Update
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289534¤tpage=25#498
Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
Boundz(DarKo)
5311 Posts
Update http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289534¤tpage=25#498 | ||
voltaic
1071 Posts
how can a hardcore fan prevent from being spoiled 2 months after the movie is out? right he can, so am i :D but still looking forward, even though it has received mixed reviews, with some saying it's waste of time and some just "audgasjfhuajkfdwhpiaruhfpgnwjkäaglsdüfobgi" about it... now the question is, which reviews are more believeable and i sadly have to realize that those with the negative opinion at least can prove their arguments | ||
Reptilia
Chile913 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:26 Boundz(DarKo) wrote: Going to watch in a couple of hours. Saving this post for an update i don't understand Are posts in a thread limited? or is page 25 specially important? | ||
Manit0u
Poland17187 Posts
On June 03 2012 17:50 Bobgrimly wrote: Show nested quote + On June 03 2012 16:30 Manit0u wrote: On June 03 2012 09:29 teapot wrote: A message to people who have not seen this film yet: Lower your expectations. Seriously. If you want to enjoy this film you might want to book yourself some sort of lobotomy to remove any last trace of critical thought. It really is a silly mess of a film. Well now, we'll have to take this info with a pinch of salt. IMDB - 8.3/10 based on ~5500 reviews. RT - 80% staff (40 reviews), 97% audience (~38000 ratings). So far it seems that the movie might be a blast. Especially that I actually do enjoy the fact that Scott wanted to disjoint it from the Alien franchise a bit. The masses like anything with pretty pictures and large explosions that they are told to watch by all the hype. Doesn't mean the masses know what a good movie is. The masses used to think the earth was flat and that mercury was a medicine. Just because the masses like something or say it to be so doesn't actually mean it. That's probably why good movies get good notes and bad movies get bad ones for the most part (there are some exceptions because of nostalgia/fanboyism, like SW ep 1-3, but even big blockbuster hits with a ton of fanboys like The Twilight Saga can't get past 50% rating, with most of them not being able to get past 30% mark)... Just look at some blockbusters with 'splosiunz and what not: Transformers? Barely pushing 60%, and they were all about action, explosions, fast cars and barely clothed chicks. | ||
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:18 moktira wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 02:00 Quotidian wrote: On June 04 2012 01:50 moktira wrote: On June 03 2012 21:20 Quotidian wrote: On June 03 2012 20:22 teapot wrote: OK. Apparently someone on IMDB had acces to Weyland's computer and found this little .doc lying around. I wonder what it could all mean? + Show Spoiler + MY PLAN FOR IMMORTALITY - BY WEYLAND ==================================== - Spend $trillion on a trip to an unknown moon, on a hunch from a naive hippy couple who believe things because they choose to - Recruit a bunch of absolutely stupid tools from various disciplines who think and act irrationally - Get some crew members with adolescent angst on board (incl. an android and my own daughter) - Pretend to be dead to the crew, but reveal myself later (problem - won't they think I'm a dousche? Cross that bridge when I get to it) - Let the "scientists" fumble about a bit first and see what they rustle up - Even if lots of people die, become infected and raped by aliens, don't worry, keep believing that "they created human life, so they must be able to save us too" (Wait - if that's the case, what about asking a few milfs to save my life? They've created human life too... does what I said even make any sense? Have I taken my pills? Ah whatever, the $1t trip to a moon will be fun) - Anyway - get to the Alien chamber whatever the risk, and ask an android to try and ask an alien creature for some "answers" so that I might cure the aging problem somehow. Contains spoilers, obviously. it has a shitty script with contrived plot points. That goes for 99% of big, Hollywood action movies. Even Dark Knight had a shitty script, but it was saved by a few important elements - like Ledger's Joker. Just because some of the plot devices in Prometheus are silly doesn't mean the movie has no redeeming qualities or that it isn't enjoyable. But ok, we get it.. you don't like the movie. You're just repeating yourself at this point. On June 03 2012 20:53 teapot wrote: Good review. Uninsightful and narrowminded review.. and anyway, even Alien and Blade Runner got torn to pieces by narrowminded reviewers when they were first released.. I'm curious as to why you think it's a narrow minded review? Just because I didn't enjoy something you did doesn't make it narrow minded. I don't think people with differing opinions to me are narrow minded, especially when it comes to enjoyment of a film or story. I