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

[JoeinAR 1,949]

that machined section of the cup always bugged me. It's representative of the sloppiness of the overall production.

It's like a film I saw the other day involving military action. First they show a navy pilot in his F-18 fighter about to take off. It's definately pointed out that it's the US Navy involved. Then the plan takes off and it's an Airforce F-15, then a few minutes later as it goes to bomb it's target it's an Airforce F-16. Does it really change anything thing in the film, no but continuity and correctness should count for something.

[Quintus 5,399]

Lol!

Fair enough.

[Wojo 2,453]

too bad it lacked a good villain and it made a buffoons out of it's [sic] extended characters

Yes, it turned Sallah into comedic relief and painted Brody as an idiot, while in Raiders, Brody was totally serious and too superstitious to crack a joke, while Sallah was respectably somber, except for when he sang showtunes -- but if Karen Allen had kissed me in 1981, and I wasn't months old, I would have been on cloud nine, too.

Donovan the good guy American: "Don't trust anyone."

Donovan revealed as a Nazi stooge: "[You] didn't take my advice. Didn't I warn you not to trust anyone?"

So...the girl Indy wasn't supposed to trust...is working with Donovan for the Reich.

"I want you to meet my contact in Venice and work with her to find your father, but don't trust her." Ok, fine, don't give her the map or the diary.

"You had it? You didn't trust me." Nope; a romp in the hay with a girl I just met doesn't require "trust."

So at what point is "trust" given? When he believes that Vogel will kill her in the Nazi castle? Really?

The "what-ifs" of whether Indy's quest would have been any easier if he had just hit Elsa over the head with a brick after finding the grail marker -- he needed her intel to determine where his father was last seen, the converted church -- are too convoluted to consider, if Donovan's plan had been to kill both Jones boys all along.

Ok, but as long as you ignore the fact that they Mythbusted the notion of a stuck front tire flipping a motorcycle in spectacular fashion, it's still enjoyable on its own terms.

Did Mtythbusters [sic] explain why a bolt is visible on the bottom of the false Grail? Or how Indy got untangled from the gun turret?

I never noticed the bolt. Blame the marketing department. Like I said, low budget. Oh wait, in Raiders don't we see glass in front of the cobra, and a groove under the truck in the desert chase.

Indy got untangled from the gun turret the same way he survived the submarine ride in Raiders from Katanga's ship to the ark island: pretend the audience is too engrossed in the visuals to notice the logical breakdown.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Indy rode the pariscope in Raiders.

the glass was a necessity but the machined ancient cup was just sloppy. The glass couldn't be avoided otherwise Raiders would be a stand alone film and even more infamous than Twilight Zone the movie.

Hell it might have prevented the Twilight Zone Movie accident as Spielberg might never have worked again.

[Incanus 5,713]

Wasn't there in Indy films always the old fashion Saturday matinee serials type of "after our heroes escaped from the trouble to continue the fight" type of feel anyway which didn't require iron clad logic in all the events when it kept the adventure moving? You just assume the hero finds a way to get where he needs to get like in Raiders with the submarine.

[indy4 155]

I find it to be Spielberg using his status and religion to portray the point of view that revenge or vengence is a legitimate form of action. I find the film extremely heavy handed and over the top in that respect.

I find the last shot to be an insult to those who lost family and loved ones in 911, it's a cheap final shot used to legitimize his film.

So Munich is a bad film because it offended you? How precious.

it's a leigitimate a reason as any. And Alex, what exactly is the film about, it's not a historical retelling of a terrible event.

In the beginning of the DVD version Spielberg literally tells the audience what the purpose of the film is--he says that it isn't to condemn or encourage violent retaliations, it's just to make the audience consider the complexities of the situation to make sure that a targeted killing only happens when it should.

TLC was a Raiders retread on a shoestring budget. The effects, the decision to not use the LSO, etc. show. If you look at it as the touching father-comes-to-love-and-accept-the-son-who-finally-comes-to-love-his-father adventure tale, it's superb.

ToD didn't use the LSO either. Did Raiders even?

[Jay 37,322]

Yes, Raiders was recorded with the LSO

[Thor 7,478]

Just be honest: you like almost every high profile movie you see and it bugs you when others don't share your enthusiasm.

There's nothing cynical about some people not liking Prometheus at all, so please stop trying to put that spin on it. It's arrogant and irritating.

Uhm, the 'cynical' comment had nothing to do with PROMETHEUS. It was the argument that most new films in a franchise only exist because of monetary reasons (as opposed to creative ideas). I think it's a bit more nuanced than that.

