Prometheus...

[Mark Toia]

Just got back from watching Prometheus... FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCCKKKKKKKKK..... stunning picture.

Ridley at his best.

 

[John Wee]

For someone that just got a C-Section, she sure can run fast and what is up with the Teddy Bear Slot Machine approach to the procedure?

 

[Seth Larney]

For everyone that has seen the film, there's a really awesome breakdown of the thematic elements here: http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html#cutid1

SPOILERS!! DO NOT READ THIS UNLESS YOU'VE SEEN THE FILM! However, if you went away thinking that stuff might not have made sense.. or you thought some things weren't explained, this may help to shed some light on things. I'm not saying one way or another whether the symbolism of the film was too buried or not, that's subjective and everyone will have their own opinion on how well the film worked on a story-level for them. However, there's alot of really cool stuff in there if you'd like to dig. I love Ridley, and whether or not you liked the film, I don't think you can say that anything he does is random or not thought through.

Oh and - the visuals were freaking amazing. We all know Ridley oozes craft and Prometheus is no exception.. and the EPIC looked DYNAMITE.

 

[Mike Garrick]

Everyone should read the above ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^great explanation ...........to possibly a great film ^^^^^^^^

(time will tell , I like it .......but I'm often wrong but then again so are critics )

Thanks Seth for the link!

 

[Stephen Mick]

I was mildly entertained by the film, but it's no Blade Runner. All the mythic thematic elements in the world can't make up for drawing characters I feel no real empathy or emotion for. It says something when the most well-shaped character in the film is a robot.

And I wasn't one of those people going in hoping to see a true Alien prequel. I really liked where the movie was going in the first half-hour, but after that, it just didn't feel like it knew what kind of movie it wanted to be.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

Review Part 1

After I saw the film on Friday night, I decided to wait a day and reflect a little before I went ahead and wrote my official review. I also discussed the film with some of my pals to get their take on this controversial picture. Before I start, I would like to talk a little about the effect of hype on expectations and how this film's reaction really encompasses the state of online movie fandom. Buckle up.

I will be totally honest. I totally bought into the hype of this movie. I watched all the virals, looked at spy photos, watched the trailers over and over and speculated on the plot. After all the hype, I was really expecting this film to be Citizen Kane in space. In the days leading up to this film, I realized that my high expectations were going to really damage my enjoyment of the film. After reading some of the early reviews, it seemed that many viewers immediately divided themselves into the love hate camps. I have never seen a film that has been quite as divisive as Prometheus. When people invest as much time an effort into studying a film's preproduction as is common today, expectations tend to go through the roof and these viral campaigns only fan the flames. We live in an interesting time when it comes to movie criticism. IMDB is filled with one star and ten star reviews and many seem intent on telling others what a shit covered fan this film was or how moronic the haters are for hating a film as groundbreaking as Prometheus. I'm not going to play into this love hate battle because frankly, I don't belong to either camp.

WARNING: SPOILER ALERT

What follows is simply my opinion.

Prometheus is not a brilliant movie. Prometheus is not a terrible movie. I'm not going to stand on the mountain and proclaim Prometheus the be sci-fi's second coming but I am also not going to say that Ridley Scott and Damon Lindelof took my mother out to a nice seafood dinner and never called her again. In my honest opinion, Prometheus was pretty good, not great, not awful but pretty good. I guess the best thing to do is break the film up into categories in order to be as fair as possible. This is a Red forum so I guess I will start with the visuals.

Visuals: 10/10 - Even the overwhelmingly negative reviews admit that Prometheus is a gorgeous film. Only Siths deal in absolutes but there is one absolute that will be almost impossible to refute and that is the fact that Ridley Scott put together one of the best looking sci-fi films in history. Anyone who tries to say otherwise needs to have their heads examined.

Score: 5/10 - This film's score has received a lot of flack and for good reason. At times, the music seems to go against the mood established in the scene. The score was not particularly memorable and it seemed oddly out of place in some instances. There are some phenomenal film scores that have been put together over the years. This is not one of them.

