PROMETHEUS was (Alien 0?) NOW NO LONGER SPOILER FREE. — Page 12

Anchorhead said:

I'm no longer interested in this film. After seeing these extended trailers, for me it's too slick and too 2012 with regard to cinematography and pacing.

Trailers are edited separately and differently than films. Also, comparing Ridley Scott to Roland Emmerich is ridiculous.

As a prequel, it also has the same issue that bothered me with Phantom Menace.  There is a huge technology step backwards for events taking place several decades later.  That's a story killer for me.  We're seeing Minority Report computers which, far into the future, will become the CRTs of the Nostromo. No thanks.

Bingo covered this.

Plus, I'm just not getting a good vibe from seeing so much about the derelict ship.  For me, the Space Jockey will forever remain a mystery, just as he has been for the past 34 years.

This is how many pre/sequels work - Something that wasn't explored in the original is explored. The process of revealing that and whatever it leads to can be a great experience, independent of the wonder you may have felt previously. Plus, one of the two writers is Damon Lindelof, previously on LOST. He's very good at showing the partial answer to a mystery while raising ten new mysteries. If it's mystery you want, Lindelof's your man.

Bingowings said:

That's because it's made now and isn't meant to be a setup for a film from 1979.

It's a different story set in the same universe it isn't a route map to Alien.

As for Nostromo being a Model T.

It travels faster than light, it keeps the crew in cryonic suspension and it lands and takes off in one unit.

The two ships practically do the same thing to the same level of sophistication only one is a space truck and looks dingy and older and the other is a science vessel/corporate ambassadorial/store window ship and looks flashy and new.

It's surface details and surface details change extremely fast (I noticed this morning looking in the mirror).

I'm with this logic all the way. Perfect sense to me.

I wanna point out that from what I know about the film, people who are interested in this only as a set up to Alien are in it for the wrong reasons and will be disappointed. To make a Star Wars analogy in regards to this as a Alien prequel, this won't be "Ah, so that's how Anikin became Darth Vader" it's more like "Ah, so that's how that dragon skeleton got there". Which is possibly a much more interesting story.

...did that make sense?

I could be wrong. There's a lot of conflicting info out there.

Anchorhead said:

To clarify: When I said it looked too 2012, I meant in regard to current visual trends in motion pictures, not a reference to the film 2012.  Prometheus looks like it was made now, instead of a setup to a film from 1979.

Ooooh that makes way more sense. Okay, cool.

I would like to remind everyone that I'm not some sort of "all film creativity ended in 1985" naysayer.

I did need this reminder.

I've openly welcomed some sequels, prequels, and remakes.  Even to films that were iconic in my world.  I'm completely ok with films that are new and\or current versions of older films, or are connected to older films.

and am thus interested in some examples, if you feel like it.

ray_afraid said:

I wanna point out that from what I know about the film, people who are interested in this only as a set up to Alien are in it for the wrong reasons and will be disappointed. To make a Star Wars analogy in regards to this as a Alien prequel, this won't be "Ah, so that's how Anikin became Darth Vader" it's more like "Ah, so that's how that dragon skeleton got there". Which is possibly a much more interesting story.

...did that make sense?

I could be wrong. There's a lot of conflicting info out there.

I'm pretty sure you're spot on.

Alien and Prometheus are intended to take place in "The Future". I'm sure there are years assigned or whatever, but they are pretty unimportant other than of ordering events and placing them in The Future. Alien wasn't intended to portray an alternate future in which we never progressed beyond CRTs or regressed to CRTs or whatever; it's just that that's what was available (within budget, feasible, etc) to the filmmakers. If you gave the Alien team easy access to flatscreens or CGI-holograms back then, I bet they would have used those instead. Maybe they would have had them flicker or whatever, to demonstrate that the Nostromo is a hulking rustbucket, but they would have picked whatever they could that would indicate to viewers "This is clearly taking place in The Future".

The filmmakers of Prometheus have the same choice. Using CRTs, while consistent with the look of Alien, would have

1. Implied that these films take place in some sort of future/alternate-history in which we never progress beyond or regress to CRTs
2. Probably confused viewers. Not that they would have doubted it was the future, because spaceships, but it would have been weird.

The filmmakers either assume that the viewers can get over this discrepancy, being aware that Alien was made in the 70s, or are super-committed to not-being-George-Lucas (by which I mean making Special Editions), or both.