just skimmed it because it's way too tl;dr, but it's a text that's stuck in a negative mode with no proficient attempts at analysis what so ever. It's just listing stuff you think are bad and festering in negativity. The funny thing is, you're lambasting Prometheus for having shallow characters, which is exactly the same criticism lobbed against Alien in its time: "There is very little involvement with the characters themselves ... A generally good cast in cardboard roles." Variety. "Indeed, the film's characters are so lifeless that one begins to wonder whether they might not be parodies of space-age bureaucrats. If so, the satire is far too flat to be its own reward." The New York Times http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=43799.0 But that's a thread called "Alien: The Bad Reviews", it still got some great reviews at the time. My review certainly was negative but I do think I explained why, I don't think it's fair to say there's no analysis whatsoever, especially when you didn't read it. I didn't go in to the film looking for holes or to be negative, I wouldn't have gone otherwise, these were things that struck me as I saw it. And whether some people thought the characters were shallow in Alien or not, I thought they were far more shallow in Prometheus, personally I didn't warm to any of them or care about any of them, whereas when I first saw Alien I did, I also recognised each character in Alien after a time, I never did in Prometheus. yes, you explained why you didn't like it. That doesn't mean your review was critically adept and not shallow. With lack of analysis, I mean there's nothing of what for instance Mark Kermode attempts to talk about in his review - where he draws parallels between David and Deckard in Blade Runner, and tries to ascertain what Scott's motivations might've been. Just listing negatives is easy and uninteresting. There's a reason why there are very few good cultural critics - it's actually much harder than posting some unedited blog on a forum. Prometheus is 79% on Rottentomatoes at the moment and has quite a few very favorable reviews. It's not as original as Alien, it won't be as much of a classic, but so what.. That thread has that title because people seem to forget that Alien was critically panned when it was released. Same goes for Blade Runner. There's no reason to take the opinion of critics seriously at all - even less so blog posts of anonymous people on some forum. People like for instance Fredric Jameson are probably as rare as one in ten million. You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie, just because you're picking at superficial low hanging fruit. The general consensus is that it's a solid movie, with both a grand, well realized vision and some cool set pieces, as well as deep and unfortunate flaws. Two wavy thumbs-up, like Mark Kermode said. Like I said initially, it's a shitty script saved by great direction and fascinating mythology | ||
Leftwing
Canada229 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 02:18 moktira wrote: On June 04 2012 02:00 Quotidian wrote: On June 04 2012 01:50 moktira wrote: On June 03 2012 21:20 Quotidian wrote: On June 03 2012 20:22 teapot wrote: OK. Apparently someone on IMDB had acces to Weyland's computer and found this little .doc lying around. I wonder what it could all mean? + Show Spoiler + MY PLAN FOR IMMORTALITY - BY WEYLAND ==================================== - Spend $trillion on a trip to an unknown moon, on a hunch from a naive hippy couple who believe things because they choose to - Recruit a bunch of absolutely stupid tools from various disciplines who think and act irrationally - Get some crew members with adolescent angst on board (incl. an android and my own daughter) - Pretend to be dead to the crew, but reveal myself later (problem - won't they think I'm a dousche? Cross that bridge when I get to it) - Let the "scientists" fumble about a bit first and see what they rustle up - Even if lots of people die, become infected and raped by aliens, don't worry, keep believing that "they created human life, so they must be able to save us too" (Wait - if that's the case, what about asking a few milfs to save my life? They've created human life too... does what I said even make any sense? Have I taken my pills? Ah whatever, the $1t trip to a moon will be fun) - Anyway - get to the Alien chamber whatever the risk, and ask an android to try and ask an alien creature for some "answers" so that I might cure the aging problem somehow. Contains spoilers, obviously. it has a shitty script with contrived plot points. That goes for 99% of big, Hollywood action movies. Even Dark Knight had a shitty script, but it was saved by a few important elements - like Ledger's Joker. Just because some of the plot devices in Prometheus are silly doesn't mean the movie has no redeeming qualities or that it isn't enjoyable. But ok, we get it.. you don't like the movie. You're just repeating yourself at this point. On June 03 2012 20:53 teapot wrote: Good