RE: Prometheus

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: Prometheus

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Prometheus

Page: << < prev 29 30 [31] 32 33 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

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 #: 901

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 2:55:21 PM

jobloffski

Posts: 1846
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

He rejected one creation (Vickers) in favour of another (David). In that sense he abandoned her, out of disappointment, and not caring about how it hurts her. And people are 'killed inside' by their parents all the time, and even if there is wealth in a family, it isn't enough if a child feels her father wishes she didn't exist.. But obviously, I'm more inclined to link the father/child/why did you 'make? me stuff with the creators/created on various levels than most.

I'd say the film is very clearly made to make future viewings add what some people feel is missing. The way Vickers glares so angrily at David (the usurper of her father's love) and the potential sting of a mocking parent apparently telling his inferior child 'try harder'. Shaw's hopelessly naive and smiley reaction to the discovery of the cave paintings feels different when you know what she doesn't about where this will lead her, etc. But surprise or not, the reveal of Weyland being her father isn't the entirety of her relationship with her father in the film, she's being kept at arms length from him by the existence of David from the start, and is livid about it, and this is something that has been going on for some time, prior to the mission. That's enough for me regarding that particular story strand for it to function well enough in the film , it might not be enough for others, but guess that's life.

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 19/6/2012 3:05:08 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 #: 902

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 3:16:02 PM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Your reasoning is totally sound, but I just don't think the film/script did justice to the idea and handled that aspect/her character poorly. I didn't like her, hate her, or care much about her at all basically - she just came off as a bit of a spoilt brat (if her character was written with a little more empathy, then she may have come across entirely differently). I must stress though that this wasn't a major thing for me, and probably would have been a minor nitpick if the rest of the film stood up, but as it is, it's just another feather on the camel's back...

< Message edited by KeithM -- 19/6/2012 3:33:36 PM >

(in reply to jobloffski)

Post #: 903

RE: So Poor. - 19/6/2012 3:49:14 PM

makins

Posts: 30
Joined: 15/12/2011

quote:

ORIGINAL: antosh25

there were Pott holes in the Script.

yeah you ought to get onto the council about that, bloody dangerous if you ask me.

no pott holes where i saw it mind you.

Post #: 904

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 4:27:48 PM

chris kilby

Posts: 1189
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation

Future morphine is an incredibly powerful thing.

I never venture on to the forums without it.

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 905

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 5:48:15 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26923
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Oh come on Dev. You're defending the indefensible.

I didn't know I was defending Hitler.

quote:

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.

But the examination of the air showed that the air could have been breathable and that it was far more breathable than the air on Earth. There proved to be no problem with the air and none proved to be so. It might have been rushed but the point till that moment was made. Jesus, this is like seeing the discussion on The Hurt Locker where it was criticised because the scene where the soldiers in a recon are attacked in the desert was inaccurately portrayed in many ways...

Also, does training to be a scientist include training under a situation where they are left abandoned on an alien ship, exhausted and stressed, while a sandstorm is going on outside billions of fucking light years away from Earth? While they are in an alien spaceship that was meant to be abandoned. The worst fucking extraordinary scenarios imaginable. No, they wouldn't, you don't think when you are doing in that scenario no matter what sort of scientist you are and you wouldn't even think that even if you were a colonial marine. Add the incredible curiosity factor and the whole theme of things going wrong because of being way too curious, and the idiocy makes sense.

quote:

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!"

But other than all the other things mentioned here, that is also forgetting that debris was falling everywhere. Running 90 degrees away from it still meant that they could be hit by debris or the ship itself once it fell to one side, as it almost happened to Shaw. She also just fell by a few centimetres from where the ship was falling and almost miraculously dodged it.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 19/6/2012 5:57:57 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 #: 906

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 10:55:12 PM

Cool Breeze

Posts: 1722
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

As Redlettermedia so eloquently put it, '' Why would anyone volunteer for a mission that they dont know anything about? What if it involved a gang bang? ''.

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 907

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 11:07:41 PM

Dirk Miggler

Posts: 836
Joined: 14/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

As Redlettermedia so eloquently put it, '' Why would anyone volunteer for a mission that they dont know anything about? What if it involved a gang bang? ''.

Errrrr, money ???????

