The answer to some of the questions from numerous articles on the BluRay deleted scenes...
The black goo is
pure xenomorph genetic material that seems to either break down (first scene) or hyperaccelerate the genetic structure of the individual, and combine it with the environment, or if there is no exterior environment present, with its own alien patterns. Perhaps there are two types of goo out there.
The Engineers take the goo and seed the universe as a kind of ritual sacrifice. Again, this isn't explicit, but it seems they do it because they can.
All the Engineers
are dead because their xeno-goo turned on them (in the throne room, there are holes in all the other vacant tubes...around the chest area), and it was set on probably by another
Engineer, who might have been impregnated, escaped, and reached LV 426.
Milburn's an entomologist (studies insects), and so loves snakes and doesn't mind baiting them. (Still stupid though)
Holloway is grumpy because he wanted live engineers and is so, pissed off when
the head explodes from infection.
Weyland was behind David's machinations, and together, they used the crew as guinea pigs to see what the goo did (except it seems David has ethical programming, thus Holloway stating that 'anything and everything' is permitted to find the answers for what they came for, gives him permission to spike his drink with the goo)
Guy Pearce was cast because there was a dream sequence scripted involving David and his 40 year old self that wasn't included.
Meredith Vickers
isn't a robot.
The Engineers and Weyland had a brief conversation in a deleted scene about how he is a 'God' for creating David - and whilst this isn't explicitly stated, perhaps this is why they got sick of man trying to run the show and turn all serial killer.
The Captain and Vickers ended up hooking up due to the fact they had a few deleted scenes involving flirting that were prior to that scene.
He then later
sacrifices himself quickly
because he had a military past which involved his running foul of a contamination outbreak, and knows the consequences of inaction.
This answers some but not all of the questions here: http://www.juliansanchez.com/2012/06/11/whats-wrong-with-prometheus-a-partial-list Most questions are either due to sloppy plotting, or just overemphasis on the thematics: life, creation, father vs son, identity, purpose, origins and final destination, the unknown, the insignificant nihilism of creation and destruction, loss and transcendence, and religious mythology...the only difference is Alien didn't make us *have* to think in order to explore its' own logic.
My old and very extensive review is at the top of page 5. http://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/prometheus/comments/?page=5
This was probably the most illogical film I've ever watched. The dialogs, the characters were just unrealistic and pointless. The plot was so disconnected and full of holes that it feels like an insult to your intelligence. No action/ no horror, just some good visuals and a "robot" doesn't make a good science fiction film, I am very dissapointed..
LONG-ASS review, but I love the Alien saga, so deal. I changed it around a lot at first and more now that it's out on DVD/BR. Seeing the explanations as mood driven and implicit helps you see things much more clearly here. Plus paying attention also helps. Definite answers don't help when it comes to themes this big anyway.
THE GOOD
Lots of open-ended great ideas that create mood and social theories. To take the first scene,
what's the EvoGoo, a weapon? (A genetic accelerant - Holloway impregnates Shaw with an EvoGoo octopus baby, and Shaw gives Holloway her genetic prelediction for Ebola, that hyperaccelerates him to his death.) Where is the first scene set? (Looks like Earth) Is the different-looking ship at the start another species that created the Engineers? Why? (Nope, it's theme) Is the alien at the start on a officially condoned mission, a secret military operation, a willful martyr, or a condemned rogue exile? (The alternative beginning shows him as a willful martyr in what looks like a religious group). Why is he choosing to die, and if so, why the surprise? Did he steal the EvoGoo and is being punished by having to play his part in a greater scheme? (There doesn't seem to be coercion or rebellion on the martyr's part). What's the motive to create new life on Earth - peaceful creation or manevolent manipulation? (Neither - certaintly not peace as we learn, but not outright destruction - just neutral, implacable accelerated evolution, it seems.) Were humans the desired result of this process, or an unfortunate byproduct? (We weren't planned). How come plant, bacteria, and other non-mammalian life exist on Earth if it's all the product of organic Engineer DNA that directly correlates to our genetic material? (This is still a good question.) Seeing as our creators want us dead (a very Blade Runner idea), why set this entire process into motion? Galaxy wide purification? (Just to play God!)
