Prometheus - Part 8

[Maximum Carnage]

Wait, was Madonna in this movie? How did I miss that?

 

[Figs]

I love the nitpicking in here and people who once again needed the movie to hold their hand because they obviously had their brains turned off while watching.

 

[Pink Ranger]

The Engineer figure from NECA looks pretty sweet: I will clear a spot for it on my shelf between Beast Man and The Undertaker.

I'd be pretty keen on getting David, Shaw and Vickers too, depending on the quality and nature of the sculpting and design.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I love the nitpicking in here and people who once again needed the movie to hold their hand because they obviously had their brains turned off while watching.

Oh boy the Prometheus fans have moved into the anybody who didn't like the movie's the crappy script and poor characterzation is a dumbass who didn't understand it.

Oh what a joyful time this is going to be...

The real question is why was ever excited for a Ridley Scott movie in the first place?

 

[Figs]

Oh boy the Prometheus fans have moved into the anybody who didn't like the movie's the crappy script and poor characterzation is a dumbass who didn't understand it.

Oh what a joyful time this is going to be...

The real question is why was ever excited for a Ridley Scott movie in the first place?

I never said people who didn't understand it were dumb, but it seems some people watched the movie but turned off their brain like it was a mindless summer action blockbuster like Transformers.

What exactly was crappy about the script, I do agree that it could have used better characterization but I won't trash the entire film because of it.

That last line kind of tells me you already had a bias against this movie since I've seen past posts of yours and you're not at all a Scott fan.

 

[redhawk23]

I love the nitpicking in here and people who once again needed the movie to hold their hand because they obviously had their brains turned off while watching.

Is that really what anyone has complained aboaut though? It seems what people dislike about the movie is not that it goes over their heads but that it is nowhere near as intelligent a film as it would like to be.

Bringing up the general BIG QUESTIONS is not the same thing as actually examining them. People aren't asking for hand holding, they just wish the film had actually done anything to address really anything at all and to have done it well.

At the same time that it muddles some of its supposed subtexts it has some major problems with basic things such as plot and character. Other films have often been accused of having similar problems (Does anyone really care about the crew in 2001: A Space Odyssey?). But other films have a lot more going for them than Prometheus. They actually offer examination of the questions they ask rather than just having their characters just outright verbally ask them again and again.

 

[The Slang]

Anybody read this?

http://www.prometheus-movie.com/uploads/leaked_script.txt

If this script is real then it seems the movie could've gone a lot differently.

 

[Motown Marvel]

ha ha, a friend of mine said he was watching Alien the other day with the Ridley Scott commentary on, and apparently in it Scott lays out the entire story for Prometheus talking about how he wishes he could of made that movie before Alien.

 

[redhawk23]

I never said people who didn't understand it were dumb, but it seems some people watched the movie but turned off their brain like it was a mindless summer action blockbuster like Transformers.

What exactly was crappy about the script, I do agree that it could have used better characterization but I won't trash the entire film because of it.

That last line kind of tells me you already had a bias against this movie since I've seen past posts of yours and you're not at all a Scott fan.

That many things that happen and subplots in the film serve absolutely no purpose, the characters have no reaction to what should be major developments.

I don't care that we don't find out what reanimates the mohawked geologist (or even how his face is still in tact post acid/melting glass, although thats pretty random as well) but rather that the he come back, crab walking and super strong serves no purpose to the film other than to provide a short fight scene which no one ever comments upon again. If it had never happened the rest of the film would be unaffected. It is extraneous. A non sequitur.

Or how about the fact that no one really seems to give a damn about the fact that one of the leaders of the expedition gives birth to a tentacled alien baby? You think that would be brought up beyond David making a pun about it.

Nothing done about said baby? Sure lets just leave it in the room alone. Never mind the fact that a half hour ago we didn't want to let a sick man on board out of fear of contamination. Alien baby is fine, because hey, we need a giant monster for the end right?

I'm repeating myself here but these are just a few of such of examples of several throughout the film.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I never said people who didn't understand it were dumb, but it seems some people watched the movie but turned off their brain like it was a mindless summer action blockbuster like Transformers.

What exactly was crappy about the script, I do agree that it could have used better characterization but I won't trash the entire film because of it.

