Prometheus - Part 8

[DCW]

I listened to the soundtrack for this today and it reminded me how much I loved this movie!

 

[SuperSoldier985]

The truth hurt?

I'm just sick of people putting this movie on a pedestal.

It's like people never watched a movie with minor flaws before. They've overhyped this movie so much in their minds that they have to go out their way to overexaggerate and harshly criticize the things they didn't like in it.

Ugh.

 

[TheOnlyOmega]

I listened to the soundtrack for this today and it reminded me how much I loved this movie!

What inspired you to listen to the soundtrack? I found it to be terribly out of place. Needed a dark foreboding score that adds to the film, like some have said about Inception's score.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'm just sick of people putting this movie on a pedestal.

It's like people never watched a movie with minor flaws before. They've overhyped this movie so much in their minds that they have to go out their way to overexaggerate and harshly criticize the things they didn't like in it.

Ugh.

I think it is a clear reaction to those that are acting like this films has only "minor" flaws, as opposed to the clear and rather large structural problems it has.

 

[Balthus Dire]

I think it is a clear reaction to those that are acting like this films has only "minor" flaws, as opposed to the clear and rather large structural problems it has.

Exactly. The flaws are not minor...they're major thematic problems and general storytelling problems that if present in almost any other movie would be torn apart as such. And justifiably so.

Hulk Smash's article is perfect and sums it all up nicely. This quote was especially noteworthy for me and it's the way I've felt since I first saw the film:

Spoiler

REALLY, ASK YOURSELF THIS: HOW IS THE MAIN SCIENTIST LADY DIFFERENT FROM HOW SHE WAS IN THE BEGINNING? WHAT DID SHE LEARN? WHAT DID ANYONE IN THIS FILM LEARN? EVERYONE JUST PILES THROUGH WITH RECKLESS ABANDON AND MEETS SOME SORT OF END. AND THUS THE CONSEQUENCES OF EVERYTHING WE'VE SEEN ARE RENDERED MEANINGLESS. THAT AWESOME CESAREAN SCENE? BARELY ****ING MENTIONED AGAIN AND THUS ROBBED OF ANY IMPACT. SO WHY SHOULD WE EVEN REALLY CARE? THE CHEST-BIRTH SCENE IN THE ORIGINAL ALIEN STANDS THE TEST OF TIME BECAUSE IT RADICALLY CHANGES THE DIRECTION OF THE MOVIE. IN THIS? IT HARDLY MATTERS OR AFFECTS ANYTHING. SHE TELLS WEYLAND "WE WERE SO WRONG!!!" AND THEN IMMEDIATELY SAYS WHATEVER AND GOES ALONG WITH HIM ANYWAY. BY THE END OF THE FILM, SHE LEARNED NOTHING. SHE LOST HER HUSBAND AND HAD AN ALIEN BABY TORN OUT OF HER AND SHE WAS BASICALLY LIKE "SIGN ME UP FOR MORE OF THIS!"

It's just completely contrived, scene after scene.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Exactly. The flaws are not minor...they're major thematic problems and general storytelling problems that if present in almost any other movie would be torn apart as such. And justifiably so.

Hulk Smash's article is perfect and sums it all up nicely. This quote was especially noteworthy for me and it's the way I've felt since I first saw the film:

It's just completely contrived, scene after scene.

I completely agree with Film Critic Hulk. That is not to say I didn't enjoy the film. There was something I did like about it. But some are just completely ignoring the obvious here.

 

[Lighthouse]

I completely agree with Film Critic Hulk. That is not to say I didn't enjoy the film. There was something I did like about it. But some are just completely ignoring the obvious here.

I think visually, this movie is the best looking thing since Scott directed Blade Runner. It inspires awe in it's production. The movie isn't hateful or even what I would consider "bad". It's just a massive waste of potential. It's thematic failings and plot inconsistencies are so obvious, it's shocking they put it to film without thinking twice.

 

[dark_b]

its scary how good the Film Critic Hulk article is. and he never insults Lindelof or writtes that he is stupid.

 

[spider-neil]

its scary how good the Film Critic Hulk article is. and he never insults Lindelof or writtes that he is stupid.

Not going to read that much text that is all in capital letters.

 

[dark_b]

i woudlnt be suprised if this was the original story for the alien prequel
http://boxofficebuz.com/news_full.php?id=287

 

[regwec]

Just got back from watching this. I absolutely loved it.

I don't understand what was so divisive about the movie. As for the "questions" that the movie supposedly leaves open well I feel that it actually answered a good deal of them. The most important one too.

