Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Genesis?

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Genesis? Page: <<   < prev  27 28 [29] 30 31   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Genesis? - 17/6/2012 1:44:55 PM   
BatSpider


Posts: 170
Joined: 6/7/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: darkhart

I could see very little wrong in this film but I can understand how some people might be disappointed considering the long and feverish gestation period.... THIS IS NOT AN ALIEN FILM... nor did it promise to be.
What it is, is a very good sci-fi film with tension, scares and enough questions to be thought provoking long after the credits have rolled.


The biggest question was how the hell could Ridley Scott fail to se that the utterly shite script, dialogue, performances, and lame-ass creatures were going to result in a Nostromo-sized turkey. Maybe the only person who noticed was the poor sod in editing who had to piece random scenes together.

I'm sure Ridley is professionally embarrassed by the mess and will be pissed off once it's confirmed as a major box office flop. I just hope he takes note in the future to follow his own instincts and not use legions of talentless idiots like Lindelof stinking up current Hollywood, ever again.

That's why people are still discussing the film, because it's SEVERAL shades of crap, not just one shade. It's historically as well as hysterically freakin' bad. Which is not to say that other movies this summer aren't equally as rubbish, but they ain't pretending to be something they're not. Folks, let's kick and yell and DEMAND better mainstream movies.

_____________________________

"Baby, you make me wish I had THREE hands!"
Post #: 841
RE: Genesis? - 17/6/2012 2:02:32 PM   
Filmfan 2


Posts: 1043
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: BatSpider


quote:

ORIGINAL: darkhart

I could see very little wrong in this film but I can understand how some people might be disappointed considering the long and feverish gestation period.... THIS IS NOT AN ALIEN FILM... nor did it promise to be.
What it is, is a very good sci-fi film with tension, scares and enough questions to be thought provoking long after the credits have rolled.


The biggest question was how the hell could Ridley Scott fail to se that the utterly shite script, dialogue, performances, and lame-ass creatures were going to result in a Nostromo-sized turkey. Maybe the only person who noticed was the poor sod in editing who had to piece random scenes together.

I'm sure Ridley is professionally embarrassed by the mess and will be pissed off once it's confirmed as a major box office flop. I just hope he takes note in the future to follow his own instincts and not use legions of talentless idiots like Lindelof stinking up current Hollywood, ever again.

That's why people are still discussing the film, because it's SEVERAL shades of crap, not just one shade. It's historically as well as hysterically freakin' bad. Which is not to say that other movies this summer aren't equally as rubbish, but they ain't pretending to be something they're not. Folks, let's kick and yell and DEMAND better mainstream movies.


Lol, hyperbole much?

Fair enough, you didn't like it, and the film has a fair number of problems, but it's not the absolute turkey you seem to insist it is in pretty much every post you've made in regards to this film.

I'm unaware of the current box office numbers for this film, but I'm pretty sure it won't be classed as 'a major box office flop', that's just wishful thinking on your part. I'm sure it will make its money back and we'll probably see the sequel(s?) getting made.


< Message edited by Filmfan 2 -- 17/6/2012 2:06:35 PM >


_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins


(in reply to BatSpider)
Post #: 842
RE: Thin film (spoilers) - 17/6/2012 4:00:04 PM   
scary_ice

 

Posts: 179
Joined: 11/1/2007
From: Meath, Ireland
quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Pretentiousness subroutines engaged...


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr E

Alien is my favourite film and I was so disappointed with this utter
turkey of a film I just had to write some thoughts. This is not much of
a review more of a list of all the bad points in this film. Quite
honestly there aren't many good points.

[WARNING - MAJOR SPOILERS]

BASIC FLAWS:

- Not scary at all, a complete lack of tension and suspense. In Alien
the edge of seat suspense was non-stop. every alien film has a different tone to every other one, and I felt a sense of foreboding and wondering what was gonna happen when it kicked off. Horses for courses. Alien is set on a mainly totally enclosed environment, this one has massive clear vistas the narrow and tone becomes more chaotic and fractured the more the film goes on. Big massive hopes, with the walls closing in as the film goes along depicted via the camerawork alone. Style matches content,

- Awful characters, clichéd sci-fi stereotypes. Too many characters
most of which were just plot devices waiting to die. somewhat necessary to the genre staples, with the wider themes being expressed in a simple context./color]

- Muddled and confusing storyline. It tried too hard to be an original
concept with deep, meaningful questions about our creators and where we
come from blah blah blah whilst also trying to be a horror film/prequel
to Alien. It failed and couldn't decide what it wanted to be. your opinion. By choosing to call the film Prometheus, Scott has invited us to look at that myth and compare/contrast how that story relates to aspects of the film and that provides the 'depth' of the film. I mean, for example, Prometheus is subjected to repeated and extreme abdominal agonies, part of him being torn out for seeking to align with/be equal to/discover the knowledge of his Gods, and Shaw, in wanting to stand next to her 'Gods' and find answers is being 'impudent' from a God's point of view in such a context and what happens to her? Extreme, repeated abdominal agony and something torn out of her. My own pretentious (if you like) take on any story designed to have 'levels' is to say shite like 'Look at a puddle. depending on how you look at it, you may see just the water it's made from, you may see a reflection of yourself, or you may see the entire sky.
Either come up with something completely original that is not connected
to the Alien universe in any way or do a full blown unpretentious Alien
prequel with a direct link between the space jockeys and the eggs/face
huggers/aliens/queen alien etc. There was no need for this awful film
to be connected to the alien universe and it may have slightly improved
had it not.given the evolution of the ooze into worms, bigger worms, etc, all the way to proto Alien, it could have existed as a stand alone story giving a 'what happens next ending, with the evolution to the alien we know yet to come or as a direct prequel, to me it does both

