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

[A24 4,331]

Ask any director or listen to their comments about deleted scenes on the DVDs. Or just watch the deleted scenes. Often it's self-evident why they were cut.

And while we're on the subject of character development. Alien and Blade Runner aren't exactly movies known for character development either.

Alex

[JoeinAR 1,949]

They don't need lots of development because each character is a archetype.

[A24 4,331]

Yep!

[Quintus 5,399]

What's there is beautifully drawn nonetheless.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

So what things about Prometheus did the disappointed camp like or dare I say it even love?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[JoeinAR 1,949]

the art direction, the vfx, the Captain, David, all these things I did love about the movie.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I really liked the getting laid scene.

the art direction, the vfx, the Captain, David, all these things I did love about the movie.

I agree these were also my favorites.

I also loved the lighting all around...especially the use of sickly saturated yellow light...included judiciously but to great eerie effect. It's a color in lighting we rarely see since the 80s, outside of a Borg vessel.

I also didn't get what all the fuss about Fassbender was before this...but I think he did very good job with David.

[Quintus 5,399]

I thought it was nice to look at, the sets were attractive if derivative, David was watchable and somewhat interesting but held back by the script, the theme was lush and the makeup on the engineers was excellent.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

Engineers reminded me too much of ripped Voldemort.

[Brónach 1,302]

What's frustrating to me is to read all the negative comments I read in forums such as this almost ALL have to do with story, story, story. Now, I'm not saying that there are a couple of issues in that department, but many of them are seemingly also 'created' out of nothing, as if the critic is too caught up in the moment and the deconstruction.

In any case, I never - NEVER - go into a Ridley Scott film for his storytelling skills. To me, it's all about how he exploits the film medium's audiovisual possibilities to create moods, sensations, tableaux, ideas. That's where his true strenght lies, IMO, and that's where PROMETHEUS really excels as an ART WORK.

Screw the story, I just want to delve into his universe, and his execution of it.

This thinking is alien to me.

If I want to delve into a universe, I want the events in that universe to be entertaining and make sense and make me believe in that universe. Like the real world, comprised of so many stories that make sense together. But if it's just to observe randomness, what's the point? What kind of universe is that?

[Thor 7,490]

What's frustrating to me is to read all the negative comments I read in forums such as this almost ALL have to do with story, story, story. Now, I'm not saying that there are a couple of issues in that department, but many of them are seemingly also 'created' out of nothing, as if the critic is too caught up in the moment and the deconstruction.

In any case, I never - NEVER - go into a Ridley Scott film for his storytelling skills. To me, it's all about how he exploits the film medium's audiovisual possibilities to create moods, sensations, tableaux, ideas. That's where his true strenght lies, IMO, and that's where PROMETHEUS really excels as an ART WORK.

Screw the story, I just want to delve into his universe, and his execution of it.

This thinking is alien to me.

If I want to delve into a universe, I want the events in that universe to be entertaining and make sense and make me believe in that universe. Like the real world, comprised of so many stories that make sense together. But if it's just to observe randomness, what's the point? What kind of universe is that?

A fascinating one.

[Brónach 1,302]

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

Two scientists make mysterious discovery on Earth that seems to point to a certain part of space. These maps show people worshipping giants. A rich old dying man believes he can extend his life by meeting these creatures. He funds an expedition to go to the location in the maps. The team lands on the planet. They discover an old ship carrying dangerous cargo that destroyed its crew. One of these ancient people is still around. But the rich old dying man would rather save himself than hear any world-changing truths they have. He sabotages his own mission to get to his own ends...in part using a resentful artificial intelligence he created. Unfortunately it turns out our own makers decided they made a mistake and wanted to destroy us. The remaining ancient person makes one last effort to complete the mission, the humans sacrifice themselves to prevent that from happening.

At what point did you feel overwhelmed by incoherence with this? It's a fairly simple linear narrative.

[Brónach 1,302]

No I wasn't talking about this film in particular I was talking in general.

[Quintus 5,399]

Chaac hasn't seen Prometheus, Blum.

[Wojo 2,453]

That's why they don't turn newspapers into movies.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

No I wasn't talking about this film in particular I was talking in general.

Oh well, I'm a dumb ass.

And I still thought Prometheus was coherent and easy to follow, so...there's that!

[Quintus 5,399]

No you're not. You're not fucking psychic.

You are a twat, however.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

the art direction, the vfx, the Captain, David, all these things I did love about the movie.

Same here, I'm also really loving the score, but I know I'm in the minority with that one.

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

At what point did you feel overwhelmed by incoherence with this? It's a fairly simple linear narrative.