Acting: 9/10 – This is another area that has received a lot of criticism. I disagree. Fassbender is beyond perfect, Rapace is pretty good, Elba is solid as always, Theron was very effective at being a bitch, Pearce looked a bit tacky with the makeup but he was great as always. Overall, the acting was first rate and I would go as far as to say that Fassbender deserves an Oscar nod. No real complaints but I will say that Fassbender is so good that he makes everyone else look a bit dry by comparison.

Dialogue: 7/10 - Many will tell you that it was written by Alan Smithee himself. Don't listen to them. It was a bit too expository for my liking but it did the job. I would have liked a bit more humor and less philosophizing but if there was anything substantially wrong with the dialogue, I can't really put my finger on it. A few lines seemed a bit out of character but nothing worth writing home about.

Plot: 7/10 – Alright, this is the controversial part. I actually liked the plot (which is separate from structure) in many respects. I though that the film presented an interesting story with a host of unique sequences and touched upon a number of themes that are seldom explored in movies today. The film did seem a bit confused about what it was trying to convey but overall, it aroused my curiosity and allowed me to ruminate on some meaty sci-fi ideas.

Structure: 6/10 – The film’s structure does leave a lot to be desired. In some instances, the film fails to build up the necessary momentum leading up to big scenes, causing them to fall a bit flat. Some sequences were introduced and resolved way too quickly, lessening their effect. Furthermore, the vast majority of the action takes place in the last 30 minutes of the film, which seems to work against the pace that was established previously. The pacing and structure of this film certainly could have used a bit of work and I honestly believe that an additional 30 minutes of content could have cleared up many of these issues. People keep talking about a director’s cut but Ridley said that this version was the director’s cut so I guess it is what it is.

Entertainment: 8/10 – Overall, I have to rate the entertainment value of this film pretty highly. Yes, the tension was deflated pretty quickly in some scenes and I really wish it had been more frightening but I was never bored and there were enough interesting things going on to keep me engaged from beginning to end. I will mark two points down because some of the aforementioned problems did detract a bit from my enjoyment of the film.

After adding up these categories, I got a rounded up score of 7.5/10.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

Review Part 2

Character Development – Character development could have certainly been much better but it is hard when you have so many characters to deal with. Cutting down the size of the crew would have helped substantially. Unless characters are directly talking about their respective pasts, it is difficult to figure out what defines them. To be honest, you probably would not know much about your fellow crewmembers unless you spent a great deal of time with them and from what I could see, they really did not interact with one another until after hypersleep.

Plot Holes - Many reviewers claim that the film’s plot has enough holes to sink the Bismark. I usually consider plot holes to be instances where the film fails to follow the logic that the narrative has established. I don’t necessarily consider illogical character actions or unanswered questions to be plot holes but I can understand why some would. I can really only think of one plot hole off the top of my head but if there are other please let me know. When the Engineer’s ship crashes, he decides to attack Shaw in the lifeboat. From my understanding, the Engineer’s needed those space jockey suits to survive outside but when he attacks her he isn’t wearing one. He could have put one on and then taken it off when he got to the ship but I think that they just forgot about that.

Stupid decisions – My father always told me to never overestimate the intelligence of the human race. Smart people do stupid things all the time. If anything, many of these dumb decisions were an indication of how reliant these people have become on technology. Instead of being cautious, they totally trust their sensors to determine if air is breathable. They don’t wear masks because after all, the computers say that there are no contagions present. They totally trust David to watch over them in hyper sleep even though he obviously does not have their safety in mind. Naturally, this overreliance on technology gets them into trouble but I can see how this would be a problem a hundred years from now where machines take care of just about everything. The cobra-petting scene? Ya, stupid move on his part but how many people have been killed by wild animals because they got a little too close? You also have to remember that he was wearing a protective suit so maybe he though he was safe. Are people really criticizing Elba’s character for leaving the deck for a Vickers booty call? Not even going to comment on that one.