review. Uninsightful and narrowminded review.. and anyway, even Alien and Blade Runner got torn to pieces by narrowminded reviewers when they were first released.. I'm curious as to why you think it's a narrow minded review? Just because I didn't enjoy something you did doesn't make it narrow minded. I don't think people with differing opinions to me are narrow minded, especially when it comes to enjoyment of a film or story. I just skimmed it because it's way too tl;dr, but it's a text that's stuck in a negative mode with no proficient attempts at analysis what so ever. It's just listing stuff you think are bad and festering in negativity. The funny thing is, you're lambasting Prometheus for having shallow characters, which is exactly the same criticism lobbed against Alien in its time: "There is very little involvement with the characters themselves ... A generally good cast in cardboard roles." Variety. "Indeed, the film's characters are so lifeless that one begins to wonder whether they might not be parodies of space-age bureaucrats. If so, the satire is far too flat to be its own reward." The New York Times http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=43799.0 But that's a thread called "Alien: The Bad Reviews", it still got some great reviews at the time. My review certainly was negative but I do think I explained why, I don't think it's fair to say there's no analysis whatsoever, especially when you didn't read it. I didn't go in to the film looking for holes or to be negative, I wouldn't have gone otherwise, these were things that struck me as I saw it. And whether some people thought the characters were shallow in Alien or not, I thought they were far more shallow in Prometheus, personally I didn't warm to any of them or care about any of them, whereas when I first saw Alien I did, I also recognised each character in Alien after a time, I never did in Prometheus. yes, you explained why you didn't like it. That doesn't mean your review was critically adept and not shallow. With lack of analysis, I mean there's nothing of what for instance Mark Kermode attempts to talk about in his review - where he draws parallels between David and Deckard in Blade Runner, and tries to ascertain what Scott's motivations might've been. Just listing negatives is easy and uninteresting. There's a reason why there are very few good cultural critics - it's actually much harder than posting some unedited blog on a forum. Prometheus is 79% on Rottentomatoes at the moment and has quite a few very favorable reviews. It's not as original as Alien, it won't be as much of a classic, but so what.. That thread has that title because people seem to forget that Alien was critically panned when it was released. Same goes for Blade Runner. There's no reason to take the opinion of critics seriously at all - even less so blog posts of anonymous people on some forum. People like for instance Fredric Jameson are probably as rare as one in ten million. You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie, just because you're picking at superficiality and low hanging fruit. The general consensus is that it's a solid movie, with both a grand, well realized vision and some cool set pieces, as well as deep and unfortunate flaws. Two wavy thumbs-up, like Mark Kermode said. Like I said initially, it's a shitty script saved by great direction and fascinating mythology That last part explained the movie perfectly. | ||
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 02:18 moktira wrote: On June 04 2012 02:00 Quotidian wrote: On June 04 2012 01:50 moktira wrote: On June 03 2012 21:20 Quotidian wrote: On June 03 2012 20:22 teapot wrote: OK. Apparently someone on IMDB had acces to Weyland's computer and found this little .doc lying around. I wonder what it could all mean? + Show Spoiler + MY PLAN FOR IMMORTALITY - BY WEYLAND ==================================== - Spend $trillion on a trip to an unknown moon, on a hunch from a naive hippy couple who believe things because they choose to - Recruit a bunch of absolutely stupid tools from various disciplines who think and act irrationally - Get some crew members with adolescent angst on board (incl. an android and my own daughter) - Pretend to be dead to the crew, but reveal myself later (problem - won't they think I'm a dousche? Cross that bridge when I get to it) - Let the "scientists" fumble about a bit first and see what they rustle up - Even if lots of people die, become infected and raped by aliens, don't worry, keep believing that "they created human life, so they must be able to save us too" (Wait - if that's the case, what about asking a few milfs to save my life? They've created human life too... does what I said even make any sense? Have I taken my pills? Ah whatever, the $1t trip to a moon will be fun) - Anyway - get to the Alien chamber whatever the risk, and ask an android to try and ask an alien creature for some "answers" so that I might cure the aging problem somehow. Contains spoilers, obviously. it has a shitty script