Gang bang = bonus

(in reply to Cool Breeze)

Post #: 908

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 11:24:10 PM

Dirk Miggler

Posts: 836
Joined: 14/1/2009

Gotta love the "well if I was in this life or death situation I would do this....." comments. You see a huge spaceship or whatever falling out of the sky, shit falling all around you, what do you do, stop and look ? how the hell would you or they, have any idea how its going to crash. Answer........... you dont .You run and it its fear/panic that drives you.

"Well thats totally unbelievable, you wouldn't do that at all you would just run to the side" *sitting there in armchair in comfort of living room, weighing up the situation for 20mins after seeing film*................... Yeah. ok !!

< Message edited by Dirk Miggler -- 19/6/2012 11:27:22 PM >

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)

Post #: 909

RE: Prometheus - 19/6/2012 11:24:50 PM

Dirk Miggler

Posts: 836
Joined: 14/1/2009

double post

< Message edited by Dirk Miggler -- 20/6/2012 12:04:19 AM >

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)

Post #: 910

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 12:14:31 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

Your attempts to explain away the stupid don't make them any the less so I'm afraid. As I have repeatedly said, any one of those would be a stupid thing that COULD be explained away, forgiven, or let slide as a nitpick in order for it not to spoil the experience if only there wasn't so much of it that NEEDED explaining away. In isolation I could maybe just about accept some of these sophist explanations for any one of these problems, but there are so many of them that distract us from discussing the actual film itself that I believe they cannot have all been intentional, but are just what they appear to be - poor writing, plain and simple.

You're welcome to believe otherwise, but I know stupid when I see stupid and I saw a lot of stupid in Prometheus.

@Dirk: Being snarky isn't cool or clever. Unless it's funny. And you aren't. You act like everything I'm saying is completely ridiculous and so utterly nitpicky that it's stupid to even mention them. Not so. These are perfectly legitimate and widely shared complaints about the film. And you also imply that I'm just an idiot sat in an armchair with no clue about how human beings might react to a stressful situation. Which is one hell of a presumption. You also act like you know Lindelof/Scott (and yourself, but not me) do, only on an alien planet in this case, where I'd wager my experience is at least the equal of theirs or yours (i.e. none). In other words my judgement on how believably the people in the film might behave is as valid as anyone else's. Your statement shows a lack of maturity.

If you HAVE an argument, then you can make it without trying to belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. And "of course they act stupid stupid! It's on an alien planet duh!" is NOT an acceptable explanation. :)

@Dev: If she had been hit by falling debris, fair enough, I'd take that (although I'd still call it a random, meaningless death), but she didn't even TRY to dodge (at least not clearly so) and got crushed right in the middle of the falling mass, not the edges, not by debris, and considering she was running for quite some time, it seems more like a damn good shot by the space ship OR a lack of the simplest survival instinct on her part for it to hit her when she had that long to get clear. The length of the shot/run was a huge part of the problem. She had AAAAAGES to change course. If it was more sudden, if it even LOOKED slightly unavoidable, if she'd clearly changed course and still got hit, you'd hear no complaints (apart from the randomness of it), but she seemed to have all the time in the world and just kept running and running down the length of that shadow...

Again, in isolation, not a film-breaker by any means, but all those feathers sure are heavy...

< Message edited by KeithM -- 20/6/2012 12:49:36 AM >

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)

Post #: 911

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 12:47:29 AM

Deviation

Posts: 26923
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

As Redlettermedia so eloquently put it, '' Why would anyone volunteer for a mission that they dont know anything about? What if it involved a gang bang? ''.

Being very well paid tends to do the trick. Gosh, why did those colonial marines accept to go on a mission with no idea on what they might be facing?

quote:

Your attempts to explain away the stupid don't make them any the less so I'm afraid. As I have repeatedly said, any one of those would be a stupid thing that COULD be explained away, forgiven, or let slide as a nitpick in order for it not to spoil the experience if only there wasn't so much of it that NEEDED explaining away. In isolation I could maybe just about accept some of these sophist explanations for any one of these problems, but there are so many of them that distract us from discussing the actual film itself that I believe they cannot have all been intentional, but are just what they appear to be - poor writing, plain and simple.

