So Ridley Scott is directing an Alien prequel... (The official Prometheus Thread)

[A24 4,331]

Thank goodness?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

List all the really brilliant films that this "so-called" 70's style movie making has brought forth. Are they really more numerous then the brilliant 80's or 90's films?

Also I find this myth that in the 70's movies were not made to entertain the masses but solely as an expression of a director's artistic vision to be rather nonsensical.

[A24 4,331]

Whether the moviemaking of the '70s is better than the '80s or '90s is another discussion. It would takes us too far from here. I certainly see a difference.

Also I find this myth that in the 70's movies were not made to entertain the masses but solely as an expression of a director's artistic vision to be rather nonsensical.

Yes, but now Hollywood found out who the audience actually is. Before the '80s and before marketing boys called the shots, they thought the audience were adults. I'm still amazed when I notice how mature the tone of Jaws (1975) feels for a summer blockbuster movie. As an adult movie fan, I feel deliciously respected when I watch that movie. The same goes for Alien, another '70s movie. Or observe the sexual, phychological tone in the thriller Straw Dogs (1971). This is what I miss whenever I watch a big movie these days. Look at the top 10 highest grossing movies of each year and tell me movies haven't grown more childish, Steef.

Alex

[Quintus 5,399]

Just watched Porky's 2.

Oh wait - wrong thread.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Whether the moviemaking of the '70s is better than the '80s or '90s is another discussion. It would takes us too far from here. I certainly see a difference.

Also I find this myth that in the 70's movies were not made to entertain the masses but solely as an expression of a director's artistic vision to be rather nonsensical.

Yes, but now Hollywood found out who the audience actually is. Before the '80s and before marketing boys called the shots, they thought the audience were adults. I'm still amazed when I notice how mature the tone of Jaws (1975) feels for a summer blockbuster movie. As an adult movie fan, I feel deliciously respected when I watch that movie. The same goes for Alien, another '70s movie. Or observe the sexual, phychological tone in the thriller Straw Dogs (1971). This is what I miss whenever I watch a big movie these days. Look at the top 10 highest grossing movies of each year and tell me movies haven't grown more childish, Steef.

Alex

You seem to be making the assumption, wrongly, that Jaws was plotted to be a summer blockbuster when the term didn't even exist at that point and indeed Jaws became the very first summer blockbuster, an event that would not be repeated in 1976, but would again happen in 1977. I'm glad you like the mature tone of Jaws, but at the time Jaws came out you had to be a child, yet you could fully appreciate it for different reasons than you may now.

[A24 4,331]

You seem to be making the assumption, wrongly, that Jaws was plotted to be a summer blockbuster when the term didn't even exist at that point and indeed Jaws became the very first summer blockbuster,

I know that, Joey. It just illustrates the difference between the times. Yes, today it would be designed from the ground up as a summer blockbuster, no question about it.

[crocodile 8,000]

I like Jaws more now than I liked it when I was younger. Maybe it's because when I was born the film was already old with old movie tricks. Jurassic Park was tge event movie of my childhood. But as the time went by I started to really love it. It's a really small movie and it is both thrilling and fun. And an really unlikely merging of the genres. If it was to be made now, it would be dead serious and brooding. I mean who would in these days score action scenes in a horror film with swashbuckling music and not making it feel like a gag? I mean it wasn't pretentious at all.

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

Jaws isn't a horror film.

[crocodile 8,000]

No matter the genres. You get my point.

Karol

[JoeinAR 1,949]

You seem to be making the assumption, wrongly, that Jaws was plotted to be a summer blockbuster when the term didn't even exist at that point and indeed Jaws became the very first summer blockbuster,

I know that, Joey. It just illustrates the difference between the times. Yes, today it would be designed from the ground up as a summer blockbuster, no question about it.

and be all the worse for it.

Quint, I agree and disagree, Jaws is an action adventure comedy horror family film, it mixes genres' with ease.

The chum sequence goes from hilarity to shock to nervous laughter to shock to exhileration. Universal has greenlit the Gus Van Sandt remake of Jaws, a shot for shot remamke using only practical effects and no cgi.

just kidding. though when and if the inevitable remake is made a no cgi practical effects only version is the way to go.