And I certainly don't like all high profile movies. As I mentioned earlier, I recently pretty much slaughtered SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN, for example (although it, too, had unfulfilled potential).

[Quintus 5,399]

The cynical comment had everything to do with Prometheus. This being the Prometheus thread and in which some folks dislike of the film spurred you on to share your cynicism theory.

[Thor 7,478]

The cynical comment had everything to do with Prometheus. This being the Prometheus thread and in which some folks dislike of the film spurred you on to share your cynicism theory.

Geez. No, it didn't. Read the dialogue between me and Jason first before you make such comments. It was a far more general discussion about new films in franchises and how they're received.

[Brónach 1,301]

Of course they make sequels for money. In addition to that, there can be some people with the job interested in doing something cool.

[Quintus 5,399]

The cynical comment had everything to do with Prometheus. This being the Prometheus thread and in which some folks dislike of the film spurred you on to share your cynicism theory.

Geez. No, it didn't. Read the dialogue between me and Jason first before you make such comments. It was a far more general discussion about new films in franchises and how they're received.

Thor, there may have been a misunderstanding on my part, as a result of my interpretation of this comment:

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here has ever seen a new film in a (long-running) franchise that you loved when it came out, preferably in recent times?

Which I attributed perhaps unfairly or incorrectly to your "cynicism theory". If that's the case, I apologise.

[Wojo 2,453]

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here has ever seen a new film in a (long-running) franchise that you loved when it came out, preferably in recent times?

I have.

[Thor 7,478]

The cynical comment had everything to do with Prometheus. This being the Prometheus thread and in which some folks dislike of the film spurred you on to share your cynicism theory.

Geez. No, it didn't. Read the dialogue between me and Jason first before you make such comments. It was a far more general discussion about new films in franchises and how they're received.

Thor, there may have been a misunderstanding on my part, as a result of my interpretation of this comment:

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here has ever seen a new film in a (long-running) franchise that you loved when it came out, preferably in recent times?

Which I attributed perhaps unfairly or incorrectly to your "cynicism theory". If that's the case, I apologise.

Ah. Now I understand. No, I didn't mean any cynicism by that, I was just curious about how people reacted to that particular type of film.

What I found slightly cynical was the notion that new films of this kind are only (or mostly) made out of monetary concerns. My opinion on that was that yes, there's always that incentive when it comes to Hollywood films and franchises, but there may also be actual creative impulses involved. It's not black and white.

Sorry if I was ambigous.

[Quintus 5,399]

Hey, it's the whole nature of faceless debates, man! The whole thing about not being able to read a person's face when they're stating an opinion or a pov is surely the number one cause of all online rows! If it weren't for misunderstandings on message boards the Internet would collapse in on itself

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Whether you loved Prometheus or hated it, you've got to admit, when was the last time a film sparked this much discussion on the board?

[Jay 37,322]

Indiana Jones 4

[Quintus 5,399]

Yep.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Which is a little over 4 years old, kudos to Prometheus.

[Jay 37,322]

Before that it was probably ROTS and AOTC

[Quintus 5,399]

Yeah, kudos to Prometheus for breaking the drought (of awful highly anticipated blockbusters).

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Just admit Quint, you loved it. Why else would you still be babbling on in this thread?

[Quintus 5,399]

Because I've got sod all else to do!

Actually, I'm just trolling here in between Max Payne shootouts.

[Brónach 1,301]

Whether you loved Prometheus or hated it, you've got to admit, when was the last time a film sparked this much discussion on the board?

...Watchmen?

[Jay 37,322]

Nah that was only 9 pages

http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=16934

[Brónach 1,301]

But there was a lot of talk after that!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Alien sure is a perfect flick. Just thinking of that part after they've landed where they're discussing venturing out to the source of the transmission. The shot from the perspective of Lambert as she's smoking a cigarette anticipating being assigned to the group that goes out. Awesome.

[Matt C 452]

I'm tempted to ask if anyone here has ever seen a new film in a (long-running) franchise that you loved when it came out, preferably in recent times?

That's because most of the time when a studio returns to some long running franchise its because they want to make money, not because there's a brilliant, creative idea that needs to be filmed.

