PROMETHEUS post-release discussion - Page 7

"They created us and left clues for how to find them, with the intention of wiping us out if we ever did manage to find them.  They were happy with their creations so long as we remained primitive and posed no threat.  However, they knew there might be a time when we were advanced enough to pose a threat.  That's when Plan B --releasing some variation of the xenos-- would come into play.  Somewhere along the way, a whole bunch of them die for whatever reason.  Humans eventually show up, wake a sleeping "sentry" and start demanding answers.  He then tries to put Plan B into effect."

 

I like this reading. But...

 

"It's typical Lindelof. Being obtuse and mysterious just for the sake of it. And then providing no answers."

 

Apparently he's said that the "event" 2000 years ago that pissed off the the engineers and created the "spill" that killed them...is THAT THING that happened 2000 years ago. That's why all the crosses and shit (coz y'know fuck all eastern religions). Standard Jealous Gods stuff from his PoV.

 

http://www.esquire.com/the-side/qa/spitznagel/ridley-scott-prometheus-interview-9423167?src=nl&mag=esq&list=nl_enl_mtv_non_060612_ridley-scott-interview&kw=ist#slide-1

 

Scott covers the religious themes. Gives a bit more room for interesting/less reductive interpretation.

 

 

I liked it but it bears all the hallmarks of something that was felt out on the fly/in production rather than structured. Hence all the characters having strange levels of development that don't quite play out equally to their individual importance.

 

 

"Disappearing Snakes"

 

I think the insta-rot  Mega-Hugger covers that. The "weapon" lives to fuck, then dies when it succeeds - it's progeny is then born...to fuck.

I'm just going to leave this here, walk away and people can draw their own conclusions.

 

 

Oh and this:

 

 

I enjoyed the movie on a very B-Movie level, but I was disappointed by the lack of screen time any of the monsters had.

 

However this:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Is infinitely better than this:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Which just makes me think of this:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Oh and a bunch of huge ending spoiler images here, so don't click.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

There's a scene where the only ones who remain -minutes before- behind the dust storm are David Shawn and Holloway...cut to 4 figures riding 2 motorcycles. I might have missed something but those are little details that bug me. They should have keep a tiny crew: Vickers, Shawn, Pilot, a biologist -for some needed exposition-, 2 muscular goons, David and a cooker. That's all you need. For example why do you need anyone else besides Idris Elba at the cockpit in the last scene?

Because it's not 1979, and we can show SO MUCH MORE NOW!!!!

 

Doesn't care for the facehuggers, and approves that fucking cuddles the squid design? 

 

Why do I expect a special edition of Alien, with added crew members, slicker visuals, and a CGI Alien.

Don't Pete...Just DON'T!

 

That way lies madness...and it's rather mountainous...

you know you want to see an expanded Derelict scene, with added Space Jockeys, and the crew finding other alien vagina snakes that they have to fight off!

 

Maybe even a scene of Ripley looking at Shaw's file, and finding out that's her MOTHER!

 

DAMMIT, Pete...don't RUIN MY fan-fiction!!!

Ridley-bashing to a ridiculous degree in here.  Disappointing, guys.  Criticising his latest work is one thing, it's not everyone's cup of tea, I get that.  But discussing him like he's the next modern day George Lucas is another.  Scott is still a talented craftsman, and has at least not resorted to using CGI as a crutch.  Seriously, I'm not getting this hate for the man, his film doesn't even tarnish Alien!  The link between the two films is so tenuous, it's not like the next time you sit down to watch Alien you'll be reminded of anything from Prometheus, save the one scene of the space jockey.  Which is not even the same space jockey from Prometheus.

 

Basically:  chill out!

 

Because Janek is a shit pilot! DUH!

 

Crikey Sean, that's actually pretty depressing. I'm leaning more and more toward the potency of the Alien space jockey being a fluke.

Hope you're not lumping me in with that. I'm just linking to the article, but I do think it shows a change in perspective as I've never read Ridley talk about Alien like that before.

 

I've read other interviews with him lately that show him to be lucid and quite smart, considering he's fucking 74(!), so I hope people won't lose faith based one dude's anecdotes about the guy.

 

 

Tenuous?  Did you see the film?  He couldn't even keep his shit straight. 

Tenuous... LOL.  It features the same creature that was in the Alien, and the creation (maybe, I don't even think he knows) of the Alien. 

 

My issue if how the script thought it was clever.  Going to have it both ways.  Standalone, yet a prequel.  Fails in both regards. 

You're right, he's not a modern day Lucas, he's worse.  George had a clear intention, and went with it.  Sure he failed, but did it in grand fashion.

This is nothing but a wet fart.   It was like Ridley was timid, or afraid to go "all out" with this film, and in the end made a film that has a poor poor story, and only is considered passable in the regards to the visuals.  The visual aspect is nothing groundbreaking either, and as the years go by, the "awe" of this visuals will subside, and the mess of the story will be what it is known for. 

