I saw Prometheus the other day and I actually really enjoyed it. My thoughts are just a selection of stand alone sentences that I cant be bothered forming into a flowing structure so that is how Im going to present them, and when considering the movie Im talking about thats rather fitting I think. Also, in the interest of full disclosure I have never seen Alien. Dont know why, just never grabbed me as a must see...so there's that.I see its flaws and I'm clearly in the camp that I was enchanted by what I liked enough to overlook the flaws...or at least not have my viewing experience characterised by them. It is definitely a movie you can watch for its ambition or watch for its failure, and I consciously choose to watch the ambition.Its kind of like, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and none of the parts really stand up to individual scrutiny, but the whole is still impressive.Im just glad that a large scale sci-fi/genre movie has so much thought behind it.Its priorities certainly seem to be in its themes and symbolism than in its characters.If there is any validity to the Space Jesus theory, then is this new Scott franchise going to be the Space Bible. Prometheus = Genesis and the Old Testemant vengeful god, and its sequels will cover other elements of the bible? Prometheus IV: Revelations (featuring the four space jockeys of the apocolypse).I thought having the scientist protagonist (which is usually a position of skeptcism or atheism) also being the true believer was an interesting move, which also added to some confusion around character motivations and stance on the central thesis. This point engaged me the most of the film as I was continually trying to figure out where the characters stood on the idea of creation. Im a pretty hard core atheist so I found this combination of science and religion difficult to swallow but I wanted to consume it within the context of this film....if that makes sense. It was funny when we look at this in the context of god and the bible. Jesus says "The meek will inheret the earth", so when the most rich and powerful man in the world travels across the galaxy to meet god, he gets pimp slapped. BAM!Also, the line "we all want to see our parents dead" was delivered by David, not Theron, in which case I think it was more to put David's view into perspective contrary to the normal human view. Maybe then adding context to the engineers response to David talking to him. Im leaning more towards a set up by David. And on that point, David was needed by main lady (sorry forget her name) for communication and also to pilot the ship, so her taking him in the bag is very important. Also, do you think that is meant to be a suggestion of John The Baptist, he had his head cut off and his head was presented on its own. Did he betray someone too? im not too sure. In the end it suffers from franchisitis, where it assumes it will spawn sequels so it can afford to plant more seeds than it sows. I remember wishing once upon a time that more films would do this rather than have the stand alone first movie followed by part 2 and 3 being closely interconnected (Star Wars, Matrix, Back to the Future, etc), but now I wish that was more the norm again. Overall, thumbs up (if thats still a thing), and I really hope this moves forward to the next installment so we get the pay off.....or at least some of the pay off. Sorry for the ramble, This movie has just really struck a chord with me and I enjoying trying to process it.
Wow, after looking at this actually posted Im embarrassed with the length. More a post than a comment.Sorry.
I enjoyed reading your post. It's got some great points and speculation in it. In fact, I think I can let this be my only post on this movie, because you brought up some interesting points. I hadn't even thought about religious parallels or Jesus theories until this episode, just Greek mythology, but I enjoy how people are getting such varied reads of the same movie. I just saw the movie last night, but have already had a ton of fun exchanging ideas with other people about what certain things mean. I can't tell you the last time a movie spawned so much deep speculation from me. I really like it for that. I mean, it's not flawless or fantastic, but I like that it left air to breathe and I like that it didn't hammer home certain points (except the end, the tacked on thing, which I did not want or need), and that there's lots of room for theories. I think I've had more fun talking about the movie with my wife and friends than I did in the actual movie itself.
I saw both Snow White and Prometheus this weekend. I didn't care for Snow White at all, finding it overlong and devoid of enchantment. I was very surprised to hear Patrick describe it as beautiful to behold since to me it seemed designed to have an unpleasant "lived-in" aesthetic. The fantastic flora and fauna of the forest sequence often triggered a small amount of repulsion rather than wonder. I agree with almost all of the criticism of Prometheus and yet I liked the things that worked in the film so much that I don't know where I stand on the film as a whole. I thought the question that was asked but not answered was designed to retain some mystery and not to set up a followup film. Even when the characters continue in their exploration I thought it was more akin to the ending of the Black Hole than to the Empire Strikes Back.