I don't think, from the way I see it, that it needed further explaining. From the way I saw it, I immediately thought of those being the reasons and that the film needed no further explanation. It wouldn't distract me from discussing the main themes (expectations, relationships between creators and creation, the way people act to such incredible findings) if it wasn't because somebody mentioned those criticisms. For example, I met a person who found the characters of Blade Runner or Ivan's Childhood to be thin at best and absolute voids of character at worst, I argued otherwise and we didn't argue on what greater themes the movies in question were aiming for. I don't see anything sophist, excessive nor overcomplicated about the problems being raised on Prometheus. It doesn't make me right, but I don't think they were in any way, a problem. My real problem lies with how Shaw could have known that the Engineers were going to Earth as I don't really remember the scene where David (the only character who could have known the Engineer's intentions) told Shaw that they were going to Earth with that powerful cargo.

Also, calling somebody as being sophistic can be very snarky as well and as snarky as Dirk was in the last post, it's not really fair to call people for being snarky when you use words like that.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 20/6/2012 12:49:07 AM >

_____________________________

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 Cool Breeze)

Post #: 912

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 12:58:48 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

I didn't call anyone sophist Dev, I simply said some of the explanations were (my apologies if that distinction wasn't clear) - and in my opinion they are, no matter how firmly held by their proponent (that is they may not be knowingly so). I blame that on Lindelof/Scott, not on the people trying to defend their film. I have no problem arguing against or even mocking someone's argument, but that's not the same as belittling or mocking the person*. So, to reiterate, I wasn't calling anyone here a sophist, but that doesn't mean all arguments are without sophistry. Not all may be and I may be judging too harshly because otherwise "normally stupid" behaviour in isolation might be reasonable. But this much stupid makes the film appear stupid, not just the odd character.

*And I can be guilty of it too on occasion - I won't pretend otherwise. No high horses here, just a call to keep it civilised if we can. :)

< Message edited by KeithM -- 20/6/2012 1:16:08 AM >

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 913

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 1:16:09 AM

Dirk Miggler

Posts: 836
Joined: 14/1/2009

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

Your attempts to explain away the stupid don't make them any the less so I'm afraid. As I have repeatedly said, any one of those would be a stupid thing that COULD be explained away, forgiven, or let slide as a nitpick in order for it not to spoil the experience if only there wasn't so much of it that NEEDED explaining away. In isolation I could maybe just about accept some of these sophist explanations for any one of these problems, but there are so many of them that distract us from discussing the actual film itself that I believe they cannot have all been intentional, but are just what they appear to be - poor writing, plain and simple.

You're welcome to believe otherwise, but I know stupid when I see stupid and I saw a lot of stupid in Prometheus.

@Dirk: Being snarky isn't cool or clever. Unless it's funny. And you aren't. You act like everything I'm saying is completely ridiculous and so utterly nitpicky that it's stupid to even mention them. Not so. These are perfectly legitimate and widely shared complaints about the film. And you also imply that I'm just an idiot sat in an armchair with no clue about how human beings might react to a stressful situation. Which is one hell of a presumption. You also act like you know Lindelof/Scott (and yourself, but not me) do, only on an alien planet in this case, where I'd wager my experience is at least the equal of theirs or yours (i.e. none). In other words my judgement on how believably the people in the film might behave is as valid as anyone else's. Your statement shows a lack of maturity.

If you HAVE an argument, then you can make it without trying to belittle anyone who doesn't agree with you. And "of course they act stupid stupid! It's on an alien planet duh!" is NOT an acceptable explanation. :)

I dont act like I know how people would react, I can't say how I would react and I dont presume to know how you would react and I don't. My whole point is that none of us know, you might run to the side, you might not, how would you even know ? Sure we can look and say the the ships shaped like this, the shadow was pointing there but for me thats looking at something in hindsight with time, and sound mind. Completely opposite to the situation.
I just accept that they are running. Sideways, backwards, forwards, its irrelevent and in that situation would be totally acceptable to me because they are driven by fear and panic, hence why the "stupidness" of their actions or how believable they are doesnt bother me or take me out of the film.

