CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › PROMETHEUS post-release discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PROMETHEUS post-release discussion - Page 12

post #551 of 1957

You guys are making me hate this movie more (I was kind of OK with it, my expectations were super low).

post #552 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica View Post

You guys are making me hate this movie more (I was kind of OK with it, my expectations were super low).

 

 

Nerd Rage is a hell of a thing, Cap.

post #553 of 1957
I wonder what the reaction would have been if this had come out before Aliens, and there had been no defined Alien universe, and this wasn't Scott's return to the genre after a 30 year delay.
post #554 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

A little nitpick.  

 

I don't get why the DNA had to be a COMPLETE match.  I mean, wouldn't it be just as amazing if it was a 99% match?  These guys are huge jock douches that seem to all look the same.

 

But maybe it's just because I'm not a BIOLLAJISS.

 

There's only about a 2% difference between humans, chimpanzees and gorillas. It doesn't take much genome variation to produce something quite different. Pigs might be as high as a 99% match depending on who you ask, I think it's one of the reasons they're being looked at as potential xenograft donors for transplants after some tinkering. 

 

I think what's actually being done in the movie is a species match, thanks to the CSI effect, it gives off an impression that it's more like a specific match to a particular individual. Which of course isn't and couldn't be the case.

 

(... could it?)

post #555 of 1957

Reaction wouldn't be as negative, but it would still be a gorgeous movie that's sloppy as shit.

 

(response to Harford)

 

As for the DNA... I was aware of the small (but WIDE) difference between humans, chimps, and gorillas.  But that just makes me go, "Why not 99.8%?"  It's just a thought that came to mind during that scene.  I guess 100% is clearer...  Hahahah

post #556 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Reaction wouldn't be as negative, but it would still be a gorgeous movie that's sloppy as shit.

 

(response to Harford)

 

As for the DNA... I was aware of the small (but WIDE) difference between humans, chimps, and gorillas.  But that just makes me go, "Why not 99.8%?"  It's just a thought that came to mind during that scene.  I guess 100% is clearer...  Hahahah

 

Well, if it's not perfect, it's just not good enough. You know what sticklers for detail these auteurs are.

post #557 of 1957

When Vickers said ".... father" you could see helplessness in her eyes. Not Vicker's helplessness, Theron's, due to having to say that line.


She'd probably been more comfortable getting nude instead.

post #558 of 1957

I've just watched this again, and it's almost like watching a different film...It's goddamn brilliant! (Green aside, but his performance didn't SEEM to matter THAT much...)...It's like I needed my first viewing as some sort of pallette-cleanser of all the hype and build-up.

 

The only other time I've remembered feeling like this was with 'Blade Runner', make of THAT what you will!

post #559 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

Reaction wouldn't be as negative, but it would still be a gorgeous movie that's sloppy as shit.

 

(response to Harford)

 

As for the DNA... I was aware of the small (but WIDE) difference between humans, chimps, and gorillas.  But that just makes me go, "Why not 99.8%?"  It's just a thought that came to mind during that scene.  I guess 100% is clearer...  Hahahah

As a biologist that stupid 100% match across 3.5 billion years of history bugged me. Remember the Engineer jumped into a primordial soup in early Earth -vulture article posted today seeds some doubt it's really Earth-

post #560 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by cognizant View Post

 

Did I imagine this or did he tell the other two to raise their arms before they crashed into the ship?  Is there a shot of all three guys with their hands in the air like at a rock concert?  Tell me you saw it too!

 

I took it as a "roller coaster ride" reaction.

post #561 of 1957

Idris Elba taking his two kids to the amusement park!

 

"Alright, kids!  HANDJOBS!!!"

"HANDJOOOOOOOBS!!!!"

 

The way those two guys were taking bets, they might as well have been played by kids.

"See?  I told you they wouldn't make it back!"

"Nu-UHHHH!!!!"

 

 

EDIT:  I do want to repeat that I actually really enjoyed this movie for the most part.  Hahahaha

post #562 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post

It's goddamn brilliant!