with contrived plot points. That goes for 99% of big, Hollywood action movies. Even Dark Knight had a shitty script, but it was saved by a few important elements - like Ledger's Joker. Just because some of the plot devices in Prometheus are silly doesn't mean the movie has no redeeming qualities or that it isn't enjoyable. But ok, we get it.. you don't like the movie. You're just repeating yourself at this point. On June 03 2012 20:53 teapot wrote: Good review. Uninsightful and narrowminded review.. and anyway, even Alien and Blade Runner got torn to pieces by narrowminded reviewers when they were first released.. I'm curious as to why you think it's a narrow minded review? Just because I didn't enjoy something you did doesn't make it narrow minded. I don't think people with differing opinions to me are narrow minded, especially when it comes to enjoyment of a film or story. I just skimmed it because it's way too tl;dr, but it's a text that's stuck in a negative mode with no proficient attempts at analysis what so ever. It's just listing stuff you think are bad and festering in negativity. The funny thing is, you're lambasting Prometheus for having shallow characters, which is exactly the same criticism lobbed against Alien in its time: "There is very little involvement with the characters themselves ... A generally good cast in cardboard roles." Variety. "Indeed, the film's characters are so lifeless that one begins to wonder whether they might not be parodies of space-age bureaucrats. If so, the satire is far too flat to be its own reward." The New York Times http://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/index.php?topic=43799.0 But that's a thread called "Alien: The Bad Reviews", it still got some great reviews at the time. My review certainly was negative but I do think I explained why, I don't think it's fair to say there's no analysis whatsoever, especially when you didn't read it. I didn't go in to the film looking for holes or to be negative, I wouldn't have gone otherwise, these were things that struck me as I saw it. And whether some people thought the characters were shallow in Alien or not, I thought they were far more shallow in Prometheus, personally I didn't warm to any of them or care about any of them, whereas when I first saw Alien I did, I also recognised each character in Alien after a time, I never did in Prometheus. yes, you explained why you didn't like it. That doesn't mean your review was critically adept and not shallow. With lack of analysis, I mean there's nothing of what for instance Mark Kermode attempts to talk about in his review - where he draws parallels between David and Deckard in Blade Runner, and tries to ascertain what Scott's motivations might've been. Just listing negatives is easy and uninteresting. There's a reason why there are very few good cultural critics - it's actually much harder than posting some unedited blog on a forum. Prometheus is 79% on Rottentomatoes at the moment and has quite a few very favorable reviews. It's not as original as Alien, it won't be as much of a classic, but so what.. That thread has that title because people seem to forget that Alien was critically panned when it was released. Same goes for Blade Runner. There's no reason to take the opinion of critics seriously at all - even less so blog posts of anonymous people on some forum. You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie, just because you're picking at superficiality and low hanging fruit. The general consensus is that it's a solid movie, with both a grand, well realized vision and some cool set pieces, as well as deep and unfortunate flaws. Two wavy thumbs-up, like Mark Kermode said. Like I said initially, it's a shitty script saved by great direction and fascinating mythology consensus is it's a beautiful movie that lacks substance (characters/plotline) honestly this movie would have been much better if the stupid trailer didn't spoil half of it, and also the trailer built soo much hype. This is one of those cases where the trailer being so good actually hurt the movie imo (not in terms of sales, just viewing experience). edit: by trailer being good I mean gripping and visually beautiful even though it reveals too much | ||
topoulo
253 Posts
Reality check , they arent. A movie doesnt always have to be about character creation , further more why everyone behaves like their opinions matters most than the others when clearly it doesnt You can like a movie or you cannot everything else is just subjective bs. | ||
NuclearJudas
6546 Posts
