They're Remaking 'Alien' -- the 'Prometheus' thread

This movie does have a great character in David (imo) -- even if I don't agree that "character" is required for greatness.

kotto and stanton are likable to each other, but they're total dicks. you saw their whole "what i can't hear you, ripley" routine

agree that fassbender made david compelling but it's like no one else was even trying.

besides beyond some (correct) complaints about character motivation a great deal of the complaints seem to boil down to claims about intentionality--in which case who cares what was intended?

look, if you are trying to make a movie featuring an elite group of highly-trained scientists, and the scientists barely seem able to tie your shoes, there is just a fundamental problem with the movie. really, stop trying to drill down deeper than that.

honestly though, it's really gonna come down to a matter of opinion and taste. either you have the correct opinion and think this movie was a dirty dog turd, or you have the wrong opinion and like it. different strokes for different folks!

In light of character behaviour, who fuckin *knows* what was intended?

psssh I merely wave my hand at this notion that scientists can't be utter buffoons in areas outside their extremely narrow expertise. Hell, even within them!

To me it's obvious this film has a very pessimistic view of the human race, with a crew of randomly assembled incompetents always doing the worst possible thing. In abstract, fine -- I work at a corporation too -- I get it. But the dialog, characterizations and acting were all 9th rate television grade, so watching those sections of the film absolutely comes across like having a conversation with a misinformed drunken person telling you that you are really very stupid

However, as the evening progresses, he turns out to be a completely unpredictable and highly entertaining drunken person, and he clearly doesn't think you're -that- stupid because he's actually setting up some fairly interesting stories for you. The saving grace of the film for me is the depiction of the hulkamaniac Engineers, who've moved on from hotrodding their own DNA to ritualistically sacrificing themselves in the service of creating new races, and who end up accidentally taking themselves out while designing the next iteration of their previous creation, i.e. us. What is a bioweapon to us is simply another genesis to them, except the Engineers weren't exempt, or careful, and that next iteration took them out.

Perfectly acceptible science fiction concept! With generous helpings of jellyfish c-sections, eyeworms and starmap CGI and trilobite facesex while all of this is being broken down for you. I dunno, for me, the real films insulting us where every last thing is clearly set up, spelled out, and wrapped up for you, but in this film everything important is actually airtight

i liked how people were smoking and pouring each other cocktails like it was 1958 or something.

i loved the "WY" etched into david's fingerprint whorl.

look slocki a couple of the scientists were really dumm about practical matters and fearless when they should not have been but that describes a lot of scientists tbh, in any case i am truly sorry that it affected your enjoyment of this amazing fuckin movie

looks like we're on the same page, milton parker.

I'll keep repeating that a second viewing is much more rewarding, but if you were grinding teeth through yr first then maybe it's not for you. to address some caps lock egregiousness:

Er, zzzz. Basically, if you liked it, cool, but do you really think you are actually RIGHT?

― Doctor Casino, Friday, October 12, 2012 6:17 PM (56 minutes ago)

MP already responded and you walked this back yourself, but yeah, my opinion is right, as is the opinion of the ppl who thought it sucked, this is science fiction, not science. the ppl who like prometheus itt seem to be aware of the movie's deficiencies, it's not like everybody saw a different movie. it is kind of a bummer for folks trying to talk about what they liked about it having to fend off it sucked u rong on every other post but eh the internet.

"character" is what made alien great and what made aliens great and what makes basically every great movie great. i dont care if it's a talky drama or an outer space xenomorph movie. w/o it you have NOTHING.