< Message edited by Dirk Miggler -- 20/6/2012 1:27:41 AM >

(in reply to KeithM)

Post #: 914

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 1:22:15 AM

Dirk Miggler

Posts: 836
Joined: 14/1/2009

yeah I was being a bit snarky

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)

Post #: 915

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 1:35:00 AM

KeithM

Posts: 862
Joined: 31/7/2008

@Dirk: I know what you're saying. Of course panic plays a part and If the run was short, I'd agree, but the danger was so clearly telegraphed, the shot went on so long, they ran such a distance, that it SEEMED so utterly stupid for them NOT to just run in a different direction. That's a problem with the script, the director's interpretation of the scene or just plain stupidity. I suspect the script simply called for her to be crushed by the falling spaceship and the rest was Scott's attempt to make it dramatic. It failed to do that because (a) he failed to make us care enough about her for us to care much, and (b) the shot went on too long and gave US time to see how ridiculous it seemed for her to KEEP RUNNING in the one direction she shouldn't, for like minutes it seemed, and simply could not change direction, even when that shadow was getting bigger and bigger...

It could simply be that simple storytelling flaw that makes that scene stand out as yet another moment of true stupid rather than simple panic, or it could just be laziness and they just said "yeah, we'll have the ship fall on her" and didn't think about it much more than how to make it look 'cool', which I suspect is the case.

Edit: And anyway, don't you think death by panic was a rather pointless, undramatic, wasteful way to dispatch the character, making all that vague abandoned progeny nonsense moot? All 'nitpicking' about the actual mechanics of her death aside, it felt cheap and throwaway, and ultimately made her character no more than just another red shirt. Now, if they had Weyland somehow be the agent of her death, directly or through his agent - and her 'replacement' - David, then it might have had a bit more, I don't know, thematic weight?

< Message edited by KeithM -- 20/6/2012 2:09:26 AM >

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)

Post #: 916

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 1:41:25 AM

Deviation

Posts: 26923
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: KeithM

I didn't call anyone sophist Dev, I simply said some of the explanations were (my apologies if that distinction wasn't clear) - and in my opinion they are, no matter how firmly held by their proponent (that is they may not be knowingly so). I blame that on Lindelof/Scott, not on the people trying to defend their film. I have no problem arguing against or even mocking someone's argument, but that's not the same as belittling or mocking the person*. So, to reiterate, I wasn't calling anyone here a sophist, but that doesn't mean all arguments are without sophistry. Not all may be and I may be judging too harshly because otherwise "normally stupid" behaviour in isolation might be reasonable. But this much stupid makes the film appear stupid, not just the odd character.

*And I can be guilty of it too on occasion - I won't pretend otherwise. No high horses here, just a call to keep it civilised if we can. :)

Fair enough, I thought there was only two acts which would be outright foolish in the film (the whole venture was both ballsy and rather reckless, but there's been more incredibly dangerous and reckless space ventures in recent history ) and all made sense in the situation in which they happened. It's not normal stoopid, but foolishness which could have happened and due to the circumstances, it wasn't such an extraordinary thing that they happened.

But yeah, anyways...

_____________________________

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 #: 917

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 2:25:43 AM

Spaldron

Posts: 10487
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

As Redlettermedia so eloquently put it, '' Why would anyone volunteer for a mission that they dont know anything about? What if it involved a gang bang? ''.

You do realise they were kidding and gave the film a positive review in the end?

_____________________________

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 Cool Breeze)

Post #: 918

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 8:05:12 AM

bennyboy1971

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/7/2008

I cant remember for sure, but wasn't the guy who was fascinated by and stroked the alien snake thing smoking pot moments earlier?

(in reply to Spaldron)

Post #: 919

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 10:11:40 AM

pete_traynor

Posts: 2935
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA

Another thing and perhaps any of you nuclear physicists out there can clear this up. The Prometheus had 4 nuclear powered ion plasma engines, according to those diagrams released before the film came out. Surely the 4 of these would have to contain nuclear cores, or reactors right? When the ship collides with the ascending Jugernaught it understanably explodes and the Jugernaught comes crashing back to the surface in pretty good condition, all things considered.

