Prometheus (Post-release)

[Jedi2016]

Do you think it's possible that there was a severe contamination within the Engineer crew and that's why they were hauling ass from whatever in the hologram the crew saw in the beginning?

That's exactly what I think they're running from. The dead one was clearly infected with it, he started oozing black goo when they were examining it.

Damn almost $40 for two tickets? I'm guessing you saw it in 3D and in a big city?

$18 for two 3D tickets at Cinemark off Harvey.

 

[Nwerke]

I paid $24.50 per ticket last night. Bog-standard cinema, 3D showing, no special seats or bar or any of that.

Huh. Don't love the Deacon but Manzella's good. I'd like to have seen this version of Fifield:

http://cache.krop.com/ivanmanzella-4fd5fa2b10fa509.jpg

- really appropriately Gigerish!

 

[Too Much Garlic]

I'd like to have seen this version of Fifield:

http://cache.krop.com/ivanmanzella-4fd5fa2b10fa509.jpg

- really appropriately Gigerish!

What? You serious? Looks like one of the Ripley clones from Resurrection.

Giger is about bio-mechanoid... that thing is just a gelatin blob.

 

[TK765]

Perfect review here.

The PopScience Review: Symbolism or Not, 'Prometheus' Still Fails as a Compelling Story

A few highlights.

"
Scott, Lindelof and Jon Spaihts are clearly intelligent people who know a lot of interesting things about a lot of interesting stuff. And, finding clues to a greater meaning in a story can be fascinating and great fun. But, for symbolism to have any real meaning, it has to make sense. It has to serve the story, and it has to come organically. The shotgun-symbolism of LOST, where countless bits of disparate philosophical ideas were blasted onto the canvas and allowed to mean everything or nothing, depending on the knowledge base of the viewer, is not storytelling. You can take the worst Eddie Murphy movie and load it with potent religious symbolism, and it’s still going to suck. Why? Because, it’s still a dumb Eddie Murphy movie injected with potent religious symbolism. The symbolism is irrelevant if there isn’t a good plot or well-drawn characters to carry the themes through. "

"with Prometheus. Early on, we’re introduced to ship’s captain Janek (Idris Elba) and two forgettable pilot characters who clearly have no interest in discovering an alien civilization. They are stereotypical “we’re in it for the money” types. Our storytellers never spend enough time with these pilots to humanize them, and Janek’s main purpose earlier in the film is to get Vickers (Charlize Theron) into bed and find out if she’s a robot. (He succeeds, and she isn’t. Hooray for Janek.) Later in the film, when a big alien ship containing dangerous black goo – and one angry Engineer - is headed to Earth to carry out that 2,000-year-old vendetta against humanity, Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) basically says, “Hey, you guys gotta stop that ship from leaving or Earth is finished!” And they basically say, “Well, we don’t have any guns, so I guess we’ll just crash into it and die!” You know, like Kirk’s dad in Star Trek, or a million other movies. And, these three characters, who have in their minimal screen time shown almost nothing but apathy, are all suddenly super-patriots, and are visibly cheerful about dying for Earth. I thought they were going to start chest-bumping and high-fiving each other as they crashed into the alien ship and vaporized. Tellingly, nobody in the audience cheered. People actually laughed (including me).

So, what is gained by threading themes of sacrifice into Prometheus if we aren’t affected by it when it happens? It is commendable to explore it as a theme, but the movie I watched was a logic-free sci-fi explode-a-thon, full of stock characters and wonky physics and ideas and set-pieces I’ve seen before, with bits of philosophical dialogue squeezed in here and there. Nobody behaves like a real human, so vital human themes are lost. The details chronicled by Cavalorn are there, but they’re really just Easter eggs for the erudite, hidden in a squall of screaming and disemboweling and stuff blowing up. "

Thats all this movie is, Alien with dumb "potent religious symbolism" sprinkled in.

