are fine and I expect a director's cut to give them more time to breathe. It could have been a smarter movie for sure, but in the current Hollywood climate obsessed with remakes, reboots and adaptations of board games, I'm surprised we even got this. Let's hope it continues the trend that films like District 9 and Moon kickstarted, and culminates in more cerebral mainstream films with decent budgets like in the good old days.
Overall I liked it, but there were several moments I'm not all too sure about. Loved Fassbender, liked Theron and Rapace. 3D was pretty good, the score pretty bland. The music from the trailer was great - should have been in the movie.
Points
1) When they revealed that they'll go down in history as the first humans to have contact with an alien species, not one of them seems surprised or shocked or anything. Their reaction is a reasonable reaction to going to tow back a refinery with 20 million tons of space ore, but to meeting an alien race? Everyone is like "whatever."
2) I began laughing when Shaw suggested not to bring armed security to their first expedition. I stopped when she got through with it. You let scientists travel two years to a distant location inhabited by unthinkable dangers yet caring for their safety isn't important? It should have been of utmost importance for Vickers to have soldiers with them, in case some of the team members needed to be sorted out due to infections.
3) For being a great thinker Weyland is quite naive thinking the awakened Jockey would just immediately follow his order and help him extend his lifespan. First of all, they should have let the expendable redshirts awaken him, trying to get friendly with the mysterious bald guy. If that doesn't work, then bring armed guys, drones and robots in and force him. Only when he's no longer a threat, get Weyland. Maybe the Jockey isn't even able to extend lifespans? Maybe it takes a long time work out something like that. An inacceptable risk he's taking.
4) The image of the Jockeys actually looking like humans would have been way more shocking if we only got to know upon lifting the helmet. The big stone head kinda spoils it for the character. Again, not enough authenticity in the cast seeing that.
5) After Shaw's abortion she should have been knocked out - then awakened on the way to the pyramid. Otherwise it doesn't make sense not mentioning the growing proto facehugger in the medibay.
6) Fifield and Millburn want to leave early because they're afraid, right? Good. But hours later, instead of waiting near the entrance they go even deeper into the caves and not only find a scary alien snake, they are glad about it and try to touch it. Really?
7) Things Vickers should have done: the push-ups in the nude. Things Vickers shouldn't have done: banging a crew member, mentioning the word "father", trying to outrun the falling Space Jockey ship, not going on a four year trip just to see dad die and have the final affirmation she's taking over the company for good. Which she probably already has due to the fact everyone thinks Weyland is dead already.
8) Why does Weyland lie in the opening holograph? There is no reason for doing so. No one is able to leak that news to anyone back on earth anyway.
The end is rather confusing. So SJ drank that fluid, dissolved and thus humans were created. Centuries later, Holloway unknowingly drinks the same fluid and has sex with his girlfriend. While he dies, his infected semen and Shaw's sterile eggs create a proto-facehugger. Said proto-facehugger then impregnates SJ and a proto-alien is born. The sequel is going to explain how the proto-alien becomes the alien and how it's eggs end up in a SJ ship that crashes on LV-426, which is not the same SJ ship as the one on the way to the SJ's home world, amirite?
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Wrath of the Titans. Men In Black III. Three of which were granted a bigger budget than their predecessor.
Three of which had predecessors that were fairly successful--relative to budget--in their original theatrical run.
Two of which were superhero films and were hoped to be franchise-able.
One of which starred bona-fide box office draw Will Smith and debuted to decent money.
Also, the unspoken assumption is Prometheus and sequels will be a Ridley mini-franchise. I again state, for that to happen, most likely this movie is going to have to do very well stateside. I just don't see non-geek audiences being able to make heads or tails of the movie by the time credits start rolling, and I certainly don't see any of them returning for seconds or thirds. Prometheus will probably open between 70-90 million and have little staying power. Now, if Prometheus bombs and Ridley is bound and determined to make more of these, I'm sure he's got clout enough to make it happen. But I'm not aware of a Ridley Scott-directed sequel ever happening. Sure, he could produce, but what's the point? The further he gets away from the director's chair, the further this Prometheus project will move away from whatever it was first intended to be. (Though, how it could move any further away from the Alien prequel concept at this point is beyond me.) I'm not sure, in the wake of a possible box-office disappointment, where the passion would be for Ridley to go full throttle on a sequel. Much less why actors of any caliber would return. I mean, the Alien franchise has outlived its welcome. Prometheus was a chance at redeeming the original idea...and we see how that's turning out.