OTHER FLAWS:

- Bad dialogue. 'You wanna get laid?' scene - Absolutely no need for
this scene between vickers and janek. Added nothing. Film themes creation/birth/survival/creation driving everything a species does, so referencing sex isn't THAT odd and given the debate over whether Vickers is a robot, this would seem an attempt to confirm that she isn't (but it foreshadows the 'cant believe I nearly fucked a robot from Resurrection so it serves a function in it's film, references another part of the franchise AND doesn't settle the 'is she a robot' debate because in the later film the concept of robots being able to have sex is floated.
Also unfunny banter between two unnecessary co-pilots. lame but not ruinous

David talking to big white engineer in alien speak - probably one of
the most unintentionally hilarious things I've ever seen, space jockey
then rips his head of for no reason. Brilliant! Not. Tons of other
examples I can't be bothered to list. There is a reason. David is attempting to speak to it in its own language, and it considers David beneath him. Not only beneath him, beneath the Engineer's creation too, a HOW DARE YOU ADDRESS ME reaction (lame comparative, geek tries to talk to 'cool kid', geek gets punched in the face for daring to believe he is worthy. Anyway, the created trying to speak to/be equal to the creator and getting punked by the creator is the theme, and this bit is the theme in action: someone wishing to align himself with 'God' and 'God's' reaction all in one brief moment

- Space Jockeys looked awful. Turns out they were just wearing suits
and are actually just big bald pumped up white guys who like to throw
people about. Giger must be laughing his head off. .physically superior 'gods' who wont lower themselves to talk to their creation,also frankenstein theme in reverse (kill your creation or it will kill you) the tension between creation and destruction depicted

- Score. Contributed nothing to the film. Created no tension
whatsoever.that's just an opinion, if the events left you cold, the music would jar, whatever it was

- Turns out Weyland is still alive and onboard the ship. It's supposed
to be a shock twist but no one cares. Guy Pearce is cast as Weyland and
wears the worst make up known to man. former, it's not that much of a surprise that he's on board (the 'recording' of Weyland would be very weird if he wasn't on board to point to exactly where Shaw and her other half were standing. The make up sucks, and hopefully there is some reason for casting Guy Pierce in the role, but can forgive the make up, personally

- hated the way most the crew didn't no what the mission was until they
got there. Unrealistic and downright bad writing. totally realisitic, in a company/organisation/life people very often know the ins and outs of their 'superiors' big picture plans and just do the job/thing they do. Vickers considers Shaw and employee, for example, and therefore not worthy of being treated as an equal. Also, those 'above' us having information/knowledge we don't have and attitudes to the 'unworthy' re knowing this stuff is totally in keeping with the Prmoetheus God/those the gods create themes

And finally to sum up...

Stupid black goo spills out of stupid vases. Stupid character gets
infected with stupid black goo because stupid android put it in his
stupid drink. Stupid character makes love with stupid Ripley wannabe.
Stupid character gets torched and dies. Stupid Ripley wannabe becomes
pregnant. Stupid Ripley wannabe cuts out stupid baby squid from her
tummy tum tum. Stupid squid turns into stupid giant squid which
impregnates stupid big bald white space jockey. Stupid alien rips its
way out of stupid space jockey's chest. Stupid film ends. Stupid film
makes no sense.

clearly it does make sense, since that's what happens, aside from the opinion that it is all stupid and happening for no good reason



I appreciate your analysis of the themes and how they fit in with the story of the original myth of Prometheus but to be honest if the story doesn't do it for you on the most basic level then you aren't really going to be encouraged to dig deeper and engage with the deeper layers are you?

Nobody tells their mates "I saw a film last night where the themes were fantastically well implemented and the symbolism was ever so clever. You should check it out!"

And the referencing of other Alien movies was one of the problems for me. They kept telling us it wasn't an Alien prequel only to reference it at every opportunity!

< Message edited by scary_ice -- 17/6/2012 4:01:50 PM >

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 843
RE: So Poor. - 17/6/2012 7:12:16 PM   
bennyboy1971

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 4/7/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: antosh25

The gore and Special Effects were good, but there were Pott holes in the Script. Prometheus left me feeling confused and quite dissapointed.
thefilm was rushed ! Ridley should've taken his time to work on the plot of the film.


Just as you should have taken time to read your post?

Sorry - I find it hard to respect your view if you can't use capital letters properly or even spell the word pot.

What next - moaning that it wasn't Aylean 5?



< Message edited by bennyboy1971 -- 17/6/2012 7:15:19 PM >
Post #: 844
RE: Thin film (spoilers) - 17/6/2012 9:25:26 PM   
benny the jet


Posts: 2418
Joined: 27/8/2008
From: Over there
quote:

ORIGINAL: Happy Shrapnel


No, never seen it.






I watched it the night after I saw Prom and sorry, your wrong.
Alien has a unique quality in that its a movie that never seems to age, including the effects.