I do think there were certain sets in Snow White that had a "lived in" aesthetic, but I liked that -- it gave the fantastical world a sense of place and history, and made them feel less like sets. And even when some of the scenery was deliberately ugly, as you say, I thought it was always photographed beautifully. Like I said, I'm very aware that I'm going to be pretty much by myself out on the ledge in support of the movie.I'm totally ok with having open-ended questions as far as Prometheus goes, but I just can't get past the feeling that they're the result of bad storytelling and not deliberate mystery.Thanks for listening/commenting!
Your whole "I like this movie so I'm going to fill in the gaps for it..."That, my friend, is why you're a "Phantom of the Paradise" fan.As I tell people I try to turn on to the film, I can tell you two more faults for every one you point out...but the whole is greater than it's parts.
YES. Certain movies just hit us somewhere we can't totally explain. Those are the best kinds of movies, because they're the ones we feel most personal and passionate about.
Explains how a movie where maybe 1/2 of it was missing for about 80 years and what was left was often shown out of sequence - Fritz Lang's "Metropolis" - has so many fans.
I haven't seen Prometheus yet, but the prospect of listening to the majority of this episode is a pretty good reason to get my butt to the theater.LOVED the Wes Anderson talk at the beginning. Our local art house is getting Moonrise Kingdom at the end of the month. I can't wait. I share JB's appreciation of Life Aquatic. It took a second viewing, but there's a lot of great stuff in that movie. Not my favorite Anderson flick, but far better than its reputation.
Saw Moonrise Kingdom this past weekend, really enjoyed it, for many of the reasons JB gave; especially enjoyed the kids in this one. Wanted to chime in on the Wes Anderson love and encourage everyone to see it.
In case someone didn't hear the news, Anderson's "The Royal Tenenbaums" is coming to Criterion Blu-ray August 14th. I know the wife of a certain podcast host is gonna be mighty happy. :-)I enjoyed "Prometheus" when I watched it (in subtle-but-underwhelming 3D) but, the more I think and analyze it, the less I like it and the more it falls apart as (a) typical Damon Lindelof hack writing meeting (b) a desire to reboot "Alien" without calling it that. Noomi Rapace and Michael Fassbender are both excellent; their skill and audience sympathy help carry the movie through its last 30 minutes (minus credits) when someone seems to have panicked and thrown the movie's carefully-established rhythm into an editing hack-a-thon to get "Prometheus'" running tume under two hours. I'll give Ridley Scott the benefit of the doubt and assume that, like "Kingdom of Heaven" and "Robin Hood," an extended cut of this movie will fix the pace issues and breathe more life into an army of supporting characters whose performances all fit the 'red shirt' moniker. Even Idris Elba and Charlize Theron (so good just last year in "Young Adult") seem to be lost as to why their characters are even in the movie at all, for heaven's sake.And yet, in a summer where only "The Avengers" has truly blown my socks off, I've got to take all the bad that "Prometheus" has with the truckload of good stuff in it. It's nice to have a hardcore sci-fi movie that, even as it piles on the "Alien" playbook scenes (which Ridley proceeds to play around with to twist audience expectations), has stuff in the brain like the meaning of life and men's desire to seek their creators. Production design and SFX work is the best money can buy and even the 3D, while not show-offy enough, underscores how the tech can just be used to magnify the scope of its photography. And the movie's BIG SCENE (you know the one, everyone's talking about it), while unable to top "Alien's" classic chest-bursting scene, is both (a) worth the price of admission and (b) a profound statement about how in the future reproductive rights might just be something as casual and personal as a do-it-yourself operation. Now that's a future I want to live in, right now. :-(