Were you to accuse me of trolling at this point, you might not be far off...because the more I hear about this movie, the more irritated I become. Looks beautiful. Includes great actors. The finished product sounds like a confusing mashup full of missed opportunities. Come next weekend, we may find that my predictions are way off. But I doubt it.
You all may get a sequel or two out of this, but I doubt it's going to be anything you want.
Overall I liked it, but there were several moments I'm not all too sure about. Loved Fassbender, liked Theron and Rapace. 3D was pretty good, the score pretty bland. The music from the trailer was great - should have been in the movie.
Points
1) When they revealed that they'll go down in history as the first humans to have contact with an alien species, not one of them seems surprised or shocked or anything. Their reaction is a reasonable reaction to going to tow back a refinery with 20 million tons of space ore, but to meeting an alien race? Everyone is like "whatever."
6) Fifield and Millburn want to leave early because they're afraid, right? Good. But hours later, instead of waiting near the entrance they go even deeper into the caves and not only find a scary alien snake, they are glad about it and try to touch it. Really?
I hated the 3D, it was useless as every other film since Avatar. I feel like I'm not watching the film the way it's supposed to be watched, the image was just darker and way too much strobing when the camera pans. I watched it in IMAX though, not 'real3D'.
Regarding your first point, although I can acknowledge that is frustrating, in a way I also like it too. It's kind of like how some people don't like Michael Mann films because they're too 'cool', the character's don't react in obvious ways but rather process information internally. Of course Prometheus is nothing like a Michael Mann film, but in a way I was glad we didn't have to deal with too much obvious reactions. I mean we do get repeated acknowledgements from the crew about the nature of their trip, the tattooed dude's ramblings, the bet between the bridge guys, etc. I also liked Idris's blatant "I don't give a shit, I want to go home" attitude when Shaw confronts him. Perhaps it was intentional to portray their jaded and cynical nature to an epic undertaking such as finding the meaning of life. "Whatever, I just want to watch some holo-porn with replicants back on Earth."
Regarding your other point about the two idiots stumbling around in the dark, that was the one thing I actively hated in the film. They just HAD to have a dumb character doing dumb things next to an alien. I mean is it so hard to engineer (geddit?) a scenario where they get attacked without blatantly asking for it? But regarding how they ended up in that chamber, didn't Idris tell them to go there?
I have never understood criticism of 'old man' makeup in movies.
That's not what people are criticizing here, what they are criticizing is what seems to be a very poor, half-assed make up job.
That's not what people are criticizing here, what they are were criticizing is what seems to be a very poor, half-assed make up job.
No that's what I mean. I mean that I don't understand people criticising make up jobs. Guy Pearce looks old. What more do people want? He looks really freakin old. How can movie make up conjure such strong feelings in people? I mean if you could literally see bits of fake skin flapping around I'd understand. Any film I've watched where an actor is made to look old, it simply serves its purpose, you suspend disbelief and move on. I've never encountered make up that ruined any aspect of a film for me.
Anyway, that would be the least of this film's problems and is not worth discussing much really. More interesting is his character's relationship between David and Vickers.
Three of which had predecessors that were fairly successful--relative to budget--in their original theatrical run.
And Prometheus could be fairly successful -- if not moreso -- in its original theatrical run. It's the notion that mediocre word-of-mouth = no sequel that I find silly.
I would say because we've been spoiled by some very good make up jobs in the past. Even if this one isn't particularly bad, it stands out and seems cheap compared to everything else in the film (that's always a major thing for people, when there's a make up job like this in a film that doesn't have a lot of that otherwise).
Also when it comes to making people look old, as far as I'm concerned less is more, for me it just never really looks good when the make up is piled on thick with heavy latex. It doesn't look realistic.
In a film like this that didn't really have to cut corners anywhere it was a somewhat of a warning sign that everything wasn't going to be great. That's all I'm saying. Between this and Abrams go-to guy for monster designs working on the creatures for this, those were two things that had me a little worried, outside of the script which I expected would have problems.
I dunno I'll probably be pleasantly surprised by it with this new mostly negative outlook.
Old Weyland is supposed to be 103 years old. Knowing how the actor looks right now, it's always a hard suspension of disbelief. Name one old man make-up that truly convinced. I bet if DiCaprio went shopping in his J Edgar make-up, people would not recognize him. On screen, it looked odd.
Speaking Prometheus, I was surprised the movie does not kick the AVP movies out of the canon. It easily could have by stating that Peter Weyland and not Charles Weyland founded the corporation, like the viral Weyland website does, but there's not a word about it. So, in the movie verse, Lance Henriksen could easily be Guy Pearce's father. Just saying.