I shouldn't say that, Alien at least had some characters you got to know and sort of liked or sympathized with. This is just a poor rip off of Alien with dumb "potent religious symbolism".

How to write a script for Prometheus and use Alien as a outline...

Ship going to investigate a planet, check!
Crew wakes up and has breakfast, nobody wants to be there, check!
Find spacejockeys, check!
Find alien life, check!
Crew gets infected, check!
Flamethrowers, check!
Alien coming out of a body cavity, check!
Corporate secrets, check!
Robot getting his head pulled off, check!
Female lead being chased by alien, check!

But how to make it different, I know lets have David Lindelof add some of his "potent religious symbolism" :rolleyes

"Lindelof said. "This movie is about realizing his vision. He's only directed three science-fiction films, and now 'Prometheus' is one of them, and if he told me to jump off a bridge, I would."

Ridley could get on that please, find him the nearest bridge.:lol

 

[Jaedena]

To point about the breathable air, they would have been screwed regardless if they removed their helmets or not. Look at the snake scene, they had helmets on.

 

[ghostryder]

I really hope at some point we're able to read Spaiht's original draft. I *do* think some of the issues are echoes of ideas and concepts in that script - as opposed to Lindelof coming in and doing a complete page one rewrite. We know at first it was a straight up Alien movie: a crew discovers Xenos and Facehuggers and all that - then the rewrite with "bigger, grander themes" - so it'd be interesting to see what carried over. I can't help but wonder if the derelict crash WAS at one point supposed to be OUR derelict, but then got changed in subsequent drafts.

 

[Jedi2016]

Rumor has it the scripts will be on the Blu-ray. Spaiht's at least, maybe Lindelhof's.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

To point about the breathable air, they would have been screwed regardless if they removed their helmets or not. Look at the snake scene, they had helmets on.

Yes... but would add drama and realism instead of apathy and stupidity. Leaving the helmets on, getting stuck in the silo, slowly suffering from CO2 poisoning and the whole getting lost and wanting to pet a giant penis would suddenly make sense.

 

[Bryancd]

speaking of petting the penis, are we to assume that the penis snake simply killed him or was he also going to go through some kind of transformation? I took it that he was stone cold dead. Kind of begs the question what was the purpose of the snake creature in this whole evolution. Or perhaps sometimes a penis snake is use a penis snake...:lol

 

[TheRealMcFly]

Damn almost $40 for two tickets? I'm guessing you saw it in 3D and in a big city?

Yep, fake/mini IMAX in 3D. I dunno if Id call Cherry Hill, NJ a city but Fandango charged me an extra $3 a ticket.

You know it really grinds my gears to see a lot of the concept stuff that would have helped me through the many of the 'um okay I guess' moments I had.

Fifeild alien style transformation>film zombie version

And what a useless sequence. I'm not trying to diminish anyone's enjoyment of the film but I think I liked Robin Hood better. And I didn't like it that much.

 

[Stockers]

Prometheus frustrations aside; I just turned my TV off after watching Alien : resurrection.

There are some astounding connections between the two, as bookends of the bigger story. Intended or not, the whole thing seems to come full circle... Not to mention the human/xeno hybrid now making a lot more sense...

Check it out - some really startling coincidences. Although the spitting acid scene still really pulls me out of the story.

 

[Kit Rae]

Incidentally, there's an annoying line of dialogue from Holloway as they first approach the temple, asking Fifield if he can tell whether it's artificial, and he says 'no idea but I can tell you it is hollow'. It's FRICKING OBVIOUSLY artificial. But some of the concept art is basically a naturalistic hill with a head on top. So I guess this line is a holdover.

I thought so as well, as was the line the captain delivered later calling it a pyramid, which is in the very early concept art.

So a gigantic explosion plus a heavy collision on the ground that doesn't shake things up on the inside (David's head doesn't move) and doesn't leave a scratch on the hull somehow renders the ship completely useless. That's like having a bullet proof vest successfully stop a bullet from entering your chest, but your heart still got ruptured from the shot.

