Prometheus - Part 9

[DarthSkywalker]

I think Ridley and Fox should of said Prometheus was a spin off of the Alien franchise instead of being coy about it.

If Prometheus does get a sequel Lindelof won't be coming back which will make some happy.

The vast majority happy.

Prometheus being or not being a part of the Alien franchise is not the problem. It is what is there that is the problem. If it made most who saw it happy, it wouldn't matter if it was a prequel to "Goodbye, Mr. Chips".

It is clearly a prequel to Alien. The movie is about the Space Jockey's race.

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[DarthSkywalker]

prometheus training

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFYmv6t_Xyg

That is awesome.

 

[Airwings]

I haven't followed this thread or peoples' opinions after the release of the film. But I must ask you what you think of Prometheus. Was it as good as you wanted it to be? Were your praises for Ridley Scott justified?
I remember before the film got out. When I tried to come up with ideas for how the plot should be, people turned against me.

Some of my quotes:

They could have done so much with the story in this film, but I think the visuals are the film's strongest side. It will be breath-taking. But the plot not so much. Like Avatar, perhaps?

Why am I messing around when I write about different ways to tell a sci fi version of a titan?
Do you guys feel so offended when I don't praise everything Ridley Scott does? You truly worship him and NOBODY is allowed to talk him down, right?

A titan could very well be technological advanced alien being, and this film could reveal this in a smarter and much more mysterious way than the explanation we got in Thor.

As I said; they could have done so much with this. Some really heavy writing, something brain-twisting and mind-bending far beyond what we are used to see in American blockbuster films.
I am sure there are better ways than having the film begin with a ship called Prometheus.
But this is a popcorn sci fi after all. We should not demand too much.

"Keep it simple"

And now some qutes from others, in response to my posts:

Scott is all about story and themes. He's not Michael Bay. Scott said he'd never come back to the franchise unless he had a strong story.

You don't know what you are talking about. Either that, or you're purposefully being an idiot. This is Ridley Scott we're talking about, the guy who made Blade Runner. Thought provoking sci fi at it's best.

 

[dark_b]

Good 3D-World, Cinefex, and AC articles about Prometheus, for those interested in the more technical aspects of the film.

Good pictures for everybody to enjoy though...

http://www.prometheusforum.net/disc...-in-cinefex-american-cinematographer-3d-world

I can't believe they shot it almost exclusively with zoom lenses, and lit it with LEDs... Gorgeous visuals for a reputedly "amateur" equipment (I remember documentaries from film school advertising prime lenses as the only "real cinema quality" lenses).

This goes to show just how much cinema is evolving.

YEEEEEEES the original opening has finished CGI.

I think if he wasn't burnt, he would have mutated into an aggressive monster. The original (and better than what's in the film) sketches of Fifield's return depict him as a human who taken on certain xenomorph features around his face and head. I still think that they should have left Fifield dead and made Holloway that turns into a rampage-killing monster in the movie.

 

[Mandalore464]

Edit : Deleted

 

[dark_b]

its a scifi movie. i take an alien monster over a cliche looking zombie.

 

[craigdbfan]

Maybe they ran out of money.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Holy mother of god! I can only imagine the goodies that are in store for us in the Director's Cut.

Considering what Ridley Scott stated in the same recent interview, A L I E N needs at least another additional prequel to close the gap. So, yes, I agree with the notion and sentiment that Ridley should not risk leaving more 'unanswered questions' in Paradise. If I were him, I'd put it all out there and go for broke because the risk will be far greater the next time and there's no guarantee that Scott will get another opportunity.

 

[chamber-music]

I preferred the Fifield crab caveman over this zombie egghead alien cgi version.

 

[matrix_ghost]

I recently bought a book a long wanted too read.
It's called " the greatest SCi-FI movies never made ". THis along with "Tales from development hell" , both are written by the same author , it also gives insight in several projects Ridley Scott was attached too.

Seriously one thing that you kinda see is how Ridley Scott takes on a project. When you read the stuff like how Lindelof was working closely with Scott ...it's eeerliy similar to how RIdhey Scott was working with another writer on I AM LEGEND. THey are basically questioning stuff etc.

Looking back on Prometheus i don't mind if movies ask audiences questions but applying that apporach to basically every movies makes you wonder whether or not people aren't overthinking stuff.

