|
The article some of you pointed out was really a good read.
I am not sure if everything he said holds ; I will probably need to rewatch.
That said, if an article is required to understand properly the movie, I feel this is becoming like 'contemporary art' where you need an interpret to actually understand what's the meaning of the object in front of you
|
Did Ridley Scott pull a George Lucas
|
On June 11 2012 08:47 Rakanishu2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 06:07 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 11 2012 03:57 Rakanishu2 wrote:On June 11 2012 03:06 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 10 2012 19:45 Hairy wrote:I wish people would stop posting that link to someone explaining what he thinks the film was about like it somehow makes everything ok: - A film should be able to properly communicate what's going on to the audience. If it cannot manage this, it has failed. If you need someone to explain why everything in the film was so clever, it is not clever. It's the equivalent of telling a joke to an audience, NOBODY LAUGHING, and then explaining (in length) to the audience why they should have found it funny.
- The person who wrote that 'explanation' is just some random guy telling you what HE thinks happened, and what HE thinks the reasoning behind it was. He explains why the engineer in the opening scene drank the solution that killed him; the symbolic and special meaning behind this; how this sentiment/theme is echoed throughout the movie; and how this was all very, very clever. But it's just his interpretation of what he saw - it doesn't make it correct, as there's virtually no actual information to go on. It's actually a bit tenuous to say it's speculation - it's almost pure guesswork.
If I were to think the alien man was just a bit of an idiot and drank something he shouldn't, you have no way to prove me wrong because the film simply doesn't provide enough information to do so. And, honestly, if the alien man did just drink the solution because he was a bit of an idiot it actually would be incredibly consistent with with the rest of the film given the behaviour of many characters in the story.
Even if there ARE a lot of interesting sub-plots etc etc going on, there are so many nonsensical things that happen, and the characters in the film continuously do such stupid and idiotic things (sometimes completely contrary to previous character development), that it is hard for many people to take the film seriously. This is due to 'suspension of disbelief' being broken - we are all gamers here, so chances are that you will have heard this term thrown around in game reviews. Essentially, when being told a story we are all happy to accept the story 'universe', providing that the 'universe' remains consistent with itself, and that everything within it makes sense and can be explained logically. However, if anything jarrs uncomfortably out of place it will drastically (sometimes irreparably) destroy the believability of that story, and your enjoyment is lost. When watching Lord of the Rings we accept that Gandalf can cast magic spells, that there are tiny people called hobbits, and that there are monsters out there in the world such as trolls and orcs and goblins. However, if Frodo decided he was bored of all this walking, pulled out a jetpack and flew himself to Mordor, this would break the suspension of disbelief entirely because it simply doesn't make sense. For me, and many other people watching the film, some of what happens in Prometheus is as bad as Frodo's jetpack. I think the more proper comparison would be this: If most movies made logical sense, there would be no plot. For instance, I always like to use the Haunted House story: If two people walked up to a really spooky haunted house that obviously looked a little sketchy, they normally would not bother to go in. But this is a scary movie and requires a plot. It wouldn't be interesting if they just walked away; in fact our movie would just go strait to credits. Illogical events make things interesting. Use your imagination! There is an explanation you can come up with! You make me angry with the mental gymnastics you're having to execute to disagree. You can always put characters into a predicament without hurting suspension of disbelief. Always. Read, Always. "If most movies made logical sense, there would be no plot". Wow. + Show Spoiler +That's all the time I have to spend marveling at how you interpret script writing, back to Prometheus:
Look for subtlety all you want, great. Subtlety is awesome, artistic, leaves room for writers to express broader ideas. However, if your audience has to build up a large and complex world around your subtle hints alone, and fill in large parts of the plot of your story using this audience created vision (which will differ vastly from person-to-person), you've failed as a writer.
This was Fantasy-Fiction, when most people came to the theater looking for Science-Fiction. In Sci-fi things shouldn't be mystic and magical. I shouldn't have to read an article that tells me the engineers gave us Jesus and we killed him, to understand the plot.
The character development is also horrifyingly bad. Who are these 3 idiots going to commit suicide to stop the ship? Why do I care about them? Additionally, it's ok if the audience creates it's own vision on the movie. It's like a book; makes you think. You don't think writers of novels who leave parts of plot for the reader to formulate in their own minds are failures, too? Books like those tend to leave a lasting impression beyond the reading experience. No, I haven't read a book that required me to read an article to explain all the plot holes. Please, share with me some of the books you have been reading. Yes, movies and books should make you think. But they shouldn't make me think "This is stupid."
lol, exactly.