That last line kind of tells me you already had a bias against this movie since I've seen past posts of yours and you're not at all a Scott fan.

I have a bigger bias against terrible screenplays. That last line doesn't mean a thing, I give all movies a chance and if I don't like them I don't like them.

Is that really what anyone has complained aboaut though? It seems what people dislike about the movie is not that it goes over their heads but that it is nowhere near as intelligent a film as it would like to be.

Bringing up the general BIG QUESTIONS is not the same thing as actually examining them. People aren't asking for hand holding, they just wish the film had actually done anything to address really anything at all and to have done it well.

At the same time that it muddles some of its supposed subtexts it has some major problems with basic things such as plot and character. Other films have often been accused of having similar problems (Does anyone really care about the crew in 2001: A Space Odyssey?). But other films have a lot more going for them than Prometheus. They actually offer examination of the questions they ask rather than just having their characters just outright verbally ask them again and again.

Exactly. I'm mad because the movie wasn't intelligent...at all. I'm mad because an incredibly dumb movie actually thinks that it is intelligent.

 

[spider-neil]

Just watched the 4 viral clips. Really hope they are on the Blu ray.

 

[chamber-music]

Ridley Scott and Damon Lindelof on a possible Prometheus sequel

"From the very beginning, I was working from a premise that lent itself to a sequel," said Scott. "I
really don't want to meet God in the first one. I want to leave it open
to [Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace)] saying, 'I don’t want to go back
to where I came from. I want to go where they came from.'"

Writer Damon Lindelof added: "['Prometheus']
has two children: One of these children grows up to be 'Alien,' but the
other child is going to grow up, and God knows what happens to them.
And that's what the sequel to 'Prometheus' would be."

Ridley Scott
went on to explain that the original title of "Prometheus" was
"Paradise." When Lindelof came on board, he changed the story to focus
on bigger ideas of the "Alien" franchise,
rather than on the creatures. As a result, the "Paradise" title will
now likely become the name of the sequel, which will take us to the home
planet of the Engineers. But that home planet will be far from paradise.

“Because [the Engineers]
are such aggressive f******, I always had it in there that the God-like
creature that you will see actually is not so nice, and is certainly
not God," Scott explained. "I'd love to explore where the [Dr.
Shaw] goes next and what does she do when she gets there, because if it
is paradise, paradise can not be what you think it is. Paradise has a
connotation of being extremely sinister and ominous."

Scott is very interested in returning for the sequel and so is Lindelof, but Lindelof believes a new writer should step in. "It could actually benefit going into someone else's able hand," he said. "Although, I feel like some storyline has already been constructed based on conversations that Ridley and I had about it."

Sounds like it could be intresting.

Atleast Lindelof isn't doing the script for it if it does happen.

 

[Frodo]

I know this might come off as stupid but I watched the movie and it left me really confused did anyone else feel that way? I mean I understood the basis of the movie but the relation to Alien did not seem to be there besides the little nods here and there. I have not watched Alien in like 10 years so I might be missing something.

you're not missing something.IMO. The film has very little to do with alien. The reason the basis of the film seems off is because they're the themes of Bladerunner, which is really the story Ridley wants to tell. This film IMO is kinda a vessel for Ridley to revisit the characters and themes from BR. In other words Prometheus is the rebound girl that Ridley is with because he can't be with the one he wants...Bladerunner.lol.

 

[Destructus86]

this probably already was stated somewhere here...but something just occured to me.

Spoiler

When Weyland meets the Engineer he asks David to tell him something. (can't remember what he said) But now that I think about it...I believe David told the enginer something else. He wanted the Engineer to kill Weyland. Probably something along the lines of they are inferior and want to use you. I am not one of them.

 

[spider-neil]

Bring on the sequel.

 

[Destructus86]

I have a bigger bias against terrible screenplays. That last line doesn't mean a thing, I give all movies a chance and if I don't like them I don't like them.

Exactly. I'm mad because the movie wasn't intelligent...at all. I'm mad because an incredibly dumb movie actually thinks that it is intelligent.

To be honest...what you found unintelligent...I found entertaining.

 

[spider-neil]

Now playing podast came up with a very interesting idea

Spoiler

David tells the engineer he (David) isn't human and was created by man, the engineer in a rage that man has attempted to play God (by creating artificial life) rips off David's head to confirm what the android says is true and when it is confirmed the engineer then flies in a rage and attacks the humans.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

To be honest...what you found unintelligent...I found entertaining.

