PROMETHEUS post-release discussion - Page 32

Of course. There is no general consensus Film Crit Hulk cannot conveniently summarize under the pretense of insightful criticism.

He nails the fact that Lindelof circles a theme he has nothing to say about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FeydRautha22 

 

What I don't understand (and I have not heard this discussed) is that the alien ship is receding very quickly into the distance, away from the launch point that was opening up underneath Shaw.  Prometheus takes off and even goes to "SUPER ION DRIVE CORE MODE" to ram the darn thing.  I seem to recall the escape pod that vickers was in be launched backwards from the ship as it headed towards it's triple suicide mission.  As the ship gets hit, does it not appear to be dropping straight down?  How could it be dropping straight down on top of Shaws and Vickers when it is clearly about 10 miles away by then?  That also goes for Prometheus' debris raining down.

 

Also, wasn't Shaw running back down the connecting tunnel to the temple?  Yet she somehow climbs vertically up a tube to the surface right above the ship...I think the mapmaker was involved again on this one....All that technology and nobody had an iPhone on their wrist to see a map.

There's an extra concussion-wave thing that propels it back in their direction (like a Star Trek Warp Core breech) - possibly that it's also somewhat under the pilot's control attempting a landing of sorts like an out-of-control helicopter.

Shaw definitely gets pushed into an exhaust tube when the ship first gets it's engines revving (I have the feeling that the exhaust tubes are established at some point earlier but can't remember where). But the basics are that a big cloud of smoke and debris is blown through all the tunnels when the pilot activates the ship's ignition sequence or whatever and Shawn is blown into the bottom of the shaft and looks up to see daylight and a bunch of things sticking out from the wall she can climb up. When she gets to the top of the shaft there's a pillar of smoke coming out of the ground behind her. So likely she got some help climbing with all that air pushing up behind her, but I don't think it's full-force til she crawls free.

So, there's two blasts of air and smoke: The first that knocks Shaw into the shaft and gives her the quick way out and alerts the people in the Prometheus control room when they see the ring of exhaust plumes come from the ground. Then a second sustained blast as the Juggernaut starts lifting out of the hangar.

I'm sure this particular point has already been talked to death and this may go nowhere, but there seems to have been a bunch of peeps who were confused at why the Engineer hulked out and smashed David, Weyland and co.

I thought we knew that 2000 odd years ago the engineers had been planning to take this ship and its tanks of black goo to Earth to wipe out the destructive evil we know as humanity. They were done with us. It seemed it was a case of Earth being a science experiment which had got out of hand and which needed to be wiped and restarted. So then this guy wakes up to the horror that the rogue science experiment which had been technologically pre-medieval and very safely planet-bound when he laid down for a spacenap has advanced during his slumber to the point that THEY'VE BROKEN INTO HIS BEDROOM!!!

It's a fucking home invasion. Of course he went apeshit. There may be unsatisfying ambiguities galore in Prometheus but to me that engineer's behaviour seemed one of the most understandable motivations in the film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMulder 

Of course. There is no general consensus Film Crit Hulk cannot conveniently summarize under the pretense of insightful criticism.

'Summarize' is the one word not in that guy's vocabulary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

And remember, Alien is brilliant and all, but it's a brilliant B-monster movie.

Alien is brilliant. A brilliant, thematically consistent monster movie.

Prometheus, however, is a mishmash calamity. Focusing so heavily on Shaw and her twat of a boyfriend's philosophical questions in Act 1 (albeit the most banal, juvenile form of philosophy imaginable), it needed to follow through on those questions. I studied Scriptwriting at University - and believe me when I say I wrote some horrible scripts during those years - but one thing I did learn was what you set up in Act 1, you escalate in Act 2, then pay off in Act 3. If you fail to do so your audience will become frustrated, and possibly get pissy about the movie on message boards.

The Prometheus script fails on the most basic level any script can fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/17/film-crit-hulk-smash-the-damon-lindleof-intervention/
 

Film Crit Hulk on Lindelof and Prometheus. Do not miss. Says everything I wanted to say about this film.

