Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Prometheus...

I went to see it at my local Vue. Despite them bombarding you with their 4K projector marketing, the film definately wasn't in 4k. Its quite misleading. It would be great if there was something at the start of the movie so you'd know what you're paying for.

Despite that, the film was pretty good. Some of the 3D was the best i'd ever seen, the rest was the usual mix of being either distracting or unnoticeable/pointless. Shallow dof seems to be the killer for me.

Dave
 
Saw it. Another vote for excellent picture and 3D. Ridley Scott never disappoints in this regard. Also a very interesting, nail bitting movie. There are some plot holes and a bit forced plot points, but, all in all, one of the best sic-fi experiences of the past 2 years. It felt more interesting than Avatar, at least, for me. I was a tiny, tiny bit disappointed with the art design, I was expecting a little bit more, but, then again, its still good. Great performances from Fassbender and Charlize. Great accomplishment, Red Team. The camera was up to the task and I never missed film watching it.
 
I hear a lot about plot holes, I really want to know what plot holes people refer to. Most people I discussed the movie with seems to have lost their skill of attention when watching it because I seem to counter-argue most suggestions of plot holes.

Also, I really like how they took some of the old concept art that didn't make it into Alien and updated it into this movie, really pleasant surprise :)
 
Jeffrey T. Morgan said:
I have watched this 3 times since you posted it, lol. LOVE IT for some reason. I wonder why they would need to transcode everything? Why not just work raw?
Click to expand...

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. :)
 
When will NASA wise up and put lamps all through the insides of space helmets so we can tell who's who?.....NEVER! That's when, because the wearer's visibility would be seriously impaired if they did.
Just another annoying aspect of sci fi movies.
 
Just saw Promethus in Wales, UK on a Sony 4K realD 3D and really enjoyed it, plot holes aside. It was an interesting take on one of my favorite film franchises. Fassbender really shined - I recently discovered him in a film called "Shame" - Very disturbing subject matter but well put together. Getting another look at Giegers designs is always a pleasure and between the intense surgery scene and amazing Icelandic locations, it was a cool piece of Sci-Fi, if not on the level as the first Alien.

Regarding technical:
I was hoping this would be the one to change my mind on 3D but alas, it didn't deliver. I don't feel it added anything to the film and I left wishing I'd been able to see it in 2D. Its cool for the first few minutes but then it just gets distracting if its even noticeable at all. I'm not bashing 3D, I'm just seriously over the gimmick. I think at this point I can officially say I only really appreciated 3D the first time I saw it.

Regarding plot holes:
The most glaring to me was how they extrapolated the planet location from the cave paintings. It was said that the constellation could not be seen from earth but without a stated viewing point (such as earth) that constellation would look totally different depending on your location in the cosmos. It was in no way a real map.

The second was the guy who is in charge of the mapping spheres - How does he get lost? The guy is in charge of the mapping technology! Not only that, but the crew back on board seems to totally forget that him and another guy never return with the group. I think space exploration goes like scuba diving - Buddy system! How do you forget two guys out there?
 
First part spoiler free, second not.

Michael Romano said:
Regarding technical:
I was hoping this would be the one to change my mind on 3D but alas, it didn't deliver. I don't feel it added anything to the film and I left wishing I'd been able to see it in 2D. Its cool for the first few minutes but then it just gets distracting if its even noticeable at all. I'm not bashing 3D, I'm just seriously over the gimmick. I think at this point I can officially say I only really appreciated 3D the first time I saw it.

Regarding plot holes:
The most glaring to me was how they extrapolated the planet location from the cave paintings. It was said that the constellation could not be seen from earth but without a stated viewing point (such as earth) that constellation would look totally different depending on your location in the cosmos. It was in no way a real map.

The second was the guy who is in charge of the mapping spheres - How does he get lost? The guy is in charge of the mapping technology! Not only that, but the crew back on board seems to totally forget that him and another guy never return with the group. I think space exploration goes like scuba diving - Buddy system! How do you forget two guys out there?
Click to expand...

The technical
I think that people view 3D wanting something more magical then it is. If you do that then you will be disappointed or think it's a gimmick. It's not meant to take film to the stars and beyond but to add a depth. Surround sound is exactly the same, do you think that is a gimmick? I watch movies at home in stereo and then go to a theatre to watch a movie in surround sound. Do I think it's a gimmick? No, do I think it adds, yes. But is it magical, no.

3D adds one step of immersion, that's it. Why people are against it is I think because they can't do it themselves. What is there to be against? You can still watch it in 2D and nobody is stopping you



------------------
PLOTSTUFF

Point 1
They meant it was a constellation that couldn't be seen with the naked eye, as they didn't have telescopes or keplers 30 000 years ago.
Point 2
People make mistakes, how many corporations screw up over and over, forgetting people all over the place, having accidents etc.? The "guy" is a geologist, his "puppies" are meant to map the geostructure for scientific research. He maps the location but the data is sent to Prometheus, he doesn't seem to have the map, or else they would have gotten out. Another reason is that at the time they get lost the mapping wasn't really complete. He is not there to "make maps" he is there to study the geological structure.

Plot holes are holes that doesn't make sense, if someone makes a mistake, get lost or a corporation forget to check all the numbers or whatever, it's not really a plot hole in my opinion.
The first point yes, it could seem to be a plot hole, but as I saw it, they speak of how people long ago couldn't have seen the constellation because you would need a telescope or such to be able to.

The whole film is about the answers to creation, why are we here and if we realise that we aren't created by Gods, but by others much like us, then how do that change our view upon ourselves? It's the dynamic between David and the crew, and the crew and the creators. David is the key point to answer all unanswered questions in the film, that creation might have been "just because they could".
That why we were created and our search for answers to why we are here is a very much irrelevant question.

I think this movie has a lot more in common with 2001: A space odyssey then Alien.
 
Just saw it in IMAX 3D at the largest digital IMAX in the world. It was fantastic. I thought the 3D was phenomenal. It was bright enough even in the darkest scenes and the depth was subtle where it needed to be and engrossing during exciting moments. The shots of the ship in space and with the holographic table were particularly beautiful. Props to Ridley Scott and the gang.
 
I thought it was great! 3d was subtle but used very well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top