I'm all for a movie that gets richer when you walk away and think of it. That box contains some of the greatest movies ever made. The thing about those movies is that you also think they're excellent movies from the moment you walk out of the cinema, because the story and the resolution satisfied you right at that moment, and then appears even stronger later on.
Prometheus doesn't do that. Prometheus relies completely on each viewer conducting a great battle between fridge-logic and fridge-brilliance (or sequels, or reading some dude's blog) before it starts to hang together at all. That's not good storytelling, no matter how justified it might later appear.
|
movie had so much potential, but it seemed insanely rushed. turned out bad.
|
So is this a prequel to Alien or not? If it is, then I am going to watch it. If not, then I have to think about it.
|
its a prequel to alien in the sense that it's the events that happened before alien and (kinda) explains where the alien came from. It however isn't really a sequel in the sense of carrying the same storyline.
I think the best way you could say it, is that the sequel to Prometheus wouldn't be Alien
|
|
On June 11 2012 12:35 2yph0n wrote: So is this a prequel to Alien or not? If it is, then I am going to watch it. If not, then I have to think about it.
As stated several hundred times, it's a prequel to Alien. And theres more movies to come (all being prequel to Alien). Hopefully the last leading up Alien itself where everything goes full circle.
|
Some of his points are pretty good, some not so much. One thing that makes me giggle is Space Jesus. Silly Romans killed Space Jesus --> We must wipe out dem humans! Doesn't sound like a thing superior beings would do... I guess it's possible they're petty and get angry easily.
|
Well damn. You guys are just slamming the entire movie lol. I can understand some of your points, but when more than half the questions are about what the opening scene depicted, I can't help but call many of the judgements in this thread "credible". I left the theater feeling like I got more out of the movie than what I paid for it ($9.50) and that's all that matters imo. Even if I did think everything else was atrocious, I wouldn't care because watching Fassbender's performance made the entire movie worth watching by itself.
|
On June 11 2012 09:06 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 08:47 Rakanishu2 wrote:On June 11 2012 06:07 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 11 2012 03:57 Rakanishu2 wrote:On June 11 2012 03:06 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 10 2012 19:45 Hairy wrote:I wish people would stop posting that link to someone explaining what he thinks the film was about like it somehow makes everything ok: - A film should be able to properly communicate what's going on to the audience. If it cannot manage this, it has failed. If you need someone to explain why everything in the film was so clever, it is not clever. It's the equivalent of telling a joke to an audience, NOBODY LAUGHING, and then explaining (in length) to the audience why they should have found it funny.
- The person who wrote that 'explanation' is just some random guy telling you what HE thinks happened, and what HE thinks the reasoning behind it was. He explains why the engineer in the opening scene drank the solution that killed him; the symbolic and special meaning behind this; how this sentiment/theme is echoed throughout the movie; and how this was all very, very clever. But it's just his interpretation of what he saw - it doesn't make it correct, as there's virtually no actual information to go on. It's actually a bit tenuous to say it's speculation - it's almost pure guesswork.
If I were to think the alien man was just a bit of an idiot and drank something he shouldn't, you have no way to prove me wrong because the film simply doesn't provide enough information to do so. And, honestly, if the alien man did just drink the solution because he was a bit of an idiot it actually would be incredibly consistent with with the rest of the film given the behaviour of many characters in the story.