*SPOILERS*Even though those cave paintings might have been done before they got mad at us...or that there's two groups of Engineers or whatever....I still want someone to give me a rational explanation as to why the hell did they give mankind a map to THEIR WEAPONS FACTORY AND NOT THEIR HOME PLANET?Someone's tried to tel me it's because they wanted us to come so they could test the black goo on us...but then why not come and get some of us? Or take one of the prehistoric men back when they came to give them the map?If they did want to test the goo on us, why was the ship where Grumpy was in cryo already stocked to the gills with the goo before we even showed up?Was it a big middle finger? "Hey, come on up! We want to give you a tour of the plant where we're creating a horrible way for you to die before we unleash it on you!"?And then there's the beginning (whether it's Earth or not)....When intentionally killing yourself by drinking something that will break you down to your DNA so that your remains will mix with the water and create life, don't maybe take a swig and then immediately jump into the water.No...instead stand looking at yourself disintegrate and chance that as you die you'll fall the opposite way, land on solid ground and you did this all for no damn reason.And then there's the really nitpicky one....you've brought back the head of one of the Engineers. Nearly killed yourself running into a storm to do so even though you could have 1) waited for the storm to blow over 2) if you lost it there's still the rest of the body to use for testing or 3) send THE ANDROID YOU HAVE ON BOARD out to go back for it. Before even testing what it's made of or anything else about it, shove a probe into it and start pumping electricity into it! You have NO IDEA if it will even have the desired effect - and could cause many more dire ones - but what the hell!WTF?This thing was a beautiful but horrible mash-up of "2001", "Leviathan", "The X Files: Fight the Future" (the black worms in the eyes) and "Star Trek V: The Final Frontier" ("What does God need with a spaceship?").And now I am REALLY, REALLY glad I never watched "Lost".
*SPOILER CONTINUE*Thanks for bringing this up. It just occurred to me today, maybe as I was reading something else. But, yes, as JB pointed out, it's possible that the Engineers came and visited us/the cave paintings were made BEFORE we went and killed alien Jesus. This does not answer the question of why they are directing us to their military outpost, as explained by Capt. Stringer Exposition.
*AND THE SPOILERS GO ON*Add to that the fact that even Capt. Love The One You're With didn't ask out loud "Why direct us here?" means that the writer probably thought of that question but has no freaking answer for it. They're hoping that if they don't bring it up, we won't think about it.And was thinking about this alien Jesus theory last night...Well, since Jesus was never described as being very tall and albino - and the story we know - then that alien Jesus was born of a human. So we've got a Creator from another planet having physical relations with a human instead of an immaculate conception...That's from The Book of Mormon!!!!And what an amazing conceit that the only thing that was going on on Earth 2000 years ago that could have pissed them off just HAD to be Christianity related. Maybe it was something the Chinese were doing? The Celts?Meanwhile, someone has postulated that the first hologram they see of the guys running (in flying helmets?) is that actually the first few were running away from the one that ends up decapitated...because he was infected. However, that guy while lagging behind looks behind him like he's running from it too. And IF the problem there really was that the stuff got out and was killing them, why were they all running to lock themselves in a room full of vases full of the stuff in the first place?And why does Grumpy go to the trouble of chasing after Shaw when there are other ships on the planet? I could see that before if he thought she was one of the group that stranded him there...but wouldn't he have known he could just get on another ship?I still really want to believe that the film makers had reasons for all these things and this movie means something but...it just gets harder.
Man, Kathy, you're making some excellent points here. Of course, obscurity without explanation is a hallmark of Damon's "Lost." Why come up with coherent answers, when it's so much more fun to jerk the audience around with new mysteries?As I was leaving the theatre upon seeing Prometheus, I said to myself, "So this is basically Mission to Mars, except in this version the aliens are assholes?"Really, why give so much credit for an idea that has already appeared several other places - including an episode of TNG, for chrissakes?
