Prometheus trailer

Batutta said:
In addition, so the humans take down your ship as you're trying to take off. You crash and survive unharmed. So what do you do? Go to one of the other several ships waiting conveniently nearby and take off again, or waste time going to kill a helpless girl in a tiny shuttle craft because you're mad. If you're a moron, you take option B and get killed...I could list a hundred more things wrong with this stupid movie, or just post a link.

http://www.juliansanchez.com/2012/06/11/whats-wrong-with-prometheus-a-partial-list/
Click to expand...

"Noomi’s squid-fetus, meanwhile, has grown to monstrous proportions despite being locked in a small room with no sources of food or other places for the additional mass to have come from."

This bothered me in the original Alien. I can suspend my disbelief so that something can grow really fast. But unless you're changing the rules of physics the matter has to come from SOMEWHERE. I can even buy that you can change energy into matter, but the Alien nor the squid monster plug into any sort of energy source to make them suddenly grow large. The extra mass just appears out of nowhere.

Also, you've just discovered and alien race. An alien race that is hell bent on coming to Earth and spreading black goo all over the place that will turn humans into squid monsters.

Maybe you should go back and warn people about that? I mean, you just asked the captain to crash into the alien ship to stop it from happening so obviously you care what happens to those people back home. Aren't you going to go back and give them a heads up about this danger?

Nope, not really. Gonna head out and see if I can find the rest of these black goo making bastards that impregnated me with a squid baby. Maybe they can tell me some cool stuff about the Universe and things!
 
Last edited:
Gillvane said:
But unless you're changing the rules of physics the matter has to come from SOMEWHERE.
Click to expand...

...If we are going to start insisting on only producing scientifically accurate movies, then pretty much every action movie ever made would have the the main character physically disabled with broken or fractured bones as soon as they get in to a typical action-movie fight, jump from a high place, get hit by any high speed object, etc... It would make for a very boring action movie with the main characters recovering in the hospital or wearing a cast much of the time.
 
I think my feelings (although it's not like I haven't made them clear enough), can be summed up by the last paragraph in that link I posted--

"...there are plenty of things that are left deliberately ambiguous or merely implied and left for the reader to puzzle out, and that’s all to the good. It’s fine that they don’t spell out exactly why the Engineers changed their mind about humanity (there’s a strong hint in the allusion to some catastrophe “about 2000 years ago”), or detail the precise nature of the Black Goo. It’s good to leave a few mysteries, and a smart audience doesn’t need everything handed to it on a silver platter. But there’s a difference between a cosmic conundrum or an implicit motive and a simple plot gap or character inconsistency, especially when they’re piled atop each other in such quantity. That starts looking less like deliberate mystery and more like simple bad writing."
 
While I'll admit I'm still unsure whether I think Prometheus, as a mere story, was of a great quality -- I think as a cinematic experience, it was akin to Inception. Maybe not quite so amazing as Inception was, certainly not as beautiful or profound, but I left the theater with so much to think about. I miss that. I miss when movies used to leave me talking about them for weeks afterward, and the only ones in recent memory to have done that are Inception, Drive, and Prometheus. I think part of it, though, is that with each of these movies, it was very "love it or hate it," and the controversy and debate about which side you were on lead to feeling involved with the movie -- a closer attachment to it because you're exploring it continuously afterward, and defending it. That's not to say the only reason these movies left me thinking about them is because some people hated them -- people hated Sucker Punch, which I loved, and I never think about that movie anymore.

There's something about these movies that just leaves so much to be talked about. I want to watch Inception again, now. And Alien. And hell, even Blade Runner, which I really wasn't impressed with the first time around.

-JMT
 
adkimery said:
The Engineers had to help w/the cave paintings to some degree because, as stated in the film, the human paintings showed a cluster of stars too distant for ancient humans to see.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but giving some indication where they're from isn't an invitation to come visit them. I tell people where I'm from all the time. I'm not expecting house guests.
 
1) How do we know the paintings weren't because the engineers had taken some of the humans back to those locations for some reason? Or, that engineers were living among the humans and they themselves made the paintings? Maybe the engineers were trying to explain where they were from.

2) Again, we don't know many things about the engineers. We don't know if they were actually going to release the goo on earth, or, take it themselves and create something else that would destroy us. We don't know if it was the same goo from the beginning. We've got two different creatures shown on the ample room walls. We don't know why that particular engineer was in hypersleep. Maybe he was supposed to be woken up by the other engineers, but they were all killed. Maybe he is not even sure what is going on when they wake him. I don't understand why it's not conceivable for him to be pissed off at the humans. Obviously he is of superior capability. He wasn't expecting the squid. I don't see ANY problem with what he did in those scenes. Given his initial reaction to the humans (and robot) that wake him, obviously he is VERY grumpy when he wakes up. :)

Why assume the humans figured out ANYTHING correctly about the engineers? Obviously they were incompetent, so if you already believe that, why would you even BEGIN to believe what they say about the engineers? It's like you take their observations as facts.