Completely agree. I found no issue with the plot or how it was executed, but more with the characters involved. Like it's been said, a lot are stupid and behave unbelievably.

On a random side note, I loved the part in the trailer where the guy is yelling "Cut it off!!! Cut it off!!!" and we just see Shaw hunched over the sink. I was hoping that actual scene delivered more, I imagined something much better than what we ended up with.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,068]

Like it's been said, a lot are stupid and behave unbelievably.

And...that makes them different from real every day people...in what way?

I say that as a man who just witnessed someone sacrifice their laptop to save their cup of coffee just over an hour ago.

People do stupid things all the time. We talk behind their backs for doing so all the time. A lot of our conversations include "I can't believe he/she _______" yet when it comes to this film we suddenly find stupidity, especially in a high pressure situation which is known to make you stupid, unrealistic.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

On a random side note, I loved the part in the trailer where the guy is yelling "Cut it off!!! Cut it off!!!" and we just see Shaw hunched over the sink. I was hoping that actual scene delivered more, I imagined something much better than what we ended up with.

Completely agreed. The trailer really was the best thing to come out of that film. It was extremely well made.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Like it's been said, a lot are stupid and behave unbelievably.

And...that makes them different from real every day people...in what way?

I say that as a man who just witnessed someone sacrifice their laptop to save their cup of coffee just over an hour ago.

People do stupid things all the time. We talk behind their backs for doing so all the time. A lot of our conversations include "I can't believe he/she _______" yet when it comes to this film we suddenly find stupidity, especially in a high pressure situation which is known to make you stupid, unrealistic.

Oh I agree completely, but it just doesn't feel right here considering how frequently it occurs.

Running away from the crashing ship is the epitome of it. I found the death of Fifield and the other guy to be rather accurate if it were a real life situation, but not the way it came about. For a guy who was terrified of even being a kilometer away from a potential life form, approaching a giant alien snake is not the natural response. If he said "Time to go" and on their way out they got surrounded, that's all that needed to happen.

I personally had more issue with fleshing them out, particularly Shaw, than their actual actions.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Thor 7,490]

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

That's because you're not looking at/experiencing the film the same way I do.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Like it's been said, a lot are stupid and behave unbelievably.

And...that makes them different from real every day people...in what way?

These are supposed to be scientists, men of reason at the top of their field, yet they're more incompetent and unstable than the ragtag bunch of blue collar workers in the original film.

[Quintus 5,399]

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

That's because you're not looking at/experiencing the film the same way I do.

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

[indy4 155]

I just saw Prometheus. It was good.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

Having seen the film a third time, I feel like I am now in a place where I can say how I feel about it definitively.

It is hands down one of the worst screenplays in recent memory. Nobody behaves in a logical fashion; the scientists are scientists as written by someone who either thinks all scientists are borderline retarded, or whose only conception of science and those who practice it is 1950s b-movies. That said, let's not all discount the possibility that the movie is taking this stance on purpose; maybe it is intended as a vigorusly anti-science polemic. Given the title of the film, that's no stretch of the imagination. Either way, the screenplay is awful, but if you want to atrribute that anti-science element to it, then it at least gains a little bit of coherence back. Only a little bit, though.

The frustrating thing is that as a technical accomplishment, the film is solid throughout, and utterly exceptional for long stretches at a time. Seen properly, the 3D is terrific; there is a simple shot of the image of the map being built that has bowled me over every time I've seen it, and it's a minor bit. There are many more major bits that are just as impressive. The shot of the ringed planet as a tiny, tiny Prometheus appraoches it is one of my new favorite shots in all of filmed sci-fi. The planet is gorgeously bleak. The effects of the ship taking off at the end while Shaw tries to get to safety are among the best visual effects I've ever seen.

And so forth.

So with THAT much technical genius on display, is it forgiveable that nobody had the sense not to put Guy Pearce in old-age makeup? It is not. It's excellent old-age makeup, but it doesn't work, and there is no reason on earth not to have simply cast some charismatic old coot for the part.

And yet ... Pearce, like most of the cast, is good in his role. It's not HIS fault the role doesn't work, except in the sense that he should have said "Hey, shouldn't some old guy play this part?" Can't blame the man for taking a paying role in a high-profile film. Otherwise: sure, Idris Elba's redneck accent is atrocious, but otherwise he is great; sure, it makes no real sense for Vickers to be such a dick, but Charlize Theron does a fine job with it. Nothing Fifield does makes a lick of sense, but that actor -- I forget his name -- does a good job of portraying each successive inconsistent beat. (I can't say the same for the guy playing Milburn, or for the guys playing the pilots, who suck.) Rapace has some weak moments early on, but once the shit hits the fan, she is terrific; she almost makes it plausible that Shaw could be jumping around like Spider-Man after having an alien being cut out of her body half an hour before.