Are humans either a EvoGoo evolutionary mistake to be erased, or specifically envisioned as expendable hosts for more of it's uncontrollable designs? (When we become powerful as the Gods, the purge back to the start is just part of the cycle of life). If the temple is really a military installation spaceship headed for Earth, does that mean they were waiting for us to be technologically ready to be exterminated by their black goo - before it turned on them? (Who knows) Given that the EvoGoo only seems to have to destroy something in order to create something else, do the Engineers even HAVE an agenda beyond sadistic toying with creating and destroying, or even a basic means of controlling this substance that may not even be theirs? (There's no emotion or sadism here, it's just neutral uncaring life). Another reviewer has noted that both the 223 and 426 jockeys suffer the same fate - do they even know what they're playing with EITHER?
Plus, what are the murals doing there? Did the Engineers know what they were making before it got out of hand? (It seems so) What were the holograms running from, and what could be so bad that they would run into the EvoGoo throne room itself? And how does the final scene play into the Xenomorph lifecycle as we have come to know it?
Most intellectually stimulating of all - if another race create the Engineers, they create us, and we create David, all out of an optimismic attempt at control, and every time the creation kills the Creator - does that mean our desire to discover and direct our destiny means nothing, that in the process of creation the created end up engendering murderous animosity, and that evolution's emotionally neutral yet colossal, endless, and random wave of creation and destruction and ultimate nothing is all that matters? (Seems so - sounds very 'No Country For Old Men' in its sentiment.)
These questions are enough in quantity and quality to fall into the realm of 'fascinating, I want more', particularly as we are afforded enough explanation to draw our own conclusions, though the atmospheric charge and subtle class warfare of Alien is missed a little in giving these HugeIdeas a deeper chill and psychosexual gravity.
The ruminations on Darwinism and Christian faith, the ruminations on BigQuestions, and allusions to visual horror initially qualify this work in the realm of GoodIdeasBasedSciFi(TM). The omnipresent effects, production, photography, sets, and creatures, are all good to amazing, and pretty astounding on a home rewatch. At the cinema it was difficult to not feel like the visuals were undermined by 3 decades of Giger imitation, but now that's not a problem. The impact of the horror is genuinely unsettling and powerful. The central performances are good - Fassbender particularly
(between his secret militaristic agenda in spiking champagne with EvoGoo, and then intending to stick the accordingly 'preggers' Shaw in a Cryo tube, it appears Weyland's desire for bioweapons knows no bounds. Yet it's hardly like he could have predicted Shaw and Holloway's tryst as a means of facilitating this end, so this immediately makes this strategy suspect - so instead his agenda must be to prolong Weyland's life even as things spiral out of control)
Noomi Rapace does incredibly well too, gorgeous and tough - serving as the audience role, you watch her faith in humanity get tested to the limit as she escapes with her life in true Jamie Lee Curtis fashion. Against her personal and spiritual perspective, many of the films' flaws find grace.
There are terrific individual moments that come together in a strong drive by the end: the Caesarean scene (bye bye placenta - OW), the aforementioned early montage, a dizzingly lush throne room map, and the sly closing moments that were intended as a hint towards 'ancestry' of sorts. SO - When framed as 'mission gone wrong' versus 'ponderous epic Alien prequel' - it works excellently.
THE LESS GOOD
There are in fact, TOO MANY unanswered questions that serve as blatant sequel bait, and tip the Interest-Scale from 'fascinating' to 'overwhelming'.
The plot and script are almost deliberately unclear and inconclusive - unless if you believe like David, that 'the answer is irrelevant'. This is where the questions become overabundant. The one thing that is hard to dispute even on a second viewing, is that the secondary characters are flat, stupid, weak unlikeable cutouts suffering from lazy dialogue and extremely poor reasoning.
('Let's agree to a 4 year mission without asking what it entails'.'Well, we're the first humans to land on an alien world, what's this dangerous looking slime all about?' 'I'm scared of the 1000-year dead alien, waaargh, run away!' 'OK, I'm feeling chipper now, wanna bait a snake?''Let's take off our helmets!', 'I'm sick, won't say anything', 'He's lost on a strange ominous planet, he'll be fine!' 'An MIA sick grunt? Let him in!' (and worst of all) 'Out of misguided idealism, instead of going home, let's go greet this dangerous, aggressive new lifeform, on their own turf, on our own, unarmed, all out of intellectual curiosity!')
