georgec said:
Ugh when I read interviews of Lindelof I cringe. His "vague is good" argument is a laughably transparent attempt to divert criticism from his extremely flawed, amateur writing.
I'm not sure who got it from who but this philosophy drives me crazy. A year or two ago Wired magazine let J.J. Abrams edit an issue and one of the things he kept harping on is that mystery is the key. It's the mystery that is important and it doesn't matter if there is an answer. Just...ARRGH.
I feel like my reaction to Prometheus has been the inverse of yours, georgec - I was immensely disappointed walking out of the theater, but the more I think about the movie the more I like it.
I'm also being perhaps too optimistic that the extended cut will fix the issues I have with the theatrical version.
ChainsawAsh said:
If you're referring to Charlize Theron's character's "half a billion miles" comment, well, she's a corporate suit who doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about. She probably just pulled a number out of her ass that sounded big to her.
As the prospective heir to an interstellar concern having her not know the difference between orbiting another star and being just beyond Jupiter does undermine her and by extension the film.
Especially as nobody attempts even a failed effort to correct her.
Just saw it. Liked it while I was watching it.
Has me feeling a bit empty a couple hours later.
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
georgec said:
Ugh when I read interviews of Lindelof I cringe. His "vague is good" argument is a laughably transparent attempt to divert criticism from his extremely flawed, amateur writing. ...................
It feels like TPM all over again, but the evolution of my feelings on the movie is more accelerated (days vs. months or even years).
Same here.
This "raising questions is what good sci-fi does" talking point needs to get shot down. It's a half-truth used to cover plotholes. Good sci-fi can raise questions, but these are questions like "Who am I? Why am I here?" "Does mankind have a future?" "Can a machine be alive?" "What is reality?"
The questions raised by Prometheus are nothing of the sort. "What was that black goo?" is not a deep question. It's just shitty storytelling.
evan1975 said:
Good sci-fi can raise questions, but these are questions like "Who am I? Why am I here?" "Does mankind have a future?" "Can a machine be alive?" "What is reality?"
The questions raised by Prometheus are nothing of the sort. "What was that black goo?" is not a deep question. It's just shitty storytelling.
This. I completely agree with this.
Has 'The Chase' episode of ST:TNG been mentioned:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase_%28Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation%29
The common alien ancestry plot idea.
When the alien race first explored the Alpha Quadrant there had been no humanoid-based life other than themselves, and so they seeded various planets with their DNA to create a legacy of their existence after they had gone.
c'mon guys. the Movie is clearly a reimagining of Willy Wonka and the chocolate factory..
Maybe modern man just isn't what they'd planned when that guy dissolved himself..
- that could explain why the last survivor decided to be a dick and [spoiler] then all
They obviously weren't very good planners - the whole crew on lv223 [or whatever] was almost wiped out and one of them was decapitated by one of their own safety doors.
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
xhonzi said:
EyeShotFirst said:
I will never say that Ridley Scott can do no wrong, but I will definitely give this a chance.
If he screws it up, he'll just the latest in a long line of formerly golden movie directors gone to carp.
You know whom I mean.
IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!
"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005
"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM
"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.
Are people calling this movie "LOST in Space" yet? Because that should totally be a thing.
Another why: Why does a little English girl grow up to be a Swedish Woman?
xhonzi said:
Oh, and I want that 3D edition of Lawrence of Arabia.
THIS!
It helps if you forget it's links to Alien and imagine it as Mission To Mars The Remake With Snakes And Squid.
Better shot with some stunning visuals, better performances, still silly and messed up but at least a step in the right direction.
Seems like maybe the squid started out a bit closer to the facehugger in design -
Mutant Fifield looked less like a zombie conehead too :
Is it still weird for me to think that this movie was originally more closely tied to Alien when I feel like all of the Alien ties seem forced in the final version? How does that even happen?
Star Wars Revisited Wordpress
Star Wars Visual Comparisons WordPress
As I've posted before it seems as if it started out as a pretty solid Alien prequel script (face huggers, eggs, chestbursters etc) and then the suits wobbled.
