Prometheus - Part 9

[regwec]

To give a definitive answer would take the fun out of all of this discussion.

A lot of people, seemingly, would just prefer that the questions weren't asked.

Talky-thinky stuff is for books, dude!

 

[DarthSkywalker]

A lot of people, seemingly, would just prefer that the questions weren't asked.

Talky-thinky stuff is for books, dude!

I prefer when the question is explored thoughtfully and not simply asked and all but dropped or clumsy explored.

A great example is Scott's own Blade Runner. Roy Batty by himself puts this film to shame in that regard. His sadness, his anxiety, his anger at his mortality, at life. Where is that kind of depth in Prometheus?

Hell watch the last 7 minutes of Blade Runner. That is how you don't "answer" the question. That is how you still give resolution without "answering" questions.

"It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"

 

[regwec]

I agree, and Blade Runner is the more sophisticated film.

But it would never get made today.

 

[Hotwire]

Interesting article from totalfilm.com.

http://www.totalfilm.com/news/translator-explains-prometheus-ending

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I agree, and Blade Runner is the more sophisticated film.

But it would never get made today.

Moon, District 9, No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, Eternal Sunshine. The Fountain and countless other similar films have been made in the last decade.

 

[Doctor Jones]

A lot of people, seemingly, would just prefer that the questions weren't asked.

Talky-thinky stuff is for books, dude!

I don't know, I would just rather just dismiss it as lazy writing and rather not discuss it at all.

People have the right to their opinion and can choose not to further discuss something they don't like, but this movie is still being discussed hotly across the internet. And not because of plot holes, but because what was shown is actually interesting leading to mass discussion of theories. This doesn't mean it was lazy writing where the movie couldn't answer questions where people drew their own conclusions that doesn't match what the film was going for. Not answering everything provided the kinds of discussion that Lindelof wants for the audience when he writes. People don't seem to be used to Lindelof's style of writing. I can understand if it's not your cup of tea and that's fine, but for something to not be answered and call it lazy writing seems a bit much. I mean the ending of Inception for God sakes. Nolan didn't sit there and say, "I'm just gonna let it spin because I don't care." He left it spinning for a reason.

Now the script isn't perfect of course and the second act isn't the tighest, but I don't think Lindelof sat there thinking, "You know this? I'm just gonna half ass it and leave it to the audience to decide."

This movie sticks with you. This thread isn't even dead yet.

I prefer when the question is explored thoughtfully and not simply asked and all but dropped or clumsy explored.

A great example is Scott's own Blade Runner. Roy Batty by himself puts this film to shame in that regard. His sadness, his anxiety, his anger at his mortality, at life. Where is that kind of depth in Prometheus?

Hell watch the last 7 minutes of Blade Runner. That is how you don't "answer" the question. That is how you still give resolution without "answering" questions.

"It's too bad she won't live. But then again, who does?"

To be honest, when Blade Runner first came out, to the very few people who saw it, not a whole lot of those people were really thinking this. It's taken time for Blade Runner to achieve the attention and discussion it has now.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't know, I would just rather just dismiss it as lazy writing and rather not discuss it at all.

People have the right to their opinion and can choose not to further discuss something they don't like, but this movie is still being discussed hotly across the internet. And not because of plot holes, but because what was shown is actually interesting leading to mass discussion of theories. This doesn't mean it was lazy writing where the movie couldn't answer questions where people drew their own conclusions that doesn't match what the film was going for. Not answering everything provided the kinds of discussion that Lindelof wants for the audience when he writes. People don't seem to be used to Lindelof's style of writing. I can understand if it's not your cup of tea and that's fine, but for something to not be answered and call it lazy writing seems a bit much. I mean the ending of Inception for God sakes. Nolan didn't sit there and say, "I'm just gonna let it spin because I don't care." He left it spinning for a reason.

Now the script isn't perfect of course and the second act isn't the tighest, but I don't think Lindelof sat there thinking, "You know this? I'm just gonna half ass it and leave it to the audience to decide."