 

I know reviews were mixed for Blade Runner and Alien but at least at the time of release those films had unquestionably good performances.  I just don't see myself seeing Prometheus again and going "we were wrong, we were so wrong!"

post #563 of 1957

And kudos to Benedict Wong for not FUCKING UP the mission like he did in SUNSHINE.  He gets to go out in this movie like Major Kong.

post #564 of 1957

I have tickets to a free show so I'm going to see it again. It's not a stupid film -- it's a confused one. I think beyond just nitpicking there's a lot to discuss here, even though the film fails in effectively presenting those discussions. "Noble failure" gets thrown around a lot, but I think it applies here.

post #565 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Myers View Post

When Vickers said ".... father" you could see helplessness in her eyes. Not Vicker's helplessness, Theron's, due to having to say that line.


She'd probably been more comfortable getting nude instead.

 

It's a bit of delivery that would feel right at home in some fantasy like Lord of the Rings.  But in this movie, it just stuck out in the blurst way.

 

Funny too, because I made a short film a long time ago that had very similar delivery, except with... "... brother."  I was NEVER happy with that.

post #566 of 1957

(In response to the person who originallyposted this)

 

I actually enjoyed this trailer more than the film. It captures the atmosphere I'd hoped would underscore the movie. I'm still feeling waves of regret that Prometheus failed to deliver that kind of emotional response in me, for many of the intelligent reasons that other people seem to be succinctly putting in this forum. 

post #567 of 1957

Is there a better way to frame a character as a complete idiot than having him try to pet the baby alien?

post #568 of 1957

My real issue with PROMETHEUS, aside from the narrative gaps that may or may not have been put there on-purpose, is the failure of narrative character. ALIEN and ALIENS work not just because of the action and suspense and effects, but because we know our characters from the very first viewing. Maybe it's the writing, maybe it's that untangible thing that a fine actor can bring to a role, inventing their own backstories, maybe it's all in the direction and additional thought that goes on behind the scenes or a combination of all three.  But the long and the short of PROMETHEUS is this...

 

We just don't care about the characters.  Except for David, Shaw and Janek.

 

When Mohawk Man, Idiot Botanist and Scottish Woman die, did you care?  I'd bet you didn't.  They were just comic relief, narrative fodder, red shirts, what have you.  Is it because they were poorly written in such uncaring strokes that their deaths never matter? (I think so.)  Or is it because the casting people didn't get the correct people for the roles?  Or the way they were directed?  Whatever the cause, we just don't have any interest in them.  In ALIEN, we like and understand every crew member.  In ALIENS, we feel as if we get to know Hicks, Hudson, Apone and the rest.  Is the character work in those films that better written?  (I think so.)  An actor can only do what they can with the material they're given.  I feel as if I could pick out every actor and character name with a certain degree of correctness from ALIEN and ALIENS.  The PROMETHEUS crew, not so much.  And I don't think it's just because the previous films have been around for so long and I've watched them so often. I think it's because they were such good films that I've watched them so often and gotten to invest more about the characters.  Repeated viewings can help you notice things about performance.  But first a film has to engage you enough to want to give it repeated viewings.   The character types in PROMETHEUS don't inspire the need for revisitation, at least not from me.  Vickers (the "Company Stooge") is no Carter Burke.   Mohawk Man (the "Coward")  is no Hudson.  Scottish Lady is no Lambert and Botanist Guy is no Kane, Brett or Parker.  More to the point, they sit right alongside the other non-characters of ALIEN VERSUS PREDATOR and ALIENS VERSUS PREDATOR: REQUIEM as little more than creature fodder and soon-to-be-victims.

 

The exceptions, as mentioned before, are David, Shaw and Janek.  We come close with Holloway, until he inexplicably becomes a drunken robo-hater for no other reason than to give David an unsympathetic someone to victimize.  He should have infected Vickers, bringing the implied brother/sister hate relationship some real impact.  

 

Shaw's the heart, Janek is the common sense and the David is the intellectual traitor in their midst -- the "Doctor Smith."  They are the only characters in the film that feel human.  And why does the automaton David feel more "human" (or at least interesting) to me than 3/4ths of the crew?   Writing, performance or direction?  Probably a combo of all three.  They are the characters that the filmmakers care the most about, so we care about them, too.  ALIEN and ALIENS would seem to care for all the characters equally.  Ensemble casts can be tricky from a creative point of view, sure, but not impossible, as Joss Whedon's THE CABIN IN THE WOODS and THE AVENGERS most recently showed.  And for all the love/hate that his ALIEN: RESURRECTION gets, at least it gave us Wincott, Perlman, Ryder and Pinon...  A group of proto-FIREFLY mercenaries that are somewhat memorable, though less so than ALIEN and ALIENS.