Totally agree! Kathy is raising questions I haven't seen raised anywhere else.I was a little more comfortable with Lost playing this game, because it lends itself better to episodic TV. Of course, this was under the assumption that the questions would pay off, and for the most part they did not.That's why I was on board with the first half of the movie -- it was bringing up questions and plot elements that I assumed would be resolved by the end of the movie. NONE of it was.I'm totally fascinated by the response to this movie. I'm glad that so many people are enjoying it and finding so much to talk about, but it's like I saw a completely different movie (like you said, Steve, they're giving it credit for things for which I cannot). I want to be part of the discussion and everything, but can't get past the kinds of problems that Kathy is bringing up.
And I keep trying to come at the facts as we know them from other directions...but I still can't come up with anything that fits every thing that happens.For instance, maybe that facility isn't a weapons factory but just the place where they manufacture the goo that they use to create life on other planets and a batch went bad?Or maybe this was a prison or containment facility and there was an escape/breakout? In fact, that the guy drinking the goo on the planet wasn't a life creating ritual but really an execution...and the beings' DNA mixing with the water creating life was a huge mistake and they were coming back to Earth to eliminate the result?The idea of this possibly being a prison might even explain why Grumpy immediately goes Michael Meyers on everyone - unless David told him about them blowing up his friend's head in their lab.(I suspect David said to him, "You know it's not an 'Alien' movie without an android being ripped apart, so...." - and, yes, Call wasn't ripped apart in "Resurrection" but that was a "Firefly" prequel more than an "Alien" movie) But with both scenarios we're then back to that same damn question...WHY did they come visit prehistoric man and show them the location of this planet????
SPOILERSOne moment that drives me crazy...Okay, they get into the alien structure. Mohawk guy gets these Star Wars remotes that zoom throughout the structure, mapping it to the smallest detail. He then communicates with the ship to figure out where to go. We see on the ship that they have a 3D map of the place, and little locater icons for each crew member. Later on, Mohawk wants to split early, and takes Beavis with him.And they get lost. What? How in the name of blessed Christendom could they get lost? The movie just spent a considerable amount of time showing how they could not POSSIBLY get lost! They get so lost, that the remaining team leaves the structure and goes back to the ship without ever running into them! I suppose you could call this a nitpick, but few things irritate me more than a movie taking great pains to set something up, and then completely ignoring it.
Wonderful article over at Cracked.com - Science Fiction Movies That Could Never Happen Because of Present Technology. They come up a long lists of just the movies in which simple GPS tech makes the film pointless (the search for Sonny in "I, Robot" for instance).Mohawk guy and the guy who thinks alien snakes are puppies not only got lost in the structure they were completely forgotten by the rest of the group as no one wonders how all of the vehicles they brought are still outside if the two of them went back to the ship.And even though they left, wouldn't they have heard the radio chatter between the rest of the landing team and Prometheus?And if it was "safe" except for the cold for the two of them to be there, why did the others have to chance not making it in a bid to out run the storm and get back to the ship?My brain hurts!!!
An "Alien" movie marathon will cure my aches. :-) For that I'm thankful to "Prometheus": it's made me appreciate what a pile of cinematic gold the "Alien" movies on Blu-ray are.
YES to this.
Absolutely! If you haven't already, Patrick, PLEASE do a podcast on the Alien series (minus the AvP films).
Well...two out of four.(if you think I can find faults with "Prometheus" just get me started on "Alien 3")
Oh, I'm really going to step into it here...I quite like Alien 3 (referring here to the so-called "assembly cut"). And no, it's not because I'm a David Fincher fan - I actually dislike both Seven and Fight Club. Alien 3 has flaws-a-plenty, but ultimately I find it to be very moving.Gauntlet thrown!