Nothing wrong with that. I never claimed the movie was boring just incredibly stupid.

 

[bullets]

The red letter media review is hilarious.

I'm still content with the film and think it will be enjoyed more over time.

 

[Destructus86]

Now playing podast came up with a very interesting idea

Spoiler

David tells the engineer he (David) isn't human and was created by man, the engineer in a rage that man has attempted to play God (by creating artificial life) rips off David's head to confirm what the android says is true and when it is confirmed the engineer then flies in a rage and attacks the humans.

Spoiler

That's an interesting idea...I know the engineers already were planning to destroy the humans on Earth, but I could easily see the Engineer getting in a rage after finding out that humans were trying to be like them. I thought it was a fantastic scene.

 

[Destructus86]

That many things that happen and subplots in the film serve absolutely no purpose, the characters have no reaction to what should be major developments.

I don't care that we don't find out what reanimates the mohawked geologist (or even how his face is still in tact post acid/melting glass, although thats pretty random as well) but rather that the he come back, crab walking and super strong serves no purpose to the film other than to provide a short fight scene which no one ever comments upon again. If it had never happened the rest of the film would be unaffected. It is extraneous. A non sequitur.

Or how about the fact that no one really seems to give a damn about the fact that one of the leaders of the expedition gives birth to a tentacled alien baby? You think that would be brought up beyond David making a pun about it.

Nothing done about said baby? Sure lets just leave it in the room alone. Never mind the fact that a half hour ago we didn't want to let a sick man on board out of fear of contamination. Alien baby is fine, because hey, we need a giant monster for the end right?

I'm repeating myself here but these are just a few of such of examples of several throughout the film.

The crew in that room already knew about the alien baby. They are on Weyland's payroll. Remember...they were hand picked. They were to bring the embryo back to Earth by putting her in stasis.

 

[spider-neil]

The red letter media review is hilarious.

I'm still content with the film and think it will be enjoyed more over time.

Ha ha! just watched it and it is very funny. To be fair you can pick apart any movie if you try hard enough.

 

[spider-neil]

Spoiler

That's an interesting idea...I know the engineers already were planning to destroy the humans on Earth, but I could easily see the Engineer getting in a rage after finding out that humans were trying to be like them. I thought it was a fantastic scene.

Spoiler

I didn't like the scene as I was like, 'why is the engineer getting angry?' but I like the now playing explaination

 

[chamber-music]

Possibly the best analysis of the film I've read

Spoiler

Prometheus contains such a huge amount of mythic resonance that it effectively obscures a more conventional plot. I'd like to draw your attention to the use of motifs and callbacks in the film that not only enrich it, but offer possible hints as to what was going on in otherwise confusing scenes.

Let's begin with the eponymous titan himself, Prometheus. He was a wise and benevolent entity who created mankind in the first place, forming the first humans from clay. The Gods were more or less okay with that, until Prometheus gave them fire. This was a big no-no, as fire was supposed to be the exclusive property of the Gods. As punishment, Prometheus was chained to a rock and condemned to have his liver ripped out and eaten every day by an eagle. (His liver magically grew back, in case you were wondering.)

Fix that image in your mind, please: the giver of life, with his abdomen torn open. We'll be coming back to it many times in the course of this article.

The ethos of the titan Prometheus is one of willing and necessary sacrifice for life's sake. That's a pattern we see replicated throughout the ancient world. J G Frazer wrote his lengthy anthropological study, The Golden Bough, around the idea of the Dying God - a lifegiver who voluntarily dies for the sake of the people. It was incumbent upon the King to die at the right and proper time, because that was what heaven demanded, and fertility would not ensue if he did not do his royal duty of dying.

Now, consider the opening sequence of Prometheus. We fly over a spectacular vista, which may or may not be primordial Earth. According to Ridley Scott, it doesn't matter. A lone Engineer at the top of a waterfall goes through a strange ritual, drinking from a cup of black goo that causes his body to disintegrate into the building blocks of life. We see the fragments of his body falling into the river, twirling and spiralling into DNA helices.

