Prometheus (Post-release)

I also can't get over how you feel Ripley is acting like a man. You honestly believe Ripley is trying to make it in the galaxy by "acting" like a man? Art, she's got a cat! She was a mother! She has to work for a living!

I absolutely believe she was written that way... moreso in Aliens and the subsequent movies and I absolutely hate it when I see (or feel I see) writing like that, because, as I said before, I feel like it undermines the very point that is trying to be made. I just don't think Ripley is a very well written or likable character. I don't understand why the entire alien universe has to revolve around her or why she has to keep coming back again and again when she is an awful character. I don't think a woman needs to be written in a mannish way to make her seem strong or have value. I don't know how the differences between someone like Ripley and Shaw aren't extremely obvious and that Shaw, in my opinion is a much better character because she is amazingly strong without having to pretend she has a penis.
 
Art, I think you and me and a few others need to go make our own "We Like Prometheus!" thread.. lol.

It's been a long time since I've seen a film generate this kind of polarized response. My friends and co-workers all like the film well enough, so it's definitely not a universal hatred.

One thing that the naysayers should understand is that we're not necessarily defending every aspect of the film and claiming that it's flawless. No film is perfect (a few come close, IMO, but none of them are directed by Ridley Scott). We see the flaws, too, it just doesn't detract from the film enough, for us, to make a difference. Yes, it's got flaws.. we just don't care. :)

Hahaha... you know, I actually very much appreciate those with a differing viewpoint as long as they can explain why and don't resort to petty barbs. I have learned a lot in this thread, especially about Alien and what drew people to it and made them appreciate it. The next time I watch it, I will be watching it through new eyes and it will be interesting to see if I appreciate it more.

I also agree, that I haven't seen a movie in YEARS that have had people talk this much and for that quality alone, I say it makes Prometheus a great catalyst.
 
But is there an interesting story to tell there? We have already seen "aliens run amok" numerous times now. It was fun the first couple of times, but that story has gotten a bit old, predictable and boring. I can't believe you would be more interested in just having more of the same shoveled in than something new and different that opens new possibilities and treads new ground. Love it or hate it, Prometheus didn't follow the same tired model that has become the standard for the aliens franchise.
Yes, there is an interesting story to tell. In fact, it could be very interesting if told well... and any story told well has characters - likeable or not - that are worth following through their exploits. Ripley in the first and second movie was not a very likeable character, but you believed her and what she did, as well as the other characters - at least in the first one. The second one went into broader more stereotypical strokes with some of the characters, but still kept pretty much within the realm of plausibility.

The third one... who should you care about? The rapist? The murderer? The violent criminal? The stupid and the arrogant caretakers of the prison facility? Ripley? Honestly... there's no one really left to root for and at least they had Ripley die this time.

The fourth one... they ****ing bring her back? NOOOOOOOO. Alien without Ripley would work just as well, perhaps better. She is not needed.

Regarding Prometheus. The quest to figure out who and what and why the Space Jockeys are and the payload on the ship that evolves into the xenomorph. Very clearly a weapon of some type or a ritualistic cleansing tool. Whoever could dream up such things must be a heck of a lot more complex than humans in their potential capacity for good and extreme cruelty.

As mentioned in my post there is very little reaction to the fact that they found alien life, so naturally, I'm assuming humankind has had other extra terrestrial life form encounters prior to Prometheus. Otherwise there would have been a bigger reaction to the find. That just opens up things a whole lot more. Who were those and what happened there and are they looking for the same answers... and is there with their discovery a competition and potential rivalry between them and humankind to possibly get to the creators to get the answers.

But leaving that possibility aside... the movie sets out to explore the who and the what and the why - were we created by intelligent extra terrestrial beings and why did they create us... and... who created them. It is an interesting story, if you can tell it, so that it seems plausible and relatable and where it feels worth following the characters in their search for answers. The best option is usually to have the audience experience things and learn things at the rate the characters learn them, so you are more inclined to care about the characters and feel as mystified and curious as they do, instead of constantly being ahead of them and hoping they'll eventually catch up... only to groan and bemoan that they sadly never do. It's like... we are either watching the events through the eyes of the emotionless android who doesn't understand or know human emotions, or we are seeing things through the perspective of the engineers and therefore, understandably, feel disappointment with the first encounter at the invitation point, with the kind of retarded people that was actually chosen to come meet them.