Right, so that�s 4 nuclear powered engines going critical at the same time right. Surely that explosion would have been absolutely HUGE!!!! Not only wiping the Jugernaught from existence in a micro second but also completely wiping out Vickers, Shaw and every structure in that valley. They weren�t that high when the collision took place after all.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to bennyboy1971)

Post #: 920

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 11:46:04 AM

jobloffski

Posts: 1846
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

Um, thermonuclear explosion only if you overload the core, rather then just hit a reactor with a hammer or something? Were the engines heading for critical mass or just accelerating the ship to 'ramming speed'?

< Message edited by jobloffski -- 20/6/2012 11:49:08 AM >

_____________________________

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 pete_traynor)

Post #: 921

RE: Prometheus - 20/6/2012 12:13:13 PM

pete_traynor

Posts: 2935
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA

quote:

ORIGINAL: jobloffski

Um, thermonuclear explosion only if you overload the core, rather then just hit a reactor with a hammer or something? Were the engines heading for critical mass or just accelerating the ship to 'ramming speed'?

Think you�re right. They just seemed to be concerned with ramming into it. Suppose they didn�t really have much time to do anything else did they. Was a spur of the moment paniced action.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to jobloffski)

Post #: 922

RE: Oh dear! - 22/6/2012 6:52:44 AM

bennyboy1971

Posts: 42
Joined: 4/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: georgestergios

Daughters had advised me of the viral nature of the ballyhoo surrounding this film. I had seen Alien when it originally came out and also Bladerunner and was highly impressed by both. BUT when we went to see Prometheus we had expected to be underwhelmed and we we not disappointed. The hard core astronautics was a trifle passe and frankly who would go to an alien world and land without parking the getaway vehicle in orbit(as in the first Alien film). All other aspects including loose ends,unappealing characters, etc were covered perfectly by Empires's excellent review.A couple of my furhter gripes-
1.The 3D added very little to the action.
2.The opening scene with the Engineer "reinventing" himself was very puzzling.
Give me "2001" any time for a true sense of man's destiny.
This could have been such a great movie and by making it longer to develop ideas,characters etc would,strangely, have improved it.

On point 2 above - why is puzzling? It shows that the alien black goo basically fuses with whatever its host's DNA is to produce a new lifeform. Same as we see later on with the little worms in the giant head room turning into those snake things when the black goo gets released, which then turns that scientist into a weird monster, then Shaw's 'baby', the Engineer giving life to the zenomorph, etc. Basically, the stuff is uncontrollable - despite the engineer's attempts to do so, it overruns them. Our creators are therefore revealed to be massively ambitious, playing at being gods, their motives obscured and their follies ultimately misguided, sealing their own doom. Quite apt really.

Post #: 923

RE: Oh dear! - 22/6/2012 2:58:44 PM

pete_traynor

Posts: 2935
Joined: 28/11/2006
From: Balboa Towers, Balboa Island, CA

quote:

ORIGINAL: bennyboy1971

quote:

ORIGINAL: georgestergios

Daughters had advised me of the viral nature of the ballyhoo surrounding this film. I had seen Alien when it originally came out and also Bladerunner and was highly impressed by both. BUT when we went to see Prometheus we had expected to be underwhelmed and we we not disappointed. The hard core astronautics was a trifle passe and frankly who would go to an alien world and land without parking the getaway vehicle in orbit(as in the first Alien film). All other aspects including loose ends,unappealing characters, etc were covered perfectly by Empires's excellent review.A couple of my furhter gripes-
1.The 3D added very little to the action.
2.The opening scene with the Engineer "reinventing" himself was very puzzling.
Give me "2001" any time for a true sense of man's destiny.
This could have been such a great movie and by making it longer to develop ideas,characters etc would,strangely, have improved it.

On point 2 above - why is puzzling? It shows that the alien black goo basically fuses with whatever its host's DNA is to produce a new lifeform. Same as we see later on with the little worms in the giant head room turning into those snake things when the black goo gets released, which then turns that scientist into a weird monster, then Shaw's 'baby', the Engineer giving life to the zenomorph, etc. Basically, the stuff is uncontrollable - despite the engineer's attempts to do so, it overruns them. Our creators are therefore revealed to be massively ambitious, playing at being gods, their motives obscured and their follies ultimately misguided, sealing their own doom. Quite apt really.