Believability – Sure, it seems improbable that Shaw would be able to run around after a c section but what did you want her to do, crawl around on her hands and knees for the rest of the film? Plus future surgery is probably a lot more advanced than it is today so it is not totally impossible. Just go with it people. I like the idea of a woman fighting her mutant baby only hours after giving birth to it. Ya, those two guys getting lost in the cave is a bit far fetched considering that they mapped it but at some point, I don’t think they were really lost but just killing time until the storm died down. I can’t really recall anything that seemed totally unbelievable. We are talking about highly advanced future technology mixed with mysterious Alien biotech. This world does not play by the same rules.

Theories

David – Some reviewers seem quite upset about the fact that David’s actions were mostly unexplained but that was one of the things that made his character so interesting. Why did he poison Shaw’s boyfriend? No sure but I would like to think that Weyland had him do it. After all, Weyland was looking for a way to extend his life so how do you test the black goo’s medical properties in a short period of time? You test it on one of the crewmembers. David may have simply been curious as well, which is a far more frightening thought. Furthermore, many characters keep mentioning the fact that David has no emotions but how do we know that this is the case? Ridley Scott has already dabbled with the idea of intelligent androids that exhibit more human-like tendencies than their mass-produced counterparts (Rachel in Blade Runner), so it is possible that David is a special android that Weyland had brought along. An android who may posses some human emotions like jealousy, curiosity, anger, sadness ect. Just food for thought. David also exhibits a bizarre child-like attachment to certain individuals. When Weyland is asleep, he developed a Peter O’Toole attachment even going as far as to change his hair. When the humans are awake, he seems to work solely for Weyland but when he dies, he turns to Shaw to fill the void left behind by his previous master. This leads me to believe that David is capable of being lonely and needs human contact of some kind.

Vickers – Could it be possible that Vickers is an android as well? Even though she calls Weyland “father” does not necessarily mean that he is her biological father. Notice how abruptly she changes her tactics with the captain when he jokes about her being a robot. David also referred to her on multiple occasions as “mom”. Is she an earlier generation? I know this expression is used to refer to female superiors on some occasions but it is curious nonetheless.

So there you have it. I really enjoyed Prometheus but I am mindful of the fact that there were some problems that prevented the film from achieving the masterpiece status that some were predicting. Still, I like where Scott and Lindelof were going with these ideas and I look forward to future installments in the series. For me, the questions raised and the sheer spectacle was worth the price of admission. Instead of arguing about weather or not this film was any good, we should be discussing the more philosophical questions that were raised by the film. Is there anything out there to find? If there is, will we like what we find? If David was indeed more intelligent than we thought, where does that place humans on the ladder of intelligent designers? Who made the Engineers? In the end, this movie’s ability to stimulate thought may be it’s most redeeming feature.

Cheerio.

 

[Matthew Bennett]

For everyone that has seen the film, there's a really awesome breakdown of the thematic elements here: http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html#cutid1

Interesting read, and actually a very necessary companion for the watching of the film. They should have handed this text out at the entrance to the theatre.

'Please read so that you can understand that the scriptwriter did indeed research his subject, and will attempt to entertain you by regurgitating the symbolism of his subject matter into the film you are about to see.'

Unfortunately this librarian's approach to art creation is what got the fine art world into trouble with the general public. With the end result of near complete disengagement.


At the end of the day, we all know that Scott has long since mastered the most basic and most sophisticated aspects of film storytelling. He's a master of suspense, art direction, visceral experience, creation of emotion, character. If he wants to put the blunt repetition of mythic symbols ahead of character and reasonable motivation for action, then so be it. He earned it.

 

[Leo. C. Rogers]

For someone that just got a C-Section, she sure can run fast and what is up with the Teddy Bear Slot Machine approach to the procedure?

Script supervisor says dia morphine/delaudit works for that.

 

[ericyoung]

Interesting read, and actually a very necessary companion for the watching of the film. They should have handed this text out at the entrance to the theatre.

'Please read so that you can understand that the scriptwriter did indeed research his subject, and will attempt to entertain you by regurgitating the symbolism of his subject matter into the film you are about to see.'