I love Film Crit Hulk but goddamn... If he ever published a book he'd probably publish a second book filled with nothing but caveats stressing how absolutely humble he is and that he in no ways means any offense to a single person on this planet.

I love how humble his writing is. He comes across as a decent, gentle man.

No idea what FCH is like in person, but his essays are amazingly great at nailing things wrong in a person's work without ever being nasty or cruel or using ad hominem attacks. He does come across as a genuinely decent guy.

As I said, I love his essays and I'm not doubting that he's a good guy but he'd still come across as a decent guy even if he didn't spend paragraphs apologizing for his opinions.

Yeah to an extent it's refreshing to see someone online write about movies and culture in such a thorough and non-combative way, but he goes so far overboard with the qualifications on everything he says that it crosses over from politeness into... I don't know, an almost smarmy defensiveness? It's good to be self-aware enough to accept that your point of view is not the only one available, but I feel like if you're going to write 8000 words on any given topic it's okay to talk with a degree of conviction.

On the whole I have mixed feelings about him. Personally I'm more impressed when someone can condense complex thoughts into something cutting and concise. But at the same time I kind of like that there's someone out there doing this maximalist approach, even if I usually find my eyes glazing over before the end.

I suspect the reactionary nature of Internet audiences has more to do with his penchant for caveats than anything else. I haven't finished reading the essay, or even touched the fucking comments section, but I have a feeling it'd be nothing but slavering hordes of furious Lindelof fans responding with death threats if not for Hulk's inclination toward qualification.

TL;DR version, people on the Internet are fucking psychotic, Hulk's writing is probably informed by that (as well as his inherent decency).

Thing is I totally get it - I'm constantly qualifying things I say as well. But it can give an infuriatingly passive vibe and also adds extra waffle to a writer who certainly doesn't need any more of that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

I suspect the reactionary nature of Internet audiences has more to do with his penchant for caveats than anything else. I haven't finished reading the essay, or even touched the fucking comments section, but I have a feeling it'd be nothing but slavering hordes of furious Lindelof fans responding with death threats if not for Hulk's inclination toward qualification.

 

TL;DR version, people on the Internet are fucking psychotic, Hulk's writing is probably informed by that (as well as his inherent decency).

The comments are actually pretty cordial and not at all hyperbolic. When I read through them this morning, there were only a handful of pro-Prometheus folks but even the rest were commenting more on Hulk's ideas and critiques than anything else.

He does seem to break his own rule about sticking only with the text of the film itself a few times, but it's pretty great read, regardless. Do wish he'd drop the ALL CAPS schtick, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/17/film-crit-hulk-smash-the-damon-lindleof-intervention/
 

Film Crit Hulk on Lindelof and Prometheus. Do not miss. Says everything I wanted to say about this film.

I pretty much stopped reading when he said "DAMON LINDELOF IS A SUPREMELY TALENTED WRITER".

Not really, I just don't have time to read all that right now.  But still...I don't believe LIndelof is talented, the only decent credit he has is Lost (and TV and film are two different beasts).  How many episodes did he write?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/17/film-crit-hulk-smash-the-damon-lindleof-intervention/
 

Film Crit Hulk on Lindelof and Prometheus. Do not miss. Says everything I wanted to say about this film.

And in three times the space!

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 Do wish he'd drop the ALL CAPS schtick, though.

I usually copy and paste his stuff into MS Word and format it for "Sentence case." You lose capitalized proper names (film titles, etc.), but the improvement in the flow is worth the tradeoff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

And in three times the space!

+1

I'm all for reading some insightful film criticism but when the piece turns into some sort of pseudo Ph.D dissertation, I have to draw the line....

I'd rather read the 'regular' Hulk's movie review: "Hulk not like movie....Hulk confused....Hulk not recommend movie"

And the all caps thing might have been amusing when it was first considered, but it loses it's appeal after the 1st paragraph.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 Do wish he'd drop the ALL CAPS schtick, though.