Terrible analogy. Nwerke already responded to that one, but if you missed the fact that the ship was very much a mess inside, clearly damaged, and that everything, including David had moved, that goes right to what we have been pointing out about some of the hair brained criticisms we are seeing. Especially considering many of the people who are pointing out some of the true flaws, however minor, are the same people making the most bone headed accusations that really indicate they were truly not paying any attention to the film. It makes for an interesting social study, and goes to show that there are huge differences in how people watch films.

Except Alien is considered a horror classic. I guarantee only those who are Scott apologists will consider this bungled mess a classic years from now.

Alien and Blade Runner *are* two perfect Ridley Scott films. There. I said it.

I am genuinely interested to hear what "clunkers a plenty" appear in both those movies. I can barely think of any minor clunker let alone the level of WTF? that pulls you out repeatedly as in Prometheus.

How about the fact that the egg room in the derelict ship could not have possibly been inside the ship based on the movements of the characters, or when Ash somehow magically appears inside the Mother control room when he clearly was not there before, and there was no sound from the very loud door opening to let him in, simply done for the sake of a big scare when he startles Ripley. Or Brett's magical "tracking device" that he just slaps together from some parts laying around as a convenient plot device, or the fact that they needed giant tanks of COOLANT for some reason to run the shuttle, the fact that steam was blowing everywhere when the self destruct mechanism was running, the fact that there was a SELF DESTRUCT mechanism on a mining tug, the silliness of having a harpoon gun in the shuttlecraft, flamethrowers, et cetera, et cetera...

I could go on and on, and I could make a list like that of dozens of "flaws" in practically any of my favorite sci-fi films, including Blade Runner (the stupidity of that voice over!). I can easily come up with logical solutions to these apparent plot and logic holes (and have), but I don't need to because it is not necessary to enjoy the brilliance of one of my all time favorite films. Alien is just a "B" sci-fi horror film at it's core, with plenty of mistakes, but it was brilliantly done and I love it. The same with Blade Runner, and now Prometheus.

Seems reaction to Scott's sci-fi films each follow the same pattern, and no doubt in my mind Prometheus will be considered a classic in years to come. It took nearly 20 years for people to come around to seeing Blade Runner as such.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kit Rae "I invite anyone to watch the movie again and pay attention to the scene just before Fifield and Milburn's supposed "lost" scene, and who they talk to literally seconds later, then ask yourself again if you think they were lost?"
I did, but...yeah, they were lost. "....naaah...ship's good" "Yeah - ship is good" <flee>

Well, I don't want to nitpick and write out all the elapsed time in detail, but we are only taking about a span of a few minutes here, and people have made a huge debate over it. Based on the hologram layout and scale, it was only about a ten minute walk to the outside, 5 minutes at a run, and another 2 in the vehicles. Fifield and Milburn had a four minute lead, walking. As I watched the hologram in the film, from the temple/ampule room I counted two rooms the whole party had passed through and what looked like two side passages along the main hall where they came in. Shaw and co had 15 minutes to get back, which they did. The captain then asks where Fifield and Milburn are. In the span 9 minutes or so they had to get to the outside they could have only missed one or two of those two turns, and probably just barely missed the others running out by one hallway and a few hundred feet.

So maybe 2-3 minutes of being "lost" (one poster here said they were lost for 30 minutes and how could no one one the ship have known?). That's not exactly what I would call lost, but the two were not very bright, and written as such. The captain rolls his eyes (idiots) upon hearing they did not come back with the others and is immediately on the comm to them delivering the line "Between the static electricity and the wind speed, there aint no safe way to come and get you. The temperature is dropping, so get your helmets on and stay warm until the storm passes."

This has nothing to do with them being lost, but the captain said something about "enough static to fry your suit" as Shaw was packing the head .There were no shots of the hologram in the entire evacuation scene, but the monitors the captain and the crew are looking at indicate the storm front that had just hit them and was playing havoc with the electronics, most likely the hologram transmission as well. The captain also delivers the line later to Fifield "the signal has been coming in sporadically since the storm hit". The film is packed with tons of detail like this.