 

All the special effects and multi-million dollar productions in town have no meaning if we don't care about the characters they're supporting.


Edited by Engineer - 6/9/12 at 12:15pm
post #569 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica View Post

And sorry, the whole David learning the Engineers language is just a bit too much. David just knows how things work in this alien facility, and how to remove their helmets without any indication of how he can figure such things out.

 

While all of this was happening I was getting ready for the big reveal where someone in the Weyland organisation had been in contact with or had some prior knowledge of the Engineers, but no, it was just more lazy storytelling.

 

One of my big movie pet hates is characters being able to operate unfamiliar gizmos/ pilot unfamiliar vehicles/ fire unfamiliar weapons like a pro on the first time of trying, and Prometheus was full of stuff like that. At least in Aliens (yes I'm comparing it to Aliens ...tough!) a couple of minutes were spent showing Ripley getting a bit of weapon training from Hicks and that she could drive a powerlifter. Little things like this can make a world of difference when it comes to believing in the movie.

 

Everything just works out so perfectly in Prometheus. Ignoring that fact David can get the Engineer security footage working right away, isn't it just too perfect that it plays the exact few seconds needed to explain the plot?  Stuff like that just stinks of laziness.

post #570 of 1957
Originally Posted by Evi View Post
Is there a better way to frame a character as a complete idiot than having him try to pet the baby alien?

 

Perfect example.  This is a trillion-dollar mission paid for by a globally-recognized economic giant attempting to investigate and establish first contact with extra terrestrial life on a world many many light years across the galaxy.  On a mission this important there should be no complete idiots on board.  Everyone hired should be the best in their fields, be it intellectual science or blue-collar ship mechanics, and have whatever comic relief is necessary come naturally and freely from character reactions and intelligent dialogue.

 

It sounds like I have a hate-on for the movie, I know.  It's just that the stuff that works in Prometheus makes all the stuff that doesn't just that much more noticeable.  


Edited by Engineer - 6/9/12 at 12:58pm
post #571 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineer View Post

On a mission this important there should be no complete idiots on board.  Everyone hired should be the best in their fields, be it intellectual science or blue-collar ship mechanics, and have whatever comic relief is necessary come naturally and freely from character reactions and intelligent dialogue.

 

I was surprised they didn't include an expert on religious studies of some type, specially if they had anticipated these could potentially be our "creators" and somehow their existence was revealed via religious imagery (the invitation).

 

By the way, why were these guys named the "Engineers"? I'm not sure how they leap to the conclusion that they engineer life, the evidence they have is that there was alien contact in our distant past, not anything about being "engineered" by these beings.

post #572 of 1957

I think Cesarean is a more correct word than "abortion" for the scene in this movie. She's trying to communicate with a computer, remember. The most common forms of abortion are miscarriage induced via medication, or dialating the cervix and removing the fetus that way. Would you want a giant alien squid baby pulled directly out of your vagina?
 

post #573 of 1957

I have a friend who is a concept artist.  He was VERY disappointed when all that came out of Shaw was... a squid.

 

"Really?  That was the best design they could come up with?  A FUCKING SQUID???"

post #574 of 1957

Me and Scott are now officially done.

 

Let's get the positives out of the way first. It is beautiful to look at. It is beautifully designed. Fassbender is damn great. It is not a bad movie.

 

Other than that? It is not a bad movie but an infuriatingly mediocre one. You could have told me Paul WS Andersson directed it and I'd believe you. 

 

It is cold. I never gave even the smallest of fucks about any of the characters in this. Everyone is reduced to a single character trait. Rapace has faith. Elba is Han. Theron is a bitch. Everyone else is a douche or a prop. Fassbender is a robot. For a movie supposedly dealing with one of the most profound philosophical questions it barealy spends any time talking about it, other than characters issuing pronouncments here and there.