Strangely, the all caps thing doesn't bother me at all. I'm almost interested to know what it is that other people see when they read it (does he seem like he's shouting or something?) because to me it just feels like I'm reading in a big font.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

I love Film Crit Hulk but goddamn... If he ever published a book he'd probably publish a second book filled with nothing but caveats stressing how absolutely humble he is and that he in no ways means any offense to a single person on this planet.

The reason he does this is that he would, given the chance, like to press this review into the hands of Damon Lindelof himself (and given his increasing notoriety, it's entirely possible Lindelof WILL read it). He honestly wants this to be constructive criticism, something that the internet has forgotten how to do. Most essays in this vein are more about getting attention for the writer and making sure everyone knows how they feel, and possibly stirring up shit in an attempt to get hits--like, say, Devin does. Hulk is actually trying to dispassionately analyze Lindelof's weaknesses and learn from them. And he genuinely wants Lindelof to improve. You don't encourage people to improve, or win them over to your opinion, by writing WORST POS EVER LOL essays. That's just balm for your own ego.

And given how brutal his dissection of Prometheus eventually becomes, I don't think it's unreasonable to make it crystal clear that he's not intending it personally up front.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTRan 

 

+1

 

I'm all for reading some insightful film criticism but when the piece turns into some sort of pseudo Ph.D dissertation, I have to draw the line....

 

I'd rather read the 'regular' Hulk's movie review: "Hulk not like movie....Hulk confused....Hulk not recommend movie"

 

And the all caps thing might have been amusing when it was first considered, but it loses it's appeal after the 1st paragraph.

He also needs to remember that "litany" is a singular noun.  But, on balance, a good read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 
But still...I don't believe LIndelof is talented, the only decent credit he has is Lost (and TV and film are two different beasts).  How many episodes did he write?

He's written quite a few that are pretty much regarded as some of the best of the series (Flashes Before Your Eyes, The Constant, The Other 48 Days, the Mr Eko episodes, and the wonderful season 3 finale, which is probably the series' high water mark).  He's also had a hand in some of the shittiest episodes too, so there's that.  I like Lindelof and when Lost was really clicking, I don't think it was lightning in a bottle.  Hes good, but not good enough to focus his big ideas and nice character beats into a two hour stand-alone block.  At least not yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

 

Strangely, the all caps thing doesn't bother me at all. I'm almost interested to know what it is that other people see when they read it (does he seem like he's shouting or something?) because to me it just feels like I'm reading in a big font.

For me, it makes it harder to read overall, because the caps make everything seem emphasized or important. Everything quickly starts blending in, and it's harder to visually parse and navigate.

To paraphrase THE INCREDIBLES, "If every word is important, than no word is important."

I think Lindelof is an inherently good writer who's been tainted badly by quick success. He's turned lazy and self-indulgent at a time when he should have been perfecting his craft. The fact that he's gotten to the level he has--being the sought-after screenwriter for so many major Hollywood projects--while being so utterly cavalier to character motivation, plot coherency, and thematic integration is kind of alarming.

But I agree with Hulk that there's a level of talent in there that's worth saving. Lost is a VERY well-conceived show, even if Lindelof has to share the credit with a lot of others. He could have more greatness in him. Maybe the overwhelming backlash against him due to Prometheus might cause him to reflect a little.

Still, I fear his takeaway, as from Lost, is going to be "people don't like my DEEP THEMES and AMBIGUOUS STORYTELLING" when it's his nuts-and-bolts storytelling that's causing the problem.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

The fact that he's gotten to the level he has--being the sought-after screenwriter for so many major Hollywood projects--while being so utterly cavalier to character motivation, plot coherency, and thematic integration is kind of alarming.

That's virtually par for the course in blockbuster filmmaking. 

The problem I have with the Hulk gimmick is that he forgets to stick with it.  He'll compose an entire paragraph of completely normal phrasing, then throw in a "HULK THINK" as if he just remembered he's supposed to be doing it that way.  Either commit to it -- which would also seem to preclude his verbosity -- or admit it's served its purpose of getting you in the door and stand on the strength of your material.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

Thing is I totally get it - I'm constantly qualifying things I say as well. But it can give an infuriatingly passive vibe and also adds extra waffle to a writer who certainly doesn't need any more of that.

