PROMETHEUS REACTION, OPEN DISCUSSION WITH SPOILERS

[Mr. Spencer]

Ozwell E. Weyland

[GEORGE TREVOR]

Saw the film today.......some wonderful moments but as a complete film, it fails considerably. The utter lack of severe tension, some appalling dialogue along the lines of 'this is what's happening kids'.....the Captain's conclusion that it's a military installation comes out of nowhere, without any evidence or experience to suggest this.

There is no uniformity to the processes involved with the 'black goo' , as contact with it produces a range of different effects ~ so it disintegrates the ingesting being as a military resource, but in the hands of the Engineers it becomes a vehicle to create life.....it may also have mutated the worms into that being that breaks that guy's arm & then dives down his throat (??) but then we have the blood of that generated worm act like an acid, but turn a man into a super-human lunatic....but then it can infect a being and bond with his DNA whilst he stays disintegration free long enough to create a further life form when hours later he has sex......this is a fucking B-movie! The creature that then grows from this hybrid resembled the final form of William Birkin and looked like something out of a bad 1980s Amityville sequel.

I would love some answers from a mind sharper than mine....why was there a design of a xenomorph in the temple if the generations to create one had not yet existed (black-goo infected human + sex with another human > giant tentacle final form Birkin thing + Engineer = early form xenomorph) ? Were those aqua-snake things that broke the guys arm and ingested by him already there on the planet before the engineers arrived with their urns, or was that a latter creation ? and why did the escaping 2 females not just side-step the falling Engineer ship to the left or right ?!

[[STARS]TyranT]

Clearly the Xeno's had existed before, and we know they have because the ship on LV426 is ancient.

The ooze is a life creating or evolving tool, though if ingested it clearly breaks down the host, but the DNA also creates life in its own way. Though I suspect Holloway would of become much like Fifield.

[Rombie]

I think David spiked Holloway's drink becase he has been tasked by Weyland to learn all he can about what's going on and to find Weyland a cure from 'dying'. He uses Holloway as his test subject so to speak.

People I saw it with and I were talking about this after the film, David acts against all sorts of safety and quarantine issues - opening doors and access ways without any care, and the like. We figure the directive from Weyland was to do anything and everything possible to find information on how he could live forever or to return any specimens back with him.

We decided the directive in Alien is basically the same idea of what he was told.

investigate life form. Gather specimen. Priority One. Insure return of organism for analysis. All other considerations secondary. Crew expendable.

The last thing, again, probably most important. He treats the crew as expendable on the same basis that Ash was told.

[I_Am_Nemesis]

and why did the escaping 2 females not just side-step the falling Engineer ship to the left or right ?!

This! this really bugged me, i get that the long run from the ship was meant to be dramatic but this still bugged me. Have to say that i agree with the rest of what you said as well, although i still enjoyed the film as a whole, even if it did raise a 1000 questions while answering none.

[Smiley]

The viral videos show Yutani, and the Weyland website describes Yutani as a rival company.

They are also the main reason why they hired Guy Pierce, check out Weyland's TED talk.

Don't forget as well, the ship on LV426 has been there thousands of years, and is still sitting there while the events of Prometheus happen, the engineers have a mural showing an alien in the urn chamber too.

Viral videos aren't always going to measure up to the finished film. And regardless they should have still used an older actor for Weyland or at the very least plausible old man's makeup.

I had heard that other scenes of Guy Pearce younger were cut from the film, and if that's the case I hope there's a director's cut to add those in.

I think David spiked Holloway's drink becase he has been tasked by Weyland to learn all he can about what's going on and to find Weyland a cure from 'dying'. He uses Holloway as his test subject so to speak.

I thought he just did it for the lulz.

[Spera01]

I just saw this with a few friends last night. I gotta say, as a huge Alien fan, I was really looking forward to this movie. Finally being able to see the jockeys and stuff? Hell yeah!. Sadly though, I wish I could say I had the same entusiasm walking out of the theater. I ended up leaving both scratching my head.

I was actually pretty pissed honestly and still am a bit annoyed. This movie (while it was pretty) was horrendous. There are so many plot holes in this film its ridiculous. How did Milburn and Fifield get lost/stranded in the structure when they mapped out the whole thing? If they were lost couldn't they have just contacted Janek and asked him for directions (he could see the whole map of the place). Another thing, why was Charlize Theron's medbay suite thing meant for only men? Are they trying to hint at something there or is it just bad writing? Then theres the many other plot holes such as the jockey chasing shaw back to the lifeboat, charlize not getting on her own lifeboat to get off the ship instead of taking an escape pod, what the hell the jockeys were running away from in the hologram, and how after removing a alien fetus from her abdomen, Shaw is just walking around fine (hell she even outruns the ship falling while charlize, the girl who was doing pushups as soon as she awoke, gets crushed). Also how the hell do humans have the same DNA as the jockeys? If we had the same DNA, wouldn't we, you know, look the same? Last I checked, no one in the movie (besides the jockey himself) was a tall albino humanoid with black eyes and super human strength.