 

[TheOnlyOmega]

Some films people are going to see no matter what. Transformers falls into that category. This movie was being talked about as a "classic" before it even came out.

And Madagascar is already up 40 million on it and is continuing to do much better business.



They are talking 2014 release dates for a sequel to a film that came out in 2010. We will see if it gets made.

If The Golden Compass had been a smash hit, the sequels would have been made. But I am pretty sure it lost money so it disappeared.



What? You do realize the studio get about 55% of the actual ticket sales right? They don't get all that money, so the film grossing the same amount that you spent on the film is not good. In fact, it is a very bad thing.

Cut that advertising budget in half and you still get something like $180 million. You need to double that money just to cover cost. How in the world is $300 million going to cover that?

Nobody really knows how the money is split between theaters and companies. If theaters get half of the money then why are they always selling concessions at ridiculous prices to stay alive? That 55% statement is complete bullcrap if you ask me, because theaters don't make much money from movies, most of there profits come from selling cheap food for $7. Nobody but Fox knows how much went into the marketing, so please don't pull numbers out of thin air.

You also fail to account for all the money to be made from the blu ray and television rights.

 

[I'm Old Greg]

I thought this was funny http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CFcQtwIwAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D-x1YuvUQFJ0&ei=XYTnT9quG_C62gW27fDaCQ&usg=AFQjCNFCYetvJ-4ttKslW7nICv0yJAb3nA

 

[DACrowe]

I wasn't using those films do to their size. I was using them simply because they basically had sequels green-lit right out the door, and one got shelved a year later and the other is still being talked about two years later, but still hasn't been made.

Also not sure it is fair to say The Golden Compass destroyed New Line. They were begging those films to be their next LOTR, to save the company. Their attempts to manipulate the creative in that direction didn't help, along with the subject matter itself.

Well, yeah. New Line put all their hopes on solving their financial woes on TGC being another LOTR (and made sure to literally spell out the connection of producing both in the trailers) and then when that went bust for being a terrible movie and nothing working beyond a handful of performances....that was that.

Even if Prometheus crosses $300 million at the box office, I don't think it will make profit on its theatrical run. The movie had a good sized marketing campaign.

The rest I agree with.

Prometheus cost $130 million. We can estimate that the marketing was at most $50-$60 million (though it could have been quite a bit less), that would bring Fox's total investment in the film to $180-$190 million. Now if Prometheus can cross $300 million WW (I think it will cross $315 million in total), that's a nice chunk of change for an R-rated film. Studios generally keep around 70 to 75% of the box office hauls from exhibitors. But even if we low ball it given how confusing foreign markets are to an average of only 2/3, that still means Fox gets over $200 million of Prometheus's WW take. That sets the floor for this thing to at least $10 million netted in profit.

Granted, that's not a lot. But it will definitely recoup its costs theatrically and I think Fox will make a little bit more than that off of its theatrical run. While not a lot, in this market starved for new tentpoles, and for Fox who doesn't have a franchise right now without an X or Ape in the title, that isn't the end of the world. In fact, if it sells very well on DVD/Blu-Ray--and if you drop a "Ridley Scott Director's Cut" to a genre movie, fanboys are going to eat it up--I think there is still a strong likelihood of a sequel.

My only suggestion would be to get a new writer, Lindelof can work on the basic story, but not the final screenplay, keep the budget the same as the first film and release it in winter with a new title ("Paradise"). Make it a Christmas release and market it as a different type of sci-fi film from the first one (i.e. not a horror movie). I think they could very reasonably see a profit in at least one sequel. I don't think it has the longevity of the "Alien" franchise, but there is room for at least one sequel to wrap things up. If audiences respond positively to the new tone and approach, Fox can run the brand into the ground after Scott leaves just like before.

 

[DACrowe]

I wasn't using those films do to their size. I was using them simply because they basically had sequels green-lit right out the door, and one got shelved a year later and the other is still being talked about two years later, but still hasn't been made.

Also not sure it is fair to say The Golden Compass destroyed New Line. They were begging those films to be their next LOTR, to save the company. Their attempts to manipulate the creative in that direction didn't help, along with the subject matter itself.

Well, yeah. New Line put all their hopes on solving their financial woes on TGC being another LOTR (and made sure to literally spell out the connection of producing both in the trailers) and then when that went bust for being a terrible movie and nothing working beyond a handful of performances....that was that.