In retrospect, these are relatively minor points from the view of the central nihilistic thematic drive, and it IS one of the only real problems here, but unless you grant their lack of characterization as a means of the movie treating them as expendable to a sadistic mood, it's still a problem. The aliens often act as compulsively and stupidly as the humans do, almost turning 'serial killer' in the final reel. Why bother driving the film from their perspective even remotely? I understand that only the characters who are driven by the core of 'optimistic creation in the yawning black gulf of evolution' get a say in where the film goes, or even get noticed in this film, but would it have hurt to have tried just a little? I'm thankful that upon repeats, this issue is not so prevalent.
On your first viewing, you may find that the seemingly needless, myriad plot holes undermine the potential atmosphere: HAVING to think, versus being invited to think, during moments of tension, RUINS horror. The often inconsistent pacing and momentum don't do wonders for the internal claustrophobia, often lurching and halting as we move between two ships, and the overdone philosophising and religious overtone (Contact meets Star Trek by way of 2001 lite) only compounds the problem. It's almost as if exploration of character was shoved aside because it was getting in the way of a schoolyard debate. Yet these problems do smooth out on a second viewing now it's out on DVD, as in the light of hindsight not only do expectation and hype vanish, but people stop holding a grudge, so you can grant directorial intention, in a film as ambivalent as this, benefit of the doubt. A mood of ominous existentialism is the name of the game here.
Other things that are stupid at first but forgiveable: Guy Pearce's old age makeup, the bland music irritates, a particular secret involving Theron's character is totally extraneous, and by the end, the Space Jockey mysticism could be somewhat ruined for some. (but on second viewing, I realise that Alien's majestic atmosphere will never be spoiled).
Was it worth it for the final scenes? At first I wasn't sure. Between my unanswered questions, I was left with the feeling of a very diffuse work where you veer randomly between moments of mediocrity and sheer excellence. Now the smoke has cleared, I can see just how excellent, flawless even, the flow and sheer intensity of the action scenes in the second half really are, having been perfectly imbued with some of the spirit of sci-fi's best. Many will leave the cinema both frustrated and a little exhilarated from the rollercoaster vertigo: one of the worst kinds of cinema experiences.
DESPITE ALL THAT - it still works. It makes just enough sense as it needs to, if you view it from the angle of 'humans shouldn't be optimistic, this place is death!' instead of carrying expectanty of Xenomorphology.
The optimistic drive sees this work through to its end, but it's not a truly great film because beyond the aforementioned singular idea, unless you are willing to perceive the mood Scott seeks to insinuate, all you have is a bunch of uneven cinematic devices. Great direction doesn't save a script written by those who thrive on the tightrope of ambiguity and incompletion, and you have the writers of Lost to thank for that: what a surprise. If anyone is to blame for these flaws, it's them.
Overall, there is style and content, epic, sublime and intensely unnerving, but no real conclusive narrative form and many easily avoided pitfalls, yet it's forgiveable really. The open-ended approach is both a gift and a curse for those who see one good form of narrative struggling to emerge from about 3 other halfbaked ones at the same time.
Still, you treat this as not-Alien-related and you'll be OK, if you don't spend your time taking apart what is essentially a film about the created-turned-Gods being brought low by their own creators. (Thorkell here seems to be the closest to touching the center of this). This movie is going to be divisive and get people talking - which is what I suspect Lindelhof and Scott, rather cynically, TRULY want.
Put this back in the oven, it's a great film struggling to get out. Or give it a second spin in the microwave, and take it for a second opinion, and you might find you're wrong.
Prometheus probes at grand questions about the reasons for creation while providing a treat for fans of the Alien series by showing the origins of the "space jockey". Its action is watchable and engrossing, but it ultimately isn't more than the sum of its very good parts (including great performances from all).
Recommended for fans of Alien, less so for others unless they might like the proto-Alien, proto-horror philosophical mix present here.
This is a movie that keeps me arguing with myself about how good or bad I consider it. The first time I watched it I was impressed by the great pictures of landscapes and by Michael Fassbender's role, the robot - but I was very disappointed by the way the story was told. Watching the trailer, I had expected so much more mystery and an atmosphere of anxiety and menace, combined with a visionary explanation of what exactly the crew of the Prometheus was going to find. This expectation was only partly met and it turned out to be more of an alien-horror-movie and less of a mysterious story. However I have watched the movie again since and I liked it better than the first time. I'm also hoping that some more facts will be revealed if there's really going to be a second part. All in all, the movie is not bad and I loved Michael Fassbender and Charlize Theron - plus, I'm looking forward to the second part. (By the way, I do not really know the "Alien"-movies.)