Could perhaps be considered puzzling for some because the effect of the goo differs throughout the film. The engineer in the opening scene is essentially stripped back to his base elements, allowing life to evolve and flourish anew. The goo breaks him down to almost nothing. But for some reason it doesn�t kill the creatures it comes into contact with later in the film. These just mutate into pretty generic sci fi monsters. Nasty worms and space zombie with a massive head. Might be a different strain of the goo... might not. We�ll never know probably but it could definitely be called confusing.

Perhaps it�s because he ingests the liquid and the others merely get it on their skin... again, probably never know. And I suppose Holloway was breaking down at a much slower rate as it was a much smaller dose than the SJ in the opening.

On a different note...

Look at the size if that bloody Xeno infant when it comes out of the Jockey! It�s HUGE!!!! Would have killed him way before it�s birth... he was like a flesh suit for that thing as it was almost his size when it came out. Worst scene of the film for me, as it was so cheap and unnecessary. Made all their comments trying to distant it from Alien look rather pathetic too. When Scott mentioned the last 8 minutes would make you realise the connection, who on Earth didn�t guess it would be a chest burster scene.

But again, I rather enjoyed the film. It�s just holier than bread and wine round the Popes place! No getting away from that in its current edit.

_____________________________

EXTREMELY LIMITED 1/1 FILM DIRECTOR HAND DRAWN ORIGINALS COMING SOON - http://lomierart.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to bennyboy1971)

Post #: 924

RE: Oh dear! - 22/6/2012 9:40:27 PM

Jackie Boy

Posts: 1129
Joined: 2/1/2006

The worst scene in the movie for me was actually Charlize Theron's death scene. I nearly pissed myself with laughter.

Gotta agree with the xenomorph scene at the end by the way, it was beyond silly.

_____________________________

"If you're not against me,don't cross this line! If yes,do."

(in reply to pete_traynor)

Post #: 925

RE: Oh dear! - 22/6/2012 9:43:10 PM

Jackie Boy

Posts: 1129
Joined: 2/1/2006

.

< Message edited by Jackie Boy -- 22/6/2012 9:44:09 PM >

_____________________________

"If you're not against me,don't cross this line! If yes,do."

(in reply to pete_traynor)

Post #: 926

RE: Oh dear! - 22/6/2012 11:44:47 PM

trainedasninja

Posts: 206
Joined: 25/5/2011
From: Kidderminster

Im glad someone picked up on her death scene, honestly the only thing that rele bugged me with this film.
(spoiler) Whilst rapace casually rolls away, Theron continues to run in its path instead of running away from where it would fall.
She did a good job at escaping only to die straight after in such a stupid way.

(in reply to Jackie Boy)

Post #: 927

RE: Prometheus - 23/6/2012 1:46:38 PM

kurtangleuk

Posts: 1
Joined: 23/6/2012

I have to say this film was a major disappointment. Heres a great article that makes the case perfectly. I really hope he stays away from Blade Runner!!

http://whatculture.com/film/prometheus-20-blunders-that-ruined-the-film.php

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 928

RE: Oh dear! - 23/6/2012 7:00:43 PM

makins

Posts: 30
Joined: 15/12/2011

quote:

ORIGINAL: trainedasninja

Im glad someone picked up on her death scene, honestly the only thing that rele bugged me with this film.
(spoiler) Whilst rapace casually rolls away, Theron continues to run in its path instead of running away from where it would fall.
She did a good job at escaping only to die straight after in such a stupid way.

we didn't actually see her die at all. i believe she is returning in the sequel.

(in reply to trainedasninja)

Post #: 929

RE: AWFUL REVIEW!!! STUNNING FILM!!! - 24/6/2012 1:06:06 PM

chris kilby

Posts: 1189
Joined: 31/3/2010

I think the reason it was called Prometheus and not Alien: Prometheus (or Alien Begins or Alien Royale or some shit like that) was part of the same clever marketing strategy which had Ridley Scott deliberately hedge as to whether this was an Alien prequel at all.

Fox knew that us fanboys/saddoes would go see it anyway. By deliberately distancing Prometheus from the Alien franchise in ALL the publicity, they clearly hoped to attract a broader audience of, well, normal people. Of course it's an Alien prequel! Just not one not aimed exclusively at audiences necessarily familiar with the originals. A smart move if you ask me.

Post #: 930