Possibly out of fear of other prequels of note not fairing well or possibly because if the toys were the same they wouldn't sell enough toys (Alien junk sells, even I got plastic crap from both of the AVP films and I loathed the second one).
Ergo the announcement of this not being in anyway a prequel just a story set in the same universe.
Then they twitched again and worried that if they had no links with Alien the pre-existing fanbase wouldn't plug in to their dream/toy machine and bolted back on Alien bits in a haphazard way.
I just hope they bring out a really good Space Jockey and gun thing (the boneship would be cool too) so I can pretend it's from Alien and not from Prometheus.
Just look at Ridley's own Robin Hood, the script was thought of a masterpiece (the good King John holding back the vile terrorist Robin) then the suits twitched and it became a vehicle for Russell Crowe's global accent.
I also think it was constructed with PG13 in mind but they didn't count on the classification board getting the jitters over the medpod scene.
Hardly any of the violence is bloody (even David doesn't squirt much of the white stuff).
Bingowings said:
As I've posted before it seems as if it started out as a pretty solid Alien prequel script (face huggers, eggs, chestbursters etc) and then the suits wobbled.
Does anyone have that script? That sounds like the movie I would have rather seen. Apparently that was before they brought in that Lost hack.
Just look at Ridley's own Robin Hood, the script was thought of a masterpiece (the good King John holding back the vile terrorist Robin) then the suits twitched and it became a vehicle for Russell Crowe's global accent.
SERIOUSLY!? That would have rocked!! I recently discovered I am a descendant of King John and it's been something of an embarrassment to me. This would have changed all that.
I also think it was constructed with PG13 in mind but they didn't count on the classification board getting the jitters over the medpod scene.
I totally agree. They even "bleeped" the geologist's F-bomb.
Firstly, Bingowings, awesome blog post.
I saw Prometheus in 3D at the IMAX a couple of days ago and have been digesting it ever since. My initial reactions, both during the viewing and immediately after, were ones of disappointment and irritation, not just at the muddled story but also at the sloppy editing/script/narrative (if it was a case of me simply not liking the movie that's one thing but bad editing, characterisation, dialogue etc are inexcusable from a filmmaker of Scott's calibre).
Anyways... After two days of pondering and reading countless reviews, I still feel the same, and it seems the rest of the web agrees with me, but I've warmed to the film slightly (inexplicable really as the deeper I delve the more bad points I uncover) and hope there's a decent director's cut in the future.
I wonder if I'll ever be able to watch Alien again without thinking of those damn blue guys in the space jockey suit...
As a side note, the visuals were impressive, especially on the massive IMAX screen. It was the first time 3D has ever not been a hindrance to my viewing pleasure.
War does not make one great.
FanFiltration said:
Now I understand why there was no tie-in novel.
Heh! :)
Here's a good speculative article I came across recently, that's worth a read through -
http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/what-is-going-on-in-prometheus-a-universe-of-questions-answers-and-theories/
...and here's another good 'un covering the artwork and how things could have turned out - http://i09.com/5917639/10-things-you-didn't-know-about-the-design-of-prometheus
Actually I rather like the idea that they look like us and yet fly a space croissant by playing a flute and massaging a hard boiled egg.
It makes them even more alien than being space elephants.
I think people were bound to be disappointed by whatever the Space Jockeys ended up being, just by the sheer fact that 33 years of speculating have passed. Much the same thing happened with the prequels, if you'll allow me to talk some heresy. I think you just have to deal with the fact the Scott never envisioned the Space Jockeys how you envisioned the Space Jockeys.
I myself was pleasantly surprised to learn that the elephant thing was merely a mask that was worn by one of our giant, white creators. Now I'm starting to sound sarcastic. But I'm really not.
I never imagined the Space Jockeys to be anything other than what they were shown to be in Alien. I'll bet, back in the day, that Scott didn't either.