Don't get me wrong, I wanted to like this movie but I guess I was expecting something different. I understand Ridley kind of wanted to do his own thing with this but at the same time make it an Alien prequel but damn. Also, the whole process to make a (proto)xenomorph was just.... odd to me.

[MiLØ]

Saw it several hours ago and an overall impression - quite underwhelming.

I must admit, maybe my hopes were a bit too high for this, which resulted in being pretty disappointment by the movie, but how can you not have high hopes for an Alien-themed space horror directed by R. Scott himself? I was holding my breath and hoping it to be one of those rare hard science-fiction films, that come out only every 5 years or so. Nope, Prometheus is definitely not one of those. It's a good looking shell of a wasted potential and ideas.

Most of the crew don't seem like a group of professionals who deserve a place in such an expensive expedition as this one. And it's too many of them, so a lot of people barely get any screen time so it's like they are obviously are just some meat waiting to die. They should have made a smaller team with better explored personalities. But instead we've got quantity over quality here.

The action scene about geologist turning into an unstoppable crimson head is retarded and is very out of place. This is a movie that suppose to have a threat coming from unknown alien species, not zombies.
Weyland's old man makeup is ridiculously exaggerated.
Characters just do some really dumb things that defy common sense and basic safety procedures: taking helmets off in underground caves on another planet, opening a spaceship door to a zombie, trying to touch an obviously hostile monster cobra snake, etc.

It was strange to see how Shaw teamed up with David and was all nice to him at the very end. Even though she didn't know for sure that he was responsible for her beloved one's death, she was given a hint and if putting things together she should have been way more suspicious of him. Plus he just seemed like the kind who's been doing his own thing the whole time.

One scene that I though was actually tense and original is when Shaw attempts a surgery on herself to extract a fetus of an alien.
Other then that - a tease and a slap in a face to those who love, understand and appreciate the first two movies.

4/10

[Wrathborne]

Blame Damon Lindelof, good at coming up with ideas, terrible at conclusions.
Script probably needed a good 'doctor' to fix it up some before they started filming.

[Mr. Spencer]

I always blamed Lindelof. Hipster fool.

I don't blame Ridley, I blame the incompetents he worked with, e.g. Damon Lindelof.

[TheBatMan]

Viral videos aren't always going to measure up to the finished film. And regardless they should have still used an older actor for Weyland or at the very least plausible old man's makeup.

I had heard that other scenes of Guy Pearce younger were cut from the film, and if that's the case I hope there's a director's cut to add those in.



I thought he just did it for the lulz.

Normally I'd agree but I don't in this respect. I think the TED talk should have been included right after the opening credits. I think it's a great little scene. The full version of the talk is 6 mins long and Lindelof has said it will be included in the DVD.

They did have another scripted scene for Guy Pearce but they never filmed it. When David uses the headset to 'speak' to Weyland whilst he is asleep, originally David was to go into his mind. Weyland was on board an island in the sun surrounded by women in bikinis. David was to take a jet ski to this island and that is where young Weyland would have told him to try harder.

I kid you not. Sounds a bit silly to me but I suppose it could be trying to potray Weyland at the peak of his wealth and arrogance.

[Rick Hunter]

You can blame Lindelof for the awful script, but Ridely is to blame for everything else, including the lack of answers, and the fact that the editing is beyong awful.

In the trailers we saw some action scenes, hoping there would be more of them in the final film.

1) We already saw everything
2) They were actually longer in the trailers...

The cobra scene was longer, fifield attacking people was longer (and in earlier trailers fifield was a real monster, not a zombie. He had giant arms with very sharp nails...), even the final scene between Shaw and the engineer was longer.

In the trailers he pushes her down to the floor, then stands in front of her, then grab her by the throat, lifts her, and push her against the wall to strangle her.

In the final movie he just pushes her and less than 2 seconds later she releases the squid. It's been totally cut.

Oh, and originally... the engineer was badly burned following the crash of his ship:



One more thing, in the movie, Fifield kills a mercenary during the fight in the ship. Then a few minutes later... you find the same guy standing with Weyland. Great, how can that be possible?

Answer: Awful editing. Originally, Weyland was supposed to exit the ship at the same time Fifield attacked it:



Ridley changed things around but made the whole incoherent. This movie really, really needs a director's cut.

[TheBatMan]

I don't think we're gonna get one though. I just have a bad feeling as Scott has stated many times he is happy with his cut. Best we can hope for I think is 15 mins of deleted scenes on the dvd we can add in ourselves. Personally my own fan edit will include the Ted Talk at the beginning. It's one of my fave scenes and it's not even intended to be in the fucking movie!

[Mr. Spencer]

[Wrathborne]

You can blame Lindelof for the awful script, but Ridely is to blame for everything else, including the lack of answers, and the fact that the editing is beyong awful.