Refer back to my post to Patrick about "Phantom of the Paradise".I'll just say...1) You can't tell the actors/red shirts apart, much less get to like them2) One egg, one face-hugger. One impregnation per face-hugger. That's the way it's always been until this movie. Suddenly, a face-hugger can implant, crawl away and then implant again?3) I don't believe for a micro-second that Ripley would put them into cryo without searching that ship with a microscope for any trace of the Queen.4) And how did the egg even get on the ship much less in the cryo deck? The Queen lost her egg tube and wasn't carrying an egg under her arm. Even if she could lay an egg without the tube, she was too busy ripping up Bishop and chasing the others around to do it. The eggs don't suddenly grow eggs and walk...The part that a group of prisoners could tell the Powers That Be, "Yeah, we've found God now so you can take all the guards away and leave us to run the joint" and it would happen makes more sense than any of that.In my humble opinion, of course. ;-)
Of all the series, I'm probably least familiar with Alien 3. I don't even think I've watched the "assembly cut" yet, but I'm working my way through the box set now.I may get killed for this, but I don't think Resurrection is as bad as its reputation would suggest. That doesn't mean it succeeds, either, but I think there's some weird stuff to like in it.
It stuck to the mythos well enough...and Ron Perlman can turn crap into gold better than anyone I've ever seen.I was fairly okay with "Resurrection" once you ignore the fact that Ripley's not just a regular human anymore for you to relate to...And when you get past what Brad Dourif's character (WTF was his deal?)But Joss Whedon wants us to believe that you can ram a multi-ton ship with a fusion reactor into the Earth and yet it doesn't disturb the planet's atmosphere or environment in the least. Even though we know very large plain rocks have hit the planet in the past have caused major destruction and one is even believed to have killed off the dinosaurs.A collision like that should have ripped the atmosphere from the planet.But fanboys need a big BOOM at the end of movies so...
Last rant, I promise.As I've thought about this movie (probably for too long at this point) I've found myself noticing just how many massive jumps to a (simplistic) conclusion that are made in this movie.Cave painting + star system matches = It's an invitation.Assumed invitation + matching DNA of Engineer found = Engineer created us (rather than we and the Engineers were created by the same being)Isolated building + stuff inside is lethal to us (as is the outside atmosphere, but ignore that) = has to be a weapon facility.Ship with cargo bay full + route map to Earth = Cargo must be for Earth! Even though they've been to Earth before and didn't exterminate everybody - and haven't tried since this ship was loaded - and they could just be stopping by on the way to deliver the cargo somewhere else....Is this the highest level of logic the filmmakers are capable of?
I'll throw one more bitch into the mix as well. Regarding the whole auto-surgical table scene - leaving aside the crazy notion that it's "for men only" on a ship where the leader of the expedition is a woman, I hung with the scene for quite a bit. I thought it trod the line between scary and silly with aplomb. But then, that damn "grabber" comes into view to lift the organism out of Noomi. I half expected to see it pull a stuffed bear out of her. Was David fiddling with a pair of joysticks outside the capsule, calling to Vickers: "I almost got it, mum! Can I have another quarter?"
And then she programs it to operate on her as if she was a man with a "foreign object" inside her...Not to be gross but shouldn't the thing have taken her uterus along with the squid...because it would think that they're both foreign to a man's anatomy.
I just think that whole sequence is a mess. I get that it's a set piece and done pretty well, but it's just one logic gap after another. It's programmed for men! Dumb. She rewords the procedure and does it anyway! She gets it out and LEAVES IT. Then she's fine.GREAT point about her uterus, by the way. And not that I would have wanted to see that on screen, but at least it would have paid off the whole 'men only' bit. You need to start your own site devoted to this movie, Kathy.
Yeah, and even conceding that the device recognized her uterus as a legitimate part of the body, we only see it stapling the main incision on the surface - meaning the uterus still has a gaping wound in it.Did you also notice that when Noomi stumbles into the room where old man Weyland is, no one comments on her bloody appearance or what happened to the organism growing inside her? They're all like "Hey, how's it going?"