EDIT: So, some months after seeing the movie for the first time, I have - believe it or not - decided to make it a favourite of mine. For me, it just keeps getting better the more often I see it - and in the end, I DO like movies that asks more questions than they answer... plus, I do hope that there will be a second part and the story will continue. What I just love about the movie is the character David, and I also like Idris Elba as the captain more and more. The overall atmosphere and everything combined finally made me favourite the movie.
Every time they show the alien planet, you expect Sigur Ros to start playing in the background.
Also there were no scenes in which Guy Pearce was young. So, unless there's going to be some sort of prequel prequel, what was the point of casting him in the role of an old person? Did Hollywood run out of old actors? Do FX makeup people have some sort of sweet contract guaranteeing them work? After J. Edgar and Mr. Nobody, I don't know how much more thick, rubbery, old guy make-up I can take.
This quote is taken from Blade Runner but it could have been the tagline for Prometheus. Prometheus has actually much more in common with Blade Runner than the Alien series. Blade Runner was all about the search for origin, meaning of life and escape from death. Same goes for Prometheus, except here mankind is in the role of the NEXUS 6 Replicants facing (SPOILERS) an even more hateful creator (END OF SPOILERS).
I can see why some would not like the religious undertones in this film but I think they would be mistaken to write it off because of it. If you look deeper into the theology you will see that it is rather pessimistic, and if something, anti religious. SPOILERS: There is no meaning, only darkness staring back at us ready to kill us every second. Those who believe choose to believe. There is nothing more to it. It is all very post modernistic. END OF SPOILERS.
Prometheus is a child of 3 films, Blade Runner, Alien and 2001: A Space Odyssey, and it borrows beautifully from all of them but still stands on its own two feet. I am in love with this film. Finally we have a Sci-Fi for grownups which dares to be dark and deep. And it did not hurt that it constantly quoted from Lawrence of Arabia! Maybe I should say that it is a child of 4 films because it has also a lot in common with Lawrence of Arabia. SPOILERS! Search for meaning and ending with emptiness. And no man needs nothing, like the Arab said to Lawrence and David said in Prometheus. Don't go searching for a meaning, you will only come back empty handed. END OF SPOILERS. Or as the tagline to this film says: The search for our beginning could lead to our end.
I'd say Prometheus is a seriously underappreciated movie. One of only a few sci-fi movies of the last couple of decades that has had any staying power. It was exciting before it came out and it is still exciting 11 years after. I haven't really understood the backlash it has had, I could only speculate and I lean towards a guess that at least some of the viewers might have been threatened by the non-human-centric and hostile world it depicts.The reason this movie hasn't gone over that well with many people I think could be similar to why Lovecraft hasn't really broken to mainstream. To me it seems this movie really honed in on the "lovecraftian" aspects of the Alien films, arguably with more teeth than the original Alien, perhaps over some tolerance threshold for people that want mindless repetition in their action.
I personally would rank Prometheus way higher than most movies of the "big budget action-sci-fi/fantasy movie" genre made since the turn of the millennium, perhaps even all of them, excluding "Mad Max: Fury Road".and the "Lord of the Rings" movies. Better than all the super hero, big budget sequel-prequel-reboot movies of the "blockbuster genre", but also some quite supposedly "serious and intelligent" sci-fi movies, often considered classics.I'd say while all of these movies have their strengths, Prometheus beats District 9, Interstellar and Annihilation with not too much effort as an idea-driven sci-fi movie. Yes, all of these films had something going, but all had some faults compared to Prometheus: less ambitious, less original, more sentimental or stuck in some form of ideological world view that made them seem more average than they could have been. That sort of lessened the excitement and staying power of those films, while I am still thinking about and re-watching Prometheus occasionally.
Prometheus is epic and grandiose, although a prequel to a four movie universe, I'd say feels more original, thought and emotion provoking and engaging than any of the critically acclaimed "original films" I listed.
Yes, the scientists could have been smarter in a few situations, but that is a really minor gripe, and the critique that it had "plot holes" could be raised as convincingly to true monumental classics. "2001: The Space Odyssey" and "Solaris" by Tarkovsky had plot holes by this definition, The Matrix and Terminator 2 as well, not to mention Nolan's Batman movies that were more hole-ridden than swish cheese. When someone critiques David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" for having plot holes I think many would agree with me it is missing the point and perhaps the problem originates from the lack of or fear of imagination by the reviewer. Although definitely a different genre, and more rooted in action tropes and extravaganza, I'd raise that possibility with Prometheus.