Unfortunately this librarian's approach to art creation is what got the fine art world into trouble with the general public. With the end result of near complete disengagement.


At the end of the day, we all know that Scott has long since mastered the most basic and most sophisticated aspects of film storytelling. He's a master of suspense, art direction, visceral experience, creation of emotion, character. If he wants to put the blunt repetition of mythic symbols ahead of character and reasonable motivation for action, then so be it. He earned it.

Agree with you, except for the last two sentences! :smile:

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

That was the most useless film I've seen in years. I didn't dislike it at all. I didn't like it at all. I don't think I saw a movie. It's not worthy of an opinion because it doesn't really exist. There is 2 hours of nothing that's labeled Prometheus but it's not a movie. It's like watching a movie in a dead language that nobody speaks and without subtitles.

Plot holes imply there was a plot around said holes. The film was a void with some fragments of something resembling a story floating around in it without aim or reason. It's like finding a a few scattered characters from a 100 page manuscript. What you do with those letters is completely pointless since you only have .0001% of the story.

The 3D was near perfect. I just let it wash over me and forgot it was there in the best possible way. Fastbender did whatever it was he was doing great. The lighting was very nice. The ship model was beautiful. Kudos to all of the production design and set building team. Visual effects were excellent. It's too bad the ship blew up before they could start shooting the movie.


Gavin's thrilling sequel to Prometheus:

"Bob sat in the chair."
"The large orange fire..."
"... and that was the best day of his life when..."
"... Prometheus notched an arrow--"
"--her screams rang out--"
"--And tha----to they sought--"
"42"

 

[Erich Ocean]

For everyone that has seen the film, there's a really awesome breakdown of the thematic elements here: http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html#cutid1

SPOILERS!! DO NOT READ THIS UNLESS YOU'VE SEEN THE FILM! However, if you went away thinking that stuff might not have made sense.. or you thought some things weren't explained, this may help to shed some light on things. I'm not saying one way or another whether the symbolism of the film was too buried or not, that's subjective and everyone will have their own opinion on how well the film worked on a story-level for them. However, there's alot of really cool stuff in there if you'd like to dig. I love Ridley, and whether or not you liked the film, I don't think you can say that anything he does is random or not thought through.

Oh and - the visuals were freaking amazing. We all know Ridley oozes craft and Prometheus is no exception.. and the EPIC looked DYNAMITE.

People, in general, are NOT upset about the symbolism.

People are, in general, upset about the characters, which were stupid, illogical, and unmotivated. As a result, the plot/story became dumb because nothing was remotely motivated. We didn't give a damn about the vast majority of the characters sucking up screen time.

No amount of brilliant art direction, cinematography, production design and, yes, symbology can make up for poorly drawn characters.

Screenwriting, this movie failed at. -- Yoda

 

[Scott Crawley]

People are, in general, upset about the characters, which were stupid, illogical, and unmotivated. As a result, the plot/story became dumb because nothing was remotely motivated.

The characters are not unmotivated, they are simply motivated and devoid of hidden agendas. As a fan of dramas and mysteries I am happiest when characters obscure their motives with complex and sometimes contradictory behaviors, but in melodrama motivations are always kept simple, clear and are often exaggerated to archetype. Prometheus is melodrama.

If you can accept the archetypical nature of the characters and stop looking at them so deeply, they may begin to make more sense and the story may appear more holy and less full of holes. ;-)

BTW, people ARE stupid, illogical and motivated by self-interest. Therefore the characters as you see them are very real... Hyper-real if you will. ;-)

 

[Andrew Huse]

I was unimpressed. Sorry.

 

[Robino_J]

Watching Alien 1979 right now after coming back from Prometheus. What a great movie. I hate that directors today have to please the ADD generation. Prometheus was not terrible and you can see a master at work but to me it's too much CGI everywhere and crazy pacing. Slow down Jesus! Beautiful natural skin tones in Alien 1979... Sometimes in Prometheus the neck color doesn't match the face :0

 

[Paul Kalbach]

I wonder what Fassbender said to the alien before he unscrewed his head? He must have screwed-up his translation and insulted him big-time.
Visually extraordinary.