The only ones generally accepted to be good are Casino Royale, Toy Story 3, American Reunion, Poirot, and Dr Who

You forgot the Nolan Batman franchise and J.J. Abrams' Star Trek reboot entries. A few people can criticize Christopher Nolan for his more realistic approach to Batman, and Abrams for his handheld, lens flare-riddled aesthetic. But both were well-liked and did well at the box-office. They both had folks who were passionate about the material, and it benefited both parties.

Oh wow we switched from discussion on Prometheus to the classic "KotCS sucks" tirade. That movie obviously haunts people's memories quite strongly and is used like a blunt instrument around here.

I was referring to the pre-release anticipation of Prometheus equalling the fervor around when KOTCS was greenlit. A lot of die-hard fans went in with astronomically high expectations, and most of them ended up hating it or disappointed with either film.

I enjoy KOTCS. It's not one of Spielberg's stronger entries, but I enjoyed it as light entertainment. Shia was grossly miscast, but that was the biggest problem (among the infamous fridge scene).

[JoeinAR 1,949]

too bad the writers of Star Trek were not passionate about writing a logical tale.

[A24 4,327]

@ Joey: I think Spielberg's portrayal of the violent acts in Munich are meant to fill you with disgust. It's not cool but shocking and in the end answering violence with violence did not heal. A problem is that some viewers do think it's cool and they do get a kick out of it but I honestly don't believe this was Spielberg's purpose.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Exactly, that's evident in the boat murder scene. When one goes to cover up the naked woman, and the other says to leave it open "because that's what they'd do." Or something to that effect.

[Brónach 1,301]

Munich is as much about legitimacing violence as Saving Private Ryan is propaganda to make you enlist. As in, not at all.

[publicist 4,643]

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN may not ask you to enlist, but it tries not too hard to conceal that WWII was a 'good american war G. I. JOE can be proud of'...there's just no other way to interpret Spielberg's prologue and coda with the well-shaped american family assuring their old man he did right. Mind you, this is as sound an opinion as any other, but i always chuckled at reviewers suggesting this was a pure anti-war film. It's too ambivalent in its messages and idoelogical leanings for that.

MUNICH is not legitimizing violence, it just drowns a bit in its fear to offend anyone. It could be a taut 120-minute thriller (without mechanically presenting the same killing over and over again) and would be great.

[Quintus 5,399]

The killings in it are fucking awesome though.

[Brónach 1,301]

I think it's a great 164-minute thriller.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

I was peering through my 2012 edition of Leonard Maltin and looked at his reviews for the Alien movies. I noticed he gave Alien three and a half stars and a glowering review. This didn't look right because I remembered differently from a previous edition, so I looked at my 2003 edition and found he gave the film two and a half stars and a bit of a "if you're into this sort of thing". Wonder what changed his mind?

[Quintus 5,399]

Maintaining credibility.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Like Empire revising its AOTC review from 5/5 to 3/5? Just get it right the first time, idiots!

[Wojo 2,453]

Hey, you're allowed to change your opinion after so many years.

It's called divorce.

[Jay 37,322]

OK I saw Prometheus last night. I am going to go back and read all the conversation from the last several pages, but for now I am just going to grunch my thoughts and then read the discussion here after.

Note that I went in completely open-minded - aware of the general consensus but was not going to let it taint my judgement. I was prepared to be blown away or disappointed or anything in between. I tried to not think about any of that while watching and just enjoy the ride, but the movie quickly lost me.... let me show you my broad thought process as the movie went on

SPOILERS

Immediately I was with the film. Loved the opening vista shots (How did they film them - did they find locations on earth then digitally manipulate them, or were they completely digitally made?). Then the engineer showed up and drank his goo and was killed by horrible CGI. WTF? This film was supposed to have great special effects, why were these so bad?

Then I was with the film again for the opening scenes on earth, and the opening scenes on the Prometheus with David being awake while they all slept, them then slowing waking up, arriving on the planet, beginning exploration.

Then the film started to slowly lose me again. Characters started doing things that made no sense or weren't explained. Why was David able to immediately figure out how to open doors everywhere? Just cause he spent 2 years studying ancient languages? Why in the FUCK would scientists EVER take off their helmets on their first hours on a new planet just because this one area had breathable air? Weren't they afraid the system generating the air could be turned off at any time? Then 2 crewmembers get left behind. They are told there is a lifeform west of them, so they head east. The VERY NEXT scene with them involves them seeing an eel-like alien coming out of the ground and one of them wants to go up and touch it. CRAZY and super unrealistic. I know it was time that people had to start dying but come on.