[Quintus 5,399]

I mean who would in these days score action scenes in a horror film with swashbuckling music and not making it feel like a gag? I mean it wasn't pretentious at all.

Karol

I don't think it has anything to do with the era, or 70s mentality, to be honest. I think Jaws is unique for the reasons you stated, that's all. There are no other movies like Jaws. For decades they tried to duplicate it, but nobody has ever managed it.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

And the score is just JW Brilliance, a perfect 5 star score.

[Quintus 5,399]

Of course. That's a given

[crocodile 8,000]

About the score: I, like most people, thought it only consists of this ominous motif. But some years later I bought a CD and was amazed how varied and full of different thematic material it is. It's such a colourful and brilliantly orchestrated music. And while shark ostinatio remains certainly a crucial element, it's such a shame the rest of is so overlooked by the general public.

Karol

[Thor 7,492]

I'm not talking about misfires. That's a different discussion altogether. I'm talking about general priorities and artistic emphasis in a person's work. His first movies are almost silent movies (their stories were also kept to a minimum). They are not just beautiful but also very strong visual communicators. The visuals did all the talking and this, accidentally or not, made his first films highly open to interpretation. After or since Legend, I see a lot more water being added to the wine, and that goes for the narrative tone as well, which is 'slightly' more compromised by relying more on script, big events or spectacle, more clear-cut characters and exposing dialogue. Of course, this is also due to the times we are living in. The seventies style of moviemaking has disappeared from Scott's movies.

Alex

Yeah, I understand what you said, but I still don't agree. Everyone evolves -- both personally as an artist and adhering to the conventions of the time. What is so marvelous about Scott, IMO, is that he manages to keep his very distinct approach and trademark through ALL of this; through ALL his work. His prioritization of film as an audiovisual medium; audiovisual tableaux, but wrapping it in fairly traditional storytelling. That's been the case from THE DUELLISTS and to this day.

I agree that the 'misfire' discussion is a separate issue, though.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

About the score: I, like most people, thought it only consists of this ominous motif. But some years later I bought a CD and was amazed how varied and full of different thematic material it is. It's such a colourful and brilliantly orchestrated music. And while shark ostinatio remains certainly a crucial element, it's such a shame the rest of is so overlooked by the general public.

Karol

the end title is such a beautiful counterpart to the main titles.

[crocodile 8,000]

Some more images from the film (not so good quality).

Karol

[A24 4,331]

I'm not talking about misfires. That's a different discussion altogether. I'm talking about general priorities and artistic emphasis in a person's work. His first movies are almost silent movies (their stories were also kept to a minimum). They are not just beautiful but also very strong visual communicators. The visuals did all the talking and this, accidentally or not, made his first films highly open to interpretation. After or since Legend, I see a lot more water being added to the wine, and that goes for the narrative tone as well, which is 'slightly' more compromised by relying more on script, big events or spectacle, more clear-cut characters and exposing dialogue. Of course, this is also due to the times we are living in. The seventies style of moviemaking has disappeared from Scott's movies.

Alex

Yeah, I understand what you said, but I still don't agree. Everyone evolves -- both personally as an artist and adhering to the conventions of the time. What is so marvelous about Scott, IMO, is that he manages to keep his very distinct approach and trademark through ALL of this; through ALL his work. His prioritization of film as an audiovisual medium; audiovisual tableaux, but wrapping it in fairly traditional storytelling. That's been the case from THE DUELLISTS and to this day.

You don't have to agree. I'm trying to explain why I and a lot of other fans of Scott's first period no longer find satisfaction in his films after Blade Runner. In your perspective, the level of the visuals has never changed. Personally, I experience it quite differently. Simply put and to the point, the compositions of his shots are less artistic and creative. The moments when I'm visually impressed with Scott the visualist are scarce to none. I no longer see the obsessive detail he treated his first three films with (something Scott admits himself - he even named The Duellists and Blade Runner his only possible 2 auteur films - I knew there was a reason why I love them . They surely are most referenced to by other artists, which I completely understand). The films are no longer that visually centered. It has become more functional, workable, more ordinary, formulaic, conventional and perhaps worst of all, more predictable. It's like with Alan Parsons Project, the first album is more experimental, more daring, more outwardly and ballsy in approach. Later they became tamer, user-friendlier, radio-friendlier with each record. Jean Michael Jarre? I can sorta listen to the first album, the other music I've heard from him is kitsch. I mention these artists because I know you love everything they do, from first note to the last. That's been always a difference between us. It seems to me that, once you love an artist, you are extremely loyal to the end. Perhaps so loyal that you do not see or hear clear anymore?