It's pretty clear that these "engineers" have different factions and philosophies towards life and terraforming. The one we saw in the beginning was willing to sacrifice itself to give birth to life. It had no fear of death.

While the one that was in cryo in the weapons manufacturing "facility" had a great fear of dying (holograms of them running from their own weapons and the one that chased after Shaw struggled for its life against the proto-Xenomorph). Clearly the latter group of Space Jockeys weren't happy with the decision with creating life on earth thus sending those WMD to earth to eliminate the life the self sacrificial and seemingly more benevolent faction of Jockey had given Earth.

I was wholly satisfied with this movie and the set up for the sequel is interesting to say the least. I feel Ridley will further elaborate on the clashing views from different factions of Jockey if Shaw ever reaches their home planet. Shaw kept wondering why they created humans and then wanted to destroy them. Well the answer is fairly simple. The Jockeys are no different than us just like Earth where we have people with different religions/philosophies & cultures. The more militarized faction just didn't agree with the other group and their decision to give Earth life.

Guess they can go further into the schism between the two in the sequel.

10/10

Great to hear your opinion on the film. I think what you speculate about the Engineers is probably correct, and I am interested to see how it is further explored. I also expect that the question of why these Engineers and the Space Jockey are obviously different species will have to be answered. Are the Jockeys to the Engineers what the Engineers are to us?

The confusing or unsatisfactory elements of the plot didn't concern is themes, in my opinion, but specifically some of the alien tech/fauna. You have to think long and hard to come up with an explanation of why the ooze behaves the way it does. Again, I hope this is addressed in the sequel.

I really don't understand why Prometheus is getting such a low reception, to me, it's more important to create an intelligent story than an outstanding action flick. It seemed to me that it had a really interesting plot with a lot of smart references and points of view, it seems to me that some people just don't know how to watch a movie without being awed by Hollywood-iconic-pre-fabricated scenes and scenarios.

I think it was damned either way. If it had given the mouth-breathing action fans the mindless AVP style shoot 'em up they clearly wanted, then it would have got blasted by the 73% of critics who liked what we got (Rotten Tomatoes stats). Expectations were too high, inevitably, but I'm glad that Scott didn't pander to the morons.

The criticism from the other side is that it left themes under developed and seemed to be saving too much for the sequel. I personally think the film would have been badly overloaded if a lot more plot had been stuffed into its running time.

Because it isn't that intelligent of a story. It is like trying to watch a murder mystery written by an 8 year old. It is amusing, but not at all intelligent.

In other news, Prometheus only made 20 million this weekend. Looking like it will have trouble getting to 300 million.

Add another 50+ million for marketing. This movie needs to clear 300 million at the very least.

I think it is a clear reaction to those that are acting like this films has only "minor" flaws, as opposed to the clear and rather large structural problems it has.

It's always funny when someone seems to be personally upset by a film, and develops a personal interest in hoping that it fails.

 

[chamber-music]

Prometheus is still hasn't opened in some other countries yet. I'm not saying its gonna make a whole bunch of money but its not finished its takings tally just yet.

 

[marvelman2006]

My stance on the movie is this:

It wasnt a great movie but very fascinating and the cast was pitch perfect to even the side characters who said the standard lines. The story was pretty straight foward and not alot of twist and not very scary when looking back at it. There were alot of promises made during featurettes and interviews by scott and producers about asking and answering questions of our origin but in the movie all we got was that the engineers did in fact create us. But just when you think the movie is about to wrap up then they ask "why did they create us" and then string us along for the remaining 1/3 of the movie and then ultimately lead us to a sequel and shaw might as well have had her finger out the window at us as she was flying off at the end.

Theres a difference between leaving something to the audiences imagination and then deliberately setting up for a sequel and this deliberately set up for a sequel. Im not mad at the movie at all but at some points and especially the ending there was such a feeling of lazy writing and worse directing.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Great to hear your opinion on the film. I think what you speculate about the Engineers is probably correct, and I am interested to see how it is further explored. I also expect that the question of why these Engineers and the Space Jockey are obviously different species will have to be answered. Are the Jockeys to the Engineers what the Engineers are to us?

The confusing or unsatisfactory elements of the plot didn't concern is themes, in my opinion, but specifically some of the alien tech/fauna. You have to think long and hard to come up with an explanation of why the ooze behaves the way it does. Again, I hope this is addressed in the sequel.



I think it was damned either way. If it had given the mouth-breathing action fans the mindless AVP style shoot 'em up they clearly wanted, then it would have got blasted by the 73% of critics who liked what we got (Rotten Tomatoes stats). Expectations were too high, inevitably, but I'm glad that Scott didn't pander to the morons.