You already know also that David doesn't have behavioral inhibitors, that comes along later after the Ash model being a bit twitchy. :)
 
Plus, the only word on the "engineers" wanting/planning to destroy Earth comes from David, who's not exactly a reliable witness.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Why assume the humans figured out ANYTHING correctly about the engineers? Obviously they were incompetent, so if you already believe that, why would you even BEGIN to believe what they say about the engineers? It's like you take their observations as facts.
Click to expand...

Do you really think any writer sits down with the intention of making every single one of his character come across like an incompetent dumbass? I'm sure Damon Lindelof was like, hey, let's make them all boneheads and make the worst possible choices from beginning to end, because, you know, audiences love that. They love watching people get killed over and over again because of their own stupidity. Again, one or two is fine. All of them behaving that way becomes suspect. Screenwriters generally want the audience to root for and care about somebody. And they know that the quickest way to lose empathy is by having them act in a stupid, irrational manner. The characters in this are stupid, and act stupidly, because the writing is flawed. They needed certain events to happen, and wrote themselves into corners they couldn't get out of except by using dumb motivations or random incidents they don't explain, hiding behind a cloak of mystery. Even if I agreed with every reason people have listed for possible motivations and intentions (which are assumed with little evidence), doesn't mean those explanations make for a good story. In most cases, the explanations either lead to other plot holes, or make it a lame story. The story is not interesting or profound. It's mysteries have nothing to do with anything other than jerking the audience around.
 
Rick Burnett said:
1) How do we know the paintings weren't because the engineers had taken some of the humans back to those locations for some reason? Or, that engineers were living among the humans and they themselves made the paintings? Maybe the engineers were trying to explain where they were from.

2) Again, we don't know many things about the engineers. We don't know if they were actually going to release the goo on earth, or, take it themselves and create something else that would destroy us. We don't know if it was the same goo from the beginning. We've got two different creatures shown on the ample room walls. We don't know why that particular engineer was in hypersleep. Maybe he was supposed to be woken up by the other engineers, but they were all killed. Maybe he is not even sure what is going on when they wake him. I don't understand why it's not conceivable for him to be pissed off at the humans. Obviously he is of superior capability. He wasn't expecting the squid. I don't see ANY problem with what he did in those scenes. Given his initial reaction to the humans (and robot) that wake him, obviously he is VERY grumpy when he wakes up. :)

Why assume the humans figured out ANYTHING correctly about the engineers? Obviously they were incompetent, so if you already believe that, why would you even BEGIN to believe what they say about the engineers? It's like you take their observations as facts.

You already know also that David doesn't have behavioral inhibitors, that comes along later after the Ash model being a bit twitchy. :)
Click to expand...

If we assume that the characters were all wrong with their assumptions then the movie starts to break down into something totally incoherent.

We the audience don't have anything else to go on BUT what the stupid characters are telling us.

I don't see anything that indicates we should come to our own conclusions.

It's not like we're watching a Sherlock Holmes story, and there are a bunch of clues and one of the characters is interpreting them wrong, and we the audience can go ah ha! that's not right!

We don't get those clues any more than the characters in the story do.

They just blurt out "It's an alien weapons installation!" Ok. We don't see any guns, it doesn't look like a barracks, we don't get any interpretation of the writing on the wall, what are we supposed to think? It could be an alien discotheque for all we know.

I think the only viable conclusion is that the writers are seriously breaking the rules Mamet lays out and just TELLING us the information with the characters.

Like when Noomi yells to the captain "If you don't stop him, we wont' have a home to go back to!"

Ok, I think we have to take her word for it, because the writers haven't given us anything else to figure out what the alien is up to. Maybe he's going to the Edge of the Universe for a hamburger? Maybe the robot told him "Hey dude, I saw some hot alien babes you'd be into in the Pegasus galaxy" and he's going there to check it out?

http://www.slashfilm.com/a-letter-from-david-mamet-to-the-writers-of-the-unit/


I just get the feelings these characters are blurting these things out to tell US the audience, not each other. They sure as hell don't tell each other the important things, like "Hey, I've got a tentacle sticking out of my eye!"