Alex

[Quintus 5,399]

And yet for those who appreciate movies for more than just their visuals, Scott has turned out quite a generous handful of very enjoyable, wholly worthwhile work. They don't look too shabby either, as it happens.

Don't get me wrong - I'm a supporter of Bladerunner and I absolutely love how that film looks, but I'd still rather watch a Billy Wilder comedy or something like that, a Neil Simon play, something with a great script and characters. Those ingredients are to me far more satisfying than sumptuous visuals ever will be.

Scott's post Bladerunner output doesn't have the pure level of aesthetic artistry of his earlier work, in my opinion, but his later movies do level the playing field and appeal to me in other immensely satisfying ways. He still delivered superb movies long after Bladerunner and I think he will again.

[Jay 37,346]

Some more images from the film (not so good quality).

Karol

Wow, looks pretty cool

[A24 4,331]

It's very Alien-esque, actually.

[Jay 37,346]

Totally

Looks like it was filmed in the 70s

[A24 4,331]

This certainly is mouth-watering. I wish I could see it right now!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It looks 70's because of the bad picture quality.

In 3D digital this will look very shiny and clear, ruining the gritty feel

[Quintus 5,399]

This certainly is mouth-watering. I wish I could see it right now!

You change your mind more than the weather, so readily fickle that you are.

[A24 4,331]

Huh? I never said I didn't want to see it. I haven't been so interested in a new Ridley Scott film since ages, especially after seeing these new photo's.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

But will you see it theatrically Alex? Are you gonna brave annoying kids, people with cellphones and ludicrously high prices?

[A24 4,331]

But will you see it theatrically Alex? Are you gonna brave annoying kids, people with cellphones and ludicrously high prices?

Hmm, maybe. I definitely will not see it in 3D.

[Quintus 5,399]

But Scott has already stated it's to be shown in 3D and 3D only in the recent Empire interview.

Time to bite the bullet, Alex?

[A24 4,331]

But Scott has already stated it's to be shown in 3D and 3D only in the recent Empire interview.

This link leads to a video of Rick Ashley.

I don't think Scott can make that decision.

[Quintus 5,399]

Is he shooting this with Red Cam?

[Muad'Dib 1,802]

Williams should score it!

/Half kidding

[Neimoidian 14]

Hopefully it won't be Streitenfeld.

[tharpdevenport 4]

Would anybody be able to save a YouTube video for me, and send me a copy in wmv format?

There's a fanmade trailer for the film I would like to rescore with some stuff by a little known composer.

The user is gone, his channel gone, but the video is inexplicably still up.

[Jay 37,346]

This is all you need:

http://www.downloadhelper.net/

[tharpdevenport 4]

Not when you use a library computer where you can't be installing random programs. And when you briefly have access to somebody's home computer where you leave it as you found it, no. Basically I got what's here, like Windows Movie Maker. Pathetic program, but it's what I got.

[A24 4,331]

Video interview of Lindelof talking Prometheus and Ridley Scott at Comic Con 2011.

Alex

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Lindelof is the writer of Lost right?

That's a worry...

[crocodile 8,000]

What's wrong with Lost? Apart from the premise, I mean. But then again it never took itself seriously. It's more like an post-modern commentary on pop culture with constant references to everything else. I love it!

He also co-wrote Cowboys & Aliens, apparently.

Karol

[Thor 7,492]

I'm not talking about misfires. That's a different discussion altogether. I'm talking about general priorities and artistic emphasis in a person's work. His first movies are almost silent movies (their stories were also kept to a minimum). They are not just beautiful but also very strong visual communicators. The visuals did all the talking and this, accidentally or not, made his first films highly open to interpretation. After or since Legend, I see a lot more water being added to the wine, and that goes for the narrative tone as well, which is 'slightly' more compromised by relying more on script, big events or spectacle, more clear-cut characters and exposing dialogue. Of course, this is also due to the times we are living in. The seventies style of moviemaking has disappeared from Scott's movies.