 

It lacks any kind of tension. Scott is done as a director. He can make nice images but compare the crew of Prometheus exploring the ship and the crew of the Nostromo. The action climax is laughable. Rapace and Theron running in straight line away from the tumbling spaceship instead of three feet to the side as Raapce finally, brilliantly deduced, felt like a scene out of a parody movie.

 

It lacks any kind of sense. This has been demonstrated over and over and over in this thread and I'm not going to repeat everyone's objections.

 

It feels like a six hour movie cut down to two. There are character interactions that start and are never seen again. There is a whole plot about Shaw and David that feels ripped away from the movie making both the "abortion" scene and the final lose any kind of weight. Thinking about this movie depresses me. I feel sad about Scott.

post #575 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Reese View Post

I think Cesarean is a more correct word than "abortion" for the scene in this movie. She's trying to communicate with a computer, remember. The most common forms of abortion are miscarriage induced via medication, or dialating the cervix and removing the fetus that way. Would you want a giant alien squid baby pulled directly out of your vagina?
 

yeah, it has to be a caesar just because of the way it's done.


What I find interesting is comparing the trailers/ stills with what we got.


So early doors we got David taking a green thing out of the ampoule, then in the movie it's black.  In the early trailers and stills we see Holloway reaching towards a bowl on the "altar" that looks like the one that the engineer at the start drinks from.  In the movie it's a green blob, or jewel or whatever.

 

Tying that all together I theorised that originally the "mutagen" goo (the weapon, if you will) was green and the life giving one was black.  Thus David finds a load of green goo on the walls (with what looks like nanotech in them) since it's the "weapon" that's escaped, and for some reason what is in the "head" room is the "life" giving stuff (hence giant human head).  

 

But then someone must have said "hold on, so why is the black stuff now turning things nasty, when it should be the green one doing that? and why is the "good bowl" on the altar in this room that is now a room of death?" and "why were the engineers running TOWARDS a room full of death if they were scared of it?".  "Fuck it, I know originally this room was going to be something else, but now everything in this room is a weapon, so we'll turn it all black, that'll make sense"

 

It just reeks of things being done on the fly

post #576 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackyShimSham View Post

I can't believe Fox gave Ridley Scott a massive pile of money, those actors, and free reign to create whatever film he wanted, and THAT'S what we got.

 

Can anyone explain to me what this movie was trying to tell us about religion? Or faith? Or creation? Or life? Or sex / gender / pregnancy? Or humanity? Or intelligence? Or science, or exploration, or the search for knowledge? Or space, or the implications of alien life, or death? No. Because it didn't say a goddamn thing about any of that stuff.

 

I'm not usually a militant asshole about whether a movie is good or not, but this one actively pisses me off.

 

Yeah. It's basically a really expensive remake of STAR TREK V. With a dash of ALIEN for flavor. 

post #577 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

I have a friend who is a concept artist.  He was VERY disappointed when all that came out of Shaw was... a squid.

"Really?  That was the best design they could come up with?  A FUCKING SQUID???"

I loved the scene but I have to agree they could have pulled something far more disturbing out of her stomach. The scene is so brilliant because David refuses to show her what the fetus looks like, and we don't really know what it is till it's removed. The pale squid was definitely less shocking than Cronenberg's maggot baby, at least. I think the tentacles should have been more numerous and spindly. Oh, or a spider like creature!
post #578 of 1957

Yeah, the film does seem to be pulling punches, design-wise.  But imagine watching that scene in a cinema while pregnant, holy crap, awkward!

post #579 of 1957

I think it IS a bad movie, frankly. Being gorgeously immersive can only take you so far when you have a script THAT bad. The dialogue is terrible AND the characters are written not just idiotically but behaving in outright inhuman ways--a Lindelof trademark, and I'm officially done making excuses for that guy. This script was like all the worst elements of Lost times ten. It's not just that the characters act inconsistently ("AAAAAH a stone head! Oh look, an alien snake that's snapping at me, I'll pet it!") or that they shrug their shoulders and stare blankly at the wonders of the Universe (again, Lost springs to mind), it's that the plot that their moronic behaviour is servicing doesn't seem to be worth it at all. There have to be a dozen ways they could have written Millburn and Fifeld that were less stupid. And more crucially, there was absolutely no coherent, unifying idea behind the SF stuff. It was just "Hey, we've got an idea for a setpiece, let's chuck it in there!" regardless of whether it made sense as a thing an alien civilization would do, or in concert with the other organisms, or whatever. They want a Contortionist Zombie for one scene, so we get a Contortionist Zombie with no explanation. The life cycle in ALIEN was perfectly well realized, this was just "alien goo that does whatever the fuck we want it to do in this scene." The alien Engineer just woke up from a 2000+ year sleep and decided to turn into Jason Voorhees and kill the alien beings who woke him up and are clearly friendly, before getting any sense whatsoever of what's going on around him (Even if he was always going to be hostile, what was his plan if his ship was fucked? Which hardly seems unlikely after 2000 years? Wouldn't it have made more sense to befriend the humans temporarily?)