 

[Monster Dave]

Went and saw Prometheus last night....it was disappointing to say the least.

I'm sure most of what I didn't like has been said in the 38 pages of this thread, but even holding back, I still think that I had higher expectations that what was delivered on screen.


I figured that with people saying that they left the theaters with more questions than answers that it would have been like LOST where there really were more questions raised than answered with each episode and that compelled viewers to watch over and over. With Prometheus, my questions weren't compelling enough for me to even care about the answers...they were more like "Really?? Is that all Ridley could do anymore??

:angry

...now I'm going to watch Alien and Aliens and erase my memory of Prometheus altogether.

 

[Monster Dave]

Oh, and if this hasn't been posted yet, there's appearantly a missing prologue about the Engineer scene at the start of the film that will be on the Blueray release:

 

[NAZGÛL]

If we were nitpicking every detail in Alien, there would be some errors there to. Ash killing Ripley with a magazine as an example. and she cant move away? I love the symbolism in that scene, and love that Scott makes scenes that way. Who cares if she could have moved to the sides, it symbolises a rape and captures Ripleys fear and the movie theme perfectly. Or Roy killing Tyrell, who didnt call for security, knowing the most dangerous replicant is coming for him.

Its the same with Promotheus. No use in nitpicking everything searching for logic. Enjoy the questions it raises, instead of wanting it to be something it isnt.

 

[Jedi2016]

It's interesting how people somehow put Prometheus into a different category than every other film out there.

I saw the oft-repeated question come up on another forum, about how these "intelligent" characters can do really stupid things just to further the plot. The specific question was, "When did movies start doing this?" My answer was "Around 1910, give or take." Things like that have always been tropes of movie scripts, any kind of movie script.

For some reason, when it happens in every other movie (including Avengers, which is unanimously loved by absolutely everyone as the pinnacle of human achievement or something), it's considered okay, but when it happens in Prometheus, it suddenly becomes the worst writing to come out of Hollywood in the entire history of cinema.

"It's not a science class, it's a movie." - Ridley Scott

 

[Monster Dave]

If we were nitpicking every detail in Alien, there would be some errors there to. Ash killing Ripley with a magazine as an example. and she cant move away? I love the symbolism in that scene, and love that Scott makes scenes that way. Who cares if she could have moved to the sides, it symbolises a rape and captures Ripleys fear and the movie theme perfectly. Or Roy killing Tyrell, who didnt call for security. Its the same with Promotheus. No use in nitpicking everything searching for logic, .

Too much subtle symbolism, not enough plot moving "AHHH!" moments. IMO.

 

[Monster Dave]

It's interesting how people somehow put Prometheus into a different category than every other film out there.

I saw the oft-repeated question come up on another forum, about how these "intelligent" characters can do really stupid things just to further the plot. The specific question was, "When did movies start doing this?" My answer was "Around 1910, give or take." Things like that have always been tropes of movie scripts, any kind of movie script.

For some reason, when it happens in every other movie (including Avengers, which is unanimously loved by absolutely everyone as the pinnacle of human achievement or something), it's considered okay, but when it happens in Prometheus, it suddenly becomes the worst writing to come out of Hollywood in the entire history of cinema.

"It's not a science class, it's a movie." - Ridley Scott

I agree about the generalization of films these days - but frankly, didn't like Avengers at all either.

 

[Monster Dave]

One subtle thing that was really hard for me to make out in the film that I did like though was the alien cavern wall outside of the vase room. It was too dark to make it out at the time but here's a look at it:

now...this is clearly the Alien xenomorph that we all know and love, so why does the one at the end of the movie differ like some prehistoric version??

...dumb.

 

[NAZGÛL]

I think thats a nod to Giger who did a painting like that for Alien.