― Author ~ Coach ~ Goddess (s1ocki), Friday, October 12, 2012 6:45 PM (28 minutes ago)

if that works for you ok, but it leaves behind a sizable chunk of great movies, especially scifi ones - 2001, solaris, phase IV, scanners, crash. maybe I'm reading into yr definition of "character" but unlikable, nondescript, and poorly drawn lead characters are not unheard of in good sci-fi. these ain't romcoms.

ha, I like the drunk person metaphor. hey that drunk stole my $10! ah well all in the name of a good time

i loved the "WY" etched into david's fingerprint whorl.

my son pointed this out to me on my 2nd viewing, I prolly wouldn't have noticed otherwise, another example of the little details I appreciate here

i haven't seen phase IV, but 2001, solaris, scanners, crash all had pretty compelling if laconic characters (some of them probably due more to the actors than writing)

idk, acting in scanners is p terrible across the board except for mcgoohan, and I'm not sure there are actually actors in 2001, they're more like floor models, the most compelling characters are non-human (by design obv)

I'll launch a more spirited defense later... even if i only c&p the novella I've already posted itt

yeah mcgoohan's great! the main guy wasn't a great actor in scanners but he projected a credible sense of being haunted.
spader and holly hunter also great in crash (though it feels like they invented the characters themselves). i get the floor-model complaint for 2001 but there's something super-naturalistic and compelling about it (i guess it's like a robt bresson movie where you forget they are actors).

First observation from second viewing:

The "snakes" are the result of what looked like earthworm-type critters being doused with the organic weapon from the canisters

i don't buy that because it's sci-fi we're supposed to let everything slide. some of my favourite characters ever have been from scifi movies! the good alien movies, robocop, 2001 (hal!!!), even star wars! han solo! r2d2!

i think you guys are misunderstanding me, i love genre shit, i just want it to be well-done for what it is and satisfying to me on its own level.

i dig that you like the big concepts in this movie but i kinda hate that ancient aliens shit, its like the oldest scifi trope in the book... "and the two aliens were named ADAM and EVE"

also i feel like prometheus is like ideologically (not ideologically, but you know what i mean) opposed to what i loved about the first alien movie. i'll spare you linking to my lengthy blog post about the subject but the gist of it is, alien = horrifying lovecraftian unknowable terror that humans just happened to wander into by accident, prometheus = it was all about us all along! tv writing hackery.

To me one of the more salient themes of the original is this idea of contamination--it's the closeness of the alien that represents its greatest terror--that in some fundamental sense its mechanical/mindless nature is ours, or something we risk succumbing to. That's why the androids keep recurring, that's why the alien in its voraciousness is so fascinating and repellent. Its this otherness to ourselves. To me Prometheus stays pretty true to those themes (we have the same creator, etc) and even calls into question the kind of humanist naïveté of the two archeologists. That's my read anyway.

And Prometheus even goes one better by suggesting our creation was technological, accidental, and regretted. We're an unwanted, dangerous and out of control machine, not unlike David, ash, etc.

but are we? all we know is that dude gets mad and starts beating up humans. the movie doesn't give us anything, really, except a lot of hand-waving. it's exactly what LOST did... throw a lot of what-ifs in to get your attention but not really give a shit about thinking them through. you can string people along like that for a while if you're writing a TV show, but it's just a shambles in movie form

Do you think if Shaw was wearing her crucifix when she met th engineer dude if he would have been cool with her?

lol i forgot about her precious crucifix and her dream of her dad talking about heaven

all that stuff was so misbegotten... like if the movie is an allegory for faith, it fails pretty hard, but if it's supposed to be the opposite, it's pretty squirmy and half-assed about it

http://i.imgur.com/uRe8E.png

i get the floor-model complaint for 2001 but there's something super-naturalistic and compelling about it

Sure no-one's hating on 2001 in this thread* but going from "it is compelling" and "it has characters" to "the characters are compelling" is just falling into s1ocki's trap.

* but this is ILX, someone will probably be along in a minute...

slocki's diabolical trap

afaic it's ok to like or not like prometheus. all good brah.

feel like my earlier stridency is just some variation on like, if you watched the presidential debate and followed the thread at the time it was disappointing but obama had some good moments and romney did some weird things, whereas if you come in a week later things have solidified and it's just this huge disaster... I'm sure my first post-viewing comments on this thing had to admit slightly more room for liking it, it's just after this many months i can no longer mentally process people taking joy in seeing this for the first time, this is my problem and not yours but it is insane that this thread can have 3,197 responses...

hahaha yup, my first comments:

Honestly my only enduring beef with this is going to be in the editing/pacing; I thought tons of aspects of the plot/characterization were DUMB but basically admired their refusal to make anything like the creepy suspenseful Alien prequel promised by the trailer, which would have been mediocre but basically acceptable to everybody.... but boy was the pacing of this thing weird. Half the time I was convinced my theater was running the film too fast, particularly in the opening flyover montages.

