PROMETHEUS post-release discussion - Page 19

I don't remember much of the original Alien (should probably rewatch), but why do they end up in LV-426 in the first place?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

And I'm sorry, Greg, but saying Independence Day is "better written" than this is silly. They're completely different films with completely different goals, audiences, and tones.

Both of their intended audience is the summer blockbuster sci-fi fans, but one has its goals set at merely entertaining spectacle, one is swinging for The Big Questions. One of them, despite being full of stock characters and cliched character beats and a sprinkling of implausibility, actually achieved their goal. One of them aims higher but is much, much dumber, and falls flat on their face. I take the stance that Independence Day--while hardly the most sound script ever, and more than full of its fair share of dumb stuff--at least has characters with arcs and clearly defined motivations that remain consistent throughout the film. Prometheus doesn't even have a glimmer of that, and is trying to be more, which makes its script even more of an embarrassment. My saying ID4 was better written wasn't meant to laud Independence Day, but to highlight just how terrible the script for Prometheus is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

why not have LV-223, be LV-426?

 

Everything that happens in this film, feels like it should have taken place there.

 

Crashed ship... dead Space Jockeys... hell, even have Shaw have David send out a warning at the end! 

Shaw does send out a warning at the end! "Attempt no landing here. All these worlds are yours except Euro--"oh wait.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica 

I don't remember much of the original Alien (should probably rewatch), but why do they end up in LV-426 in the first place?

the crashed Engineer ship is emiiting a signal. 

To me, having all that, is like having Anakin turn to the darkside and turn into Jabba the Hutt at the end of Episode III.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

 

Both of their intended audience is the summer blockbuster sci-fi fans, but one has its goals set at merely entertaining spectacle, one is swinging for The Big Questions. One of them, despite being full of stock characters and cliched character beats and a sprinkling of implausibility, actually achieved their goal. One of them aims higher but is much, much dumber, and falls flat on their face. I take the stance that Independence Day--while hardly the most sound script ever, and more than full of its fair share of dumb stuff--at least has characters with arcs and clearly defined motivations that remain consistent throughout the film. Prometheus doesn't even have a glimmer of that, and is trying to be more, which makes its script even more of an embarrassment. My saying ID4 was better written wasn't meant to laud Independence Day, but to highlight just how terrible the script for Prometheus is.

Eh, I guess. Again, I think the main reason I'm not really angry at this movie is that while I was an engaged, thoughtful observer, many of the potential holes and whatnot people have brought up didn't occur to me while watching. That, to me, is a sign that your film has succeeded.

Clearly it didn't work for some of you, but I'm not gonna apologize for feeling like it worked for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun H 
For those who care, there was a clue hidden in the credits for a site (http://www.whatis101112.com) that lead to a new viral. I can't make out what he's saying, exactly.

 

 "I am a law only for my kind, I am no law for all" --  Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

 

the crashed Engineer ship is emiiting a signal. 

To me, having all that, is like having Anakin turn to the darkside and turn into Jabba the Hutt at the end of Episode III.

in order for the LV-426 thing to work, the film would had to:

-End up with the engineer dying at the pilot's chair.

-have the newborn proto xenomorph lay its eggs in the same manner and order as the urns.

-imply that David's signal was intentionally meddled with to appear as a distress call, instead of a warning.

Now that i think about it, a direct prequel would had made more sense....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gatorboy 

Anyone catch Holloway doing his best Hick's impression during the storm scene ("People, we are leaving!"")?

 

Also, who were the two crew members that Shaw had to fight off from forcing her back into chryo? The situation seemed to be all but ignored later on.

One was Ford, the medic.  Don't know who the other is.  Jackson?

But yeah, considering that Ford is later in the chamber with Shaw, you'd think she'd have said something about getting her head bashed in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

I do not understand how you can say he's an outstanding storyteller and then go on to agree that Prometheus is really poor storytelling. And I'm not trying to be a pedantic dick about it. But you seem to be saying one thing, and then basically agreeing, yeah, the story's completely messed up and borderline incoherent.