Ridley Scott has this to say about the scene: 'That could be a planet anywhere. All he’s doing is acting as a gardener in space. And the plant life, in fact, is the disintegration of himself. If you parallel that idea with other sacrificial elements in history – which are clearly illustrated with the Mayans and the Incas – he would live for one year as a prince, and at the end of that year, he would be taken and donated to the gods in hopes of improving what might happen next year, be it with crops or weather, etcetera.'

Can we find a God in human history who creates plant life through his own death, and who is associated with a river? It's not difficult to find several, but the most obvious candidate is Osiris, the epitome of all the Frazerian 'Dying Gods'.

And we wouldn't be amiss in seeing the first of the movie's many Christian allegories in this scene, either. The Engineer removes his cloak before the ceremony, and hesitates before drinking the cupful of genetic solvent; he may well have been thinking 'If it be Thy will, let this cup pass from me.'

So, we know something about the Engineers, a founding principle laid down in the very first scene: acceptance of death, up to and including self-sacrifice, is right and proper in the creation of life. Prometheus, Osiris, John Barleycorn, and of course the Jesus of Christianity are all supposed to embody this same principle. It is held up as one of the most enduring human concepts of what it means to be 'good'.

Seen in this light, the perplexing obscurity of the rest of the film yields to an examination of the interwoven themes of sacrifice, creation, and preservation of life. We also discover, through hints, exactly what the nature of the clash between the Engineers and humanity entailed.

The crew of the Prometheus discover an ancient chamber, presided over by a brooding solemn face, in which urns of the same black substance are kept. A mural on the wall presents an image which, if you did as I asked earlier on, you will recognise instantly: the lifegiver with his abdomen torn open. Go and look at it here to refresh your memory. Note the serenity on the Engineer's face here.

And there's another mural there, one which shows a familiar xenomorph-like figure. This is the Destroyer who mirrors the Creator, I think - the avatar of supremely selfish life, devouring and destroying others purely to preserve itself. As Ash puts it: 'a survivor, unclouded by conscience, remorse or delusions of morality.'

Through Shaw and Holloway's investigations, we learn that the Engineers not only created human life, they supervised our development. (How else are we to explain the numerous images of Engineers in primitive art, complete with star diagram showing us the way to find them?) We have to assume, then, that for a good few hundred thousand years, they were pretty happy with us. They could have destroyed us at any time, but instead, they effectively invited us over; the big pointy finger seems to be saying 'Hey, guys, when you're grown up enough to develop space travel, come see us.' Until something changed, something which not only messed up our relationship with them but caused their installation on LV-223 to be almost entirely wiped out.

From the Engineers' perspective, so long as humans retained that notion of self-sacrifice as central, we weren't entirely beyond redemption. But we went and screwed it all up, and the film hints at when, if not why: the Engineers at the base died two thousand years ago. That suggests that the event that turned them against us and led to the huge piles of dead Engineers lying about was one and the same event. We did something very, very bad, and somehow the consequences of that dreadful act accompanied the Engineers back to LV-223 and massacred them.

If you have uneasy suspicions about what 'a bad thing approximately 2,000 years ago' might be, then let me reassure you that you are right. An astonishing excerpt from the Movies.com interview with Ridley Scott:

Movies.com: We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?

Ridley Scott: We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, "Let's send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it." Guess what? They crucified him.

Yeah. The reason the Engineers don't like us any more is that they made us a Space Jesus, and we broke him. Reader, that's not me pulling wild ideas out of my arse. That's RIDLEY SCOTT.

So, imagine poor crucified Jesus, a fresh spear wound in his side. Oh, hey, there's the 'lifegiver with his abdomen torn open' motif again. That's three times now: Prometheus, Engineer mural, Jesus Christ. And I don't think I have to mention the 'sacrifice in the interest of giving life' bit again, do I? Everyone on the same page? Good.

So how did our (in the context of the film) terrible murderous act of crucifixion end up wiping out all but one of the Engineers back on LV-223? Presumably through the black slime, which evidently models its behaviour on the user's mental state. Create unselfishly, accepting self-destruction as the cost, and the black stuff engenders fertile life. But expose the potent black slimy stuff to the thoughts and emotions of flawed humanity, and 'the sleep of reason produces monsters'. We never see the threat that the Engineers were fleeing from, we never see them killed other than accidentally (decapitation by door), and we see no remaining trace of whatever killed them. Either it left a long time ago, or it reverted to inert black slime, waiting for a human mind to reactivate it.