 

[Seth Larney]

People, in general, are NOT upset about the symbolism.

People are, in general, upset about the characters, which were stupid, illogical, and unmotivated. As a result, the plot/story became dumb because nothing was remotely motivated. We didn't give a damn about the vast majority of the characters sucking up screen time.

No amount of brilliant art direction, cinematography, production design and, yes, symbology can make up for poorly drawn characters.

Screenwriting, this movie failed at. -- Yoda

Erich, just to be clear - I don't disagree with you. As I mentioned a couple of times - it wasn't my intention to add to the debate about whether the movie worked or not, there is plenty enough opinion out there on that matter as well as the fact that most people are capable of making up their own minds on what to take from it. My only intention was to provide something that I found interesting specifically as it related to the theme of the movie. I didn't say (and don't think) that any amount of symbolism makes a better movie, if the movie doesn't work on the visible level then it doesn't work, period.

There's a basic principle of filmmaking that I believe strongly in - if a scene doesn't work on it's own at the time of the telling than no amount of later revelation can save it - sure you can add layers of meaning later through understanding theme or context but if it's not working in the first place it will not save it - as you say.

My point was that there seem to be a bunch of people saying - "this was random and that was random". The fact is that nothing is random in Ridley's world. Whether or not people are interested in looking deeper is their own business - AND, I'm not saying that is any kind of saving grace, if you don't enjoy the film then that's where the buck stops. In fact you could argue in this case, it's possible that the use of theme might have actually gotten in the way of the mechanics of good storytelling.

In any case, at the end of the day, sure - It may absolutely have fallen down in ways that many people may find unforgivable, as is their perogative as an audience - but Ridley has earned more than enough respect as a film maker for me to happily take away all of the good things, of which there are many. Each to their own

 

[Jay Birch]

What I was most disappointed with was the lack of tension and shock....

*spolier*

You could pretty much count down the seconds to when the snake thing would attack, or when the squid creature would hit the glass window.... Maybe directors have used up every trick in the book or maybe the sound design was off? Something was not right though, way, way too obvious.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Erich, just to be clear - I don't disagree with you. As I mentioned a couple of times - it wasn't my intention to add to the debate about whether the movie worked or not, there is plenty enough opinion out there on that matter as well as the fact that most people are capable of making up their own minds on what to take from it. My only intention was to provide something that I found interesting specifically as it related to the theme of the movie. I didn't say (and don't think) that any amount of symbolism makes a better movie, if the movie doesn't work on the visible level then it doesn't work, period.

There's a basic principle of filmmaking that I believe strongly in - if a scene doesn't work on it's own at the time of the telling than no amount of later revelation can save it - sure you can add layers of meaning later through understanding theme or context but if it's not working in the first place it will not save it - as you say.

My point was that there seem to be a bunch of people saying - "this was random and that was random". The fact is that nothing is random in Ridley's world. Whether or not people are interested in looking deeper is their own business - AND, I'm not saying that is any kind of saving grace, if you don't enjoy the film then that's where the buck stops. In fact you could argue in this case, it's possible that the use of theme might have actually gotten in the way of the mechanics of good storytelling.

In any case, at the end of the day, sure - It may absolutely have fallen down in ways that many people may find unforgivable, as is their perogative as an audience - but Ridley has earned more than enough respect as a film maker for me to happily take away all of the good things, of which there are many. Each to their own

I see much wisdom here. :iagree:

 

[Karl H]

I wonder what Fassbender said to the alien before he unscrewed his head? He must have screwed-up his translation and insulted him big-time.
Visually extraordinary.

My take is that David wants 'his parents dead' or in his case - the human race. I suspect he said something to let the engineer in on the human's plans, and that he should kill everyone in the room if he was to succeed with his mission of destroying life on earth. Perhaps that's why the engineer seemed to thank David before going on a rampage.

At least this question is one of the good ones left from the movie and not one of the complete 'that made no sense' events.