I can understand that. For me, those little qualifying asides make the writing feel much more active to me, like I'm experiencing something akin to stream of thought but much more structured. But I can see how you feel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

The comments are actually pretty cordial and not at all hyperbolic. When I read through them this morning, there were only a handful of pro-Prometheus folks but even the rest were commenting more on Hulk's ideas and critiques than anything else.

 

He does seem to break his own rule about sticking only with the text of the film itself a few times, but it's pretty great read, regardless. Do wish he'd drop the ALL CAPS schtick, though.

Well, I'm not surprised that the comments are well-mannered; it's rare that commentary on Bad really gets that out-of-hand, especially on Hulk's articles (unless he's talking about Girls). I'd just expect there to be a lot more venom if Hulk didn't have a penchant for qualification, as he does. I think Hulk's writing invites better discussion as a rule, though I've read the commentary over on his own site and in some cases (like the Arkham Asylum piece), it gets nutty.

The caps were, for me, a problem for a long time. Eventually I just got used to it because I knew suffering through it would mean absorbing some really great insight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prankster 

I think Lindelof is an inherently good writer who's been tainted badly by quick success.

I suspect that this is much more accurate than any of us realizes. When you rocket to high levels of prominence as fast as Lindelof did, after all, what's the point of trying to improve? Not that I actually believe he shouldn't try to improve, but there's a tangible dearth of incentive for him to do so when he's already received high laurels for his work on Lost despite some of it being pretty awful.

Good analysis of Lindleof here.  The true testament of a writer should always be recognizing your weaknesses and limitations and working on those in each project. That's how you hone your craft. 

Another thing with Lindelof: his work is always directly tied to other writers / creators / etc.  On Lost, he was pretty much running the show in tandem with Carlton Cuse, with JJ Abrams even having some pull early on.  Cowboys & Aliens was a screenplay by committee, while Prometheus had the Spaihts original draft and Sir Ridley lording over the project.  Now he's jumping into World War Z to do some re-writes.  He definitely leaves his fingerprints on everything he touches but, for better or for worse, I'd really like to see him take 100% ownership of something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

The problem I have with the Hulk gimmick is that he forgets to stick with it.  He'll compose an entire paragraph of completely normal phrasing, then throw in a "HULK THINK" as if he just remembered he's supposed to be doing it that way.  Either commit to it -- which would also seem to preclude his verbosity -- or admit it's served its purpose of getting you in the door and stand on the strength of your material.

I feel the same about it. FCH seems like a nice enough fellow and appears to understand films but his failure to make his own gimmick work somewhat undermines idea that he himself is talented and worth paying attention to. And that in turn undermines the shout-for-attention nature of his gimmick. It's cute for a paragraph or two, but then it dies on the page and I quit trying to read it.

Sam Strange is far better at pulling this sort of thing off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

The problem I have with the Hulk gimmick is that he forgets to stick with it.  He'll compose an entire paragraph of completely normal phrasing, then throw in a "HULK THINK" as if he just remembered he's supposed to be doing it that way.  Either commit to it -- which would also seem to preclude his verbosity -- or admit it's served its purpose of getting you in the door and stand on the strength of your material.

That's probably the lamest thing about it. I'm okay with the all caps, and to a certain extent even the deliberately extreme length. It's a gimmick, but it's one with some substance at the heart of it. It's memorable and attention grabbing, and works like a personal signature - like you say, it 'gets you in the door'. The Hulk persona is another gimmick, but a half arsed and pointless one that's long outlived its usefulness at this point.

I also feel like if you're going to go to all the trouble of developing a unique voice and style (which I don't think anyone would deny he has), why attach it to someone else's famous (and copyrighted, I imagine) creation? But hey it's his business in the end I guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul C 

 

That's probably the lamest thing about it. I'm okay with the all caps, and to a certain extent even the deliberately extreme length. It's a gimmick, but it's one with some substance at the heart of it. It's memorable and attention grabbing, and works like a personal signature - like you say, it 'gets you in the door'. The Hulk persona is another gimmick, but a half arsed and pointless one that's long outlived its usefulness at this point.