Fassbender is terrific, of course. Even when he's saddled playing everything as a dismbodied head, he does well. Is it his fault that the screenplay fails to make David's actions sensible? It is not.

Worst of all, the film utterly fails to serve as a reverse-engineered -- see what I did there? -- ancestor for the Alien series. Yeah, yeah, I get it: Ridley didn't actually have any interest in doing that. Well, sir, your contempt shows; it's a cheat, it's a slap in the face of the people who care about that sort of thing, and if the feelings of such people are irrelevant to you, then surely you won't mind when we all tell you to go fuck yourself.

And yet... damn it to hell, the ideas that DO connect with Alien work really, really well. This makes it even more galling that Ridley decided to not simply connect the dots, but it also makes it easier -- if no more satisfying -- for us to concoct bizarre theories that allow us to do it for ourselves. That is not how storytelling works, however. And don't try to tell me it does. Imagine:

Spielberg: "Indiana Jones got hired by the government to find the Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis could find it."

Us: "Why was it important for the Nazis not to get it?"

Spielberg: "Because they were bad people, and would have done terrible things with it."

Us: "Fair enough. So what happened then?"

Spielberg: "Well, Indy and the Nazis found the Ark at basically the same time."

Us, really interested now: "And what happened then?"

Spielberg: "Well, that doesn't matter. What's important is that the Ark got found. And trust me, it all made total sense."

Us: "Fuck yourself with a garden rake."

Spielberg's incredibly untalented screenwriter: "It isn't answers that are important. It's asking questions that are important; answers only cheapen the asking of questions."

Us: "I hope you get bowel cancer."

And yet, this seems to more or less be the philosophy that Scott and his screenwriters followed. I'll admit, there is something thematically sound in the idea of answers being less important than their questions. Done correctly, I think that's a completely valid method. Here, it is not done correctly. Why? We already know some of the answers, because we saw Alien and its sequels. So trying to divert us from the path we are already irrevocably on is simply stupid.

Like Alien 3 -- another movie I like despite its best efforts to get me not to -- Prometheus is a failure of concept. And it's a near-total failure. It is, however, redeemed somewhat by truly exemplary technical credits.

The summary: this was an excellent idea on Ridley's part which was turned into a truly awful story and a truly awfuller screenplay, but was then filmed with an evidently enormous amount of passion and talent, not only on Ridley's part but also by key collaborators (including his actors, cinematographers, production designers, visual effects artists, composers, etc.).

If only all bad movies could be this good.

[Quintus 5,399]

If only all bad movies were granted this much debate and well-intentioned consideration. Suddenly we'd be seeing the bright side of Battlefield Earth and people would be mining Chronicles of Riddick for salvageable elements and morsels of, hey, it's actually not that bad to talk about on internet forums.

I personally don't see what entities this severely broken movie to anymore consideration than any other [sci-fi] mediocrity out there.

My theory is that people enjoy debating such high-profile failures out of a morbid fascination. It's like prodding a dead face hugger with a pair of tweezers.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

Simple: those two movies you mention do not possess even an iota of the technical proficiency that Prometheus does. Nor do they have good acting, good music, etc. Or good -- if horribly bungled -- ideas.

If they did, then game on.

There really IS such a thing as a mixed bag, you know.

[Quintus 5,399]

I know, but I also know there's folks out in the wilderness who would strongly disagree with your judgement of those other two movies. Bad movies are as fair game as mixed bag ones.

[Thor 7,490]

I can't find fascinating just a bunch of incoherent events put together without care.

That's because you're not looking at/experiencing the film the same way I do.

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

Great film! A bit short, but...

[Bryant Burnette 654]

I know, but I also know there's folks out in the wilderness who would strongly disagree with your judgement of those other two movies. Bad movies are as fair game as mixed bag ones.

True enough. Although ye gods, do I feel sorry for the miserable soul out there mounting a vigorous defense of Battlefield Earth...

[Quintus 5,399]

Indeed!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

So does this movie suck or what? Is there anything remotely as cool as when you see the helmets on the bridge with the text on the computer screen, or when The Nostromo slowly turns 92 degrees to port while the strings play a big rendition of the theme? If not, I guess I'll just pass.

[indy4 155]

I thought the part where that

blonde lady revealed that she was the old guy's daughter

was very predictable. I assumed that we were supposed to assume that in the beginning of the film.