The criticism from the other side is that it left themes under developed and seemed to be saving too much for the sequel. I personally think the film would have been badly overloaded if a lot more plot had been stuffed into its running time.









It's always funny when someone seems to be personally upset by a film, and develops a personal interest in hoping that it fails.

It is always funny when someone turns a blind eye to well placed criticism.

My stance on the movie is this:

It wasnt a great movie but very fascinating and the cast was pitch perfect to even the side characters who said the standard lines. The story was pretty straight foward and not alot of twist and not very scary when looking back at it. There were alot of promises made during featurettes and interviews by scott and producers about asking and answering questions of our origin but in the movie all we got was that the engineers did in fact create us. But just when you think the movie is about to wrap up then they ask "why did they create us" and then string us along for the remaining 1/3 of the movie and then ultimately lead us to a sequel and shaw might as well have had her finger out the window at us as she was flying off at the end.

Theres a difference between leaving something to the audiences imagination and then deliberately setting up for a sequel and this deliberately set up for a sequel. Im not mad at the movie at all but at some points and especially the ending there was such a feeling of lazy writing and worse directing.

Holloway's actor was so horrible. I wanted him dead so bad.

 

[marvelman2006]

It is always funny when someone turns a blind eye to well placed criticism.



Holloway's actor was so horrible. I wanted him dead so bad.

I kinda liked him but I thought he was alittle too flamboyant for a lead scientist but then I guess I would be alittle giddy if I was asleep for 2 years. t:

 

[MOVIELORD101]

Saw the movie in IMAX 3D with my dad for Father's Day yesterday. REALLY enjoyed it. Don't understand what the haters wanted out of this, but whatever. I think this was Ridley Scott getting his groove back, and he did a fantastic job directing! This was his best movie since Blade Runner and Gladiator IMO. Also, Damon Lindelof's re-writes were particularly good, and the cast was solid, especially Noomi Rapace (Fassbender was excellent, but he was nowhere near as phenomenal as most people are saying). Overall, this was a very intense, but fun movie.

9/10

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Saw the movie in IMAX 3D with my dad for Father's Day yesterday. REALLY enjoyed it. Don't understand what the haters wanted out of this, but whatever. I think this was Ridley Scott getting his groove back, and he did a fantastic job directing! This was his best movie since Blade Runner and Gladiator IMO. Also, Damon Lindelof's re-writes were particularly good, and the cast was solid, especially Noomi Rapace (Fassbender was excellent, but he was nowhere near as phenomenal as most people are saying). Overall, this was a very intense, but fun movie.

9/10

First no one is hating. Second, if you want to understand the criticism, look at the link at the top of the page for Film critic Hulk. It always amazes me when people complain about criticism and how they can't possibly understand it, and then don't read it to understand it.

 

[regwec]

It is always funny when someone turns a blind eye to well placed criticism.

Believe me, I am aware of the film's faults, but I think it is a lesser offender that most of the steaming pile produced by Hollywood. Yes, the script was questionable and there were some weak characters and weaker actors, but it is at least interesting and a bit thought provoking even where it is confounding. It's biggest problem, inevitably, was enormous expectations.

I don't understand your evident glee in your misplaced assumption that the movie has been financially unsuccessful. For all of its problems, it is an original screenplay that took some risks, and I would rather see "Paradise" that "Iron Man vs Transformers VII" or whatever.

I may have to leave the internet when TDKR inevitably takes less money than Avengers did. The moronic gloating is going to be insufferable.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

First no one is hating. Second, if you want to understand the criticism, look at the link at the top of the page for Film critic Hulk. It always amazes me when people complain about criticism and how they can't possibly understand it, and then don't read it to understand it.

I wasn't complaining, I was just a little confused as to what people were expecting out of this other than a good movie!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Believe me, I am aware of the film's faults, but I think it is a lesser offender that most of the steaming pile produced by Hollywood. Yes, the script was questionable and there were some weak characters and weaker actors, but it is at least interesting and a bit thought provoking even where it is confounding. It's biggest problem, inevitably, was enormous expectations.

I don't understand your evident glee in your misplaced assumption that the movie has been financially unsuccessful. For all of its problems, it is an original screenplay that took some risks, and I would rather see "Paradise" that "Iron Man vs Transformers VII" or whatever.

I may have to leave the internet when TDKR inevitably takes less money than Avengers did. The moronic gloating is going to be insufferable.

The financial aspect interest me for one reason. Who really had final cut. Yes, the film is rated "R, but with grumbles already about an extended version. That makes one wonder if the film was cut for financial reasons, like Scott's very own Kingdom of Heaven, which suffered as film and at the box office because of the studio's intervention.