 

I also feel like if you're going to go to all the trouble of developing a unique voice and style (which I don't think anyone would deny he has), why attach it to someone else's famous (and copyrighted, I imagine) creation? But hey it's his business in the end I guess.

It both is and isn't gimmick. The Hulk-speak is a very deliberate distancing technique, the qualifications are as well I guess. They're designed to get through your defenses and have worked pretty well for him so in that way, there is some substance. On the other hand, like any bona fide gimmick, god can you get tired of it.

Is Film Critic Hulk's real word persona known? because if it isnt, i'm going to go on a limb and say its what Devin transforms into when he isnt angry/douchey (before anyone rips me a new one, i respect and admire Devin's work as a critic and writer...his online persona, not so much).

It would made sense.

Also, anyone checked this at i09?

i havent read anything by the dude (David J. Williams, author of The Mirrored Heavens, The Burning Sky and the Machinery of Light,) but i rather liked his words here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evi 

They're designed to get through your defenses

But if people aren't reading the columns because of it, it's clearly not getting through their defenses.  It's merely creating an obstacle.

Regardless of the conceit, his pieces are incredibly insightful. His Mad Men stuff in particular.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryoken 

Is Film Critic Hulk's real word persona known? because if it isnt, i'm going to go on a limb and say its what Devin transforms into when he isnt angry/douchey (before anyone rips me a new one, i respect and admire Devin's work as a critic and writer...his online persona, not so much).

Nah, I've heard him on podcasts. Definitely not Devin.

All these "theory" posts are popping up online exploring a film that thinks it's deep and isn't. I love that everyone thinks they've taken some one of a kind insightful look at the film, when, it's just obvious with a bit of logic linking. It's fucking obvious.

The problem with the film isn't it's themes, it's meaning, it's "secrets" or what have you, it's the astonishingly weak character work and crappy dialogue. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryoken 

Is Film Critic Hulk's real word persona known? because if it isnt, i'm going to go on a limb and say its what Devin transforms into when he isnt angry/douchey (before anyone rips me a new one, i respect and admire Devin's work as a critic and writer...his online persona, not so much).

It would made sense.

Also, anyone checked this at i09?

i havent read anything by the dude (David J. Williams, author of The Mirrored Heavens, The Burning Sky and the Machinery of Light,) but i rather liked his words here.

Met Hulk at SXSW this year.  Nice as hell.  Did not smash.  Fits the FCH persona well, is a dude who would rather look at the bright side of life, whistle whistle.  I can appreciate him not wanting to shit on the creators of movies, tv, etc.  I don't necessarily think it's so they don't read his articles and get pissed, I just think he would genuinely rather find the positive shining in the negative.  The Internet would be a better place if more people did this.

That being said, man, FUCK Prometheus!  But seriously, mega disappointment and I have nothing else to add to what has been bandied back and forth here.  The more I think about it, the more I dislike it.  But, I would rather a flawed (flawedflawedflawed) interesting movie than a boring slog, and I was interested the whole time, if only to see what would fuck up next.

No WAY is 'Critic Hulk' 'Devin'...just NO WAY.

Saw this on Saturday in glorious IMAX 3D. I haven't read the whole thread yet, so bear with me if I repeat someone else's better stated observations. So, a few thoughts:

1) The verdict: I liked it. It's gorgeous and tense in the right parts, but there are some massive story and thematic problems, many of which stem from the fact that the movie has no ending. I'll get into what I think the more profound thematic problems are in a sec, but I think another major story flaw is the lack of rules for the body horror stuff. Alien had rules. The Fly had rules. The Thing had rules. This had magic black goop.

2) First thought when I walked out? "Ridley Scott needs to make a Metabarons movie." The style, particularly the sets, felt more like Juan Gimenez than Giger, and that gets a thumbs up from me.