(my reply seems to have disappeared so if this is a duplicate..sorry)Patrick...I'm getting enough crap from the fanboys in response to my questions on IMDb. I don't need the rest of the internet falling on my head. :-)I think that the "men only" thing of the surgical unit was meant to explain why Shaw wasn't anymore surprised to see Weyland there than they were to see her all bloody (I suspect David told them about it all)? But it wasn't explained very well either.Meanwhile, I need another movie to "cleanse my palate" so that I stop thinking about this. If this cluster**** of a film hadn't been directed by someone like Ridley Scott I would have blown it off as a failure (as I did with "Dark Shadows" for instance) long ago and I'd forget about it until the Rifftrax comes out...Meanwhile, someone else has noticed the connection to "Star Trek V".... :-)http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/prometheus-basically-star-trek-proof.html?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_24043
(Seriously, I need a life...)The whole surgical table being programmed for "men only" thing...maybe it meant that it was programmed for one SPECIFIC man only - Weyland.And if that's the case maybe it not taking Shaw's "mommy parts" along with the Squidy means that Weyland's got more secrets than we think?:-p
Just imagine the theories that could be spun out of THAT idea!
Even though I've come to the unalterable conclusion that the writer(s) wrote this script with the attitude they could throw as much crap at the wall to stick as they wanted because it's easy to invent a lot of questions when you never intend to answer any of them....I have to decide that the scene between David and Holloway is the closest answer to what this movie is about - the Engineers created us because "they could". To them we're just a tank of sea monkeys and when they get tired of watching us (as they probably did with the dinosaurs) they flush us down the toilet and make new sea monkeys.Yeah, that doesn't explain why one of them dies to create something they consider flushable...or why they showed us the planet...Or maybe it was like "2001"..."We're going to terraform this planet for you so come on up when you're ready." And then, they screwed something up...Not that that explains why Grumpy went Chris Brown on their asses as soon as he woke up...Aww....the hell with it.
(Oh dear...)Holloway (?) asks David if he can read the writing on the wall...to which David answers, "I believe I can".And NO ONE EVER ASKS DAVID WHAT IT SAYS???????I'm going to have to start posting about the parts of the movie that DID make sense...and then I CAN FINALLY STOP!!!!
I can only speak for myself, but I seriously hope you will NEVER stop. I'm enjoying everything you're coming up with.
I'll forward all of my electro-shock therapy bills to you then...? :-p
Have to admit that the more I think about David, the more I believe that everything he did made sense...if he was following his own (*dramatic pause*) "agenda".From what David found and what he read on the walls, etc...he knew that Weyland wasn't going to find his Fountain of Youth here. And so he was doing everything he could to make as certain as possible that Weyland finally died so he can be free of him - something he has in common with his "sister" Meredith (who wants the King to just die already so she can have the throne). David all but admits it to Shaw.I have to imagine that winding up in two pieces on the deck of the Engineer's ship wasn't part of his plan. And that if that hadn't happened he would have left that ship before it took off and already been on his way to one of the other ships, leaving Prometheus to clean up the mess.He contacts Shaw after the crash to warn her about the Engineer because he knows she's his only way off the planet now.And thank goodness all Archeologists know how to re-attach android heads... (???)Of course, when Shaw asks if he can get them to the Engineers' planet (after all, the one they met so far was so warm and cuddly toward them, I'm sure the other will welcome them with open arms) David says, "I believe I can". Which is right up there with his answer to Holloway about reading the hieroglyphs on the wall on the Passive-Aggressive meter.Maybe the biggest question of all of this is David really going to take her to their planet? Did he really find something admirable in her - that she's a survivor like he wants to be - and has decided to see what kind of "adventure" they might have?*** As I'm typing this something else just occurred to me...and I'm only going by memory here...when David contacts Shaw, doesn't he say "You need to get out of there. He's coming for you."?If that's true...how did he know she'd made it into to the Lifeboat???? And maybe he could still be monitoring ship functions that existed and knew the hatch had been closed...but that also could have been Vickers. Because we know from the Dork and Mohawk guy getting lost that they can't track the individual crew members (well, except for Mohawk guy when he's right outside the ship...THEN somehow the Captain knows that not just that there's someone out there but who it is?????)If I'm remembering that right and it's not just sloppy writing...David was connected to and controlling things more than anyone realized?Oh...for the clarity and depth of Disney's "The Black Hole"....