 

Gah, whatever. It's been covered ad nauseum in this thread already, but this is just an insultingly bad script. It's like an Albert Pyun knockoff of ALIEN from the mid 80s, rendered with a huge budget and all the latest technology. We have a right to expect better from Ridley Scott of all people.

post #580 of 1957

The squid-thing should have been something at least *slightly* more humanoid, like a human fetus that branched off into an entirely different kind of morphology a quarter into its development, like it came out Lovecraft's Big Black Book of Medical Oddities . Now that would have been disturbing.

post #581 of 1957

I place a lot of the blame on Lindelof's feet as well. I mean, it's got all his pet themes (science versus faith, unsatisfying creation myths, cruel and absent gods, far too many characters that don't have anything to do). But I'm still surprised this thing got off the ground with the script as it is. The dialogue is worse than shit from LOST, and the characters are virtually non-existent. So much of the story is communicated lazily; the ghost-aliens running around to let us know what happened to them? David reading Shaw's dreams? Finally, there's absolutely no growth for any of the characters (except for the ones that grow into aliens, or have aliens grow inside them). Shaw says they were all wrong, but at the end of the movie she's still stubbornly insisting on getting answers. When you consider the type of day she's had (finds alien life, finds that alien life and humans are linked, boyfriend turns into swamp thing, then the human torch, finds out she's three months pregnant despite being barren, finds out it's alien life, has an emergency abortion surgery, gets her stomach stapled, climbs out, suits up, goes back to the cause of all the trouble inexplicably, jumps around on top of an ascending space ship, escapes from said crashing ship, fights two different kinds of aliens --- AND THEN decides to just KEEP ON GOING) it's downright ludicrous that any human being would ever make the decision she makes at the end. 

 

Do you think this is Lindelof's pissed off reaction to LOST fans demanding answers? Because he paints these characters as gigantic, stupid douche-bags, particularly for supposedly brilliant space-scientists. 

post #582 of 1957

Yeah, the script (at least as it is presented in the film) is one of the dumbest I can recall for all the reasons already pointed out ( I still can't believe no-one mentions Shaw's caesarian) and, presumably, totally to service Scott's vision.

 

As for why the engineers send us the invitation only to want us wiped out, it was cut from the script explicitly because it was too on the nose, but they decided to wipe us out after we crucified Jesus 2000 years ago, presumably an Engineer.

post #583 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasperjones View Post

As for why the engineers send us the invitation only to want us wiped out, it was cut from the script explicitly because it was too on the nose, but they decided to wipe us out after we crucified Jesus 2000 years ago, presumably an Engineer.

 

Crucifier #1:   What the hell are we gonna do about that eight-foot-tall bald guy with the crazy eyes?  He just ripped like a dozen people in half!  How do we crucify that?!

Crucifier #2:   Forget it.  Let's say it was the carpenter, instead.

 

This summer: Ridley Scott's BLASPHEMETHEUS!

post #584 of 1957

At this stage, I wouldn't put anything past Scott.

post #585 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasperjones View Post

As for why the engineers send us the invitation only to want us wiped out, it was cut from the script explicitly because it was too on the nose, but they decided to wipe us out after we crucified Jesus 2000 years ago, presumably an Engineer.