It's like CGI movies directing attention towards the effects, showing everything before the characters see them and experiencing them, instead of letting the characters do the exploring and slowly revealing the cool thing the CGI is there to represent - environment and creature/character. It's like knowing the killer in a crime novel, because it is spelled out in the first page. Then what's the point of the rest of the story?

If we hadn't seen the human shaped engineers in this one, but kept exclusively to the space jockey design... nearly everything else in the movie could still run as it did, but would add mystery. Instead of finding a preserved head inside the bio-helmet... they just find a skull... they speculate, they argue, they have ANY reaction... and it would still be a mystery. The one at the end, being a pilot fused to the seat, in suit... you still keep the mystery for a little while longer. Even with showing him out of the suit... it would be a surprise at that point, but that's ruined by showing them already at the beginning and in those holographic recordings that are just appropriately there and showing exactly the things needed to propel the very cliche type exposition. It cheapens things by showing things way too soon.

There's no real shock at any of the discoveries they make... no reaction, no heated arguments back and forth, no real caring - no natural human curiosity in trying to figure things out, like we do here in these discussions. We are having the discussions here that the characters in the movie should have had - ANY reaction at all.

All we get is absurdly stupid *let's pet the giant penis* and otherwise... *huh*.

It would be like having Vader say in the first five minutes of ANH that he was Anakin Skywalker and Luke and Leia are his kids. Then watching the rest of the movies as they are... and you shake your head at Obi-Wan telling tall tales, Luke's reaction in ESB... and pretty much killing that whole plot immediately. You don't want to be too ahead of the characters in the movie and what they know as an audience. That's just lazy and pointless storytelling.
 
Last edited:
[B said:
Finnlock[/B] ]
I agree, because now some of the "Lovers" are willing to admit that the movie has major flaws and see the reasons why people would be turned off to it. Ain't midle ground grand? :p

I think a lot of us did that from the start. I haven't recommended the film to anyone without expressing major reservations. This is as subjective as the moviegoing experience gets.

From what I have read in the the old thread and this one, practically all of the people who have said they have liked or loved the film (including me) have also pointed out the things that they did not like. There are a few scenes that could have been improved, but no "major flaws" that I see (other than the last scene). I love this flick.

Interesting to see that many who did not like the film claimed the expectation of seeing or wanting another Alien film did not influence their reasoning. Now it seems many are now ONLY comparing this film to Alien, and not just on this forum. Two completely different kinds of films.

Ripley vs Shaw? That makes about as much sense as comparing Thelma from Thelma and Louise to Sibylla from Kingdom of Heaven.
 
Interesting to see that many who did not like the film claimed the expectation of seeing or wanting another Alien film did not influence their reasoning. Now it seems many are now ONLY comparing this film to Alien, and not just on this forum. Two completely different kinds of films.
It's natural to compare it to Alien, as it IS within the same universe. But it is also natural to compare it with other Ridley Scott movies, because... it's a Ridley Scott movie. You can get a trend regarding story and character and other things through those comparisons, but again, it is more direct to compare it to Alien because of the connection the two share, even though the stories are very different.
 
Art, I think you and me and a few others need to go make our own "We Like Prometheus!" thread.. lol.

I can guarantee that if you did that, the people who don't like the film would spend just as much time there as here. They can't seem to stop talking about it :cool
 
For the type of film it is, it is as different from Alien as 2001 A Space Odyssey was to Blade Runner.
I still think that's a big part of the problem that people have with it. It's easy to nitpick little details, but a lot of people just flat-out didn't like the film overall, and it causes them to nitpick more because they can't put their finger on what they didn't like.. mainly that it was contrary to their own expectations of what the film was going to be.

I have similar issues sometimes, but I'm able to recognize when it's a matter of expectation. I saw Brave yesterday, and it was quite different from what I was expecting it to be, and it ended up a little jarring as a result. But that doesn't mean I didn't like it.
 