 

I would have rather seen Ridley just make something daring, something unsafe.  Like he did in 1979 when he created Alien.  Sure, it may have been bad, but atleast I could respect the film for trying to be something MORE then a standard sci-fi/horror film.  Alien 3 is this.  It's not a good movie and utterly fails, but I can respect them for doing the unsafe thing, for going "we know you want this, you want us to continue with the Aliens action style, but we are going to bring it back around full circle".  It didn't work, but I respect what they tried to do. 

 

It doesn't help the posture or attitude from the audience at the debriefing is like the one seen in reluctant character #4 in a therapy session. 

More conventional reactions expected would be # go to hell there is no E.T. life! # If I found one of them I will kill it # what if they are hostile? etc

The crew doesn't even blink when they realize they are in a constructed building/spaceship!

 

I'm sorry but what exactly in Prometheus impacts the people, or events that take place on the Nostromo?  Is your reading of Alien forever changed with this film?  This isn't like Phantom Menace ruining the character of Darth Vader in the OT.  Nothing in Prometheus impacts Alien, they're seperate beasts.

 

 

And you lost me there.

 

So, this Weyland isn't the same as Weyland Yutani?

 

Think BIGGER man, outside the box.  It's there.

 

The prequels suck, they do, but Lucas tried stuff.  A fully realized CG character, added plot elements and such.  Do they work, no, not for me.  But he TRIED shit, and the guy who tries new stuff is always better then the guy who plays it safe when it comes to films.  

 

The prequels lead to CG Gollum, you can not deny that. That lead to stuff like King Kong, Avatar, and Planet of the Apes.   So that risky failure, lead to a great success.  Ridley created Alien, that lead to The Thing, success and more success.  What is Prometheus going to bring?  He played it safe, and in the end, you get a run of the mill film, that will be forgotten.  To me, that was the worst thing Ridley could have done with this film.  Is it good, is it bad, nope, it's in the middle.  Is it a Alien film, or isn't it, nope, it's in the middle.  Does it satisfy, or does it dissapoint, nope, it's in the middle.  Milquetoast is the term. 

 

Maybe you are just the type of guy who enjoys eating that same chicken sandwich from Applebees every Wed night. 

Edited by Monster Pete - 6/7/12 at 12:03pm

 

You're fucking kidding me here, right? It's okay for Lucas to expand plot elements and add them into his mythos...yet you're shitting all over Scott for essentially doing the same thing, while qualifying Jar Jar Binks as a "risky" move. Seriously?

 

I don't want this thread to devolve into Lucas v Scott argumentation, because they're objectively not even close to one another at this point in their respective careers. I really don't. But this is bordering on lunacy.

 

Lucas did it in a way that WOULD DIRECTLY EFFECT THE ORIGINAL FILMS.

 

Ridley did it in a way that is like "well, yeah, sort of, but not really, but yeah it's there, but it's really not..."

 

One is risky, one isn't.

I will always respect the risk.

 

And that's what it comes down to, both prequels aren't very good.  Not terrible, but not good.

One guy tried stuff, they other played it safe. 

 

That's my joke, maybe Ridley will go back and redo Alien so it has "strands of Prometheus DNA".

 

The creation of Jar Jar was a risky move from a technical stand point.  Lunacy?  Ya, you are there. 

 

I think you and I have a very different definition of "risk", then, though I'd agree that Lucas took a "risk" only in the sense that he risked incurring the wrath of fanboys by diluting and demystifying the lore established in the original Star Wars films. Beyond that he made three films that, essentially, wrote themselves as every event that unfolds within them ties back to/echoes within the structure of the three other films he made decades prior which elevated him to sci-fi/geek icon status. I don't really see that as being all that risky-- in fact I'd say that's the definition of playing it safe. ("These movies made me successful back in the day. How about I just make three more movies and irrevocably relate all of them together? They practically write themselves!")

 

As far as Jar Jar-- technical standpoints don't exist in a vacuum. How much does taking a risk count when it ends up working poorly and being outdone only a few years later in far superior fashion within a far superior film? Jar Jar Binks may be "first", but nobody will think of him first when they talk about the history and advancement of mo-cap-- they'll think of Gollum. Meanwhile, Binks figures into the title of a book which suggests that he should be killed. Taking a risk is great when it pays off; when it ends up being a respectable failure, that's okay too. But when the risk ends up as z-grade and terrible as the Star Wars prequels, how much value does that risk actually have?

 

Now we're talking about stuff that has little to do with Prometheus, but I'd argue that Scott-- by making a movie that connects to one of the greatest science fiction movies ever made-- is taking a risk in his own fashion. Burdening the weight of expectations is a pretty big risk, I'd say.