Same here dude. Very first thing i did when i got home. Just to remind me that Ridley used to know what he was doing :)

_____________________________

That means we only have thirty minutes to get you up that tree

I fucking love tea. Its my favourite drink after coffee and alcohol

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585511933

(in reply to Happy Shrapnel)
Post #: 845
RE: So Poor. - 17/6/2012 9:27:18 PM   
benny the jet


Posts: 2418
Joined: 27/8/2008
From: Over there
So everyone who didn't like Prometheus is just a sad fanboy if a lot of these posts are to be believed.... I didn't want "Alien 5" i just wanted Ridley to do something great again...he didn't

_____________________________

That means we only have thirty minutes to get you up that tree

I fucking love tea. Its my favourite drink after coffee and alcohol

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585511933

(in reply to bennyboy1971)
Post #: 846
RE: So Poor. - 17/6/2012 9:45:16 PM   
clownfoot


Posts: 7914
Joined: 26/9/2005
From: The ickle town of Fuck, Austria

quote:

ORIGINAL: bennyboy1971

quote:

ORIGINAL: antosh25

The gore and Special Effects were good, but there were Pott holes in the Script. Prometheus left me feeling confused and quite dissapointed.
thefilm was rushed ! Ridley should've taken his time to work on the plot of the film.


Just as you should have taken time to read your post?

Sorry - I find it hard to respect your view if you can't use capital letters properly or even spell the word pot.

What next - moaning that it wasn't Aylean 5?




I think the word he was looking for was 'plot'.




_____________________________

Evil Mod 2 - Hail he who has fallen from the sky to deliver us from the terror of the Deadites!

http://www.thepixelempire.net/index.html
http://clownfootsinversemidas.blogspot.com/

(in reply to bennyboy1971)
Post #: 847
Prometheus - 18/6/2012 4:50:40 AM   
KeithM


Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008
Visually stunning, as expected, but ultimately disappointing. I liked it to a degree, I wanted to like it a whole lot more, but there were just too many unanswered questions for it to work as a stand-alone film without a sequel(s), and just way too much stupid in it for a film that has pretenses of 'cerebral' to the point that its flaws nagged at me and stayed with me far more than any positives the film had when I left the cinema, and long afterwards.

What we learnt from Prometheus:

1. DO NOT REMOVE YOUR HELMET on an alien planet, even if the air is apparently breathable. At least not without a thorough survey of the indigenous wildlife, microbial life, etc. beforehand.

2. DO NOT PET THE WILDLIFE. Especially when there is evidence of violent death all around you.

3. Run PERPENDICULAR to large falling buildings/towers/spacecraft, NOT along the line of its fall.

4. Don't trust androids. Or scientists. Or corporations. Or gods. Or Damon Lindelof.

5. Apparently people in the near future can run away immediately after emergency major stomach surgery without much problem.

6. Not much else (maybe cast older actors for older roles rather than sticking a younger actor in unconvincing old-age make-up when he has absolutely no screen-time as a younger guy?)

It's not disappointing because it's not "Alien" enough, it's disappointing because it's just not smart enough - the script at times borders on (if not invades) moronic and the whole Chariot-of-the-Gods meet-our-makers plot is clumsily, vaguely, and at times cornily handled (I'm not sure if someone says "you just need to believe", but they might as well).

Theron is wasted. Pierce is bizarrely old throughout and thus, too, wasted. Rapace is unconvincing and makes a poor Ripley replacement, which is all she is, pretty much, motivations aside.

There is some goodness. Fassbender is excellent as David. Elba is charismatic and charming. It looks lovely. The 3D (in IMAX - I'd worry about brightness in non-IMAX) is subtle, going for depth over poking stuff in your face and therefore good (although worth £8 more than 2D is another question).

It does pose some interesting questions, but either its answers are dissatisfying (e.g. Elba reveals the entire reason for the aliens presence and reasons for being there in one throw-away speculative line and that's it) or simply left unanswered - even when the opportunity is there for more to be revealed (even if only snippets), the scriptwriter (Lost writer Damon Lindelof - alert!) chooses to opt for another monster-fight over dialogue or introspection every time, despite a great opening half-hour or so that promises the opposite. They may be saving some of these questions for a sequel (and the ending makes it clear they are), but on its own merits, the film fails to deliver on a lot of things it sets up. And while a sequel might solve some of the more puzzling things in this film and therefore retroactively improve some of it, it can't and won't undo a lot of the weaker elements regardless.

It's not exciting enough to be a dumb popcorn flick and it's not smart enough to be a cerebral science fiction classic - or anything enough to stand out, except maybe visually. It has delusions of grandeur that it fails to reach. And there's just too much damned stupid.

5/10

(in reply to clownfoot)
Post #: 848
RE: Thin film (spoilers) - 18/6/2012 12:32:20 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1893
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
quote:

ORIGINAL: scary_ice

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Pretentiousness subroutines engaged...


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mr E

Alien is my favourite film and I was so disappointed with this utter
turkey of a film I just had to write some thoughts. This is not much of
a review more of a list of all the bad points in this film. Quite
honestly there aren't many good points.