Various thoughts and basic plot run-through spoilered below in case stupid people check out the thread after release and go HOW COULD YOU SPOIL THE ENTIRE FILM + Show Spoiler + So the film begins with us seeing some outrageously muscular humanoid being drinking some weird shit (A ship in the background is also seen to be leaving for some reason, suggesting he's the last one left). He seems to fall apart, and his DNA is seen to be breaking apart. He falls into a waterfall, where his DNA seems to begin to reassemble itself, which seems to imply that he killed himself to create humanity. Then we go to 2089, where the two archaeologists Shaw (played by Noomi Rapace) and Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) find some cave painting showing a tall man pointing at a star cluster or whatever. We are also told that the two are together, as they hold hands. 2093 is next as the ship is apparently at its destination. The crew is awoken by the ship's android David (played by the amazing Michael Fassbender)Afterwards comes the mission brief (WHY THE FUCK WOULDN'T YOU INFORM THE CREW OF ITS MISSION BEFORE THEY GO TO PROBABLE DEATHS ON A PREVIOUSLY UNEXPLORED PLANET). Apparently the painting S&H found on Earth is one of many and this leads them to this place, where the ship Prometheus is in orbit. They call the tall people The Engineers, because Shaw believes that "they engineered us" without any proof to that conclusion. Meredith Vickers (wasted on Charlize Theron, who deserves better than what the film's writers gave her) basically tells the characters to behave and she's in charge. Oh yeah, we get Peter Weyland (Guy Pearce) who is apparently dead as of the movie, due to old age. Anyway, after landing the damn ship, the characters decide to rush into a huge alien building complex and explore it, despite the pilot's notion that they should probably hang the fuck on as night is approaching. The pilot Janek is played by Idris Elba, who gives a good performance as well, but in an awfully written role. So the scientists explore the complex and find one of the Engineers, who had been decapitated by a door. There's a ton of ampoules or whatever that starts leaking some weird black liquid. Also there's a huge sculpture of a humanoid head in there. Throw-away characters Milburn and Fifield decide to go back to the ship because Fifield throws a fit since NO ONE BESIDES HIM CARES ABOUT ROCKS (fuck man, why the hell are you on this expedition?) and Milburn just goes with him because the script says he has to die in a couple of minutes. Everyone leaves (they make sure to bring the Engineer head), except for F&M who are lost in the cave AND DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT CALLING JANEK TO LET THEM KNOW THE DAMN WAY OUT. When they do realise that they should contact him, Janek is away to bang Miss Wickers. Obviously they die, since the botanist decides to touch a serpent-like creature for no other reason that he's supposed to be killed there and then. Fifield gets his helmet corroded and faceplants into the weird liquid, while the serpent-thing makes it's way into Milburn's suit and down his throat. End scene. We were earlier shown that David brought along an ampoule from the alien complex, and he's later shown studying it. He opens it up, revealing a few vials with black liquid, presumably the same that we've already seen. He intentionally infects Holloway with the liquid. Also, we're shown Shaw and some medical lady researching the Engineer head, which promptly explodes as they zap it for some reason I can't remember. Shaw and Holloway have sex, because that's what couples do. Holloway is shown to be suffering from fever and very small mutations, primarily his eyes, from the dark liquid. They search the complex for F&M, only finding M, from who one of those serpent-things pop out for a short scare. David goes off on his own and finds an Engineer in stasis as well as some sort of star map highlighting Earth. Holloway's infection grows rampant (in a very silly scene, he asks Shaw (WHO IS AN ARCHAEOLOGIST BY THE WAY) about his infection (THE MEDICAL LADY IS IN THE SAME ROOM, BUT HE ASKS THE ARCHAEOLOGIST BECAUSE WE NEED TO KNOW THAT SHAW IS A PERFECT WOMAN, AND DID I MENTION THAT SHE'S CHRISTIAN? SYMBOLISM AHOY)). According to Shaw, it's bad (why wouldn't they get a second opinion what the fuck) and they rush back to the ship. Holloway is shown to be slowly dying from the liquid (looks like the Engineer in the beginning of the film, only slower) and Vicker emerges from nowhere really to do something that she should have instructed someone else to do, which is burn him the fuck up to present Shaw with a sad situation to overcome. David scans Shaw to reveal that she is pregnant, despite us learning earlier that this is impossible. David hints to there being something quite horrible inside her and then sedates her. She later wakes up, runs away into a surgery machine of some sort, and has it perform surgery on her, in a pretty sick scene. The machine pulls out some octopus-like creature, which she promptly escapes from as it comes to life. She runs into some doctors and lo and behold it's Peter Weyland who is in fact not dead. Funnyli enough no one gives a shit that Shaw is basically held together by stitches and is bleeding all over the fucking floor. Weyland and company decide to go meet the Engineer, as Shaw tags along. Fifield returns, souped up on the black goo to fuck shit up. He kills some extras before being