I don't need you to feed me "I'm not trying to be a dick" lines. If you don't understand what I'm trying to say, then it's probably my fault. Let me know if this is more clear:

I think the film's flaws are script-level. Mostly. (I think the way the zombie attack is choreographed is just silly taken in full context. As an individual scene, it's fine, but it's not an individual scene. Y'know?) But I think Scott deserves criticism for those flaws because he had full authorship here and had ample opportunity to veto the dumbest elements of the writing and jettison from the film. He didn't. After four drafts these beats still were part of the narrative. Spaights and Lindelof aside, Scott could have put his foot down; he didn't, and now we have an imperfect film.

The reason that I'm blind to those flaws-- again, most of them, as I've explained maybe a half dozen times in this thread alone; I heard that big, booming Lost drum beat in the back of my head when Weyland was revealed as alive and well (or, more to the point, old as fuck)-- is because behind the camera, Scott's a master. I tend to separate "storytelling" into two halves-- sceenwriting and filmmaking. When it comes to the latter, Scott's great, but that doesn't mean he knows what the fuck is good for him in terms of the former, and so I'd rather see him work with really great screenwriters from now on.

Anyways. I digress.

If the narrative is rotten at its core (the script), then it plays better in action because Scott knows how to put together a film well. His visual storytelling pulled me in. As the man running the show, he made me overlook all but the most earth-shattering problems Prometheus suffers from and the result is that I enjoyed myself very much in the moment. To me, that's great storytelling. And so I decree Scott a great storyteller working with a faulty narrative not of his design (but which he really should have read and fussed with more judiciously as, again, the primary author).

Does that make more sense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

With Carter though, the attitude was, "Yeah, there are problems, but..."  With Prometheus, it seems more like, "Problems?  What problems?"

Well, I agree there are problems. I've been saying as much since the first post I made in this thread. To dismiss Prometheus' flaws is incorrect; it definitely has them. I think the line here is whether those problems stop the movie from working or not, and people either fall on one side or the other.

I don't like seeing the movie's defenders get harsh about this, but I just as much dislike the "whoa, you liked this movie?" incredulity.

Apparently, they got audience reaction footage of some of you Chewers as the credits began to roll:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

So wait, if the xenomorphs are already there in that mural, what was the point of the last scene, with what looked like a proto xenomorph being created?

It should be obvious (though many detractors hate the answer): this isn't the first time it's occurred. I have pet theories about how.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

Eh, I guess. Again, I think the main reason I'm not really angry at this movie is that while I was an engaged, thoughtful observer, many of the potential holes and whatnot people have brought up didn't occur to me while watching. That, to me, is a sign that your film has succeeded.

 

Clearly it didn't work for some of you, but I'm not gonna apologize for feeling like it worked for me.

I think that's the best way to sum it up. For whatever reason I was engaged in what was happening instead of dissecting the fuck out of it as it went along. Many of the holes that people have been pointing out (and with good reason) didn't occur until after when I started looking at this thread. I can't really explain why it worked for me despite some of the very, very obvious script weaknesses, only that it did and there's no sort of leniency I'm granting because of Scott or it being Alien-related. (I'm also in heavy disagreement at most of what's being slung around as weak or a hole because I naturally inserted my own thoughts as it raced along and had no problem in doing so because it worked without force of effort.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

 

Eh, I guess. Again, I think the main reason I'm not really angry at this movie is that while I was an engaged, thoughtful observer, many of the potential holes and whatnot people have brought up didn't occur to me while watching. That, to me, is a sign that your film has succeeded.

 

Clearly it didn't work for some of you, but I'm not gonna apologize for feeling like it worked for me.

Sums up my feelings succinctly and beautifully. Well said, Chris.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun H 

It should be obvious (though many detractors hate the answer): this isn't the first time it's occurred. I have pet theories about how.