 

Also-- you don't think that Scott's taking a technical risk by working in 3D?

I'll always champion the guy who goes "all in".  Lucas bought, paid, and made them the way he wanted.  I will always respect that about the prequels.  I just can't respect what Ridley did.  I just can't.  He played it safe, he wanted it both ways, and to me it's just a wasted oppurtunity.

 

People will watch Alien, and watch Aliens 50 years from now, and Prometheus will be nothing but a trivia question.   

plus completely needless exposition elsewhere.

At the start, when the hologram Weyland says something about David being his "son" it cuts to Theron and she has this look cross her face, and I knew, KNEW that she was his daughter.  So when she later on says "Father", it just clunked.  It's already been shown beautifuly, why hammer it over the head.

And then there's the wilful "here's a mystery" that isn't explained.  It seems like they exposited all the interesting stuff, but left mysterious the dull shit that didn't make sense.

 

And when she says "yes, it IS that important to know why" it was almost a deliberate fuck you to the audience because, yes, you should have some clue, but they don't tell you anything, because frankly their motivations made no sense.  So it just felt like " for those answers, and many more, tune into Prometheii, coming 2014!"

 

You just blew my fucking mind.

Actually agree with Monster "Nerdrage" Pete in regards to both the Star Wars prequels and Prometheus' future Trivial Pursuit legacy. But I'm also pretty sure 'playing it safe' in regards to an Alien movie would generally involve... y'know, having the actual Alien in it for more than three seconds.

 

 

ha, that's great because the final scene really reminded me of this:

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

"Sure he failed, but did it in grand fashion."

 

The prequels weren't risky. They were prepaid by merch tie-in deals in excess of a billion dollars. Lucas only wrote them because the merch contract strictly stated that he must both write and direct all three.

 

The Prequels are NOT a noble failure. You're fucked in the head if you think that.

 

"Lucas bought, paid, and made them the way he wanted.  I will always respect that about the prequels."

 

Yep, you're fucked in the head.

Ebert just gave Prometheus 4 stars:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120606/REVIEWS/120609989/1001

 

I needed a boost from all these mixed reviews.

 

You don't think Ridley made Prometheus the way he wanted?

 

As far as wanting it both ways, I'd argue that Scott only did the whole "it's not an Alien film/strands of Alien DNA" thing as a feint. He can't come right out and say it's an Alien film for expectations' sake, but he also wants to sell it on the fact that they're connected. "Don't go in expecting Alien, but do go in expecting a movie that bears a distant family resemblance to it" just isn't succinct enough for a press release. Or maybe it is and he just lacks eloquence?

Kind of strange how Prometheus ending up being a disappointing turns into a Lucas bashfest.

 

The line is "Perhaps before they create, they must first destroy" = Pissed off with Us and wiping the slate clean.

 

There are plenty of problems with this movie - but let's stick to the actual problems, not the imagined ones.

I don't think there's much distance between movie talk about any movie on the Internet and George Lucas bashing. Kinda inevitable. And rightfully so.

 

 

Ebert's word is hardly irrefutable proof of quality or lack thereof.

 

Everything is subjective. Thanks for the reminder.

Did Angelina Jolie have a secret cameo in the movie that I missed????

 

The "there are other temples dude!" stuff distracted me a little during the running time, they are so focused in that temple with no explanation on why couldn't the Prometheus "lift" and park next to some other temple, look further evidence etc.

 

I actually think its a bit more complex than that; I remember that Scott said once that the moral/message of the movie was pretty much "Dont fuck with God", and I think thats why the Space Jockeys and their actions/history are left in the dark to both characters and audience; to humanity, these beings are not only their creators, but also far above in the evolutionary ladder and in technological progress; i dont think they care or feel threatened by humanity at all (you could say its a lot like Loki's "An ant has no quarrel with a boot" in Avengers), and their way of thinking/mentality could be pretty much incomprehensible to humans.

I think the movie is being far too maligned, and i rather side with Ebert's side, but it sure aint perfect, and the script is to blame; you can feel Scott would had added at least 30-45 minutes of character/plot development to this movie back in the Alien/Blade Runner days, but lets face it, that kind of move is seen as a risk and even a negative quality in Hollywood's actual bussiness model; the film feels like it managed to get away with the R rating and its major, more complex themes, but the running time and complexity were sacrificed in the process.

Not to point fingers, but can you actually see Fox executives being okay with a longer, more complex version of this film? Thats exactly what happened with "Kingdom of Heaven", wich got butchered in order to be made more "casual" to the public...but Lindelof's involvement make me think there is no better cut here, because the whole big on reveals/twists, light on development/answers problems the film has are all over his writing style.

I think the film is solid and a must see, but it pales in comparison to the other, riskier and more daring efforts of Scott; at least he played it safe and the film does nothing or little to tarnish the legacy it tries to link to...but then again, it neither enhances it or shows it ina  new light.