[WARNING - MAJOR SPOILERS]

BASIC FLAWS:

- Not scary at all, a complete lack of tension and suspense. In Alien
the edge of seat suspense was non-stop. every alien film has a different tone to every other one, and I felt a sense of foreboding and wondering what was gonna happen when it kicked off. Horses for courses. Alien is set on a mainly totally enclosed environment, this one has massive clear vistas the narrow and tone becomes more chaotic and fractured the more the film goes on. Big massive hopes, with the walls closing in as the film goes along depicted via the camerawork alone. Style matches content,

- Awful characters, clichéd sci-fi stereotypes. Too many characters
most of which were just plot devices waiting to die. somewhat necessary to the genre staples, with the wider themes being expressed in a simple context./color]

- Muddled and confusing storyline. It tried too hard to be an original
concept with deep, meaningful questions about our creators and where we
come from blah blah blah whilst also trying to be a horror film/prequel
to Alien. It failed and couldn't decide what it wanted to be. your opinion. By choosing to call the film Prometheus, Scott has invited us to look at that myth and compare/contrast how that story relates to aspects of the film and that provides the 'depth' of the film. I mean, for example, Prometheus is subjected to repeated and extreme abdominal agonies, part of him being torn out for seeking to align with/be equal to/discover the knowledge of his Gods, and Shaw, in wanting to stand next to her 'Gods' and find answers is being 'impudent' from a God's point of view in such a context and what happens to her? Extreme, repeated abdominal agony and something torn out of her. My own pretentious (if you like) take on any story designed to have 'levels' is to say shite like 'Look at a puddle. depending on how you look at it, you may see just the water it's made from, you may see a reflection of yourself, or you may see the entire sky.
Either come up with something completely original that is not connected
to the Alien universe in any way or do a full blown unpretentious Alien
prequel with a direct link between the space jockeys and the eggs/face
huggers/aliens/queen alien etc. There was no need for this awful film
to be connected to the alien universe and it may have slightly improved
had it not.given the evolution of the ooze into worms, bigger worms, etc, all the way to proto Alien, it could have existed as a stand alone story giving a 'what happens next ending, with the evolution to the alien we know yet to come or as a direct prequel, to me it does both

OTHER FLAWS:

- Bad dialogue. 'You wanna get laid?' scene - Absolutely no need for
this scene between vickers and janek. Added nothing. Film themes creation/birth/survival/creation driving everything a species does, so referencing sex isn't THAT odd and given the debate over whether Vickers is a robot, this would seem an attempt to confirm that she isn't (but it foreshadows the 'cant believe I nearly fucked a robot from Resurrection so it serves a function in it's film, references another part of the franchise AND doesn't settle the 'is she a robot' debate because in the later film the concept of robots being able to have sex is floated.
Also unfunny banter between two unnecessary co-pilots. lame but not ruinous

David talking to big white engineer in alien speak - probably one of
the most unintentionally hilarious things I've ever seen, space jockey
then rips his head of for no reason. Brilliant! Not. Tons of other
examples I can't be bothered to list. There is a reason. David is attempting to speak to it in its own language, and it considers David beneath him. Not only beneath him, beneath the Engineer's creation too, a HOW DARE YOU ADDRESS ME reaction (lame comparative, geek tries to talk to 'cool kid', geek gets punched in the face for daring to believe he is worthy. Anyway, the created trying to speak to/be equal to the creator and getting punked by the creator is the theme, and this bit is the theme in action: someone wishing to align himself with 'God' and 'God's' reaction all in one brief moment

- Space Jockeys looked awful. Turns out they were just wearing suits
and are actually just big bald pumped up white guys who like to throw
people about. Giger must be laughing his head off. .physically superior 'gods' who wont lower themselves to talk to their creation,also frankenstein theme in reverse (kill your creation or it will kill you) the tension between creation and destruction depicted

- Score. Contributed nothing to the film. Created no tension
whatsoever.that's just an opinion, if the events left you cold, the music would jar, whatever it was

- Turns out Weyland is still alive and onboard the ship. It's supposed
to be a shock twist but no one cares. Guy Pearce is cast as Weyland and
wears the worst make up known to man. former, it's not that much of a surprise that he's on board (the 'recording' of Weyland would be very weird if he wasn't on board to point to exactly where Shaw and her other half were standing. The make up sucks, and hopefully there is some reason for casting Guy Pierce in the role, but can forgive the make up, personally

- hated the way most the crew didn't no what the mission was until they
got there. Unrealistic and downright bad writing. totally realisitic, in a company/organisation/life people very often know the ins and outs of their 'superiors' big picture plans and just do the job/thing they do. Vickers considers Shaw and employee, for example, and therefore not worthy of being treated as an equal. Also, those 'above' us having information/knowledge we don't have and attitudes to the 'unworthy' re knowing this stuff is totally in keeping with the Prmoetheus God/those the gods create themes

And finally to sum up...

Stupid black goo spills out of stupid vases. Stupid character gets
infected with stupid black goo because stupid android put it in his
stupid drink. Stupid character makes love with stupid Ripley wannabe.
Stupid character gets torched and dies. Stupid Ripley wannabe becomes
pregnant. Stupid Ripley wannabe cuts out stupid baby squid from her
tummy tum tum. Stupid squid turns into stupid giant squid which
impregnates stupid big bald white space jockey. Stupid alien rips its
way out of stupid space jockey's chest. Stupid film ends. Stupid film
makes no sense.

clearly it does make sense, since that's what happens, aside from the opinion that it is all stupid and happening for no good reason



I appreciate your analysis of the themes and how they fit in with the story of the original myth of Prometheus but to be honest if the story doesn't do it for you on the most basic level then you aren't really going to be encouraged to dig deeper and engage with the deeper layers are you?

Nobody tells their mates "I saw a film last night where the themes were fantastically well implemented and the symbolism was ever so clever. You should check it out!"

And the referencing of other Alien movies was one of the problems for me. They kept telling us it wasn't an Alien prequel only to reference it at every opportunity!