Even if Prometheus crosses $300 million at the box office, I don't think it will make profit on its theatrical run. The movie had a good sized marketing campaign.

The rest I agree with.

Prometheus cost $130 million. We can estimate that the marketing was at most $50-$60 million (though it could have been quite a bit less), that would bring Fox's total investment in the film to $180-$190 million. Now if Prometheus can cross $300 million WW (I think it will cross $315 million in total), that's a nice chunk of change for an R-rated film. Studios generally keep around 70 to 75% of the box office hauls from exhibitors. But even if we low ball it given how confusing foreign markets are to an average of only 2/3, that still means Fox gets over $200 million of Prometheus's WW take. That sets the floor for this thing to at least $10 million netted in profit.

Granted, that's not a lot. But it will definitely recoup its costs theatrically and I think Fox will make a little bit more than that off of its theatrical run. While not a lot, in this market starved for new tentpoles, and for Fox who doesn't have a franchise right now without an X or Ape in the title, that isn't the end of the world. In fact, if it sells very well on DVD/Blu-Ray--and if you drop a "Ridley Scott Director's Cut" to a genre movie, fanboys are going to eat it up--I think there is still a strong likelihood of a sequel.

My only suggestion would be to get a new writer, Lindelof can work on the basic story, but not the final screenplay, keep the budget the same as the first film and release it in winter with a new title ("Paradise"). Make it a Christmas release and market it as a different type of sci-fi film from the first one (i.e. not a horror movie). I think they could very reasonably see a profit in at least one sequel. I don't think it has the longevity of the "Alien" franchise, but there is room for at least one sequel to wrap things up. If audiences respond positively to the new tone and approach, Fox can run the brand into the ground after Scott leaves just like before.

 

[Marx]

I finally got to see this last night. I love the Alien movies and this was clearly a prequel to them but I'm not sure how I feel about it. I thought it was good but I also felt a little let down by it.

 

[Rock Sexton]

I finally got to see this last night. I love the Alien movies and this was clearly a prequel to them but I'm not sure how I feel about it. I thought it was good but I also felt a little let down by it.

Same.

Visually stunning to look at in IMAX 3D ...... but I was somewhat underwhelmed, perhaps because of my expectations. Some of the character tension felt forced/underdeveloped to me and I pretty much could predict many of the plot points (i.e. Noomi Rapace being impregnated, Weyland being on the ship, etc, etc). Michael Fassbender's "David" was by far and away the best peformance in the film. I was not a fan of Theron in this movie though.

You know, I was actually annoyed with Weyland and glad he didn't get much screentime. I hate hate hate actors acting super old and dilapidated. With the exception of that viral marketing, why was it necessary to get an young actor to play an old character? They could have forgone that Ted Talk and gotten an elderly actor and it would have looked and played much better IMO.

You read my mind.

 

[MadVillainy]

I finally got to see this last night. I love the Alien movies and this was clearly a prequel to them but I'm not sure how I feel about it. I thought it was good but I also felt a little let down by it.

pretty much felt the same

 

[Rock Sexton]

Interesting article from totalfilm.com.

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

I'm glad they found somebody to translate that scene.

On the other hand, that exchange bothered me because I wanted to see the Engineer converse back. Obviously we know what he was tasked with, but I still would've expected such an advanced being to do more than rage out on the crew.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

Same.

Visually stunning to look at in IMAX 3D ...... but I was somewhat underwhelmed, perhaps because of my expectations. Some of the character tension felt forced/underdeveloped to me and I pretty much could predict many of the plot points (i.e. Noomi Rapace being impregnated, Weyland being on the ship, etc, etc). Michael Fassbender's "David" was by far and away the best peformance in the film.

To be fair though, the character development in Prometheus was no different than Alien's. So I don't comprehend how fans adored A L I E N but then criticized Prometheus for its script issues.

Prometheus ventured along the lines of an Alien prequel and a standalone Sci-Fi epic. Visually, yes, the film was elegant and stunning but what really made the film for me (best of 2012, thus far) were the personal philosophies/convictions, religious allegories, symbolism and mythology that lead to imaginative and thought-provoking 'explanations', answers and debates.