Anchorhead said:

Ocean's 11
True Grit
Casino Royale
Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull
Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
Star Trek (2009)
3:10 To Yuma
King Kong (2005)
Batman Begins
Arthur

 

timdiggerm said:

Alien wasn't intended to portray an alternate future in which we never progressed beyond CRTs or regressed to CRTs or whatever; it's just that that's what was available (within budget, feasible, etc) to the filmmakers.

As a counter-argument, I'd point out that we have 3mm thin OLED TVs commercially available today, but we're not seeing any on-board any current space-faring vessels.  I think there's a difference between what's technologically possible versus what's technologically and economically feasible and reliable.

If you gave the Alien team easy access to flatscreens or CGI-holograms back then, I bet they would have used those instead. Maybe they would have had them flicker or whatever, to demonstrate that the Nostromo is a hulking rustbucket, but they would have picked whatever they could that would indicate to viewers "This is clearly taking place in The Future".

The difference between CRT monitors and CGI-produced floating holograms is that CRT monitors are real technology, and therefore create a feeling of realism in the film--the Nostromo feels like a real vessel because everything on-board is real.  The Prometheus, on the other hand, with is interactive holographic displays, only serves to remind me that I'm being asked to buy into yet another element of fantasy. 

All this aside, what I really liked about the look of the Nostromo in Alien was that it contributed to the atmosphere and narrative.  Everything just looked so cold -- the lighting, the computer systems... everything served to remind the viewer how uncaring and alone the crew members were.  I think Mother in particular serves to illustrate this point.  Here you have a machine with a name that should reflect a source of comfort, and yet, ironically, with its perfunctory responses and mechanical sounds, it really drove home the feeling of utter isolation and abandonment.  The look and feel of everything on-board the Nostromo just screamed "inhospitable," which in turn directly affected the entire mood of the film.  This is an element that will sadly be lost if the Prometheus looks too much like a luxury liner.

Anchorhead said:

No big revelation. I just liked it and thought it was much better than the two previous versions.

corellian77 said:

This is an element that will sadly be lost if the Prometheus looks too much like a luxury liner.

That's assuming the action takes place solely on the Prometheus the way the action in Alien took place on the Nostromo. And that isn't the case.

timdiggerm said:

Anchorhead said:

I'm no longer interested in this film. After seeing these extended trailers, for me it's too slick and too 2012 with regard to cinematography and pacing.

Trailers are edited separately and differently than films. Also, comparing Ridley Scott to Roland Emmerich is ridiculous.

That's some great unintentional comedy right there.

Regarding this:

it's too slick and too 2012 with regard to cinematography...

That will happen when you shoot in digital, it was never going to look like Alien.

I haven't seen a trailer for this since I last posted as I'm now actively avoiding them, apparently too much plot is being revealed, but I'm enjoying the discussion here.

Anchorhead's concerns are valid and any rationalizing of why tech 30 years before the Nostromo looks more advanced is useless for me.

It's inconsistent.

But as long as the movie is good I couldn't care less if they have flatscreens and holographic displays.

If Scott went 'retro' with this is it would be cool but it alone wouldn't make a bad movie good and vice versa.

I wouldn't worry too much about the difference in tech, guys.

It's due to 30 years in advanced filmmaking technologies. In this day and age the envelope must be pushed to attract big audiences

The difference in technology within the films' universe(s) can be attributed to the differences between the vessels' purposes. The Nostromo was an old, battered towing ship. It didn't need a lot of advanced tech. The spacecraft in Prometheus is a top of the line scientific research vessel equipped with all the bells and whistles. It really does make enough sense so as to not be a distraction, at least to me.

I hadn't been following this film, and I haven't seen any of the Alien films.  Hell, when I saw the trailer last night, I had no idea it was connected to the Alien films other than the fact I noticed Ridley Scott's name attached.  So I have absolutely no attachments or preconceived notions about this project.  But the trailer just killed whatever interest I might have had in it.  Besides the fact that, just like every other trailer I saw preceding The Avengers, it was too obnoxiously loud and too obnoxiously explody, there is this long stretch of the last 30 seconds or so of the trailer where the soundtrack is replaced by this pulsing screaming sound that. does. not. stop.  I swear I wanted my ears to fall off and shrivel up just so I wouldn't have to hear it anymore.  Forget waterboarding.  This is torture.  I never want to be subjected to that sound ever again, so I have absolutely no intention of ever seeing this movie.

The alarm sound is from the original trailer for the original movie, its supposed to make you feel uneasy.