Even if there ARE a lot of interesting sub-plots etc etc going on, there are so many nonsensical things that happen, and the characters in the film continuously do such stupid and idiotic things (sometimes completely contrary to previous character development), that it is hard for many people to take the film seriously. This is due to 'suspension of disbelief' being broken - we are all gamers here, so chances are that you will have heard this term thrown around in game reviews. Essentially, when being told a story we are all happy to accept the story 'universe', providing that the 'universe' remains consistent with itself, and that everything within it makes sense and can be explained logically. However, if anything jarrs uncomfortably out of place it will drastically (sometimes irreparably) destroy the believability of that story, and your enjoyment is lost. When watching Lord of the Rings we accept that Gandalf can cast magic spells, that there are tiny people called hobbits, and that there are monsters out there in the world such as trolls and orcs and goblins. However, if Frodo decided he was bored of all this walking, pulled out a jetpack and flew himself to Mordor, this would break the suspension of disbelief entirely because it simply doesn't make sense. For me, and many other people watching the film, some of what happens in Prometheus is as bad as Frodo's jetpack. I think the more proper comparison would be this: If most movies made logical sense, there would be no plot. For instance, I always like to use the Haunted House story: If two people walked up to a really spooky haunted house that obviously looked a little sketchy, they normally would not bother to go in. But this is a scary movie and requires a plot. It wouldn't be interesting if they just walked away; in fact our movie would just go strait to credits. Illogical events make things interesting. Use your imagination! There is an explanation you can come up with! You make me angry with the mental gymnastics you're having to execute to disagree. You can always put characters into a predicament without hurting suspension of disbelief. Always. Read, Always. "If most movies made logical sense, there would be no plot". Wow. + Show Spoiler +That's all the time I have to spend marveling at how you interpret script writing, back to Prometheus:
Look for subtlety all you want, great. Subtlety is awesome, artistic, leaves room for writers to express broader ideas. However, if your audience has to build up a large and complex world around your subtle hints alone, and fill in large parts of the plot of your story using this audience created vision (which will differ vastly from person-to-person), you've failed as a writer.
This was Fantasy-Fiction, when most people came to the theater looking for Science-Fiction. In Sci-fi things shouldn't be mystic and magical. I shouldn't have to read an article that tells me the engineers gave us Jesus and we killed him, to understand the plot.
The character development is also horrifyingly bad. Who are these 3 idiots going to commit suicide to stop the ship? Why do I care about them? Additionally, it's ok if the audience creates it's own vision on the movie. It's like a book; makes you think. You don't think writers of novels who leave parts of plot for the reader to formulate in their own minds are failures, too? Books like those tend to leave a lasting impression beyond the reading experience. No, I haven't read a book that required me to read an article to explain all the plot holes. Please, share with me some of the books you have been reading. Yes, movies and books should make you think. But they shouldn't make me think "This is stupid." lol, exactly. I'm all for a movie that gets richer when you walk away and think of it. That box contains some of the greatest movies ever made. The thing about those movies is that you also think they're excellent movies from the moment you walk out of the cinema, because the story and the resolution satisfied you right at that moment, and then appears even stronger later on. Prometheus doesn't do that. Prometheus relies completely on each viewer conducting a great battle between fridge-logic and fridge-brilliance (or sequels, or reading some dude's blog) before it starts to hang together at all. That's not good storytelling, no matter how justified it might later appear. not too sure about that. donnie darko required you to read that time travel book thingee for full understanding and rarely anything was explained in the movie. And yet it is one of the most interesting movie to watch and keep rewatching
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On June 11 2012 05:32 deepfield1 wrote:
Great film. Yes it had some plot holes and questional character actions, but that is pretty standard in film.
If you hated this movie, you aren't a fan of sci-fi.
HAHAHAHAAHAHAH
Thanks for the good laugh.
|
On June 11 2012 13:16 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 12:35 2yph0n wrote: So is this a prequel to Alien or not? If it is, then I am going to watch it. If not, then I have to think about it. As stated several hundred times, it's a prequel to Alien. And theres more movies to come (all being prequel to Alien). Hopefully the last leading up Alien itself where everything goes full circle. Actually as has been stated several times it is not a prequel. The following quote below is taken from imdb.com
Was originally conceived as a prequel to Ridley Scott's Alien, but Scott announced his decision to turn it into an original film with Noomi Rapace (who was already set to star) still in the cast as one of five main characters. Some time later it was confirmed that while the movie would take place in the same universe as Alien and greatly reference that movie, it would mostly be an original movie and not a direct prequel.
|
Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested.
|
On June 11 2012 17:47 Fourn wrote: Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested. Ok, so what were the Engineers running from? and why did they create us and then design biological weapons to wipe us out?
|
On June 11 2012 18:22 snarl wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 17:47 Fourn wrote: Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested. Ok, so what were the Engineers running from? and why did they create us and then design biological weapons to wipe us out?
They were running from xenomorphs or some other abomination created from the black goo. There was clearly some form of xenomorph as shown by the space jockeys with their chests bursted.
They created us for the same reason that humans create androids. Because they could. They didn't need a reason. We were there experiment/playthings and they were done watching over us so they were going to dispose of us. It is also my own personal belief that they might have feared we would acquire the technology to find them and possibly harm them. Try to recally some of the conversations between Shaw, David, and Halloway. It is explained/inferred through those.