― Doctor Casino, Monday, June 11, 2012 12:21 AM Bookmark

...whereas it turns out in reality my only enduring beef with Prometheus was going to be "everything in the movie except fassbender"

I think for me it was definitely a case of "Holy shit this is a new Alien film by Ridley Scott and it has McGregorFassbender and Rapace and Theron and Pearce and Elba and the trailer looked amazing and the bad reviews seemed to dislike it on a philosophical level which isn't what I am looking for from it" and then I saw it and enjoyed watching it and got more annoyed about it afterwards as it dragged me up to it's own level and then honked all over me.

So yeah I can definitely see that if I'd read this thread first (or rather the thread a week ago) and gone to see the films expecting it to be 90 minutes of Ridley Scott punching me in the balls, I'd probably quite enjoy that.

But it's like they say, you can't throw yourself off a cliff into the same river twice.

do not compare this film to quatermass and the pit xpost.

MP already responded and you walked this back yourself, but yeah, my opinion is right, as is the opinion of the ppl who thought it sucked, this is science fiction, not science.

Man, if you are gonna have two scientists in a movie say "Our DNA is IDENTICAL to theirs," then science-fiction be damned, you'd best be explaining why we don't look exactly like them.

do not compare this film to quatermass and the pit xpost.

otm.

xp

a chihuahua and a st. bernard have identical dna iirc

Feel like if I give it another six months people on this thread will start hating on this dog again. Will wait with baited breath.

think plenty of us haven't stopped hating on it but i'll admit it's a pretty and car-crashily entertaining pile of wank. it might play better with all the dialogue removed.

For sure, if every terrible movie were as well made as this one, the world would be a better place.

The right-before-credits reveal of the xenomorph-lookin' dude popping out of the engineer corpse has to be one of the most groanworthy moments of modern cinema

>do not compare this film to quatermass and the pit xpost.

Ha! Ok I will stop comparing this deeply flawed mess to one of the top 10 science fiction films of all time now. Duly chastened.

I'll just start comparing it to Lisztomania

milton yr music post are one of the only reasons i keep reading ilm, so yr rabid enthusiasm for this piece of shit is just baffling to me - i mean, you were already REALLY reaching when you started comparing it to zulawski, never mind nigel kneale, or ken russell. ridley scott has never been in their league even when operating at his creative peak... 30 years ago! prometheus is just SUCH a lumpen hodgepodge of v v old and tired generic material - like, i recently saw Forbidden World, which is this great early 80s roger corman-produced Alien knock-off, and it's 100 times more lively fun. i guess i'm trying to say - prometheus is very very commonplace.

BTW - I do think Pandorum was better than this, although I understand it was generally panned? That's one where I could accept the "yeah, kinda corny, twists are obvious, but it's a fun dumb space action movie with some creepy monsters and attempts to mess with your mind, man" argument.

I remain with Milton/Edward on this one. I'm planning on getting the freakin' 4 Blu-Ray set when I can, I care not what you think.

lmao cannot believe how many people have taken their helmets off itt

i will spend money and time on a bluray of this when it is confirmed that all dialogue will be replaces with an attenborough commentary

all dialogue replaced with Beavis and Butthead singing "Breaking the Law"

special non-director's cut with 25 percent more helmets

ginat white guy workout routine + diet book

special 'uncircumsized' bluray with non-cut helmets

Seinfeld slap-bass riff at the start of every scene

'behind the scenes' doc where it is revealed that guy pearce just looks like that

commentary by licensed psychologist explaining why a person would possibly behave the way any character did in any scene in the movie