The black slime reacts to the nature and intent of the being that wields it, and the humans in the film didn't even know that they WERE wielding it. That's why it remained completely inert in David's presence, and why he needed a human proxy in order to use the stuff to create anything. The black goo could read no emotion or intent from him, because he was an android.

Shaw's comment when the urn chamber is entered - 'we've changed the atmosphere in the room' - is deceptively informative. The psychic atmosphere has changed, because humans - tainted, Space Jesus-killing humans - are present. The slime begins to engender new life, drawing not from a self-sacrificing Engineer but from human hunger for knowledge, for more life, for more everything. Little wonder, then, that it takes serpent-like form. The symbolism of a corrupting serpent, turning men into beasts, is pretty unmistakeable.

Refusal to accept death is anathema to the Engineers. Right from the first scene, we learned their code of willing self-sacrifice in accord with a greater purpose. When the severed Engineer head is temporarily brought back to life, its expression registers horror and disgust. Cinemagoers are confused when the head explodes, because it's not clear why it should have done so. Perhaps the Engineer wanted to die again, to undo the tainted human agenda of new life without sacrifice.

But some humans do act in ways the Engineers might have grudgingly admired. Take Holloway, Shaw's lover, who impregnates her barren womb with his black slime riddled semen before realising he is being transformed into something Other. Unlike the hapless geologist and botanist left behind in the chamber, who only want to stay alive, Holloway willingly embraces death. He all but invites Meredith Vickers to kill him, and it's surely significant that she does so using fire, the other gift Prometheus gave to man besides his life.

The 'Caesarean' scene is central to the film's themes of creation, sacrifice, and giving life. Shaw has discovered she's pregnant with something non-human and sets the autodoc to slice it out of her. She lies there screaming, a gaping wound in her stomach, while her tentacled alien child thrashes and squeals in the clamp above her and OH HEY IT'S THE LIFEGIVER WITH HER ABDOMEN TORN OPEN. How many times has that image come up now? Four, I make it. (We're not done yet.)

And she doesn't kill it. And she calls the procedure a 'caesarean' instead of an 'abortion'.

(I'm not even going to begin to explore the pro-choice versus forced birth implications of that scene. I don't think they're clear, and I'm not entirely comfortable doing so. Let's just say that her unwanted offspring turning out to be her salvation is possibly problematic from a feminist standpoint and leave it there for now.)

Here's where the Christian allegories really come through. The day of this strange birth just happens to be Christmas Day. And this is a 'virgin birth' of sorts, although a dark and twisted one, because Shaw couldn't possibly be pregnant. And Shaw's the crucifix-wearing Christian of the crew. We may well ask, echoing Yeats: what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards LV-223 to be born?

Consider the scene where David tells Shaw that she's pregnant, and tell me that's not a riff on the Annunciation. The calm, graciously angelic android delivering the news, the pious mother who insists she can't possibly be pregnant, the wry declaration that it's no ordinary child... yeah, we've seen this before.

'And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.'

A barren woman called Elizabeth, made pregnant by 'God'? Subtle, Ridley.

Anyway. If it weren't already clear enough that the central theme of the film is 'I suffer and die so that others may live' versus 'you suffer and die so that I may live' writ extremely large, Meredith Vickers helpfully spells it out:

'A king has his reign, and then he dies. It's inevitable.'

Vickers is not just speaking out of personal frustration here, though that's obviously one level of it. She wants her father out of the way, so she can finally come in to her inheritance. It's insult enough that Weyland describes the android David as 'the closest thing I have to a son', as if only a male heir was of any worth; his obstinate refusal to accept death is a slap in her face.

Weyland, preserved by his wealth and the technology it can buy, has lived far, far longer than his rightful time. A ghoulish, wizened creature who looks neither old nor young, he reminds me of Slough Feg, the decaying tyrant from the Slaine series in British comic 2000AD. In Slaine, an ancient (and by now familiar to you, dear reader, or so I would hope) Celtic law decrees that the King has to be ritually and willingly sacrificed at the end of his appointed time, for the good of the land and the people. Slough Feg refused to die, and became a rotting horror, the embodiment of evil.