They didn't create the black goo to kill us. The goo can be used to create life when mixed with the DNA of a the space jockeys. When mixed with a form of life that has already been created by the goo it turns into an abomination or kills it. For example, Halloway getting sick , Shaw's "baby", and the earth worms turning into the worm-like facehuggers.
They were going to use the black goo on the ships to wipe out life on earth (either by killing everyone or creating creatures to kill everyone), but something went wrong and all the Spacejockeys on the ship (except the one's sealed in cryo) were killed.
|
On June 11 2012 18:22 snarl wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 17:47 Fourn wrote: Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested. Ok, so what were the Engineers running from? and why did they create us and then design biological weapons to wipe us out?
One explanation has already been given in this thread -> http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html#cutid1
The one below is another.
Taken from http://www.prometheus-movie.com/community/forums/topic/7436
This was taken from a comment I saw on another site, and I did a little research and everything seems to check out! : To give some historical/mythological background that may shed some light, Ridley stated the SJ culture was based on Persian Myths. This would be Sumerian/Akkadian/Hindu. This is all taken from the Atra Hasis. Creators - "G"ods- Annunaki - Dragon Humanoids (Naga, Dragon Kings,) Helpers - "g"ods - Igigi - Engineers. (Android like living beings....BIOmechanical humanoid. Key features- Pale skin and large black eyes. Also known as watchers, Grigori, and Archons) (in many summerian texts they are actually referred to as "Pilots". Pretty much the Annunaki Air Force.) When the Annunaki began terraforming the earth, they had the Igigi do the work for them. After a few thousand years the Igigi revolted and went on strike. The Annunaki then decided to create humans to do the work for them. They sacrificed one of the rebel Igigi named Geshtu to use his blood and dna to make human beings, by mixing it with elements native to the earth. (In the movie, this can be explained by the the different oval spaceship at the beginning representing the spaceship of the Annunaki) (It can also be explained by the concept art that leaked from the official book this week) (According to wikipedia it also says this about the Igigi: "Though sometimes synonymous with the term "Annunaki," in one myth the Igigi were the younger gods who were servants of the Annunaki, until they rebelled and were replaced by the creation of humans." This is reflectled exactly in the concept art below!) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AcThF.jpg) Even though the humans were created and did the work, 1/3 of the Igigi still werent satisfied and sought revenge for Geshtu, so they rebelled again against the Annunaki Lords and began breeding/mixing with the human females creating Nephelim. This is what sparked the Prime Lord Enlil to flood the earth. Some humans were saved by Enki, the Lord responsible for the sacrifice of Geshtu and the creation of humans. Enlil and the rest of the annunaki decide to return home and let the humans develop on their own. Enki and his family stay behind. The Igigi are forced to leave earth as well. The remaining rebel Igigi are imprisoned on a planet on the way back to the homeworld and it is said as punishment and as a mark they are altered into a demonic appearance, no longer retaining the Angelic appearance. Enki and his crew are probably the ones leaving the maps for humans to find, along with the ones helping humans advance throughout time. The sacrfice engineer is Geshtu The lone engineer is most likely Marduk or a servant/worshipper of Marduk. The xeno is Mushussu, a creature Marduk fashioned and used as his pet. The "Engineers" we see are trying to destroy Earth are of the Igigi rebels who view earth as their own. They have always despised humans because the Annunaki saw us as more in their likeness than them. IT's possible that the Igigi have long since destroyed or taken over the annunaki and the homeworld, and Earth was like going to claim the prize or spoils. They mustve used to the Xeno's to win this war and through its perfection it has began to destroy and infect the Igigi who manufacture and transport it, creating more Mushussu. the xeno in Alien is most likely an older pilot igigi birthed Mushussu egg crossed with human or a future Annunaki birthed one which would explain the size difference in hosts. It is mentioned in several lesser stories that Marduk created the Mushussu out of using the essence of the Gods' (Annunaki) he killed as a symbol of his conquering and being able to control them... ie the mural. ![[image loading]](http://www.prometheus-movie.com/media/concept001.jpg)
|
On June 11 2012 18:30 Fourn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 18:22 snarl wrote:On June 11 2012 17:47 Fourn wrote: Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested. Ok, so what were the Engineers running from? and why did they create us and then design biological weapons to wipe us out? They were running from xenomorphs or some other abomination created from the black goo. There was clearly some form of xenomorph as shown by the space jockeys with their chests bursted. They created us for the same reason that humans create androids. Because they could. They didn't need a reason. We were there experiment/playthings and they were done watching over us so they were going to dispose of us. It is also my own personal belief that they might have feared we would acquire the technology to find them and possibly harm them. Try to recally some of the conversations between Shaw, David, and Halloway. It is explained/inferred through those. They didn't create the black goo to kill us. The goo can be used to create life when mixed with the DNA of a the space jockeys. When mixed with a form of life that has already been created by the goo it turns into an abomination or kills it. For example, Halloway getting sick , Shaw's "baby", and the earth worms turning into the worm-like facehuggers. They were going to use the black goo on the ships to wipe out life on earth (either by killing everyone or creating creatures to kill everyone), but something went wrong and all the Spacejockeys on the ship (except the one's sealed in cryo) were killed. So they created us because they could, told our ancestors where they could be found and to come look for them, then disappeared for millenia and decided to destroy us?