killed by Janek, who later suggests that this planet is just a base for the Engineers to make bioweapons, but they fucked up and got killed. Weyland and co. finds the Engineer and brings him back to life. David speaks to it and promptly gets decapitated by the apparently hostile Engineer, who proceeds to try to kill everyone in sight. Shaw escapes and the Engineer sits into a chair. Janek gets an idea and finds out that the building is actually a ship. The Engineer starts the ship and starts to ascend, just as Prometheus is about to leave. Shaw talks Janek into making a suicide run on the ship (she's convinced that the Engineers will try to wipe out humanity), and he complies. He gives Vicker a chance to get off the ship, which she does. She crashes on the planet while Prometheus collides with the Engineer vessel, which crashes on the planet. Vicker and Shaw rund from the Engineer vessel which squashes Vicker because the writers didn't know what the fuck to do with her. Shaw is the last human standing. What a surprise. Shaw gets chased by the Engineer, but opens up the surgery room, which still holds the octopus being from earlier. It's grown a lot since last and overpowers the Engineer as Shaw runs away (huge plot hole regarding her oxygen supply which is not mentioned because hurr. The Octopus thing is likely the first evolution of the facehuggers, seeing as it fed a tube into the Engineers mouth and then just clung to him (in this case, it just lay on him). David contacts Shaw, and tells her that he can probably fly another Engineer vessel, which conveniently is lying around. They fly off with Shaw intending to find out why the Engineers decided to wipe out humanity. In the end, the Engineer is seen to be in pain, and something emerges from his stomach. It's an Alien in an early state (no tail, no double mouth). End film and end rant. Although I might seem negative, I enjoyed the film and the actors' performances, but was angered by the dreadful writing. It's a good film with some bad parts, not the other way around. | ||
kwizach
3658 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. | ||
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
On June 04 2012 05:15 kwizach wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. I re-read my posts in this thread, and no.. I'm guilty of no such thing. I'm not doing anything like the inverse of calling the audience that like the movie lobotomized, I'm not doing the inverse of attributing the favorable reception to the "dumb masses." I'm not being purely positive about the movie, like how these people are being purely negative. I'm not placing my opinion above that of others because I've "watched thousands of movies and read hundreds of books" So whatever... | ||
teapot
United Kingdom266 Posts
On June 04 2012 05:34 Quotidian wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 05:15 kwizach wrote: On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. I re-read my posts in this thread, and no.. I'm guilty of no such thing. I'm not doing anything like the inverse of calling the audience that like the movie lobotomized, I'm not doing the inverse of attributing the favorable reception to the "dumb masses." I'm not being purely positive about the movie, like how these people are being purely negative. I'm not placing my opinion above that of others because I've "watched thousands of movies and read hundreds of books" So whatever... Please say what is so favourable about this film that, you are able to say you enjoyed it, depsite all its glaring flaws. Would be really interested to hear what they are. | ||
myBattleship
Korea (South)41 Posts
![]() If I would have to name a few things that weren't so good about the movie: some characters were a bit too useless or cliche, one of them was even annoying as hell. I'm talking about the guy who started moaning about the whole expedition right after he woke up lol, come on. A bit too much tech porn in the first half of the movie, no substance. And just really questionable decision by the characters in the movie, decisions that make absolutely no sense to me, and I just can't see their rationale for it. Some good things: it looks amazing obviously, has plenty references to the old movies. the robot is again one of the best characters in the movie. There is plenty of blood and violence but it's not up in your face. I mentioned tech porn, but the good thing about it is they don't explain too much, it just works and it's easily readable. | ||
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