I still think that's a big part of the problem that people have with it. It's easy to nitpick little details, but a lot of people just flat-out didn't like the film overall, and it causes them to nitpick more because they can't put their finger on what they didn't like.. mainly that it was contrary to their own expectations of what the film was going to be.

As a stand alone film, with no other comparisons, it falls flat because it's nonsensical, filled with 'professional' characters who act in uneducated and stupid manner, with a poorly executed plot that culminates in a pointless ending.

Space explorers who are in a rush to get rid of their space suits in hostile territory, a guy who supposedly loves his girlfriend but screws her when he knows he's infected with something, a biologist who is terrified of finding anything biological one moment then sticks his face against something clearly making a threatening gesture another moment, a professional cartographer who suddenly can't find his way to the exit. Really, I could go on. ANY of these poorly executed moments in any other film would be torn apart.
 
a guy who supposedly loves his girlfriend but screws her when he knows he's infected with something
Hmmm. Missing character motivations I can see, because not everyone watches films the same, but this is a perfect example of the type of criticisms I have seen over and over that make some of us scratch our heads about what film some of you guys were actually watching.
 
As a stand alone film, with no other comparisons, it falls flat because it's nonsensical, filled with 'professional' characters who act in uneducated and stupid manner, with a poorly executed plot that culminates in a pointless ending.

Space explorers who are in a rush to get rid of their space suits in hostile territory, a guy who supposedly loves his girlfriend but screws her when he knows he's infected with something, a biologist who is terrified of finding anything biological one moment then sticks his face against something clearly making a threatening gesture another moment, a professional cartographer who suddenly can't find his way to the exit. Really, I could go on. ANY of these poorly executed moments in any other film would be torn apart.


The painful part is...

They didn't need to make any of them soooooooo stupid to advance the story. They could have just as easily portrayed them being careful professionals and the events they wanted to have occur still happen.
 
For the type of film it is, it is as different from Alien as 2001 A Space Odyssey was to Blade Runner.
Yes, but both Alien and Prometheus are Ridley Scott films set in the same universe revolving around the jockeys. It even has a xeno life form and life cycle in both. If you cannot see the link in that... then I'm just amazed.
 
The painful part is...

They didn't need to make any of them soooooooo stupid to advance the story. They could have just as easily portrayed them being careful professionals and the events they wanted to have occur still happen.

This is true...maybe it's some metaphorical jab at all those scientists. Maybe Ridley was trying to say, "Hey, geologists, stop counting on your equipment, and you, biologist, stop getting all excited about new lifeforms. And hey, Weyland's daughter, stop being so one track mind." :confused
 
Hmmm. Missing character motivations I can see, because not everyone watches films the same, but this is a perfect example of the type of criticisms I have seen over and over that make some of us scratch our heads about what film some of you guys were actually watching.

Okay, whatever, replace 'screwing his girlfriend' with 'finds out he's infected with something and decides to MENTION IT TO NO ONE BEFORE THEY LEAVE THE SHIP.'

For **** sake here, the characters were supposed to be professionals but NOTHING ABOUT THEM WAS PROFESSIONAL.
 
I NEVER said that Ripley was a great character because she acted like a man. I only said that in the Alien universe, everyone treats each other like equals regardless of what gender they are or how they act.


I also can't get over how you feel Ripley is acting like a man. You honestly believe Ripley is trying to make it in the galaxy by "acting" like a man? Art, she's got a cat! She was a mother! She has to work for a living!

I'm pretty sure Ripley's character was originally male in the script for Alien.
 
I actually was under the impression this was mans first time encountering an alien life form and there somewhat blasé attitude towards that is my biggest dislike of the film.


To me, selling some sense of awe and humility before such a massive revelation would be critical for this kind of story to give it more dramatic gravity. They are more on a treasure hunt, a band of tomb raiders.
 
To me, selling some sense of awe and humility before such a massive revelation would be critical for this kind of story to give it more dramatic gravity. They are more on a treasure hunt, a band of tomb raiders.

I agree, the film may not specifically mention this topic but it is certainly implied that this is a first encounter. And it's relative proximity to our own time might also suggest that.
 
This thread is more than 10 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top