Prometheus...

[Scott Crawley]

I haven't seen too many 3D films, but this is the best one I have seen. (I didn't see Avatar in 3D) I thought the 3D was well utilized, and really added to the picture in those shots where you would expect it to. Other times it was non-obtrusive. It was visually and aurally stunning.

I admit that I was unusually motivated to forgive a variety of things that may be viewed as weaknesses in plot due to my fondness for the franchise and Director. I'm inclined to defend the film against some of these criticisms, but the guy snoring next to me in a theatre with such dynamic power that Prometheus' engines shook your seat is hard to deny. I would add that it was roughly 1:30AM at the time, but as a defense that would be pretty lame. Instead I will point out that the film frequently moved at a thoughtful pace akin to Kubrick's 2001. I like that, and it makes a more compelling argument. ;-)

It's a tough call. I liked it because I wanted to like it, and it had enough going for it that I could justify my efforts. In my humble 2D home theatre, with it's relatively smallish screen (But respectable sound.) I doubt my response would be so favorable. Yes, this picture could be a poster child for the kind of added value that movie theaters need to provide to keep people coming. An enveloping field of view instead of a flat screen would have kicked ass, but I digress...

 

[Ryan Darmon]

Director's cut anybody? There's no way he meant for this film to look exactly like this. Kingdom of Heaven, etc, we shall see. Overall I liked it, I wish she would have went to their home planet to shoot off some of their own artillery back at them.

 

[Al Lougher]

For those that have seen it in the US, did you catch The Hobbit trailer in 3D? Was it 48FPS or 24FPS?

 

[Mike Harrington]

Excellent visuals....good 3d......epic shined
**SPOILERS**
Terrible plot......why did that guy drink the stuff in the opening scene? Was he depressed? Just a random mismash of unanswered questions.....the girl has the c-section after fighting off 3 people to escape them freezing her...and then its business as normal like nothing happened???nobody want to talk about the elephant in the room? Why did the aliens give them directions to a weapons planet that they were about to attack them from? why does one infected scientist attack the crew while the other sacrifises himself.....the exploding head?????everybody exposed to this stuff has a different outcome??
And why can that big guy in the end run outside without a helmet??? Don't they have the exact same DNA??? And yes they engineered us ...with the same DNA? Isn't that called procreating????
I am a huge Riley Scott fan, and this may have been his worst
Still cool to see just for the visuals, and if you go in with low expectations it may pleasantly suprise you.

 

[Mike Harrington]

I'm against editing in RAW. I Accept working in raw (obviously) only on grading.
in RAW you can't scrub at the same speed as you do with Offlines and that's is vital for some editors. I'm not talking of realtime playback but scrubs a 4 minutes clip in 2 seconds just to see what happen in it and see 50 random frames, not 5.
With offline you could use smaller and slower drives at the editing and keep the raw on a secure big raid.
probably on this film they have 200TB of hi-speed raid for editing but it's not really necessary if you transcode.
debayer should be done for creating proxies and for grading, not for the long editing process. EDL are there to allow you this



Ah, they're using four rigs, not three, and there is a fifth rig on steadycam when needed.

Sorry but you must not be using CS6...
I can playback 1/2 debayer 5 k on my laptop...no scrubbing issue....at all
Also for same image resolution debayering increases file size...as you are dealing with 3 rgb values per pixel instead of 1, and reds wavelet encoding is very efficient....in fact with identical image resolution I challenge you to find a format that would be smaller file size to r3d...even degrading the image to 8 bits you would have an extremely hard time. Debayering would therefore triple file size even with a wavelet codec...not to mention you now need 2 versions of the material not including redundancy...
Editing raw is here....I have been doing it via cineform for 4 years, now adobe/red have got it down to a science

 

[Les Dittert]

The Hobbit trailer in the Universal City Imax 3d looked to be 24 fps.

Every time I see the Hobbit trailer I think to myself that this flavor of story, ala Lord of the Rings, is now tired. It left the station long ago with the Dungeons and Dragons people.
Been there done that type of thing. I hope I'm wrong.
I loved Lord of the Rings. It was a new look and a fresh experience at the time. These things go in cycles of 5 to 10 years.

For those that have seen it in the US, did you catch The Hobbit trailer in 3D? Was it 48FPS or 24FPS?

 

[Lliam Worthington]

Saw it tonight in 3D at the Imax in Darling harbour Sydney - touted as the worlds largest screen. AWESOME way to see it. First ten minutes with all the epic landscapes, I just sat there with my mouth open grinning like a child. Fantastic.

I love the claustrophobia and intensity Ridley creates and thought this film had some great sequences. Also thought the lead female was strong and that Ridley is second to none when it comes to heroines. But unfortunately I also have to join the swelling ranks of those that felt the plot lost it's way/struggled to know or at least articulate what it was and where it was trying to get too.