It's implied the Xenomorph is something the Engineers themselves idolise in some way, and in Alien Ash calls it the perfect lifeform. I'm guessing the xenomorph is always intended to be the end result of the mini-evolutionary process that happens whenever a creature is infected by the oil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 
The other reason is legacy. Clearly Weyland thinks little and less of Vickers as a child; she can do what he does but he doesn't really much care for her. I think David is more his legacy, serving as his foster son; David will out-live Vickers and carry on the Weyland name far, far longer than she. So David represents Weyland's stamp on the world in a way Vickers cannot. And if you take those two things-- function and legacy-- and put them together, you can start to wonder as to why the Engineers may have created us.

I like this, and now I wonder if there is some correlation between the Weyland/Vickers relationship and the Engineer/Humankind relationship, somehow.  Both Weyland and the Engineer have traveled far to extend their species' reach, and both have issues with their progeny: Vickers and Humankind.  Often, parents have issues with the way their offspring live their lives, just as kids often see how their parents lived and what they've achieved and reject those choices in their own lives. (Or course, Weyland is more the controlling parent whereas The Engineer is the more violent one.)   Maybe this is why Vickers comes off as the "rich bitch in charge" that I called her earlier.   Maybe her character figures if she can't win her father's love, she'll take his company and riches.  And maybe that's the origin of her nature in being closed-off and holding others (the crew/David) in such contempt.  It's an interesting theory, once you consider that BLADE RUNNER mined similar themes of the parent/child dynamic with its Roy Batty/Eldon Tyrell relationship.  Tyrell both admires and fears his creation where Batty both seeks acceptance from and answers from his creator.  Add this to ALIEN and PROMETHEUS' recurring motif of birth and rebirth (chestbursters) and I'm not entirely sure what we get (or if I'm just grabbing at straws and there is anything to get) but it's certainly intriguing.  Plus, I haven't seen any of Scott's films since MATCHSTICK MEN (although it is another story regarding a difficult child/parent relationship), so I can't say if this theme crosses into any of his more recent works.  I dunno, just spitballing here...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

why not have LV-223, be LV-426?

THIS IS LV-426!  LV-223 exploded six months after we were left here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

If the narrative is rotten at its core (the script), then it plays better in action because Scott knows how to put together a film well. His visual storytelling pulled me in. As the man running the show, he made me overlook all but the most earth-shattering problems Prometheus suffers from and the result is that I enjoyed myself very much in the moment. To me, that's great storytelling. And so I decree Scott a great storyteller working with a faulty narrative not of his design (but which he really should have read and fussed with more judiciously as, again, the primary author).

 

Does that make more sense?

It makes sense to me. And to be open, many of the faults discussed here didn't occur to me until after the film was over.  I'm agreed that Scott is a master visual storyteller. And while I'd have to really look at his oeuvre to give a final answer, I'm OK with tentatively calling him a master storyteller, with no qualification. 

The film worked for you (and some others) like gangbusters. Cool enough. It was merely an "OK" one for me during, and post-game analysis has really turned my opinion. And that, for me, is the sign of a movie that actually works or doesn't. It should hold up both in memory and under some level of scrutiny. PROMETHEUS is broken by the details of the story - a story that Scott approved and has been explaining in interviews cited in this thread. I think those problems take this from an "OK" movie - even a B-grade SF thriller - to a actively bad one. (I do think Lindelof carries a lot of the blame here, but it's ultimately Scott's show.)

I feel like I watched the Pilot episode of a very expensive TV show.......I was expecting a preview of next week's episode at the end.

“Next time on Prometheus!”

Shaw’s flying around on the ship, David’s head is sitting on a counter saying some crap, and the Engineers are chasing them around space trying to kill them.  Then it cuts to an engineer walking into the President Engineer’s office and saying, “Sir, we have a situation!”  And another Engineer looks at the camera and says, “The humans could destroy us, we must destroy them first!”

But wait, there's a faction of the Engineers, we'll just call them "the Others"  who want to help the humans and save them, but really it all comes down to Shaw, since she's the only one who can save Earth!

Why do I feel like I've seen this show before?......koff, Lindeloff, koff, koff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

 

THIS IS LV-426!  LV-223 exploded six months after we were left here.

If Alien was a reworking of IT! Terror from Beyond Space, then what is Prometheus?  