Ridley didn't write the script, nor is he a screenwriter. Check out his IMDB credits and you'll see the only thing hes listed as writing is a 1965 short film.

Hes not an editor either, while he does have more say on things, ultimatley its the studio who makes the choice.

Not sure how much you know about film or film production, but 9 times out of 10, the director has literally no say in what happens to the film after he finishes shooting.

Ridley Scott is just a director, a visual storyteller. However the stories hes chosen to tell int he past 12 years or so haven't really been very good stories.

Hannibal, Robin Hood, Body of Lies(watched about 20 min of it, was really falt), Gladiator(personal choice, film was overrated and other than performances was kind of meh) have all be mediocre or forgettable.

I was never convinced that as a director hes been as epic as people said, not going to take away anything from him because Alien and Blade Runner are two examples of him at his best, as well as great examples of film making. But really in the pas 12 or so years, Kingdom of Heaven has been the only film he made thats had really good impact.

Not all directors are perfect, some are prolific but inconsistent(Tim Burton), some are Iconic but blow their load on the first 3-4 films of their career(John Carpenter), some make just one good/interesting film and then spend the rest of their career making mediocre crap(Tobe Hooper) and some are legendary artists who make one film that changes everything(Orson Wells).

The directors who stand out more are the ones who can maintain consistency, have their own rules and can have like a decade or so in their careers where they make some of the most amazing films that stick with you. Steven Spielberg, Akira Kurosawa, Alfred Hitchcock, James Cameron, Stanley Kubrick, and Christopher Nolan are good examples of this type of director.

Then there are the directors who just got lucky, and had more imagination, than anything else...*cough* George Lucas *cough*

[MiLØ]

and in earlier trailers fifield was a real monster, not a zombie. He had giant arms with very sharp nails...

Could you link to that trailer? curious to see that version of him. Also found this.

[TheBatMan]

Ridley didn't write the script, nor is he a screenwriter. Check out his IMDB credits and you'll see the only thing hes listed as writing is a 1965 short film.

Hes not an editor either, while he does have more say on things, ultimatley its the studio who makes the choice.

Not sure how much you know about film or film production, but 9 times out of 10, the director has literally no say in what happens to the film after he finishes shooting.

Ridley Scott is just a director, a visual storyteller. However the stories hes chosen to tell int he past 12 years or so haven't really been very good stories.

Hannibal, Robin Hood, Body of Lies(watched about 20 min of it, was really falt), Gladiator(personal choice, film was overrated and other than performances was kind of meh) have all be mediocre or forgettable.

I was never convinced that as a director hes been as epic as people said, not going to take away anything from him because Alien and Blade Runner are two examples of him at his best, as well as great examples of film making. But really in the pas 12 or so years, Kingdom of Heaven has been the only film he made thats had really good impact.

Not all directors are perfect, some are prolific but inconsistent(Tim Burton), some are Iconic but blow their load on the first 3-4 films of their career(John Carpenter), some make just one good/interesting film and then spend the rest of their career making mediocre crap(Tobe Hooper) and some are legendary artists who make one film that changes everything(Orson Wells).

The directors who stand out more are the ones who can maintain consistency, have their own rules and can have like a decade or so in their careers where they make some of the most amazing films that stick with you. Steven Spielberg, Akira Kurosawa, Alfred Hitchcock, James Cameron, Stanley Kubrick, and Christopher Nolan are good examples of this type of director.

Then there are the directors who just got lucky, and had more imagination, than anything else...*cough* George Lucas *cough*

Normally that is true but Ridley had complete creative control on this film. He may not have wrote the script but it was based on what he wanted to see and it was his idea to keep all the ambiguity in the film. Scott is one of the rare directors in Hollywood, like Jim Cameron who can have control within the studio system because of their reputations.

[Smiley]

One thing I can say for sure is it's definitely a film to see more than once because once you grasp the nature of its content you can also look out on stuff you might otherwise have missed in your first showing. Dialogue or details that may answer some of your questions.

Given the relation Vickers has with Weyland, and the state of which he is in; I believe he's the reason why the surgical pod was only designed for a man. Because at first that caught me off guard. Why would Vickers have such a thing in her life boat. But perhaps the reason is that it's not intended for her and designed for someone she knows with more mandatory medical attention than her. And even as a last resort it still runs on foreign specimens which to me makes me wonder if they prepared for whatever it was that they might find. Vickers didn't want to believe there was something out there. But Weyland certainly did.

[Inferno04]

Wow. I mean wow. I thought htis was going ot be great. My dad liked it and that got me even more excited. Underwhelming is the /perfect/ word to describe this movie. ><

The only time I really cringed either was during the Spoiler:

show spoiler

"C-Section" Dear lord, ugh. I have this slight fear(maybe really a 'heavy dislike') of pregnency and the idea of something just growing off of you like a parasite. The whole scene had my mouth hanging open.

[Wrathborne]

Normally that is true but Ridley had complete creative control on this film.

Sadly, creative control means nothing if you don't know what makes a good story.