Well, I anticipated the film being called Prometheus for a number of reasons, including the use of archetypes representing aspects of human folly writ large, so I had no trouble at all with the characterisation from the off. Every Alien film has different characterisation styles, and there is certainly contrast between the working class joes characterisation of Alien and the 'experts in their field' in Prometheus. My dealings with 'experts' make it entirely acceptable to me that when confronting something beyond their expertise, experts in this film reveal themselves to be as fallible as anyone else (even moreso, because being an expert in one thing can make people arrogant enough to believe themselves to be cleverer than they actually are, and thinking that is what makes people do things that are patently stupid).

I expected a certain kind of viewing experience, and I got what I was anticipating, which was not a film that would answer everything it set up, but one that went at 'play with fire, get burnt/curiosity killed the cat' from narrative, visual and thematic angles. Maybe I'd have reworded a few lines to make them a little less 'you can type this shit but you cant say it' (for example 'It's what I choose to believe' could have been rejigged to 'I'm taking a leap of faith' and that brings the religious and scientific perspectives together in one line, because all attempts to discover something/go out on a limb in any way require leaps of faith and you can take a leap of faith without faith seeming so much like the total naivety/mere hope the actual line made it appear to be), but I'm happy with the film I saw, even IF it seems to others I'm talking arse



< Message edited by jobloffski -- 18/6/2012 3:15:07 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to scary_ice)
Post #: 849
RE: So Poor. - 18/6/2012 4:21:47 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: clownfoot


quote:

ORIGINAL: bennyboy1971

quote:

ORIGINAL: antosh25

The gore and Special Effects were good, but there were Pott holes in the Script. Prometheus left me feeling confused and quite dissapointed.
thefilm was rushed ! Ridley should've taken his time to work on the plot of the film.


Just as you should have taken time to read your post?

Sorry - I find it hard to respect your view if you can't use capital letters properly or even spell the word pot.

What next - moaning that it wasn't Aylean 5?




I think the word he was looking for was 'plot'.





I fell about at Aylean 5.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to clownfoot)
Post #: 850
RE: We were deceived - 18/6/2012 8:14:45 PM   
mclane1


Posts: 367
Joined: 7/2/2009
Spoiler!,!...oh, and I have absolutely no desire to see a sequel/prequel that takes place on planet right said Fred. The engineers are the least interesting folk committed to film. In fact the more I think about it the less I liked the movie (seen today) it was actually unfair on the Alien franchise to link this and the whole project from marketing to finish comes across as wanting to insult anyone who loves the original!! That said fassbender was ace, of course.
quote:

ORIGINAL: mclane1

The most annoying thing is we were taken for a ride by a trailer that billed it as an out right horror/ thriller when in fact it was quite light in tone, infact the score in the film was at times uplifting and jouyous?! in a way I'd liken to stargate. There were some clever bits don't get me wrong but it lacked any suspense, repace was a really poor choice. Still, it was worth a tenner to see the extended imax trailer for spiderman!!



_____________________________

If the cash is there, we do not care.
Post #: 851
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 8:31:44 PM   
mclane1


Posts: 367
Joined: 7/2/2009
The thinking is he cast Pearce old as so in the sequels he can use him as a younger weyland.
quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM
6. Not much else (maybe cast older actors for older roles rather than sticking a younger actor in unconvincing old-age make-up when he has absolutely no screen-time as a younger guy?)



_____________________________

If the cash is there, we do not care.

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 852
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 8:59:10 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
quote:

1. DO NOT REMOVE YOUR HELMET on an alien planet, even if the air is apparently breathable. At least not without a thorough survey of the indigenous wildlife, microbial life, etc. beforehand.


This was seen as a massive risk from the start and it was mostly already examined as being safe.

quote:

2. DO NOT PET THE WILDLIFE. Especially when there is evidence of violent death all around you.


I don't really understand this. They were already tired, nervous and dealing with their fears (conditions that never make you smart) by smoking and the other by trying to pet the HOLY FUCKING SHIT A NEW SPECIES. Him trying to pet the wildlife was well done. He knew it was wrong, he pushed himself twice before attempting to touch it again, yet curiosity won over logic.

quote:

3. Run PERPENDICULAR to large falling buildings/towers/spacecraft, NOT along the line of its fall.


But the debris was falling everywhere and they weren't really looking at the spacecraft. Moving left or right still didn't guarantee that they would be safe from a falling piece of Engineer spaceship and from their perception, that definitely didn't look the case.

quote:

5. Apparently people in the near future can run away immediately after emergency major stomach surgery without much problem.


Future morphine is an incredibly powerful thing.



< Message edited by Deviation -- 18/6/2012 9:27:04 PM >


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 853
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 9:35:00 PM   
benny the jet


Posts: 2418
Joined: 27/8/2008
From: Over there
quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Visually stunning, as expected, but ultimately disappointing. I liked it to a degree, I wanted to like it a whole lot more, but there were just too many unanswered questions for it to work as a stand-alone film without a sequel(s), and just way too much stupid in it for a film that has pretenses of 'cerebral' to the point that its flaws nagged at me and stayed with me far more than any positives the film had when I left the cinema, and long afterwards.

What we learnt from Prometheus:

1. DO NOT REMOVE YOUR HELMET on an alien planet, even if the air is apparently breathable. At least not without a thorough survey of the indigenous wildlife, microbial life, etc. beforehand.

2. DO NOT PET THE WILDLIFE. Especially when there is evidence of violent death all around you.

3. Run PERPENDICULAR to large falling buildings/towers/spacecraft, NOT along the line of its fall.

4. Don't trust androids. Or scientists. Or corporations. Or gods. Or Damon Lindelof.

5. Apparently people in the near future can run away immediately after emergency major stomach surgery without much problem.