This movie sticks with you. This thread isn't even dead yet.



To be honest, when Blade Runner first came out, to the very few people who saw it, not a whole lot of those people were really thinking this. It's taken time for Blade Runner to achieve the attention and discussion it has now.

Yeah, it sticks with you with how annoyingly flawed it is.

As to Blade Runner. I am not old enough to have been around when it came out. But when I saw it, I knew what I like about it. When I saw Prometheus, it was the exact same thing.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Well that's fine like I said. It isn't perfect and what happens isn't for everybody.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

But this is the kind of stuff that appeals to me. That is what makes it hurt.

 

[regwec]

Moon, District 9, No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, Eternal Sunshine. The Fountain and countless other similar films have been made in the last decade.

Please discuss each of these movies, and why they are "similar", and specifically why they are similar to Blade Runner.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Please discuss each of these movies, and why they are "similar", and specifically why they are similar to Blade Runner.

They creative, sophisticated films that aren't directed at wider audiences.

 

[Kane52630]

Weren't there like 10 different cuts to Blade Runner? I say wait for the directors cut for Prometheus before having the final word on it. Based on the images released recently, there's a ton of stuff we haven't seen yet.

 

[regwec]

They creative, sophisticated films that aren't directed at wider audiences.

"They creative"? Perhaps. I'm not sure "sophisticated" is a running theme. "Little dialogue" is a theme that applies to a few. You haven't yet managed to convince me that any of them are similar films to "Blade Runner".

I said that I didn't think that Blade Runner would get made today. You then listed a lot of other films in an attempt to contradict my supposition. That must mean that you think those films are very similar to Blade Runner. Fair enough. So, how was "There Will be Blood" similar?

Unless you just think that- like Prometheus- these are just 'movies for clever people' or something.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Weren't there like 10 different cuts to Blade Runner? I say wait for the directors cut for Prometheus before having the final word on it. Based on the images released recently, there's a ton of stuff we haven't seen yet.

Blade Runner was always a very good film, no matter the cut. The Final Cut is indeed the best it has ever been though.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

"They creative"? Perhaps. I'm not sure "sophisticated" is a running theme. "Little dialogue" is a theme that applies to a few. You haven't yet managed to convince me that any of them are similar films to "Blade Runner".

I said that I didn't think that Blade Runner would get made today. You then listed a lot of other films in an attempt to contradict my supposition. That must mean that you think those films are very similar to Blade Runner. Fair enough. So, how was "There Will be Blood" similar?

Unless you just think that- like Prometheus- these are just 'movies for clever people' or something.

Why exactly wouldn't Blade Runner be made today? I assumed it was because no one would pay for it because it would lack appeal to the masses.

I gave you examples of films that contradict that.

 

[dark_b]

Weren't there like 10 different cuts to Blade Runner? I say wait for the directors cut for Prometheus before having the final word on it. Based on the images released recently, there's a ton of stuff we haven't seen yet.

Scott deleted a lot scenes. the qustion is if they will create an extended cut or will they realese the deleted scenes seperate. i demand a new cut from Scott.

http://thebioscopist.com/2012/06/20/the-linguistics-of-prometheus-what-david-says-to-the-engineer/

http://badassdigest.com/2012/06/20/...aid-to-the-engineer-at-the-end-of-prometheus/
classic Ridley Scott. you need to watch the DVD and BR for the real movie.

''This man is here because he does not want to die. He believes you can give him more life.''

''We’re all going to have to wait for the Director’s cut to see if the conversation between the Engineer and David – and there was indeed originally a conversation, not merely an utterance from David – yields any fruit.- Dr. Anil Biltoo''

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I'll take more Theron in that space suit.

 

[dark_b]

I don't know, I would just rather just dismiss it as lazy writing and rather not discuss it at all.