Or "Hey, I just left an alien baby in the operation room and it's still alive!".

Or "hey, the robot tried to kidnap me and put me in stasis so i could grow and alien baby!"

Or "I thought I said what's up alien dude, but I might have said kiss my shiny metal robot ass. I"m still getting the hang of this alien language".
 
Batutta said:
Do you really think any writer sits down with the intention of making every single one of his character come across like an incompetent dumbass? I'm sure Damon Lindelof was like, hey, let's make them all boneheads and make the worst possible choices from beginning to end, because, you know, audiences love that. They love watching people get killed over and over again because of their own stupidity. Again, one or two is fine. All of them behaving that way becomes suspect. Screenwriters generally want the audience to root for and care about somebody. And they know that the quickest way to lose empathy is by having them act in a stupid, irrational manner. The characters in this are stupid, and act stupidly, because the writing is flawed. They needed certain events to happen, and wrote themselves into corners they couldn't get out of except by using dumb motivations or random incidents they don't explain, hiding behind a cloak of mystery. Even if I agreed with every reason people have listed for possible motivations and intentions (which are assumed with little evidence), doesn't mean those explanations make for a good story. In most cases, the explanations either lead to other plot holes, or make it a lame story. The story is not interesting or profound. It's mysteries have nothing to do with anything other than jerking the audience around.
Click to expand...

I don't get where you conclude it was supposed to be "profound."
 
Gillvane said:
If we assume that the characters were all wrong with their assumptions then the movie starts to break down into something totally incoherent.

We the audience don't have anything else to go on BUT what the stupid characters are telling us.

I don't see anything that indicates we should come to our own conclusions.

It's not like we're watching a Sherlock Holmes story, and there are a bunch of clues and one of the characters is interpreting them wrong, and we the audience can go ah ha! that's not right!

We don't get those clues any more than the characters in the story do.

They just blurt out "It's an alien weapons installation!" Ok. We don't see any guns, it doesn't look like a barracks, we don't get any interpretation of the writing on the wall, what are we supposed to think? It could be an alien discotheque for all we know.

I think the only viable conclusion is that the writers are seriously breaking the rules Mamet lays out and just TELLING us the information with the characters.

Like when Noomi yells to the captain "If you don't stop him, we wont' have a home to go back to!"

Ok, I think we have to take her word for it, because the writers haven't given us anything else to figure out what the alien is up to. Maybe he's going to the Edge of the Universe for a hamburger? Maybe the robot told him "Hey dude, I saw some hot alien babes you'd be into in the Pegasus galaxy" and he's going there to check it out?

http://www.slashfilm.com/a-letter-from-david-mamet-to-the-writers-of-the-unit/


I just get the feelings these characters are blurting these things out to tell US the audience, not each other. They sure as hell don't tell each other the important things, like "Hey, I've got a tentacle sticking out of my eye!"

Or "Hey, I just left an alien baby in the operation room and it's still alive!".

Or "hey, the robot tried to kidnap me and put me in stasis so i could grow and alien baby!"

Or "I thought I said what's up alien dude, but I might have said kiss my shiny metal robot ass. I"m still getting the hang of this alien language".
Click to expand...

Dude. You're being a little over-the-top sarcastic if you want to have an actual conversation. Dial it back a notch. It's just a movie.
 
Michael Traven said:
While I'll admit I'm still unsure whether I think Prometheus, as a mere story, was of a great quality -- I think as a cinematic experience, it was akin to Inception. Maybe not quite so amazing as Inception was, certainly not as beautiful or profound, but I left the theater with so much to think about. I miss that. I miss when movies used to leave me talking about them for weeks afterward, and the only ones in recent memory to have done that are Inception, Drive, and Prometheus. I think part of it, though, is that with each of these movies, it was very "love it or hate it," and the controversy and debate about which side you were on lead to feeling involved with the movie -- a closer attachment to it because you're exploring it continuously afterward, and defending it. That's not to say the only reason these movies left me thinking about them is because some people hated them -- people hated Sucker Punch, which I loved, and I never think about that movie anymore.

There's something about these movies that just leaves so much to be talked about. I want to watch Inception again, now. And Alien. And hell, even Blade Runner, which I really wasn't impressed with the first time around.

-JMT
Click to expand...

As far as I know there are not a ton of plot holes in Drive. You may not like it because of it's slow pacing (I loved it) but I don't think people said OMG! why did they do this, and this, and this, and this, which makes no sense?