6. Not much else (maybe cast older actors for older roles rather than sticking a younger actor in unconvincing old-age make-up when he has absolutely no screen-time as a younger guy?)

It's not disappointing because it's not "Alien" enough, it's disappointing because it's just not smart enough - the script at times borders on (if not invades) moronic and the whole Chariot-of-the-Gods meet-our-makers plot is clumsily, vaguely, and at times cornily handled (I'm not sure if someone says "you just need to believe", but they might as well).

Theron is wasted. Pierce is bizarrely old throughout and thus, too, wasted. Rapace is unconvincing and makes a poor Ripley replacement, which is all she is, pretty much, motivations aside.

There is some goodness. Fassbender is excellent as David. Elba is charismatic and charming. It looks lovely. The 3D (in IMAX - I'd worry about brightness in non-IMAX) is subtle, going for depth over poking stuff in your face and therefore good (although worth £8 more than 2D is another question).

It does pose some interesting questions, but either its answers are dissatisfying (e.g. Elba reveals the entire reason for the aliens presence and reasons for being there in one throw-away speculative line and that's it) or simply left unanswered - even when the opportunity is there for more to be revealed (even if only snippets), the scriptwriter (Lost writer Damon Lindelof - alert!) chooses to opt for another monster-fight over dialogue or introspection every time, despite a great opening half-hour or so that promises the opposite. They may be saving some of these questions for a sequel (and the ending makes it clear they are), but on its own merits, the film fails to deliver on a lot of things it sets up. And while a sequel might solve some of the more puzzling things in this film and therefore retroactively improve some of it, it can't and won't undo a lot of the weaker elements regardless.

It's not exciting enough to be a dumb popcorn flick and it's not smart enough to be a cerebral science fiction classic - or anything enough to stand out, except maybe visually. It has delusions of grandeur that it fails to reach. And there's just too much damned stupid.

5/10


What he said

_____________________________

That means we only have thirty minutes to get you up that tree

I fucking love tea. Its my favourite drink after coffee and alcohol

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=585511933

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 854
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 9:35:31 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8222
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

quote:

1. DO NOT REMOVE YOUR HELMET on an alien planet, even if the air is apparently breathable. At least not without a thorough survey of the indigenous wildlife, microbial life, etc. beforehand.


This was seen as a massive risk from the start and it was mostly already examined as being safe.

quote:

2. DO NOT PET THE WILDLIFE. Especially when there is evidence of violent death all around you.


I don't really understand this. They were already tired, nervous and dealing with their fears (conditions that never make you smart) by smoking and the other by trying to pet the HOLY FUCKING SHIT A NEW SPECIES. Him trying to pet the wildlife was well done. He knew it was wrong, he pushed himself twice before attempting to touch it again, yet curiosity won over logic.



Pisspoor scientists though. Scientists are trained, after all, in scientific procedures. That's before even taking common sense into account. Silly things to make the characters do, reminiscent of the worst B-movie tropes.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 855
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 11:28:58 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
But common sense takes a vacation in a situation as stressful as that, no matter what the job is. The air was breathable and mostly proven to be safe, the biologist had common sense trying to win but under the stress and situation, he went for the worst decision. I really think the foolishness makes sense.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to superdan)
Post #: 856
RE: Prometheus - 18/6/2012 11:48:19 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
Also, if we're discussing poor scripting, how did Shaw know that the Engineer was going to Earth? Her only guess was the Engineer knowing where Earth is and his extremely hostile stance towards people.



_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:


ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 857
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 12:24:20 AM   
Gazz


Posts: 873
Joined: 30/9/2005
I thought David told her that was exactly where they intended to go before the outbreak happened.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 858
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 6:02:02 AM   
Lazarus munkey


Posts: 1650
Joined: 20/3/2006
From: out of nowhere
Hints at some big questions but has no idea how to tackle them.
A largely wasted cast and Rapace looked out of her depth.
Dull, dumb and the biggest disappointment in an age.

_____________________________

"Because I got the answers"

Last 5 seen
Chronicle 4/5
The Amazing Spider-Man 3/5
Young Adult 4/5
21 Jump Street 4/5
The Apartment 5/5

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 859
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 6:02:39 AM   
Lazarus munkey


Posts: 1650
Joined: 20/3/2006
From: out of nowhere
Hints at some big questions but has no idea how to tackle them.
A largely wasted cast and Rapace looked out of her depth.
Dull, dumb and the biggest disappointment in an age.

_____________________________

"Because I got the answers"

Last 5 seen
Chronicle 4/5
The Amazing Spider-Man 3/5
Young Adult 4/5
21 Jump Street 4/5
The Apartment 5/5

(in reply to Gazz)
Post #: 860
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 10:36:51 AM   
titus_andronicus

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 19/6/2012
There have been a lot of comments re Guy Pearce’s casting/the (admittedly) bad old age make-up. This interesting article on the design decisions taken from i09.com quotes one of the designers of Prometheus: "Oh, and as for why Weyland is played by Guy Pearce in old-man makeup, Spaihts says Damon Lindelof's script showed the android David going inside Weyland's dreams while he was in hypersleep — and in his dreams, Weyland is a young man, on a yacht surrounded by beautiful women. These dream conversations got cut, but Pearce's casting was already locked in. Scott had originally wanted to cast Max von Sydow as Peter Weyland.”

http://goo.gl/zpBGD

For those wishing to check out an in-depth look at the visual fx design work of the movie via fxguide.com:

http://goo.gl/c9aJb

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 861
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 11:39:44 AM   
Dr Lenera

 

Posts: 3934
Joined: 19/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lazarus munkey

Hints at some big questions but has no idea how to tackle them.
A largely wasted cast and Rapace looked out of her depth.
Dull, dumb and the biggest disappointment in an age.