People have the right to their opinion and can choose not to further discuss something they don't like, but this movie is still being discussed hotly across the internet. And not because of plot holes, but because what was shown is actually interesting leading to mass discussion of theories. This doesn't mean it was lazy writing where the movie couldn't answer questions where people drew their own conclusions that doesn't match what the film was going for. Not answering everything provided the kinds of discussion that Lindelof wants for the audience when he writes. People don't seem to be used to Lindelof's style of writing. I can understand if it's not your cup of tea and that's fine, but for something to not be answered and call it lazy writing seems a bit much. I mean the ending of Inception for God sakes. Nolan didn't sit there and say, "I'm just gonna let it spin because I don't care." He left it spinning for a reason.

Now the script isn't perfect of course and the second act isn't the tighest, but I don't think Lindelof sat there thinking, "You know this? I'm just gonna half ass it and leave it to the audience to decide."

This movie sticks with you. This thread isn't even dead yet.
.

Prometheus was a big disappointment for me. so belive me that i read a lot prometheus news,articles and other forums. and i dont see a lot discussions about the questions that Lindelof and Scott asked. IMO 99% time is spend on what the engineer did in the beginning,David poisoning Holloway,David talking to the engineer(we found out today) and the the alien coming out of the stomach.

again sorry but i dont see a lot of debates about aliens creating humans,aliens religions,.... i think those discussions will start after the bluray is out when fans will look at every frame from the movie.

and Doctor Jones i still think that people had a problem with stupid characers and not exploring the questions. i still think that asking the qustion is the easiest part of writting. a 6 year old kid can ask a question. its what you do after asking. how you explore it.

 

[regwec]

Meh. It's deeply flawed, but it is thought provoking anyway. I think the film really suffers from two things- its incompleteness, and its complacent use of stock characters.

For all of that, I can't really decide for myself how a compelling story, resting on all of these themes, could have been told within a 2-3 hr film. You could dispense with the prologue, but that was probably the strongest scene. A lot of the content of the film introduces elements in a relatively swift sequence, and it takes no more time than is strictly needed to give us an idea about what the temple is, how the ooze works etc. I could have lost Vickers and Weyland without regret, I suppose, but the pace in general often seems rushed: Janek deduces from nowhere what the croissant is, and he and Shaw jump to a much better understanding of what the Engineers want to do than is really in the script.

Yes, it is a frustrating film, but I think it is almost inevitably so. I think it would always have needed a sequel, or else an inflated running time and a lot less 'human' interest.

 

[dark_b]

wayland had no place in the third act IMO. can you imagine if you throw out wayland and wickers and give it to Fassbender/David?

i think that there is a way to balance out a complex story with Shaw who belives in god and David who is an android. both find out something on LV-223. Shaw finds out that god didnt create humans but aliens. David the android finds out that he was created by humans and that humans were created by aliens. so you have a complex character with David who finds out that the humans are as fake as he is. you then combine this with the engineers story. and you give Janek 10 minutes mroe screentiem so that when the collision happens we scream.

David and Shaw are alone standing next to the engineer when he wakes up. so you have enough time to give every character enough screentime.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Meh. It's deeply flawed, but it is thought provoking anyway. I think the film really suffers from two things- its incompleteness, and its complacent use of stock characters.

For all of that, I can't really decide for myself how a compelling story, resting on all of these themes, could have been told within a 2-3 hr film. You could dispense with the prologue, but that was probably the strongest scene. A lot of the content of the film introduces elements in a relatively swift sequence, and it takes no more time than is strictly needed to give us an idea about what the temple is, how the ooze works etc. I could have lost Vickers and Weyland without regret, I suppose, but the pace in general often seems rushed: Janek deduces from nowhere what the croissant is, and he and Shaw jump to a much better understanding of what the Engineers want to do than is really in the script.

Yes, it is a frustrating film, but I think it is almost inevitably so. I think it would always have needed a sequel, or else an inflated running time and a lot less 'human' interest.

A few things. First, the film is barely 2 hours long with credits. You could do a lot with 45 more minutes.