I'm thinking Women of the Prehistoric Planet, or Journey to the 7th Planet.

Some have said Planet of the Vampires, but it lacks John Agar, and Prometheus feels like an updated John Agar movie fo sho'

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluelouboyle 

Monster Pete, in ALIEN, on LV-426, they clearly state that the Space Jockey has been there thousands of years. So the events of PROMETHEUS have nothing to with ALIEN.

That is a guess, made by a ship captain. 

He deduces that, from the hardened body of the space jockey, saying that it looks fossilized, and therefor would be thousands of years old. 

Considering these creatures are bio-mechanical, and this is of course, Science Fiction, a simple explanation that this species technology contains a equilibrium with the Space Jockeys.  Once dead, the creature and tech surrounding it proceeds to harden like a form of rigamortis.

Not to mention, fossilization can't occur, above ground. 

The framework of this being LV-426 was clearly there, they just changed it, so Ridley can have his cake, and eat it too. 

The Space Jockey = Wolverine.  As in, so much cooler when we knew next to nothing about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

 

 

I thought is was even funnier that they're really just standing in a replica of Chauvet Cave with an extra UFO guy scribbled on the wall. "We found the cave in France that was found over 100 years ago!"

Once everyone realises this is Ridley's attempt to make a comedy, I think it will begin to be looked more favourably upon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

The Space Jockey = Wolverine.  As in, so much cooler when we knew next to nothing about it.

You know you want a story about that Space Jockey fighting wars on his planet, and his love/hate relationship with his brother! 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

The Space Jockey = Wolverine.  As in, so much cooler when we knew next to nothing about it.

Based on the hodge podge of PROMETHEUS' shooting script, I'd argue we still know next to nothing about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

Based on the hodge podge of PROMETHEUS' shooting script, I'd argue we still know next to nothing about it.

well, they differ in sizes.  We know that now.

And they are not very good pilots. 

Oh, they also have a tendancy to have their chest bursted open!

Concept art from delete scene;

"Engineer and Elder Engineer"

This last piece of concept art is weird, I wonder if it was drawn just to develop the elements of the scene because it doesn't look like they're about to fight in this rendition;

Something occurred to me early this morning.  I can't get this film out of my head, btw.  Anyways, the scene where the Fifield/Monster is outside the ship.   He's sitting/crouching very similarly like the Alien was in Alien, right before it strikes Lambert.  As a matter of fact, that scene in Prometheus is similar to the scene in Alien with Lambert.  Except, of course, minus the tail.  

See, I thought we'd see Fifield twisted into some new kind of organism, but no, he just stands up and turns into Raging Psychlo.

Whoa, I didn't catch that. I wondered why he was doing such a funny body contortion. Maybe we have our answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by agracru 

Here's my final take on Prometheus. It's a great cinematic experience, a movie that can hold people in its thrall from start to finish because Scott-- for everything he did wrong here-- is an outstanding storyteller. Under a harsh light, or even a soft light, Prometheus has a ton of flaws that will keep it from being anything more than a technical achievement in the future; he's not made an Alien or Blade Runner here. There are a ton of mistakes here, and frustratingly most of them could have been fixed on the script level, so I wish he'd been a bit more judicious about reading and processing the drafts put before him. None of that stops the movie from working as you're watching it, because he's a master, but it doesn't hold up well to criticism outside of itself. I like it, I think it's good, but I think it's just "good" and not "outstanding", which is where it really should have been. (And where it easily could have been.)

QFT.  Yes.  This.  And this movie did not bore at all.  I wish this was outstanding.  Really, do.  After what Scott has accomplished film-wise in the early parts of his career, I wanted that Scott to be evident in this film.  There were hints that he was, but you can only do so much to elevate a sucky script.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

See, I thought we'd see Fifield twisted into some new kind of organism, but no, he just stands up and turns into Raging Psychlo.