 

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

post #586 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker View Post

 

Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

 

Is this for real?  Did Lindelof seriously have that in one of his drafts or is this a parody of the religious elements in the script?

post #587 of 1957

Please be real. I want to believe this is real.

post #588 of 1957

I hope it's real too, but either way, it's funny!

post #589 of 1957

Was the shot of Shaw putting her hands up to pray after the birth scene cut from the movie?  I really liked that shot in the trailers, but don't remember seeing it in the movie.

post #590 of 1957

Ridley Scott comes out and admits the Jesus thing in this interview:

 

Fandango: You throw religion and spirituality into the equation for Prometheus, though, and it almost acts as a hand grenade. We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?
 
RS: We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, “Lets’ send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it. Guess what? They crucified him.
post #591 of 1957

Oh. My. Engineer.

 

It's twue, it's twue!

post #592 of 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agentsands77 View Post

Ridley Scott comes out and admits the Jesus thing in this interview:

 

Fandango: You throw religion and spirituality into the equation for Prometheus, though, and it almost acts as a hand grenade. We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?
 
RS: We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, “Lets’ send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it. Guess what? They crucified him.

 

Wow.  That's some Dan Brown-level shit.

 

Somebody needs to make a "Jesus Was an Engineer" t-shirt.  I'd buy it.

post #593 of 1957

Oh FFS.


Really.  For. Fucks. Sake.


When I heard the "2000 years ago" thing I tied it into Christianity, but on a different slant, that it was the start of a dangerous organised religion (I even thought, "so you;re discounting all the other ones previous to it?").  The idea that it was because an Engineer was Christ is...  fuck's sake.

 

thanks for this though!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Engineer View Post

 

Crucifier #1:   What the hell are we gonna do about that eight-foot-tall bald guy with the crazy eyes?  He just ripped like a dozen people in half!  How do we crucify that?!

Crucifier #2:   Forget it.  Let's say it was the carpenter, instead.

post #594 of 1957

Leaving the ridiculous Jesus business aside for the moment (how the hell did he even GET there?). According to this theory, the Engineers were just fucking around making alien vase-goop for more than 2000 years in preparation to kill us? And their plan to destroy us is to create MORE life that's even MORE destructive? And (surprise, surprise) it backfired? What a bunch of fuck-heads!

 

I hope there is a sequel so Shaw can spend her entire life searching for answers and finally getting one. "We want to kill you all because you killed this one guy once a long time ago." 

post #595 of 1957

You know, I just spent a lot of time writting a pretty big post about this movie, but fuck it. It doesn't deserve it.

 

Lindeloff should be sent to script writing jail. And Scott should be forced to retire. 

post #596 of 1957

He seems nice enough from what I've seen of him, and he's certainly been pretty (if mockingly) self-depreciating over comments about his scripts, but Lindelof really seems like one of those writers who is better at tossing ideas around than developing them into a story with characters, and even then most of those ideas only stick a few times.

post #597 of 1957

Know why the engineer holograms were running?

 

They spied Shaw, thought she was Lisbeth Salander, and were scared shitless.

post #598 of 1957

If the Engineers sent down space Jesus to teach us all to be kind and compassionate and so on, and we crucified him, thereby earning the ire of the Engineers (thereby invalidating the premise of Christianity, by the way), that doesn't really explain why a group of humans, having achieved spaceflight and a level of sophistication that didn't exist 2000 years ago, coming to meet their creators with open arms and the best of intentions, and approaching their creator respectfully and in friendship and even having bothered to learn their language, are met with RAAAAARGH I'LL KILL YOU BLAAAAARGH.
 

post #599 of 1957

By the way, I really believe that this movie is simply mediocre and boring with only the script being a major offender. If I'm reacting a bit harshly it's because of the circumstances this movie was made under. Ridley Scott had a superb cast, apparently a blank check from FOX and his best (by miles and miles) movie to riff on. A mediocre movie coming out of this is fucking infuriating.

post #600 of 1957

The only thing I can think of is that Engineer Jesus (who I guess would have been some other genetically engineered organism made to look more human, or a crossbreed, or something) was supposed to do something more bureaucratic, and he went rogue and started teaching peace and forgiveness before being crucified. Though that's me doing more work than the filmmakers did, and still coming up with a ton of plot holes.

 

As for that theory about how WE actually caused this bio-disaster by infecting the black goo with our malevolent thoughts, FUCK RIGHT THE FUCK OFF.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › PROMETHEUS post-release discussion