 

[Rock Sexton]

To be fair though, the character development in Prometheus was no different than Alien's. So I don't comprehend how fans adored A L I E N but then criticized Prometheus for its script issues.

Prometheus ventured along the lines of an Alien prequel and a standalone Sci-Fi epic. Visually, yes, the film was elegant and stunning but what really made the film for me (best of 2012, thus far) were the personal philosophies/convictions, religious allegories, symbolism and mythology that lead to imaginative and thought-provoking 'explanations', answers and debates.

I'm a huge fan of an intellectual movie and character depth. I just never got that with this one. For example, Charlie's tension with David. It's instantaneous the first time you see them exchanging words. So either you're left to think, "wow this guy is a complete dick" or you assume there's some other reason (never explained). That's that lack of depth I'm talking about.

There's really not much to debate other than why the engineers created the humans and why were they trying to destroy them. The film openly winks at you though with the parallels stemming from David's and Charlie's conversation as David poisons his drink. It reminded me of a scene from "8mm" where Tom Welles demands Longdale tell him why Mr. Christian had the snuff films made and Longdale simply replies "Because he could."

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I'm a huge fan of an intellectual movie and character depth. I just never got that with this one. For example, Charlie's tension with David. It's instantaneous the first time you see them exchanging words. So either you're left to think, "wow this guy is a complete dick" or you assume there's some other reason (never explained). That's that lack of depth I'm talking about.

And the identical argument can be made about Alien with its lack of depth involving the entire cast. Yet, many will defend the film to the death -- calling it a cinematic masterpiece.

As for why Holloway mocks David, it can be purely from the fact that he's an Android. Ironically, there are similarities between the relationship with David and the crew of the Prometheus and the Space Jockeys/Engineers and humanity.

There's really not much to debate other than why the engineers created the humans and why were they trying to destroy them. The film openly winks at you though with the parallels stemming from David's and Charlie's conversation as David poisons his drink. It reminded me of a scene from "8mm" where Tom Welles demands Longdale tell him why Mr. Christian had the snuff films made and Longdale simply replies "Because he could."

That theory has been discussed but then why did the Engineers guide humanity through several thousands of years before (finally) deciding to pull plug? In addition, who's to say that the Space Jockeys, who had a hand in our creation, were the very same ones that ordered for our termination?

I believe the answer is more complex than just 'because they could...'

 

[Rock Sexton]

And the identical argument can be made about Alien with its lack of depth involving the entire cast. Yet, many will defend the film to the death -- calling it a cinematic masterpiece.

As for why Holloway mocks David, it can be purely from the fact that he's an Android. Ironically, there are similarities between the relationship with David and the crew of the Prometheus and the Space Jockeys/Engineers and humanity.

I already mentioned the "similarities" that came out in David and Charlie's conversation in my above response to you. You seem to be coming at me as though I'm some rabid "Alien" fanatic. However, if I had to compare the two I enjoyed the original more from that standpoint.

That theory has been discussed but then why did the Engineers guide humanity through several thousands of years before (finally) deciding to pull plug? In addition, who's to say that the Space Jockeys, who had a hand in our creation, were the very same ones that ordered for our termination?

I believe the answer is more complex than just 'because they could...'

Well then you're ignoring what the movie is telling you for a more fantastical person preference never indicated in the film. Again, the whole point of the David/Charlie conversation about creation was to set up the parallels. They had the means, the intelligence, and the technology to do it so they did ..... just as Weyland created a replicant like David.

 

[DoomsdayApex]

I already mentioned the "similarities" that came out in David and Charlie's conversation in my above response to you. You seem to be coming at me as though I'm some rabid "Alien" fanatic. However, if I had to compare the two I enjoyed the original more from that standpoint.

Precisely the point I was making.

I am not referencing you to a rabid fan, but it's a bit bewildering to be complaining of a 'shallow' script with Prometheus when Alien was cut from the same cloth.

Well then you're ignoring what the movie is telling you for a more fantastical person preference never indicated in the film. Again, the whole point of the David/Charlie conversation about creation was to set up the parallels.

Ignoring what? If I'm ignoring a certain aspect of the film, then so are you. Your theory still doesn't explain anything (not even remotely close) involving the purpose of the origins of humanity and the relationship between The Engineers and Humans. If the conversation between David and Charlie been accurate, then the Space Jockeys would have never 'raised' us and left us clues.

 

[Soapy]