I also felt, quite surprisingly, that for once Ridley's world scope was ultimately rendered too small. It began with a feeling of such incredibly expansive and exciting scale that watching that giant cinema screen I truly felt like a child again, alive with wonder, and cherishing why I love and want to make movies... but then it quickly just became, a tunnel, a couple of chambers and a few spaceship interiors. I can only assume this was the intent to try and aid with the claustrophobic feeling he achieved, however beyond the plot weaknesses it lost all sense of scale and epic stakes and this disconnected it even further for me.

Overall still a very enjoyable experience, but it sadly fell short of the heights it really was so closely poised to achieve in my opinion.

 

[Ameer Azari]

I've been waiting for it to come out in the US so I can have a nice long rant about the terrible script, but you guys have pretty much covered it.

I'm amazed that Ridley Scott read and approved this script...unless there's a directors cut waiting in the wings. This is the first Ridley Scott film that I have been disappointed by to be honest.

I went back and watched Alien the other day. If that was released in cinemas today, it would still be 10 times better and scarier than any other SciFi out there.

I'll probably get a lot of flack for this, but Pandorum (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PItZ-qr9jG8) is the last SciFi/Horror that I watched and enjoyed to be honest.

And thanks for that video Steve G. Echoes my thoughts exactly!!

 

[Gabriele Turchi]

maybe i am an alien ... i can't really understand how people thinks that look great on IMAX 3D ,
i have seen it yesterday in the best (only) true IMAX 3D digital in NYC , off course look ""something experience wise " but the IMAX 3D technology looks like crap to me , colors are all weird , things are out of focus , if i tilt my head 10 degree all gets out of focus , dynamic range looks like 8 stops etc...

i ahem watched the trailer 1080P on my plasma when i got home and looks 10 times better ,
i am a colorist and i have fancy expensive monitors (BVM trimaster etc...) and when i go and see 2D digital DCP (usually on sony 4K ) image looks stunning ,

3D looks quality wise (color , dynamic range , brightness etc...) looks like a bad DVD , and the IMAX in 3D looked like an upscaled DVD (screen way way to big that should have a 4K master of the film and not 2K )

I have experienced some months when i was dragged into that planet like never been before watching a movie )and it was one of the very best 3Di have ever seen , but the IMAX 3D (and 3D technology in general ) is way way way worse than a normal 2D DCP , to me is the difference between a panasonic PRO plasma calibrated and a samsung crap LCD pushed etc...

i hope that the new kodak laser 4K for IMAX will change things ...

also those glasses are crap ... does not fit , they are way to light , lens are too thin etc... (i am wondering if i can buy my own glasses that would work with that technology ...)

anyway only my 2 cents

g

 

[Lliam Worthington]

The Hobbit trailer in the Universal City Imax 3d looked to be 24 fps.

Every time I see the Hobbit trailer I think to myself that this flavor of story, ala Lord of the Rings, is now tired. It left the station long ago with the Dungeons and Dragons people.
Been there done that type of thing. I hope I'm wrong.
I loved Lord of the Rings. It was a new look and a fresh experience at the time. These things go in cycles of 5 to 10 years.

I really don't think so Les. The consumption of fantasy by the world market place it as at an all time high and rising. The cycle you speak of is more likely indicative of the struggle of storytellers to create/realise classical fantasies than a tiring of the genre or any such I think. Fantasy fans appetites are ravenous and incredibly robust, probably the most of any genres. It just has to be decent fair.
Based on the fact PJ and co are putting in about twice the shooting days that went into the whole of the LOTR, I predict the Hobbit will prove anything but tired.

When you watch the blogs, such a tremendous amount of good will and creative energy and talent around this project that I feel it will be again something very special. Indeed I'd bet large sums on it if there was a Hobbitbet.com.

Oh, and the D&D film was an abomination. It never even arrived at the station, let alone left it.

 

[Stivan Widick]

Where's the best place in NYC to see Prometheus? Thanks.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

I've been waiting for it to come out in the US so I can have a nice long rant about the terrible script, but you guys have pretty much covered it.

I'm amazed that Ridley Scott read and approved this script...unless there's a directors cut waiting in the wings. This is the first Ridley Scott film that I have been disappointed by to be honest.

I went back and watched Alien the other day. If that was released in cinemas today, it would still be 10 times better and scarier than any other SciFi out there.

I'll probably get a lot of flack for this, but Pandorum (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PItZ-qr9jG8) is the last SciFi/Horror that I watched and enjoyed to be honest.

And thanks for that video Steve G. Echoes my thoughts exactly!!

I'd like to see you try to write something better. Not a phenomenal script but far from atrocious. I am working on an extensive review that I will post later but I am really trying to figure out why this is such a controversial film. Writing is tough. As a writer, it is quite difficult to put something together that it successful especially when you have everyone and their cousin looking for problems. If films like 2001, Blade Runner or Aliens were released today, they reviews would be equally mixed.