[Bryant Burnette 654]

So does this movie suck or what? Is there anything remotely as cool as when you see the helmets on the bridge with the text on the computer screen, or when The Nostromo slowly turns 92 degrees to port while the strings play a big rendition of the theme? If not, I guess I'll just pass.

It sucks AND it's awesome. Yes, I think there are things as cool as that bit from Alien; several of them, in fact. But I suspect Quint will vigorously disagree.

In any case, Alien is the better film by far.

I thought the part where that

blonde lady revealed that she was the old guy's daughter

was very predictable. I assumed that we were supposed to assume that in the beginning of the film.

Not one of the more successful elements of the film, that's for sure. As one review pointed out, there is no logical reason in-story for anyone to keep that a secret; it's an example of it being a secret simply so the film can have a surprise for the audience. Lazy, uninspired writing.

[Brónach 1,302]

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

Great film! A bit short, but...

How can you like that lifeless drivel?

[KK 3,307]

So does this movie suck or what? Is there anything remotely as cool as when you see the helmets on the bridge with the text on the computer screen, or when The Nostromo slowly turns 92 degrees to port while the strings play a big rendition of the theme? If not, I guess I'll just pass.

The movie is not as bad as people here like to boast it is. It's actually an entertaining film and you can turn a blind eye to its faults while watching it.

Overall, I find it to be a well-done sci-fi film with great potential, but falls short. Just don't walk in expecting the next Alien or a Ridley Scott classic.

So no, it doesn't suck.

[Brónach 1,302]

That means it sucks. That means Ridley Scott could have realized the flaws and asked for a better script and he didn't. It doesn't sound as f he cared that much. That means another failed oportunity of doing great sci-fi on film, which is seriously needed., by those who have the means to do so.

I'm jumping to conclusions before seeing it but meh, man, meh. I can't stand going from reading amazing stuff like Fiasko and then checking out science fiction in film and finding this endless desolate wasteland.

[Quintus 5,399]

"Boasting" about how bad it is? Please, let's keep fanboyism out of it.

[Matt C 452]

Just don't walk in expecting the next Alien or a Ridley Scott classic.

This. Scott's filmmaking style has changed dramatically over the last 30 years, and I think some people had absurdly high expectations going in. As in pre-release expectations of Crystal Skull type of high.

I know people are going to be divided on this film, but it at least sticks to its guns. I wished the movie focused solely on Noomi Rapace and Michael Fassbender's characters... they were great. Everyone else is just wasted in their roles.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

this film isn't a failure like the KOTCS. It has a better narrative, but it does lack the engaging characters of KOTCS.

I wonder how this film will be looked at sometime in the future. Noomi rapace just doesn't have the acting chops to carry this movie.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I thought she did a fine enough job. Not outstanding, but good.

[Thor 7,490]

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

Great film! A bit short, but...

How can you like that lifeless drivel?

I'm just totally addicted to and in love with the JP universe. The first film is one of my alltime favourite films, and I like the other two as well. Superb popcorn entertainment with some great setpieces. They also very much subscribe to the experience aspect of filmmaking I love so much. I just wish III was 20-30 minutes longer. It seems to be over just when it gets going, dramaturgically.

I sometimes feel there's too much negativity here...but then again, I just now ripped into SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN myself (for a review for montages.no), which I thought was quite bad:

http://montages.no/2012/06/uforlost-kitch-i-snow-white-and-the-huntsman/

[Brónach 1,302]

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

Great film! A bit short, but...

How can you like that lifeless drivel?

I'm just totally addicted to and in love with the JP universe. The first film is one of my alltime favourite films, and I like the other two as well. Superb popcorn entertainment with some great setpieces. They also very much subscribe to the experience aspect of filmmaking I love so much. I just wish III was 20-30 minutes longer. It seems to be over just when it gets going, dramaturgically.

I think it lacks everything that makes the first on marvelous.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

So tell us Thor, how do you kick-back and experience Jurassic Park 3?

Great film! A bit short, but...

How can you like that lifeless drivel?

I'm just totally addicted to and in love with the JP universe. The first film is one of my alltime favourite films, and I like the other two as well. Superb popcorn entertainment with some great setpieces. They also very much subscribe to the experience aspect of filmmaking I love so much. I just wish III was 20-30 minutes longer. It seems to be over just when it gets going, dramaturgically.

I think it lacks everything that makes the first on marvelous.

it has dinosaurs, but a spinosaur would have been killed easily by a T-Rex.

[Brónach 1,302]

I'm not going to argue with him about it. He's crazy. His avatar doesn't help.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I actually find JPIII a more entertaining film than TLW, which I think is Spielberg's worst movie*.

*equal status with WOTW.