The image of the sorcerer who refuses to accept rightful death is fundamental: it even forms a part of some occult philosophy. In Crowley's system, the magician who refuses to accept the bitter cup of Babalon and undergo dissolution of his individual ego in the Great Sea (remember that opening scene?) becomes an ossified, corrupted entity called a 'Black Brother' who can create no new life, and lives on as a sterile, emasculated husk.

With all this in mind, we can better understand the climactic scene in which the withered Weyland confronts the last surviving Engineer. See it from the Engineer's perspective. Two thousand years ago, humanity not only murdered the Engineers' emissary, it infected the Engineers' life-creating fluid with its own tainted selfish nature, creating monsters. And now, after so long, here humanity is, presumptuously accepting a long-overdue invitation, and even reawakening (and corrupting all over again) the life fluid.

And who has humanity chosen to represent them? A self-centred, self-satisfied narcissist who revels in his own artificially extended life, who speaks through the medium of a merely mechanical offspring. Humanity couldn't have chosen a worse ambassador.

It's hardly surprising that the Engineer reacts with contempt and disgust, ripping David's head off and battering Weyland to death with it. The subtext is bitter and ironic: you caused us to die at the hands of our own creation, so I am going to kill you with YOUR own creation, albeit in a crude and bludgeoning way.

The only way to save humanity is through self-sacrifice, and this is exactly what the captain (and his two oddly complacent co-pilots) opt to do. They crash the Prometheus into the Engineer's ship, giving up their lives in order to save others. Their willing self-sacrifice stands alongside Holloway's and the Engineer's from the opening sequence; by now, the film has racked up no less than five self-sacrificing gestures (six if we consider the exploding Engineer head).

Meredith Vickers, of course, has no interest in self-sacrifice. Like her father, she wants to keep herself alive, and so she ejects and lands on the planet's surface. With the surviving cast now down to Vickers and Shaw, we witness Vickers's rather silly death as the Engineer ship rolls over and crushes her, due to a sudden inability on her part to run sideways. Perhaps that's the point; perhaps the film is saying her view is blinkered, and ultimately that kills her. But I doubt it. Sometimes a daft death is just a daft death.

Finally, in the squidgy ending scenes of the film, the wrathful Engineer conveniently meets its death at the tentacles of Shaw's alien child, now somehow grown huge. But it's not just a death; there's obscene life being created here, too. The (in the Engineers' eyes) horrific human impulse to sacrifice others in order to survive has taken on flesh. The Engineer's body bursts open - blah blah lifegiver blah blah abdomen ripped apart hey we're up to five now - and the proto-Alien that emerges is the very image of the creature from the mural.

On the face of it, it seems absurd to suggest that the genesis of the Alien xenomorph ultimately lies in the grotesque human act of crucifying the Space Jockeys' emissary to Israel in four B.C., but that's what Ridley Scott proposes. It seems equally insane to propose that Prometheus is fundamentally about the clash between acceptance of death as a condition of creating/sustaining life versus clinging on to life at the expense of others, but the repeated, insistent use of motifs and themes bears this out.

As a closing point, let me draw your attention to a very different strand of symbolism that runs through Prometheus: the British science fiction show Doctor Who. In the 1970s episode 'The Daemons', an ancient mound is opened up, leading to an encounter with a gigantic being who proves to be an alien responsible for having guided mankind's development, and who now views mankind as a failed experiment that must be destroyed. The Engineers are seen tootling on flutes, in exactly the same way that the second Doctor does. The Third Doctor had an companion whose name was Liz Shaw, the same name as the protagonist of Prometheus. As with anything else in the film, it could all be coincidental; but knowing Ridley Scott, it doesn't seem very likely.

]

 

[Lord]

you're not missing something.IMO. The film has very little to do with alien. The reason the basis of the film seems off is because they're the themes of Bladerunner, which is really the story Ridley wants to tell. This film IMO is kinda a vessel for Ridley to revisit the characters and themes from BR. In other words Prometheus is the rebound girl that Ridley is with because he can't be with the one he wants...Bladerunner.lol.

But IMO the thing is IMO that Ridley Scott IMO is already planing to do a Blade Runner Sequel, so IMO he can be with his other child...Blade Runner when he wants.lol.