|
On June 11 2012 17:47 Fourn wrote: Wow
I guess I'm just really smart since I was able to understand what was going on during the movie.
Did you guys even get that the worm face hugger (the one that breaks the botanist's arm and turns him into a zombie) came from the earthworms you saw being mixed with the black goo? Because that was simple enough to understand.
You also don't need to read an article to understand what the engineer was doing at the beginning of the movie. It's left up to your interpretation since it isn't blatantly explained to those of you who lack thinking skills, but the obvious/correct answer is that he is creating life, not accidentally/stupidly drinking something he shouldn't be drinking as someone foolishly suggested. "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." -Bertrand Russell
My "foolish suggestion" was actually part of an argument that the film simply does not give you enough information to be able to come to any solid conclusions about why (or even WHAT) things happened; any explanation is essentially speculation and guesswork, and to push an explanation as the "correct" explanation would be arrogant. The "foolish suggestion" was intentionally foolish; the whole point was that it would be impossible to prove it was not a valid explanation.
Ironically, the statement you completely misunderstood (and then took out of context) came from part of an argument arguing against something you are guilty of yourself.
+ Show Spoiler [The misinterpreted quote] +On June 10 2012 19:45 Hairy wrote: The person who wrote [the post explaining what happened in the film] is just some random guy telling you what HE thinks happened, and what HE thinks the reasoning behind it was. He explains why the engineer in the opening scene drank the solution that killed him; the symbolic and special meaning behind this; how this sentiment/theme is echoed throughout the movie; and how this was all very, very clever. But it's just his interpretation of what he saw - it doesn't make it correct, as there's virtually no actual information to go on. It's actually a bit tenuous to say it's speculation - it's almost pure guesswork.
If I were to think the alien man was just a bit of an idiot and drank something he shouldn't, you have no way to prove me wrong because the film simply doesn't provide enough information to do so. The full post is here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=289534¤tpage=35#687
|
On June 11 2012 08:45 Poyo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2012 08:25 Manit0u wrote:On June 11 2012 04:08 Poyo wrote: Ridley should retire. I was hoping Prometheus would redeem him of his latest failures, but unfortunately that did not happen.
He lost his magic touch that's the only way I can explain this.
The best cast in the world couldn't save Prometheus from its disaster of a script and storyline.
I'm a massive fan of the Ridley's older work and Alien specifically, other than being visually stunning, this "half prequel" was a complete failure.
My 2 cents. Could you please explain "recent failure" to me? I mean, when you look at the American Gangster, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, Body of Lies, Kingdom of Heaven or even as far as G. I. Jane you can't really say they were bad movies (BHD remains one of my most favorite movies to date and I even enjoyed his Robin Hood). The problem is, you can't really make a cheesy sci-fi movie any more to really appeal to the hardcore fans who remember the classics and hold them dear (I've just re-watched Johnny Mnemonic and found it outstanding, even though the acting was atrocious and plot was pretty shallow). It's harder to accomplish than in the 80's or 90's for sure, but it can still be done. I'm still waiting for the movie industry to adapt and wish for at least one good interpretation of a good sci-fi book. LATEST failures refers to Body of lies and Robin hood, the latter being actually terrible. American Gangster was his last successful movie in my opinion, everything since went steadily down hill. I was really hoping its just a little stumble on the road, but Prometheus continues the downward trend. Hopefully he bounces back with his next project, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
I agree that RH was unimpressive, but Body of Lies was actually a pretty damn good movie.
|
|
|
|