But even then, if you had to drop stuff? You can drop the cave discovery. We get the exact same information less then ten minutes later. Get rid of the two idiots or simply have them disappear and have them found messed up. Get rid of the storm and the attack by corpse.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

wayland had no place in the third act IMO. can you imagine if you throw out wayland and wickers and give it to Fassbender/David?

i think that there is a way to balance out a complex story with Shaw who belives in god and David who is an android. both find out something on LV-223. Shaw finds out that god didnt create humans but aliens. David the android finds out that he was created by humans and that humans were created by aliens. so you have a complex character with David who finds out that the humans are as fake as he is. you then combine this with the engineers story. and you give Janek 10 minutes mroe screentiem so that when the collision happens we scream.

David and Shaw are alone standing next to the engineer when he wakes up. so you have enough time to give every character enough screentime.

I actually like the idea of Weyland and Vickers. They were just poorly written and they just didn't get enough time. The idea of a man asking for more life from his creator is powerful and I even think the scene worked in the film.

Weyland gave David a good bit of conflict. I wondered why people thought David was being disloyal, when he clearly followed orders the entire film.

 

[regwec]

A few things. First, the film is barely 2 hours long with credits. You could do a lot with 45 more minutes.

Hmm. It really depends where the story is going, or where you want it to. You have complained endlessly that the film just sets up questions without answering them, which is a fair point. But can you envision a successful answer to all of the questions over the origin of our species, the history of the Engineers, our interrelation with them, how the Xenomorphs fit in etc, in 45 minutes? You might be able to compress something like a conclusion in there, but I would hardly be structurally pleasing, and the extra time would have to largely be exposition.

But even then, if you had to drop stuff? You can drop the cave discovery.

One of the nicer sequences in the film, which broadened the scope somewhat.

We get the exact same information less then ten minutes later.

In a bit of clumsy exposition. That was one of the weaker scenes. I would rather keep the cave exploration and just have the team know what they are doing already.

Get rid of the two idiots

Fifield was a crappy stock character, so I am inclined to agree, but more was needed than Shaw's monstrous pregnancy to show the importance of the ooze and its uses. The loss of that whole section would remove much of the horror/suspense from the film. I would agree that it could have been better, but I don't think you could just pull it out without an even less satisfactory film. After all, we don't like are questions going unanswered, huh?

or simply have them disappear and have them found messed up.

I have the inkling of a suspicion that, had they done that, you would have called it "lazy writing".

Get rid of the storm

For me, the storm was the most visually pleasing scene in the whole film, which gave a lot of physicality and believability to this distant planet. You could cut it, but then there would be no reason for anyone to get stuck in the temple with the ooze, and a lot of visual flair would be sacrificed for little gain.

and the attack by corpse.

Not a good scene but, again, the ooze is evidently key to the whole mythos, and you would just be leaving yet more of the dreaded "unanswered questions" if you didn't trouble to explore what it is or what it does. It's another scene that I wish was better, but not necessarily absent.

What you suggest certainly makes for a lean film, but it is one shorn of much of its imagery or its already limited action. Basically, the team wake up and a presentation tells them what's going on. They land the ship and go to the temple. Nothing happens and they come back. David poisons Holloway, Shaw and Holloway have sex. Next day, they go back to the temple again. Holloway gets ill, and they go back. Flamethrower scene. Nasty pregnancy stuff. Wayland is woken up, and they all go to the temple again. The Kurgan kills all but Shaw, followed by the same denouement we all saw.

That structure as it stands doesn't really work, because there is far too much to-and-fro from ship to temple. You could argue that it could be padded with whatever the next film intends to tell us, but I think it's safe to assume that the context needs to change to the Engineer's planet for that stuff to happen. I certainly doubt it could happen before the Kurgan awakes. And then you would have a lot of leaden exposition for the audience to contend with.

I know you really don't like questions without answers, but you wouldn't be very interested in a three hour question and answer session, would you?

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[dark_b]

of course with a good script they are important. but i am looking at the prometheus that i got. and there it didnt work IMO