The screenplay didn't take risk. It leaned heavily on the original film, while never willing to explore the themes it brings up.

And I do not scribe to the idea that just because a film is better then bad films, it is elevated.

I wasn't complaining, I was just a little confused as to what people were expecting out of this other than a good movie!

The question is if it is a good movie. I'd say yes, barely, but I do not agree with the idea that is elevating it as anything more then that.

 

[dark_b]

I wasn't complaining, I was just a little confused as to what people were expecting out of this other than a good movie!

we expected a movie that asks questions and then explores the questions and themes. this movie only asked. noone cares about the answer why we were created. David and Holloway have good lines about this.

but you need to explore. thats the point of a movie right?

 

[dark_b]

The financial aspect interest me for one reason. Who really had final cut. Yes, the film is rated "R, but with grumbles already about an extended version. That makes one wonder if the film was cut for financial reasons, like Scott's very own Kingdom of Heaven, which suffered as film and at the box office because of the studio's intervention.

The screenplay didn't take risk. It leaned heavily on the original film, while never willing to explore the themes it brings up.

And I do not scribe to the idea that just because a film is better then bad films, it is elevated.



The question is if it is a good movie. I'd say yes, barely, but I do not agree with the idea that is elevating it as anything more then that.

i think Scott agreed with Fox for this 2 hour cut. but its not the movie that he wanted to make. he himself said that its an expensive movie that its not his movie and that this is a business.

it will be interesting to see the extended cut in 6 months.

 

[regwec]

The financial aspect interest me for one reason. Who really had final cut. Yes, the film is rated "R, but with grumbles already about an extended version. That makes one wonder if the film was cut for financial reasons, like Scott's very own Kingdom of Heaven, which suffered as film and at the box office because of the studio's intervention.

Fair enough. I'm sure we both look forward to seeing the full version, then.

The screenplay didn't take risk. It leaned heavily on the original film, while never willing to explore the themes it brings up.

It certainly did take a risk. A large source of the criticism of it is that it is not really an "Alien" movie at all. The whole theme of intelligent design is risky, and somewhat surprising to see in a Hollywood movie. If the movie had taken no risks, it wouldn't be so divisive.

And I do not scribe to the idea that just because a film is better then bad films, it is elevated.

That's fine, but surely you would prefer to see more films that at least attempt something different, rather than an endless cycle of Superhero sludge and SFX behemoths that look like videogames?

Do you actually have no curiosity about "Paradise" or where this whole thing is going?

Oh well. Only a matter of time before another "Underworld" sequel or another "Spiderman" reboot or something.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Fair enough. I'm sure we both look forward to seeing the full version, then.

Definitely curious. Don't know how much it will help, but I am curious.

Afterall, I fell asleep for about 10 mins watching Kingdom of Heaven in theaters. The Director's Cut is one of my favorite films.

It certainly did take a risk. A large source of the criticism of it is that it is not really an "Alien" movie at all. The whole theme of intelligent design is risky, and somewhat surprising to see in a Hollywood movie. If the movie had taken no risks, it wouldn't be so divisive.

Perhaps, but it is not an uncommon theme in sci-fiction. And I love my sci-fi.

Every time the film gets a little bit interesting and feels like it is going to start speaking to your soul, it falls back on cliched scene and dialogue.

Also, one of my major problems with trying to recall Alien with certain characters and scenes, that just came off awkward and out of place. It was like a battle inside the film itself. Every time they left the ship, it was trying to be Alien. Every time they got back on the ship, 2001. Odd really.

That's fine, but surely you would prefer to see more films that at least attempt something different, rather than an endless cycle of Superhero sludge and SFX behemoths that look like videogames?

Do you actually have no curiosity about "Paradise" or where this whole thing is going?

Oh well. Only a matter of time before another "Underworld" sequel or another "Spiderman" reboot or something.

Hey I just want really good films, whether they are Underworld sequels or the next Joe Wright film.

 

[BuddhaWasABat]

Definitely curious. Don't know how much it will help, but I am curious.

Afterall, I fell asleep for about 10 mins watching Kingdom of Heaven in theaters. The Director's Cut is one of my favorite films.



Perhaps, but it is not an uncommon theme in sci-fiction. And I love my sci-fi.

Every time the film gets a little bit interesting and feels like it is going to start speaking to your soul, it falls back on cliched scene and dialogue.

.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with that statement. It's a shame. I enjoyed the experience over all but this film feels like it doesn't ever try to hard to take itself and it's themes seriously. Its a shame. Heres to hoping the Directors Cut can fix this. If it fixed KOH, it's certainly possible.