Yeah.  See, that scene would have been more effective (and creepy) if there were less characters.  Because, I certainly could tell he was being used to clear the story of excess baggage...er, characters, quickly.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElCapitanAmerica 

Concept art from delete scene;

 

"Engineer and Elder Engineer"

 

 

 

This last piece of concept art is weird, I wonder if it was drawn just to develop the elements of the scene because it doesn't look like they're about to fight in this rendition;

 

Awww, that last one is soooo cute.  It's like they are about to dance to......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monster Pete 

It features a character named WEYLAND, and they don't drop ONE LINE that would contradict the Weyland character from AVP.  For them not to have that, says something. 

You would think Ridley, going back to this franchise wouldn't mind having one or two lines that knock that film out of the series. 

 

The film was made in a deliberate way not to contradict AvP.  Let's say Scott just ignores AvP, not worth his time to deny it's existence, you would have to imagine the subject matter of this film alone would at some point contradict something we saw in AvP.  Nope, not one thing. 

So what's the big problem with that? Doesn't it suck when franchise movies behave as if segments didn't exist? AVP was weak and AVP really bad, but they weren't so bad that they tainted the whole franchise forever. AVPR maybe.

The Halloween series has a dozen of retcons, so do the X-Men movies, both Punishers and there was no reason at all to change the Hulk origin in The Incredible Hulk. It's just overly annoying and doesn't improve the ongoing series at all.

You don't have to bow to those bad sequels but Prometheus did really well to respect both views. This way, you can count both AVPs as canon if you want to. If you don't, just ignore them. It's not fair if every new director coming in thinks one of the earlier ones doesn't fit his vision. Terminator. 4 sucked, but when Justin Lin talked about doing time travel in a fourth movie to erase 3 and 4 and to continue from 2 on... that's even worse than accepting the predecessor's existences.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smugbug 

 

QFT.  Yes.  This.  And this movie did not bore at all.  I wish this was outstanding.  Really, do.  After what Scott has accomplished film-wise in the early parts of his career, I wanted that Scott to be evident in this film.  There were hints that he was, but you can only do so much to elevate a sucky script.

Yeah, it's not boring. It's somewhat engaging, but only in the, is the next scene gonna pick up the film yet?

The script really makes the story seem meandering as it moves along. Motivations unclear, but not threateningly so. You can tell actors were trying hard but without the meat that makes them characters, they might as well not even exist. I don't have a problem with the ideas presented in the film, I just don't think the film's length, nor the way it told the story, was deserving for it. 

I don't want to compare Alien with Prometheus. I can give credit where credit is due and Prometheus is stronger for being unattached in that way. But Alien also solves the problem with why Prometheus doesn't work as well. You can identify with the characters. What does it mean when David, the robot, becomes the most relatable and interesting character in the film? 

Thinking back on this, I ended up liking Janek quite a bit.

He was less stupid than everyone else, and I liked that in regard to the "Big Questions" he just wanted to bug out when things went to crap.  I liked that he didn't care.  And ultimately his death was a result of doing something right as opposed to dying because he himself was stupid.

Although, if the others hadn't messed with the pod, they'd have been okay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

 

Honestly, that's great for you. I really wish I felt that way too. I unabashedly love Watchmen (probably the only one around here) so I know how weird this dissonance feels.

 

But there never is a feeding frenzy without blood in the water. Never. I recognize this for movies that I love in contrast to the consensus and it is certainly true for this one.

You arent the only one. I love Watchmen too. Maybe we should start a club.

Carnotaur - 

I understood Shaw's motivation.  Even her wanting to go to the Engineer's home planet.  I got that.  I also understood Vicker's and Janek's.  David wasn't the only character I identified with.  What helped that out was the extra moments we were able to spend with him before the crew awoke.  So, he had a bit of an advantage.  ;)  

But credit to Theron, Rapace, Elba and even Wong (Ravel) and Elliot (Chance), for being able to set their characters apart from the others.  And I'll go to my grave and say that the biggest issue was this:  Crew of 17.  Too many non essential characters.  

You could have your five, previously mentioned characters.  Add a capable biologist and geologist (wink).  Okay, that's seven.  Then a ship medical officer.  That'd make eight.  Two security guys.  And that'd bring the crew to ten.  There ya go.  No need to make two characters stupid and have one come back be all psycho.  