Alex

Yeah, I understand what you said, but I still don't agree. Everyone evolves -- both personally as an artist and adhering to the conventions of the time. What is so marvelous about Scott, IMO, is that he manages to keep his very distinct approach and trademark through ALL of this; through ALL his work. His prioritization of film as an audiovisual medium; audiovisual tableaux, but wrapping it in fairly traditional storytelling. That's been the case from THE DUELLISTS and to this day.

You don't have to agree. I'm trying to explain why I and a lot of other fans of Scott's first period no longer find satisfaction in his films after Blade Runner. In your perspective, the level of the visuals has never changed. Personally, I experience it quite differently. Simply put and to the point, the compositions of his shots are less artistic and creative. The moments when I'm visually impressed with Scott the visualist are scarce to none. I no longer see the obsessive detail he treated his first three films with (something Scott admits himself - he even named The Duellists and Blade Runner his only possible 2 auteur films - I knew there was a reason why I love them . They surely are most referenced to by other artists, which I completely understand). The films are no longer that visually centered. It has become more functional, workable, more ordinary, formulaic, conventional and perhaps worst of all, more predictable. It's like with Alan Parsons Project, the first album is more experimental, more daring, more outwardly and ballsy in approach. Later they became tamer, user-friendlier, radio-friendlier with each record. Jean Michael Jarre? I can sorta listen to the first album, the other music I've heard from him is kitsch. I mention these artists because I know you love everything they do, from first note to the last. That's been always a difference between us. It seems to me that, once you love an artist, you are extremely loyal to the end. Perhaps so loyal that you do not see or hear clear anymore?

Alex

I think I'm a bit more open to change than you are. As you know, I am a huge fan of APP and Jarre too (completist even), and while my primary connection is to a particular period in their work, I still find pleasure in other periods even though the style has changed. Jarre, for example, has done some really cool experimental things in recent years (more ambient than eletropop), and AP's more adult pop music in recent years is pretty damn good. I loved A VALID PATH, for example, which was a semi-electronica album.

There's no denying that Scott reached an artistic peak in stuff like ALIEN and BLADE RUNNER, but his visual trademarks are still all over his films. Again, let's not confuse the discussion of great and lesser films with a discussion of how strong or present his style is throughout the filmography.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

What's wrong with Lost? Apart from the premise, I mean. But then again it never took itself seriously. It's more like an post-modern commentary on pop culture with constant references to everything else. I love it!

He also co-wrote Cowboys & Aliens, apparently.

Karol

If you view Lost as a destination then it was a horrific failure.

If you view it as a journey then it had some very nice moments but again the journey ends so badly.

[Brónach 1,302]

Lindelof is the writer of Lost right?

That's a worry...

If I have to go with Lost, he's a good writer in the short distances who relies in the visceral emotion of the moment. His problem is that he's not concerned about making the longer stuff worth those moments. But I think he can write good two hour films.

[Quintus 5,399]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-08-10-ridley-scott-making-cod-elite-content

Oh dear.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Seems like Scott Free may just be producing, if both Tony and Ridley are "involved."

[Henry B 50]

Uhhhhh......

[A24 4,331]

Hmm, those interior shots of the Prometheus are gone from the internet.

[A24 4,331]

Scott also said that he has "completely taken off into this cyberworld of 3-D and CGI technology" and that working on Prometheus has been "the best time" he's had "in a number of years making a movie". That being said, Scott still prefers practical filming as much as possible, versus "all the tricks, the toys" of 3-D and CGI technology.

http://www.reelz.com/movie-news/12244/ridley-scott-opens-up-about-prometheus-and-blade-runner-sequel/

[Charlie Brigden 7]

Leaky PROMETHEUS footage

http://www.prometheusmovienews.com/2011/11/part-of-the-prometheus-trailer-leaks-online/

[Jay 37,346]

Video is apparently blocked at my work... how's it look?

[Brónach 1,302]

It looks cool from what I can see.