Does anyone want to buy some reserved seats for next Friday for this film? 2 for 1.
I didn't think the make-up was that bad, it was the character's complete lack of anything to do which kind of hurt the film. His reappearance is set up as kind of a twist, telegraphed by Vicker's surgical pod, but then he doesn't really do anything of interest. I get that he's supposed to be an antagonist of sorts, but he's so removed from the situation that it doesn't really work.
Is there any mention of Yutani in the film?
I didn't notice any reference to Yutani. I believe the company is actually just called Weyland Corp in the film.
F. Murray Abraham was about 45 when he played Salieri. Guy Pearce is about 45 now as well (though a much better looking 45, heheh).
The old-man make-up for Salieri was amazing, as I recall.
It didn't really BUG me, but I wasn't very convinced by the Weyland make-up either. It didn't look too far off from the latex-mask look of Palpatine in ROTS (which looked much more convincing in ROTJ). Mostly, it was the fact that the make-up couldn't take away the youth of Pearce's eyes. Whatever Abraham did with Salieri, I could feel the age even in the eyes.
And Prometheus could be fairly successful -- if not moreso -- in its original theatrical run. It's the notion that mediocre word-of-mouth = no sequel that I find silly.
Green Lantern says hi.
Green Lantern says hi.
Superman Returns says hi back.
Superman Returns says hi back.
Batman & Robin high-fives them both.
i like what you did there
Green Lantern says hi.
Green Lantern made $219m worldwide on a $200m budget.
Superman Returns says hi back.
$390m on a $270m budget...
Batman & Robin high-fives them both.
$238m on a $125m budget, and a 31% drop in gross from its predecessor. Any more you'd like to toss out? I can always sit back, shrug, and bring up the Riddick franchise.
What is Prometheus' budget? 150?
120-130 according to the Hollywood Reporter. And the film's going to make at least 200 outside the U.S.
I totally agree!!!
...can we just have some form of moratorium on the term 'xenomorph', Gorman uses it in Aliens because he's an asshole...WHY it's been taken as the perfect description of the creature is beyond me.
It's also uttered in the extended cut of Alien 3 by Ripley. Once again though, blame Dark Horse Comics. They took the term and fucking ran with it. Same goes for "Yautja", their own made-up name for the Predators.
Prometheus will probably have a huge opening weekend, but after that? It's really bleak. It has uncomfortable tentacle rape scenes, it's dead serious and there's no male lead speaking to the female 15-25 audience.
Alien: 308m (adjusted)
Aliens: 256m (adjusted)
Alien 3: 233m (adjusted)
Alien Resurrection: 217m (adjusted)
AVP: 172m
AVP 2: 128m
It'll probably need to become the most successful movie of the franchise to get a sequel. 400 at least. Tron did that and didn't get a sequel, so maybe even more than 400.
This post ended up a bit long, apologies!
Saw this yesterday, pretty enjoyable on the whole though there are big obvious flaws that will no doubt be deconstructed to death if they haven't been already. I found it more enjoyable as a kind of sci-fi mystery rather than a horror or thriller. There's not much in the way of tension or dread, which is unfortunate, but the environments are beautiful and compelling enough that I wasn't bored by the rather leisurely exploration. When they happen the grotty body horror sequences are a pulpy blast (sometimes literally!).
Visually it's just brilliant. The 3D works and isn't intrusive, and there's a real sense of place and a physicality to both the locations and the creatures. Whatever CGI is used is seamless and consistent. It feels timeless and fairly sure you could watch it alongside Alien and they would more or less feel as a piece. Ridley proves he can make a truly majestic looking movie once again.
On the thorny issue of the script, or at least the dialogue and character aspects of the script... yeah, it's a bit shit. I've gotten some stick for defending Avatar's script in the past, but this movie proves my point. Say what you will about Cameron's writing (and certainly his incidental dialogue isn't much better than what you'll find here), he knows how to make cleanly defined characters and have them follow through on their motivations in a way that makes the the story beats connect logically and satisfyingly. He may only be following the cliches of Genre Storytelling 101, but that's exactly the thing: most of the big blockbuster writers of today can't even do that.
Prometheus is full of vague, half-formed concepts and bits of characterization that are introduced, hint at some larger point and then fizzle out or are forgotten without ever properly coming together. The basic pieces here are strong enough that I really think generic, competent character writing is all they needed to properly pull it off. The craft of this movie is impeccable in almost every respect, it's befuddling that such a key aspect is allowed to be so sloppy. Though it wouldn't surprise me at all if this turns out to be yet another case of Ridley being Ridley and cutting out a ton of key dialogue scenes, leaving a bunch of narrative loose ends in the process. There was an odd scene where Elba wanders in and drops a load of important exposition that felt distinctly like it might be replacing cut sequences. It certainly would've been more satisfying to learn about the nature of the place they're exploring than have one character suddenly just wander over and tell us.