Things just kept getting worse with all kinds of characters seemingly acting randomly because the script needed it rather than because that's what their character would have done. David does a lot of weird things and his motivations are never explained. Why did he steal a canister with alien eggs, why did he get a drop of blood on him, why did he give it to the lead scientist, why did he want Shaw to keep the alien baby inside her? I guess he was following Weyland's orders, but why would Weyland want any of that?

Speaking of Shaw's alien baby, the surgery scene was easily the best scene in the whole film. I was LITERALLY on the edge of my seat, something that hasn't happened in the cinema for a while. Plus, I cared about her character and wanted her to live. But then immediately after the film lost me again. She had a c-section performed and then was doing all kinds of athletic things, running and jumping all over the place. I'm sorry, but that wouldn't happen, even in the future. Ugh.

Another big big problem the movie had was coming up with lots of ideas and not explaining them, then suddenly having a character explain everything in a line of dialogue. It was WEIRD. The movie's going along, you're trying to figure out what it's all about... then Idris Elba's character comes in and just says "This isn't the engineer's homeworld, this is a military installation where they bioengineered lifeforms. One of them escaped and killed them all." How the FUCK did he know that? There HAD to be a deleted scene somewhree, or this is just level 1 BAD WRITING. HATED that scene.

I also didn't like other characters doing stupid things. Charlize Theron's character was the only one that was logical the whole time. She didn't want the infected people on board, she flame-throwed the main archaelogist when he was infected. The scene where another character opened the doors because they detected the camera on the guys suit outside was RIDICULOUS. People of their crew had already been attacked by hostile life forms and he was like "Let's just open the door and see what's out there! It was just an excuse to kill off a bunch of ancillary characters and show another different thing attacking them.

OK, enough with the bad stuff. Eventually, the film actually won me over again. See, Idris Elba's explanation actually made sense, and I was kinda digging what the film was setting up. The way I saw it, the engineers were crazy good at bioengineering, and invented tons of life forms, a different one being in each canister in the caves (on the ship). The film was about these humans being attacked by the creatures from one of the canisters, and the original Alien and its sequels were about a completely different creature from another canister. I thought that the film would end with the ship taking off, crash landing on LV-426, and a canister rolling open with a face-hugger popping out.

But beyond all those ideas, just the way the movie had unfolded I was with it, despite all the ridiculous actions so many of the characters took. I liked that David was really under orders from the still alive Weyland the whole time, that he funded this whole thing to see if he could extend his life, etc. I liked some of the characters and wanted them to live. But then the film just completely lost me again.

Why was Guy Pearce's makeup so bad? It was SO. BAD. it was DISTRACTING. How does this happen in 2012? There was better old-man make-up in films 50 years ago! Also, footage of young Weyland never appeared in the film at all. So why not simply hire a old actor instead of putting a young one in makeup? I know they used Guy Pearce for viral marketing before the film's premiere, but that doesn't mean you couldn't just have a different actor play him when he gets older. Awful. Also characters started being stupid again. Shaw has her surgery scene and barely survives with her life, shows up covered in blood in Weylan's room (how did she know where to go) and the other characters are like "oh you're alive, cool, have a towel I guess, we're gonna go back to talking to the old guy". Shaw goes with everyone to see the last surviving engineer even though everyone she's going with actively tried to kill her buy getting her pregnant by the alien baby.

Then when the ship crashes, Shaw and Vickers are running straight forward instead of simply off to the side. WTF was that?? How in the world does anyone write that into a screen play in 2012? It was like the studio said "We need more action scenes for the trailer" so they invented the whole thing to appease them. It was a lame way to kill Vickers and added unneeded tension, this area of the film was already tense enough. Though, it was rushed. Basically everything after the surgery scene was super rushed, taking about half as much time as it should have taken to develop.

Anyway, Idris Elba sacrifices himself to not let the alien ship leave, that was fine. Why did Vicker's escape home thingy break off an immediately crash? Didn't it have its own thrusters or ANYTHING to stabilize itself? Anyway. I wanted Shaw to live, so her making it back to Vicker's home was fine, getting more oxygen... then she gets to the med room and the octopus alien inside had has grown from football sized to the size of hte entire room. WTF????? How does that happen without it having food to eat? I had the same problem with the original Alien film when I rewatched it the other week, actually - and it was my only problem with the film. I wish we had seen the alien grow up in stages from chestburster to full size.... like its cat-sized when it kills Brett, then slightly bigger when it kills Dallas, etc, maybe showing that it eats its early victims to stay alive. But anyways, back to this film, same thing. How did the octopus alien get SO GODDAMN big. Was silly. Anyways, I liked that the engineer made its way to the home and got killed by the octopus (wait a minute - the engineer can breath this moon's atmosphere? Then why did they terraform the inside of the caves at all??????) and that Shaw finds another ship to leave on and wants to see the engineer's homeworld with David. Fine. A good way for the story to end.