THIS!!!

_____________________________

check out more of my reviews on http://horrorcultfilms.co.uk/

(in reply to Lazarus munkey)
Post #: 862
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 1:17:10 PM   
KeithM


Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

But common sense takes a vacation in a situation as stressful as that, no matter what the job is. The air was breathable and mostly proven to be safe, the biologist had common sense trying to win but under the stress and situation, he went for the worst decision. I really think the foolishness makes sense.


Oh come on Dev. You're defending the indefensible. These are scientists who should know better. They didn't even know there was ANY breathable air on the planet, did not do a SINGLE scientific test on the air, did not even look for microbial/bacterial contaminants. It was a stupidly reckless thing to do, wall-buttingly so for a guy who's meant to be scientifically trained. It was a plot device so the actors didn't have to wear helmets throughout the film. A plot device they couldn't even bother to write in in a logically believable manner (say by having their helmets cracked). It's not hard to do even, so the fact they didn't indicates they either didn't care or did it deliberately as some kind of critique on the recklessness and irresponsible nature of scientists (?). That it was stupid though is not up for debate. Even the other characters in the film thought so, until they saw that he didn't die IMMEDIATELY (let's not be at all cautious and wait and see if any problems arise over the course of a few hours). The future is an idiocracy.

All the other points you defend are also indefensible. Petting the snake thing would have been stupid if he had been a grease-monkey, but as the team's Biologist,even more so - not only because that's why he's there, but also because the evidence of death all around would NOT lessen his 'common sense' but would heighten it for his own survival's sake, especially when the thing hisses a warning at him. That's a universal thing that any animal, human or otherwise, would instinctively take heed from. Plus he would fear contaminating IT with his own microbes if he was a genuine biologist. He didn't behave like a scientist, a smart person, or even an evolved life form with conditioned responses. He was stupid in a way that no real life-form can be, he was stupid in a way that only writers can make.

Falling space-ship: again, come on! They knew it was falling towards them. There was a shadow on the ground. They could see the shadow. I shouted it at the screen "RUN SIDEWAYS YOU STUPID FUCKS!"

Defend your enjoyment of the film all you want, if you must, but please don't try to insult our intelligence by arguing that the stupid in this film wasn't. Your explanations don't explain these things away anyway, and if fact, some of them make the characters sound even more stupid than the film does.

Stupid is as stupid does. And there's a lot of stupid in this film.

< Message edited by KeithM -- 19/6/2012 1:32:50 PM >

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 863
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 1:33:45 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1893
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Nah, biologist sees thing nobody in his field has ever seen before, enthusiasm in the face of new discovery gets the better of him, oops, big mistake. His foolish action in the face of stepping into the unknown costs him dear. One moment of the film that is a 'commentary' on the entire film. Almost everybody else's actions are functionally the same as those of the biologist, EVERYBODY who gets punked in the film is acting unwisely in some way, either because they don't have enough info to keep them safe or they are too bent on discovering the thing they seek to see anything but their goal. Swallow that principle and everything else falls into place. Remove the action from the context in which it is placed, and everything falls apart.


Shaw had the brains to get out of the way (survival instinct she had previously been continually demonstrating), Vickers just kept on running, not deviating from her path, and it killed her. Not just an event in the narrative, but a comment on a 'starched collar' straight down the line character (the bureaucratic type, who in real life, whatever the consequences, keep doing what they do, because that's the only thing they know how to do, and the fear of admitting being wrong, in the bureaucratic mindset makes them run straight doan the line, never deviating, oblivious to the whole shebang being about to crash down on them because they aren't doing what needs to be done to avoid it). Action demonstrates character. And in a film where practically everybody is making unwise choices that cost them dear in the pursuit of the one thing they really want, it's fully in context that Vickers does too. She pursued the same line (try to please Daddy) and ended up crushed. Or sum shit like dat.








< Message edited by jobloffski -- 19/6/2012 1:51:20 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 864
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 1:51:09 PM   
Filmfan 2


Posts: 1043
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

[Falling space-ship: again, come on! They knew it was falling towards them. There was a shadow on the ground. They could see the shadow. I shouted it at the screen "RUN SIDEWAYS YOU STUPID FUCKS!"



I saw Prometheus for the third time over the weekend so I'm rather familiar with the scene now. During the spaceship crash scene, I made a point of paying attention to see if they do indeed run exactly in a straight line, and I actually think that they don't; if you watch the scene carefully from the wider shot from the side, they are actually running slightly diagonally, albeit to the wrong side (to the left rather than their nearer right side). The tighter shot of the ship rolling behind them, however, does indicate a straighter path.

I agree that it's stupid that they don't just run at a ninety degree angle to the ship, but I think there is at least a slight concession to trying to get out of the way.