Prometheus is just solid and safe, and for a Ridley Scott film, those are simply flaws; if this was the debut or first big feature by a new/young director, we would all be singing accolades.

Also, Vickers early actions show she wants to keep the discovery and exploration under control and focused, true to her corporate nature; she screams "we are not gonna risk a trillion dollar project because these pointdexters cant take things easy, we have all time in the world"...plus, she ends up having far bigger reasons for that.

Just 'cause it was on the wonderful "How Did This Get Made?" podcast this week...

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970627/REVIEWS/706270305/1023

 

WHERE is YOUR ENGINEER now??

 

So, that was Ebert's equivalent of "Torque"?

Mind blown.

I think the thing that annoys me most is:

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

I honestly wanted LESS links to Alien.  I was happy that this was a story set in the same universe, I really didn't need or want anything that pointed to it.  It was enough to have the ship designs.  And the links to it just seemed forced, or added in as fan wank.

 

But even as a stand alone sci-fi, I just wanted more coherence, rather than rushing onto the next thing.

 

I so want to ,like this thing, it's biug, gorgeous looking, ostensibly "intelligent" sci-fi, and I'm trying to find things to like but it's just not happening.

So disappointment, rather than nerd rage, is the biggest emotion I have about it.

I think it requires mentally distancing it from Alien. Certainly tricky, particularly with that ending.
 

Yes...that WAS me...

I've many posts I DEEPLY regret.

 

That is but one.

Now...THIS is a trailer...

 

 

Saw it last night - not much to add to what's already been said - disappointing to fuck.

To be honest I was bored about 20 minutes in simply because of the atrocious acting and the characters presented. The geologist or biologist with the tattoos and shaved head was abysmal as was the Scottish female doctor. And as for the two nameless bridge crew who have the bet - Jesus Christ. When the captain decides to crash the ship there's no discussion, no fear, no "you're going to what? Like fuck I'm staying, see ya!" They simply accept it and are all in. The line "See you on the other side." should not be uttered by anyone who is about to knowingly die other than Venkman simply because it's so glib and fits his character. I find it hard to believe that the same man who got such great performances from Yaphet Kotto and Harry Dean Stanton trying to discus bonuses and percentages would settle for glib and trite dialogue and performances.

This movie looked fantastic but to be honest video games look fantastic nowadays so there needs to be more than just that. It was sci-fi movie of the week fare with a huge budget thrown at the visuals and a first-draft script.

Atrocious.

Jesus that trailer gives away the entire film. I assume it's fan made.

 

Also, weirdly, and I'm not sure this is a good thing, but Prometheus really made me want to watch the first 30 odd minutes of Alien Vs Predator, because I'm pretty sure they're quite similar.

^and the ending.

 

I do what I can.

 

Indeed. Very Weird.

 

Edit: Okay, so I'm actually watching it now and I was right to a degree. Even in very superficial ways - an opening with a young woman in a mountainous region, characters awkwardly getting to know each other on the trip, A briefing by Weyland in a big hanger as everyone sits on shitty chairs, the super expensive mission to find "something", a massive weird ancient pyramid full of alien nonsense, lots of chariots of the gods winking.

 

And that's in the first 8 minutes.

 

Also, I don't think there's anything explicitly in Prometheus to discount AVP. Weyland is just an industrial company. Pretty sure you can assume that Guy Pearce/Peter Weyland is Charles Weyland's far more talented son who built an empire on stolen Alien tech... I mean, if you hadn't seen the viral videos and online stuff. Which I'm guessing most of the audience won't have.

 

Edit: I will say this for AVP, at least Charles Weyland put some fucking effort into looking for his pyramid rather than stumbling across it. Although, they could have known anyway in Prometheus, you can never tell with that slippery Weyland chap.

Edited by SeanCE - 6/7/12 at 5:31pm

It's been said I'm sure, but I just want to say it again because it fucked with me so much. That scene of Rafe Spall messing with the snake-thing was ridiculous. Was he supposed to be high or something? Jesus.

 

Edit: And the goddamn geologist guy. "I'm going on and on about my title because otherwise the audience will wonder "what that fucking nutcase with tattoos is doing here" and I'm doing it in such a high-strung, defensive and overly intense manner because that IS THE END ALL BE ALL OF MY FUCKING CHARACTER!!!"

 

As others have mentioned, the more I think about it, the worse it gets and I didn't even pay to see it.

Edited by JacknifeJohnny - 6/7/12 at 5:37pm

Don't question him.  He's an Alien BIOLLAJISS!!!

 

 

I've never seen AVP, but a friend has joked that Prometheus was just a remake of AVP.

 

Also, if that trailer is fan-made, where did it get all that footage?