Also thought the acting was a mixed bag. Rapace is pretty entertaining when doing the action heroine stuff, but unfortunately just isn't that charismatic and was overshadowed by the rest of the main cast. Fassbender gives a fantastic performance but is sadly a bit wasted, not having that much to do. Theron, Elba and Pearce get the tone right and are very watchable (though given that you never see him young I'm not quite sure why they didn't just cast an old person in Pearce's role). The rest of the cast are either anonymous or actively dreadful, which combined with the limp dialogue makes the movie feel depressingly awkward at times.
Some of the following might sound like damning with faint praise, but I have to give them credit for not falling into a lot of typical prequel traps. It stands on its own almost entirely, with almost no nods or winks to the audience. It connects fairly consistently to the other movies, but doesn't feel like just an exercise in filling in backstory, and also doesn't overexplain the mysteries of the series. For all the fanboys weeping beforehand about how they're just going to ruin the mystery of the space jockey, it doesn't really do that at all. In fact for better or worse you probably know less about the alien universe after this than you did before.
I do take issue with the final shot though. Taken on its own, the alien being born could've been a decent horror movie "oh shit!" finale moment if it had any significance to Noomi's character or to the world at large - y'know, basically anything to suggest that exciting scary things are going to happen after the cut to black - but it doesn't. It's not like it's some apocalyptic demon that's going to destroy the universe, it's just another monster. And not even a monster that poses a threat to Noomi because it's not even on the same ship!
Also some of the 'mystery' is pretty contrived. Not explaining the Engineer's motivations doesn't leave you with some thought provoking enigma to debate, it just leaves you with a thriller where you don't know why the bad guys are doing anything.
But for all its warts and sloppiness it's basically a'ight. Probably the third best Alien related movie. Draft in a better writer in for the sequel this movie all but demands and I'd be up for it. Noomi in Billy Corgan land with her best bud Mr Head-in-a-Rucksack - why not?
Just read through the whole thread and there are so many people who need to clear off back to the pre-release thread instead of bitching and worrying and speculating in here about a movie they haven't even watched. Half the most vocal and prolific posters don't seem to have seen it. The thoughts from the people who actually have are interesting though.
Just read through the whole thread and there are so many people who need to clear off back to the pre-release thread instead of bitching and worrying and speculating in here about a movie they haven't even watched. Half the most vocal and prolific posters don't seem to have seen it. The thoughts from the people who actually have are interesting though.
Yeah, this is a worrying trend I've noticed. It was bad enough there were demands to watch what we said in the Avengers thread, because some people can't control their eyeballs from reading the right hand column of the 'new posts' page. Seriously!?
Anyway, next random question: What's with the giant head? It's like encountering a giant stone human head in a cargo hold of an aircraft carrier. Wha? I mean ok, it's an alien culture, they do things differently, but still. Comes across hackneyed.
Also, maybe I'm being dense, but I don't understand the criticism of the 'male only' operating table. Wasn't that in Vicker's quarters, and so reserved just for Weyland's use? What's the problem here? I mean I would have to assume there was another medical bay for everyone else somewhere on the ship but she didn't have time to reach it. (also I have to laugh at some people online wondering not only if she's a robot but if she's actually male, because of that operating table, haha)
edit: the cave paintings around the world indicate that humans have been continually visited by space jockeys, which I guess supports the theory that the space jockey's in the beginning of the film are from a different 'faction' if you will, then the ones with the curved ships, and have been trying to help and raise humanity. Honestly, I think this film does open up a new and interesting avenue for the franchise, it could go to very cool places, but because it's by Fox and aimed at making as much money as possible, it will always be tampered with, and whoever is directing has an uphill battle at getting their vision onscreen.
Anyway, next random question: What's with the giant head? It's like encountering a giant stone human head in a cargo hold of an aircraft carrier. Wha? I mean ok, it's an alien culture, they do things differently, but still. Comes across hackneyed.
I don't think the room with the head was in the spaceship. If you watch the part where the scanning device stops moving and starts picking up pings, you can see on the 3D scan that it's at the end of a tunnel leading off from the main structure. This is the entrance to the spaceship. The head room is in the main structure, not the cargo hold.