I liked the ideas being presented in the story/film, I just seriously believe there were too many frakkin' characters.

(And rid the story of Weyland being alive and on board.  Didn't need him.  I love Guy Pearce.  I really do.  It would have been awesome to have him interact more with Fassbender [whatta film *that* could've been] - as maybe, another character)

Re: VIckers and Shaw, I don't know if someone suggested they should merge, I suggested that Vickers and the Captain should have been one character, as Vickers has nothing to do in the movie. Literally nothing. She doesn't actually pilot the vessel, etc. She just says everything is a bad idea. Someone else mentioned that Theron was going to play Shaw at one point, and then Vicker was written to have Theron in the movie.

I am happy when people enjoy anything, and I'm happy when people can not see flaws, etc. which may not be there, but - seriously - when the geologist who made the map of the location they're in gets lost in that same location, and the film can't even bothered to explain how this happened, and then those characters end up going to the place that they're scared of and die, and then one shows up later (how'd he breathe)? at base camp to kill people, and then - when you look at the film - NOTHING THAT HAPPENS WITH THESE CHARACTERS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING - then you're wasting my time. It's the problem with Charlize as well. If you cut her entire character, the story doesn't change. And a for a movie about smart, interesting things, that's really, really dumb. And this is way more artistically complex than a FRIDAY THE 13th film, but those movies do a much better job of setting up people acting stupid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoolong 

Thinking back on this, I ended up liking Janek quite a bit.

He was less stupid than everyone else, and I liked that in regard to the "Big Questions" he just wanted to bug out when things went to crap.  I liked that he didn't care.  And ultimately his death was a result of doing something right as opposed to dying because he himself was stupid.

Although, if the others hadn't messed with the pod, they'd have been okay.

Janek was okay. But it's all he did. And how come he didn't make it to the ship but the others did?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ Dylan 

You arent the only one. I love Watchmen too. Maybe we should start a club.

I love Watchmen!  Wait, there's Watchmen Hate around here?  Really?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damon Houx 

 but - seriously - when the geologist who made the map of the location they're in gets lost in that same location, and the film can't even bothered to explain how this happened...

Wow, is that what happened? I was confused too. Seriously, all they had to do was have a short clip of Jenek and the other dude like, "where the fuck did I leave my mapping device?" and the other guy going, "Don't worry, we'll find a way out."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 

Janek was okay. But it's all he did. And how come he didn't make it to the ship but the others did?

What do you mean make it to the ship?  What others to what ship?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carnotaur3 

Wow, is that what happened? I was confused too. Seriously, all they had to do was have a short clip of Jenek and the other dude like, "where the fuck did I leave my mapping device?" and the other guy going, "Don't worry, we'll find a way out."

Oh.  Milburn is the biologist with glasses and crazy hair geologist is Fifield.  Janek is the ship captain played by Idris Elba.

Or have Janek try to help them Google map their way out from the ship, only for their comms to fail, or maybe the floor gives way and they fall into a lower chamber (making David's observation that the Alien mural and the weird green gem plugged at the base of it was "Another door") and that's where they find penis snake. Y'know, give everyone something to do and have them discover things by being proactive rather than just stupid.

I think you guys have the names wrong.  :(

What I don't understand about Shaw wanting to go to the Engineer homeworld is this ... it seems they forgot about the whole "destroy earth" mission in the first place. Why go to their home planet so that they focus back on destroying humans, didn't she learn that upon seeing humans the reaction she got was that lone Engineer wanting to destroy the planet instead of going back home. Why wouldn't she think she'd get a similar reaction?

The smarter thing, if she cared about earth, was getting that ship home and then studying to get ready for an eventual invasion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoolong 

 

Oh.  Milburn is the biologist with glasses and crazy hair geologist is Fifield.  Janek is the ship captain played by Idris Elba.

Fuck. I couldn't remember names in this movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Clark 

I don't think I do. Janek could have led them out via the comms, he had a complete 3D map of the structure right in front of him in the ship.

Should have just been a Spaceballs moment then. "Fuck! Even in the future nothing works."