It's close to what I thought...David does say, "You need to get out immediately. He's coming for you."To which Shaw says, "Who? Who's coming for me?"Santa Claus and the Ice Cream Bunny...WHO DO YOU THINK, GENIUS?So how does David know where she is?
BTW....do you think Shaw and David swung by and had a look at Squished Vickers before they left?(the ship got her pretty much centered in the spot where it stopped rolling...and then it fell over so that spot on the ground should have been uncovered...?)Or maybe she was stuck to the ship and they had to peel her off? :-)
They've been reading over my shoulder...http://www.the-editing-room.com/prometheus.html
Quite wonderful. I particularly like the "Foreshadowing Room." It brings back fond memories of the "Accusing Parlor" from Futurama.
Just saw an ad for the Prometheus DVD - the tagline is "Questions. Will. Be. Answered." They didn't learn a damn thing, did they?Or maybe they're referring to the disc's special features, which many people will undoubtedly be plowing through to try and figure out what the hell was going on.
Bill Maher, during his "New Rules" segment on last night's "Real Time" show on HBO, put down "Prometheus" with a joke that left the audience more puzzled than laughing (clearly most of them hadn't see it).
I'm resurrecting this thread to see if anyone else has read John Spaihts' original script for Alien: Engineers (what would become Prometheus) that has just surfaced? It's a fascinating read, because it's better than the finished movie in a lot of ways but still has its own problems. And the more I read about this whole saga, the more I'm starting to think the movie's problems come more from being gutted by editing than by script issues. I don't know. Just wondering what you all thought.
I'll have to read that and get back to you.Only thing I can say about the extra scenes on the DVD is that it makes Vickers more human. And the other version of Mohawk Guy when he comes back to the ship was better.But then it features a different ending with Shaw asking David what the Engineer said and THEN IMMEDIATELY ASKING ANOTHER QUESTION!!! David then gets to avoid the first question and then possibly feed her a lie based on her dream that we saw David watching (the use of the word "Paradise"). And then you have to wonder when the Engineer had time to say that if David was telling him what Weyland told him to tell him.And then that whole exchange where Weyland goes through this monologue about what David was and all of that....and then the Engineer looks at David as if he understood everything Weyland had just said in English!!!!Talk about still having it's own problems...
Enjoyed listening to the Prometheus podcast again after re-watching the movie this past weekend. Like many other people I initially looked forward to the film's release with eager anticipation of a new sci-fi classic. After giving it 7-8 viewings over the past year and a half I am resigned to say I was wrong. We were so wrong.I agree with Patrick's perspective that the movie is more successful raising questions regarding poor filmmaking than the origins of human life. Perhaps the story would be better told by focusing on the main theme of creator/parent versus child with the primary characters of Shaw, David, and Weyland; and minimizing the supporting characters to Vickers, Holloway, Janek, and the Engineer(s). Cutting the tertiary plots concerning Fifield/Milburn and Chance/Ravel would alleviate several distractions. The scene with the exploding head could be cut to just removing the dead engineer's helmet and taking a DNA sample. Even the whole Shaw impregnation/med-pod plot thread is problematic.While the BD/DVD release was marketed under the guise that "Questions will be answered," a lot of those answers were not particularly satisfying. For example, if I recall correctly Scott's rationale for the characters removing their helmets was because actors don't like to have their heads covered. Digging a little deeper, the plot point seems to be a carryover from an early revision of the Alien script where jars were found in a Pyramid rather than eggs on the derelict ship, and the character was subsequently attacked by a facehugger. As an aside, that early Alien script may have also inspired the tomb room depicted in Prometheus. (Fun trivia: the Nostromo was originally called the starship SNARK.)Ultimately, Prometheus a flawed movie with stunning visuals.
Early revision of Alien script: www.dailyscript.com/scripts/alien_early.html