On a wider note, their actions can be defended to an extent. When people walk out in front of traffic they are often rooted to the spot out of fear when they would have enough time to jump out of the way. How many times do you see a child (or indeed an adult) walk out in front of a truck/car/whatever in a movie and have an someone come to knock them out of the way, when they would've had enough time to clear the area themselves? I think people forget that a lot of what happens in movies doesn't chime with real life - things happen for dramatic effect. A lot of the logic that is followed in films is just absurd if you try and extrapolate it into real world situations. Then again, if movies tried to be like real life we'd have lots of dull movies about.

I'm not trying to out-and-out defend this part of the film and apologise for Ridley Scott, but perhaps a touch of suspension of disbelief is in order?


< Message edited by Filmfan 2 -- 19/6/2012 1:53:56 PM >


_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins


(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 865
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 1:54:37 PM   
KeithM


Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008
PS. If the falling space ship was unseen and unavoidable, how come Rapace dodged it (only at the last second, but still...)? They were running because they knew the ship was falling, they ran long enough (that was a major part of the problem) along the length of the shadow of the falling ship to (a)note that fact and (b) change direction at any time during that run. Rapace did at the last second. Theron just kept trying to outrun that shadow.... even when she could see the edge of the shadow easily within her range if only she changed direction. Stupid. And her death was utterly pointless. She was just there to add a female to the death count. She didn't serve any other purpose in the film. She wasn't useful for exposition - Weyland and David were more than enough. She wasn't there with an agenda to fuck with the mission (as per Aliens). She had no purpose in the plot at all, her death was throwaway, entirely avoidable (i.e. not dramatic) and was executed poorly (no pun intended).

I wanted to like it. I tried to put all these problems down as nitpicking, but they're not. They ARE, along with others already mentioned elsewhere, signs of a not very well written film. And that's terribly disappointing, but it is how it is.

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 866
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 2:06:31 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1893
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere
Her 'purpose' for Prometheus was to show disappointment and anger at being abandoned by her creator, and to be doing her damndest, in vain, to get Weyland to consider her worthy of his attention, and to hate her father's other creation. Which ties in with Shaw asking why our creators abandoned us, and why they seem to want to destroy us (disappointed parents by showing their disappointment seem to want to destroy their children). Wanted to be considered worthy by her creator, ending up crushed, figuratively by his cruelty and her ending makes her being crushed literal. Or something.

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 19/6/2012 2:11:33 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 867
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 2:14:20 PM   
KeithM


Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008
@FilmFan2: I know what you mean and normally that's what I do - as I said, I have tried to put these things down as just nitpicks, but (a) there are just too many of them for it to be an accident and (b) they could have been written in a way that didn't require quite so MUCH suspension of disbelief - by making things mildly believable instead of wildly not for example - and through the use of good storytelling techniques, go some way to explain why characters might behave the way they do, instead of leaving the audience to come up with possible explanations for why characters act in the stupid/illogical/survival-threatening-reckless/completely against character/basic human behaviour way they seem to.

These problems are so prevalent they PREVENT suspension of disbelief.

These are not the talking points intentioned by the filmmakers. We're meant to be discussing the Themes of the film, the Plot, The Story. Character Arcs... or at least how cool the monsters and space ships were... But we're spending as much time discussing Stupid Character Actions or Nonsensical Plot Points, perhaps even more than any of those things the filmmakers would like us to be discussing.

This is the sign of a film gone wrong.

A longer Director's Cut might fix some of it, but for me the problem is in the script. There are too many instances of laziness, stupidity, bad science and so on in the writing to think it's anything to do with editing. A longer Director's Cut might clear up some of the more puzzling plot points perhaps, but it can't undo the sheer amount of stupid in the script.

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 868
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 2:32:42 PM   
Filmfan 2


Posts: 1043
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM


These are not the talking points intentioned by the filmmakers. We're meant to be discussing the Themes of the film, the Plot, The Story. Character Arcs... or at least how cool the monsters and space ships were... But we're spending as much time discussing Stupid Character Actions or Nonsensical Plot Points, perhaps even more than any of those things the filmmakers would like us to be discussing.


You've definitely got a point there.


_____________________________

I am not drinkin' any fuckin' Merlot!

"All I wanted me was a piece of cornbread, you motherfuckers!"

Defender of all things Batman Begins


(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 869
RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 2:41:34 PM   
KeithM


Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008
@joblofski: That whole 'Chariot of the Gods/abandoned progeny' thing was very clumsily handled too. I was aware that that's what Theron was MEANT to be there for, but that point was so clumsily made* and the 'reveal' so NOT a surprise that any intended point she had was utterly wasted. She was a part of the Weyland company. A Big Cheese. And on the mission (and he's NOT dead, so he knows she is). So hardly 'abandoned'. That allegory is weak, because she's hardly scrabbling round in the dirt and in the dark (metaphorically what we've been doing), and her father wasn't out to kill her either. She has some daddy issues for sure, but it was such a petty-spoilt thing considering her privileged status in comparison - and came in so late in the film that it just seemed extraneous, too on the nose and just unnecessary. Now if Weyland had been awake all along and involved on the ship, then more could have been made of it and consequently both the actors, but no. Her death had nothing to do with any of that either - it was almost random...

*because it was made in a speech rather than through story and actions.

Again I put it down to poor writing -although if there are more Weyland sequences in a possible directors cut then that might help flesh it out perhaps, but I'm not sure why they'd cut stuff that would make a film better in the first place, so perhaps not

< Message edited by KeithM -- 19/6/2012 2:50:06 PM >

(in reply to KeithM)
Post #: 870
Page:   <<   < prev  27 28 [29] 30 31   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Genesis? Page: <<   < prev  27 28 [29] 30 31   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.094