Like, how does the geologist that's in charge of mapping get lost? Why doesn't the scientist mention to anyone there's a tentacle coming out of his eye? Why does the wealthy old man fake his death? What's the point? and on, and on, and on.


there's a difference between a movie that leaves you wondering about the issues they bring up but do not answer, and a movie with HUGE gaping plot holes you can drive a tractor through.

Inception was ok. AFAIK it didn't have gaping plot holes. What bugged me about that movie was it didn't seem like a dream, but like a James Bond movie.

Sucker Punch was just vapid. There was no reason to care about any of the characters, especially the main character. The forays into dream land meant nothing, because no one could get hurt there. They weren't real, so why did we watch them? Just for the cool robots and ninjas, which is never enough if there isn't a good story.
 
And can't one say the same thing with the incompetence of almost the entire marine crew from Aliens? Not listening to their superiors, over and over again. Having a person in command of the units who loses it under pressure and Ripley has to take over. Why didn't they send an elite squad of marines if they were so worried about what they would find? Clearly the company knew something was there, again. In Alien, Aliens and Prometheus, it's clear "The Company" goes to great lengths NOT telling anyone what to expect.

And Shaw didn't leave her squid alive, she tried to kill it with the decontaminate setting in the medi-unit. Unfortunately that failed.

And actually, with the gaps I've filed in for what I believe the motivations were, I think it makes an excellent story. Granted, I could be wrong, but for me, that's part of the fun. After seeing a million movies where they have to paint an exact picture for me, I like that this story doesn't, because it's different, and leaves a lot more to discuss. And of course, I've changed my interpretation many times talking with others.

The crew of Prometheus is going to a planet they know NOTHING about. They don't know if a full civilization lives there, or nothing at all. So when you think about a "specialized" crew, they didn't know what they were going to find. It's not like when you are a "geologist" or a "biologist" you've got the same exact all encompassing skill set for ANYTHING you might encounter. Just because the geologist brought something to map out the caves of the temple doesn't mean that is what he is GOOD at spelunking. It seemed like Weyland just had a random group of scientists just in case, but they certainly SHOULDN'T be exactly tailored for their jobs or it would feel more contrived. When they found the body, he was obviously very freaked out. Last time I checked, geologists didn't have to deal with dead bodies.

I play guitar very well, I'd call my self a musician, but if someone brings me a trumpet, it's going to sound like crap. Clearly, I was brought along for my music knowledge but it failed in regards to what ended up being needed. I see the crew under the same light.
 
David Jimerson said:
Let's also not forget that the entire problem in Alien could have been avoided if Dallas had followed the law, his training, and every bit of common sense, and not brought the alien on board to begin with.

Ash let him in, but Ash was programmed to do that. Dallas wasn't.
Click to expand...

If Dallas didn't bring the Alien aboard, then the movie ends. Done.

Sometimes characters have to make bad decisions in order to create horrific consequences.
 
Gillvane said:
So originally the story was Space Jesus goes to earth because teh Romans are bad. They are conquering other people, which is you know, mean and stuff.

But, instead of listening to Space Jesus, the Romans crucify Him.

So the "Engineers" that sent Space Jesus to earth are mad because the humans killed Space Jesus.

The Engineers decide that to punish the bad earth people (that they created) they are going to spread black goo on them and turn them into giant squid monsters.

But then something happened. It was decided by someone that the Space Jesus scene should be taken out of the movie.

Why? Scott says it was just to "on the nose". But maybe they should have left Space Jesus in the movie.

View attachment 55065
Click to expand...

Wouldn't Space Jesus be 8 feet tall and full of muscle? And bald? And pale? And distinctly lacking a rich, vibrant beard?
 
GrahamH said:
Oh it was definitely supposed to be profound. Check out this guy's tally of all the Giver of life, with abdomen torn open moments: http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html

However Scott was so busy shovelling in the symbolism and allusions that he apparently lost track of any need to make the story remotely credible.
Click to expand...

This is a guy's opinion, and what he reads into these things. And he apparently wasn't even watching very closely, because he missed that indeed, Shaw did try to kill the "squid." And Shaw didn't say "we've changed the atmosphere"; she said "they've changed the atmosphere," as part of a terraforming effort. Yet, he still comes up with overly-symbolic meanings for things which were misreads/mishearings of the film.
 
David Jimerson said:
I don't get where you conclude it was supposed to be "profound."
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it was supposed to be profound. I'm saying the unexplained mysteries in this film are not there so an audience can tease out some profound meaning, or even to solve an intriguing puzzle. It exists only to toy with the audience, lead them on and cover up messy storytelling. If they were only interested in making a monster movie they shouldn't have gone there. But they did. And they did it sloppily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top