On June 04 2012 05:37 teapot wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 05:34 Quotidian wrote: On June 04 2012 05:15 kwizach wrote: On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. I re-read my posts in this thread, and no.. I'm guilty of no such thing. I'm not doing anything like the inverse of calling the audience that like the movie lobotomized, I'm not doing the inverse of attributing the favorable reception to the "dumb masses." I'm not being purely positive about the movie, like how these people are being purely negative. I'm not placing my opinion above that of others because I've "watched thousands of movies and read hundreds of books" So whatever... Please say what is so favourable about this film that, you are able to say you enjoyed it, depsite all its glaring flaws. Would be really interested to hear what they are. beyond the proficiency of the 3d and visuals and production design, which I think is easily stronger than for instance Avatar, it would be things like.. first and most importantly, as a vehicle for getting transported into a pulpy, comicbooky alternate dimension for 2 hours, it was extremely effective - as in: I was entertained. when compared to other summer blockbusters of similar budgets (Transformers, Avengers, Avatar, Harry Potter, MiB3 etc) it has a cool premise and great mythology. The writing and characters isn't any worse than any of these movies, and the plot holes and deus ex machina aren't any more egregious. And I like that its Lovecraftian references are so clearly on the surface (as was also the case with Alien) - so much so that it basically killed Guillermo del Toro's At The Mountains of Madness.. well, I don't like that it killed that project, but anyway... It had some cool horror/action set pieces. + Show Spoiler [rambling...] + I thought the abortion scene was intense and novel as a set piece. I liked the giant facehugger and the possible implications that Rapace's character might've birthed the predecessor to the facehuggers in Alien. Or maybe something like that gets created every time someone gets impregnated by an infected human/ancient human (or are they all male?) Although the pacing is uneven and the characters are generally uninteresting, I like that a large part of the story is basically an archaeological dig. From my perspective, the flat, shitty characters are just there to allow you as a viewer to move around in this awesome space. It's fun to look at the architecture of this ancient civilization and imagine what their society and belief system would be like. They are clearly religious, and from the murals/reliefs seem to be worshiping something that looks a lot like the xenomorph they also (later?) create. Maybe their culture also worships the idea of a creator, so we have an infinite loop of creators creating creators. And this somewhat mirrors some of the themes of the Alien series as a whole, which is evolution and metamorphosis. In the case of humans - maybe the purpose of our creation was to create the xenomorph? Maybe the planet in Prometheus wasn't a facility for making weapons, but rather an attempted final stage in bringing an ancient race of gods back to life? I'm generally very fascinated by elliptical narrative structures.. I think the christian faith of the main character (despite being without faith and being anti-religion myself, and it being handled too bluntly in the movie) is interesting/important because it ties into the idea of a maker - which also connects to David (an Abrahamic reference as well) The aliens who made the ruins in the movie are also clearly religious/ritualistic themselves, and very occupied with culture, given all the repetitious sculptural reliefs and symbols. So again, we have an elliptical structure. Who created the creators? I think that without David a lot of the conceptual basis of the movie would have fallen apart - and although nothing new, his weirdly antagonistic relationship to his makers is paramount in a thematic sense. Kermode linking David to Deckard was also very interesting to me, although I wasn't aware of it until after I saw the movie Although there were some weird logical leaps to get to the cockpit scene, I think it had enough payoff to be worth the mental acrobatics required. But then, I don't find the idea of a multibillionare obsessed with death travelling all this way for an attempt at immortality that "out there" I like that the movie made me think about all this stuff... of course I'm also disappointed, because with better screenwriters and more faith in its audience, the movie could've been the best thing in its genre for years and years, instead of "just" a 7.5. But I'll probably see it again next week.. and actually, when I think about it, it's still the best hardcore sci fi movie in a very long time.. I mean, what's really it's competition? Avatar? Are we forgetting how dumb some of the writing/characters/plot points was in that movie? | ||
kwizach
3658 Posts
On June 04 2012 05:34 Quotidian wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 05:15 kwizach wrote: On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. I re-read my posts in this thread, and no.. I'm guilty of no such thing. Yes, you are. You're telling people who didn't like it and who have provided solid arguments for their criticism that they're wrong and that the movie's pretty good, a "7.5". | ||
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
| ||
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