But then the final scene happened. UGHHH. Awful awful awful. So in the end, the Aliens we know and love are not just another one of their creations....... they got created by the the glass thingy in a canister pricking a robot's thumb, getting a human to drink it, getting him to impregnate a female human, getting the fetus out of her, having that fetus grow and kill an Engineer, planting a seed inside the dead Engineer's body, gestating in there, and finally bursting out of that. OKkkkkkkk..... pretty far fetched, even in a world with a bunch of other stuff that should be far fetched too but actually made some sense.

So in the end, the film is a mixed bag of good moments and scenes and an over all amazing look, and HORRIBLE screen writing with characters jumping to WILD conclusions and just accepting them and acting in COMPLETELY unrealistic ways for the sake of the plot.

Oh, just thought of a few other things:

How in the WORLD did the characters come to the conclusion that the Engineers created us? And that they later grew to hate us and wanted us dead? This was NOT explained, and all the characters seemed to just accept it. Was it because the DNA was a match? How was it a match? That part all made no sense.

Charlize Theron's character was really completely pointless in the end. The movie would have been the same if she had not even been in it! You could have just had some other character be the one holding the flame thrower in that one scene. The fact that she was Weyland's daughter (which BTW did not come as a surprise to this viewer, was it supposed to be?) meant nothing, had no impact on anything. I HATED that she was smart enough to have her own little detatcheable home and escape pods, but then that she was stupid enough to run STRAIGHT instead of SIDEWAYS to avoid the ship UGH.

How about the Prologue? An Engineer drinks black goo, it causes him to fall off a cliff and we see its breaking him apart on a molecular level. Ok... WHAT did that have to do with anything else? I don't get it? Was it the same black goo on all the canisters? WTF.

The briefing scene!!!!! Why did Vickers not tell her crew WHY they were where they were until they were already in orbit? Didn't even one who signed up know what they were signing up for BEFORE they agree to cryo-sleep and travel to an alien world? Ugh.

Alrighty well enough of this, time to read what you guys have been saying...

[JoeinAR 1,949]

@ Joey: I think Spielberg's portrayal of the violent acts in Munich are meant to fill you with disgust. It's not cool but shocking and in the end answering violence with violence did not heal. A problem is that some viewers do think it's cool and they do get a kick out of it but I honestly don't believe this was Spielberg's purpose.

thanks for the great response.

[Quintus 5,399]

It was cool as the Fonz seeing that hot femme fatal take one in the throat! Blood all over the place, yeaaaaah! Unga bunga!

So, Jay LeBlanc basically thought Prometheus was shite. If that doesn't tell those who have yet to see everything they need to know then nothing will.

[Wojo 2,453]

Well since I don't remember seeing a movie in the theater since Deathly Hallows Part Deux, unfortunately it looks like I'll be waiting at least a few more weeks then. Thanks for the superb warning!

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I did not take it that the creature at the end is the xenomorph from Alien/Aliens

I thought it was something slightly different.

while I believe the engineers engineered the bio construction of the xenomorph and ultimately met their end as a relevant species I get/got the impression that the xenomorphs have been around for sometime

[Jay 37,322]

It was the xenomorph, that was the whole point of taking the time to have its inner mouth shoot out

[JoeinAR 1,949]

it was not the xenomorph, or not the same kind of creature, it was very much different.

similar but not the same.

hell it looks more like pumpkinhead.

I don't recall an inner mouth coming out, I just remember it screeching. But as I said I don't recall.

[Quintus 5,399]

I thought it looked like some sort of hybrid. Suggesting that the species has many variations.

Its inner mouth did burst out, right at the end.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

also the murals in the room with the large head seemed to depict them and on the wall there was a physical representation of a xenomorph. That's why I had the impression they'd been around a long time.

[Jay 37,322]

Well in later stories they retconned that the alien takes the form of whatever it bursts out of, so since it burst out of an Engineer instead of a human I suppose it should look different

And it had an inner mouth

[JoeinAR 1,949]

like I said I didn't recall but either way very unsatisfying ending with no logic, and worst of all no emotional involvement.