3) The main problem with the themes of the movie (I might start a blog just to expand on these ideas): Lindelof really needed to read "Beyond Good & Evil" and take it to heart. I'm thinking mainly of Nietzche's famous assertion that "God is dead," which he saw as a profound truth that could either lead to destruction, or else a life giving truth, depending on who realized it. There's so much potential in many aspects of this movie. For one, there's the title, and the film's first scene. Sure, the ship is called Prometheus, but we also have the image of an almost literal Prometheus. From what I remember, that first Engineer that we see is dressed in robes, to call forth the image of a priest. This is man's creator, and his fate is an expression of the Nietzchean formula. God is dead. Then there's David, who acts according to his commands. There's an arc hinted at, though, with his secret hoping for Weyland's death so that he might be free. Who is Weyland if not his God?

But the movie is too weak kneed to really follow through on any of this promise. Judging from Lost, I get the sense that Lindelof is a guy that seriously doubts his own spirituality, but doesn't have the balls to let it go. Which is why this movie winds up with pablum about "You still believe?" "It's what I choose to believe!" Way to lose your balls, Prometheus. If there's ever a sequel to this, I guarantee you that Shaw will find a reason to keep believing in God, and David will come to some stupid spiritual awakening. Bullshit. I say go all in, embracing the atheistic places that this story points to might wind up being more uplifting (much like Ripley finding ways to survive for her own sake) and smarter that what Scott and Lindelof want to say.

I'll stop there, but I could go on, and likely present a better argument for why this needed to be an atheist manifesto for the story to make any sense or have any power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graham 

No WAY is 'Critic Hulk' 'Devin'...just NO WAY.

Yea, he comes across as a pretty nice guy.... so that more or less rules Devin out.

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.S. Randlett 

2) First thought when I walked out? "Ridley Scott needs to make a Metabarons movie." The style, particularly the sets, felt more like Juan Gimenez than Giger, and that gets a thumbs up from me.

 

"The Metabarons Saga: A Scott and Jodo joint".

TICKET SOLD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeanCE 

 

The problem with the film isn't it's themes, it's meaning, it's "secrets" or what have you, it's the astonishingly weak character work and crappy dialogue. 

It's why I could never genuinely give this movie a pass as something I would own on DVD and ever watch without muting.

What's the point of great ideas if this is what they're in service to? An idea is only as good as it's relevance. Lindelof and Scott want to ask tough, galactic questions about the existence of man, and our origins. But the proxies they use to explore these ideas are not people. They're sketches, they're cliches and/or they're just quirks and bad decisions made to embody actual people.

It's weird that you'd make a film about the existential questions of mankind, and then only use people that are stupid, vain, or inconsistently written. In fact, it's downright misanthropic, as if proper, human characters could not be used. These guys can only ask big questions about humanity by not using humans with interesting, compelling, real human characteristics. At all.

"You can't fake the funk on a nasty dunk." - Darryl Dawkins.

To the best of my knowledge, Shaw never tells any one, "Hey, funny thing, I just had that med pod surgically remove a giant squid fetus from my uterus." I would be telling everyone that. I mean, if I had a uterus.

No, the ONLY weakness in this film...

"NO CORNBREAD..."

Quote:

Originally Posted by D.S. Randlett 

I'll stop there, but I could go on, and likely present a better argument for why this needed to be an atheist manifesto for the story to make any sense or have any power.

There's a very short list of people whose detailed take on this film I'd love to read, and you're on it, no matter how much I'd likely disagree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryoken 

 

"The Metabarons Saga: A Scott and Jodo joint".

TICKET SOLD.

Even better? "A Ridley Scott and Alexandro Jodorowsky production of a Paul Verhoeven film..."

These sets and this DP + Verhoeven on Metabarons would... damn.

EDIT: I really want to work something out, Jeb. Looking at wordpress right now...

But if there's a line that I could have added, it would be something like this- Shaw: "There's nothing out here. No gods. Only death. But I will live."

Just thought i would put this here

The nerd got the better of me

That was kind of upsetting.