On June 04 2012 07:08 kwizach wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 05:34 Quotidian wrote: On June 04 2012 05:15 kwizach wrote: On June 04 2012 02:38 Quotidian wrote: You're free to think whatever you want about the movie, but what irks me is how you or "teapot" or whoever else seem to think your critical faculties are more sharply honed than that of the people who like the movie You're guilty of the exact same thing in reverse. I re-read my posts in this thread, and no.. I'm guilty of no such thing. Yes, you are. You're telling people who didn't like it and who have provided solid arguments for their criticism that they're wrong and that the movie's pretty good, a "7.5". Bullshit.. I haven't told anyone they're "wrong." I'm not even arguing against most of their criticisms. I said everyone has a right to their opinion and I even openly agree with a lot of the criticisms. I think the way the critique is being presented is narrowminded and what they're attacking the movie for is "low hanging fruit" as far as critique goes. But not once have I berated anyone for having an opinion in the same way that teapot has with his lobotomy comment, or whoever was throwing the whole "opinion of the dumb masses" thing around. I mean, some of the stuff they're attacking it for doesn't even make much sense to me, expectations-wise. No Alien movie has ever had complex characters. Did William Hurt get to flex a lot of his acting muscle before getting offed by a chest burster? Are you telling me one-note Paxton with his "game over, man!" is complex? Not even Ripley has ever been especially complex.. Only Alien 3 came close to depth and complexity in some of its characters. So yes, I agree Prometheus has badly written characters - that's par for the course and there's no reason to watch an Alien movie if what you want to see is complex characters. It's always been about the monsters, the mythology and the horror and action. Maybe this movie or the Alien series isn't these people's cup of tea, but that doesn't mean it is without merit - which is the impression you get from some of the posts in this thread. Or just because it doesn't have the understated artfulness of Alien, doesn't mean it doesn't have other qualities. the 7.5 is referencing Mark Kermode's review, that I have posted a few times in this thread but get the feeling no one has watched... I'm not saying it is universally and undeniably a "7.5" That's the score Kermode gave it that I agree with - I haven't even seen any of the haters in this thread attempt to give it a score. | ||
Boundz(DarKo)
5311 Posts
On June 04 2012 02:33 Reptilia wrote: Show nested quote + On June 04 2012 02:26 Boundz(DarKo) wrote: Going to watch in a couple of hours. Saving this post for an update i don't understand Are posts in a thread limited? or is page 25 specially important? Lol I wasn't in fact aiming for a page in particular. I smiled a little when I saw that it turned up on top of a new page, which made my post seem that more serious. I just didn't think my contribution to this thread was worthy of more than one post. But since it all changed... whatever. The movie was really good, especially with it's looks and filming but also with the music. A good line of actors whom all died in most rewarding scenarios. It left a lot of things open and yet gave you many things to think through. I understand the beginning as well as the ending of the movie, but it doesn't explain what - in essence - the movie is trying to answer. So there will most likely be sequels... or if Ridley Scott wanted to, this could be his ending to the Alien saga. But something makes me think otherwise. Noomi is simply too baller for that. Cheers 8/10 | ||
-Switch-
Canada506 Posts
| ||
MooseyFate
United States237 Posts
Can't. Fucking. Wait. | ||
| ||
![]() StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Mini Dota 2![]() ZerO ![]() Snow ![]() hero ![]() Barracks ![]() Sea.KH ![]() ToSsGirL ![]() Rock ![]() Aegong ![]() SilentControl ![]() [ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games hiko979 DeMusliM622 Fuzer ![]() Hui .308 crisheroes307 Beastyqt249 QueenE200 Liquid`VortiX195 ArmadaUGS86 JuggernautJason59 KnowMe30 ZerO(Twitch)28 Trikslyr8 Organizations StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • StrangeGG StarCraft: Brood War![]() • LUISG ![]() • Adnapsc2 ![]() • tFFMrPink ![]() ![]() • LaughNgamezSOOP • sooper7s • AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv ![]() • Kozan • IndyKCrew ![]() • Laughngamez YouTube • Migwel ![]() League of Legends Other Games |
SOOP
SKillous vs Spirit
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs TriGGeR
Cure vs SHIN
The PondCast
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
Clem vs Bunny
Solar vs Zoun
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Rogue
ByuN vs SKillous
SC Evo Complete
[ Show More ] [BSL 2025] Weekly
Replay Cast
SOOP Global
ByuN vs Zoun
Rogue vs Bunny
PiG Sty Festival
MaxPax vs Classic
Dark vs Maru
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|