I would have loved to see IMDB posts about 2001 if it were released today, "Oh my God, most disappointing sci fi film ever. What the hell was up with those monkeys? It seemed liked that stupid scene would never end and I could totally tell that they were dudes in monkey suits. It was like three hours of dudes walking around a spaceship saying nothing and then it gets all trippy and pretentious. Seriously, the movie explained nothing and the ending was beyond stupid. For real, the dude turns into a space baby? Retarded. I guess the evil computer was cool but otherwise, this was a total waste of time and money. 2/10"

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Could this be a typo on the journalist end--maybe its 3.2K for the 3184x1592 2:1 in yellow they have in their chart. I don't see any 2.2k in there?

You can do small tweaks to the convergence in post for the purposes of the edit in context if you have a little look-around area.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I would have loved to see IMDB posts about 2001 if it were released today, "It seemed liked that stupid scene would never end and I could totally tell that they were dudes in monkey suits. It was like three hours of dudes walking around a spaceship saying nothing and then it gets all trippy and pretentious. Seriously, the movie explained nothing and the ending was beyond stupid. For real, the dude turns into a space baby? Retarded. I guess the evil computer was cool but otherwise, this was a total waste of time and money. 2/10"

Nice! You wrote my 2001 review! Except I wouldn't even give it 2/10 (BTW I love Arthur C Clarke books, the movies are just terrible imo and don't translate to the screen well).

 

[Ameer Azari]

I'd like to see you try to write something better.

I can't believe I am actually replying to this, but here goes. Pay me Lindelof's salary, and I'll write something better.

You might as well use that line with every critic out there. Excuse me for having an opinion. I never said Alien would be received 10 times better. I am saying (in my opinion) it IS 10 times the better film. I've payed my compliments to plenty of Scott's films in the past.

No need to be so condescending mate. I didn't bash anyone else's opinion, I don't see why you have to bash mine.

 

[Oliver Cross]

I'd like to see you try to write something better.

Word of advice. This is not a strong argument. One does not have to be a good chef to determine that a meal doesn't taste good. And I disagree that if those films would be released today people wouldn't like them. Seen Moon? That is very much in the vein of those 70s scifi films you mentioned and it was very well received. Moon is much closer in tone and quality to Alien that Prometheus was, although to be fair Prometheus was not trying to be another Alien.
A lot of people seem to be loving it and that's great.. to those people I say.. I've got some good news for you.. Total Recall & Dredd are on the way!

 

[Andrew Rieger]

A lot of people seem to be loving it and that's great.. to those people I say.. I've got some good news for you.. Total Recall & Dredd are on the way!

That sounds like an insult. I liked Prometheus but I'm not excited about Dredd or Total Recall. I get it, I like Prometheus therefore I must like junky sci fi films. Slick.

I've seen Moon. A bit overrated in my opinion. I knew he was a clone from very early on in the film and nothing in the film really blew me away. A Pretty good low budget sci fi film but nothing groundbreaking. I liked Duncan's follow up Source Code much better which I thought was much more creative.

2001, Alien and Blade Runner all received mostly negative reviews when they were released and were viewed much more favorably over time. I absolutely think that those films would receive equally negative reviews if not more so if they were released today.

 

[Andrew Rieger]

I can't believe I am actually replying to this, but here goes. Pay me Lindelof's salary, and I'll write something better.

You might as well use that line with every critic out there. Excuse me for having an opinion. I never said Alien would be received 10 times better. I am saying (in my opinion) it IS 10 times the better film. I've payed my compliments to plenty of Scott's films in the past.

No need to be so condescending mate. I didn't bash anyone else's opinion, I don't see why you have to bash mine.

Ok, then why are you not getting A list writing gigs if you are better than Lindelof? I'm not saying his writing is superb but it is no where as bad as people are making it out to be. It was flawed in some places but I can see a lot of creativity at work and it made me look forward to a sequel. Mission Accomplished. How about this, write a phenomenal script for the Prometheus sequel if you think you can do better.

 

[Niko Pueringer]

Andrew, you seem to not understand that "I'd like to see you do better!" is a horrible argument.

 

[Ameer Azari]

Ok, then why are you not getting A list writing gigs if you are better than Lindelof?

OK, I think you're arguing for the sake of arguing.

1) I'm not getting writing gigs because I did not chose a career in film.

2) I take it, by your standards, no one is allowed to criticise anything ever, unless they are an expert at said thing?

I'm done arguing with you. I'm not going to throw insults your way, challenge you or further provoke any sort of response. It's impossible to argue illogically with someone.


On a another note, I am looking forward to Dredd. Total Recall's trailers haven't really grabbed me (is it ok for me to say that Andrew, or do I have to eclipse Len Wisemen's directorial efforts?)

I did like Stallone's Judge Dredd, but more as a general action film than as a Dredd adaptation.