I'd argue some people don't like Prometheus not because it is somehow more "mindless" in it's entertainment than most of the action sci-fi spectacle that has been coming out of Hollywood for a couple of decades, but because it was more ambitious, added something extra to the safe escapist formula that might have either flown over the head of many viewers or threatened consciously or sub-consciously a deeply held belief-system.
Either way, that is their loss. I personally will probably be returning to this film in the future as well. A grandiose spectacle, thrilling, thought provoking and original, something similar to what "Mad Max: Fury Road" was to Mad Max movies, a seriously visionary late entry in quite a long series.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 86
Sokratesz
This movie features some of the most retarded scientists in the history of film-making.Scratch47
The answer to some of the questions from numerous articles on the BluRay deleted scenes...The black goo is
The Engineers take the goo and seed the universe as a kind of ritual sacrifice. Again, this isn't explicit, but it seems they do it because they can.
All the Engineers
Engineer, who might have been impregnated, escaped, and reached LV 426.
Milburn's an entomologist (studies insects), and so loves snakes and doesn't mind baiting them. (Still stupid though)
Holloway is grumpy because he wanted live engineers and is so, pissed off when
Guy Pearce was cast because there was a dream sequence scripted involving David and his 40 year old self that wasn't included.
Meredith Vickers
The Captain and Vickers ended up hooking up due to the fact they had a few deleted scenes involving flirting that were prior to that scene.
He then later
This answers some but not all of the questions here: http://www.juliansanchez.com/2012/06/11/whats-wrong-with-prometheus-a-partial-list Most questions are either due to sloppy plotting, or just overemphasis on the thematics: life, creation, father vs son, identity, purpose, origins and final destination, the unknown, the insignificant nihilism of creation and destruction, loss and transcendence, and religious mythology...the only difference is Alien didn't make us *have* to think in order to explore its' own logic.
My old and very extensive review is at the top of page 5. http://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/prometheus/comments/?page=5
Big A2
They should have called this movie "Space Octopus vs. The Michelin Man".Iguana
This was probably the most illogical film I've ever watched. The dialogs, the characters were just unrealistic and pointless. The plot was so disconnected and full of holes that it feels like an insult to your intelligence. No action/ no horror, just some good visuals and a "robot" doesn't make a good science fiction film, I am very dissapointed..Scratch47
LONG-ASS review, but I love the Alien saga, so deal. I changed it around a lot at first and more now that it's out on DVD/BR. Seeing the explanations as mood driven and implicit helps you see things much more clearly here. Plus paying attention also helps. Definite answers don't help when it comes to themes this big anyway.THE GOOD
Lots of open-ended great ideas that create mood and social theories. To take the first scene,
Are humans either a EvoGoo evolutionary mistake to be erased, or specifically envisioned as expendable hosts for more of it's uncontrollable designs? (When we become powerful as the Gods, the purge back to the start is just part of the cycle of life). If the temple is really a military installation spaceship headed for Earth, does that mean they were waiting for us to be technologically ready to be exterminated by their black goo - before it turned on them? (Who knows) Given that the EvoGoo only seems to have to destroy something in order to create something else, do the Engineers even HAVE an agenda beyond sadistic toying with creating and destroying, or even a basic means of controlling this substance that may not even be theirs? (There's no emotion or sadism here, it's just neutral uncaring life). Another reviewer has noted that both the 223 and 426 jockeys suffer the same fate - do they even know what they're playing with EITHER?
Plus, what are the murals doing there? Did the Engineers know what they were making before it got out of hand? (It seems so) What were the holograms running from, and what could be so bad that they would run into the EvoGoo throne room itself? And how does the final scene play into the Xenomorph lifecycle as we have come to know it?
Most intellectually stimulating of all - if another race create the Engineers, they create us, and we create David, all out of an optimismic attempt at control, and every time the creation kills the Creator - does that mean our desire to discover and direct our destiny means nothing, that in the process of creation the created end up engendering murderous animosity, and that evolution's emotionally neutral yet colossal, endless, and random wave of creation and destruction and ultimate nothing is all that matters? (Seems so - sounds very 'No Country For Old Men' in its sentiment.)
These questions are enough in quantity and quality to fall into the realm of 'fascinating, I want more', particularly as we are afforded enough explanation to draw our own conclusions, though the atmospheric charge and subtle class warfare of Alien is missed a little in giving these HugeIdeas a deeper chill and psychosexual gravity.
The ruminations on Darwinism and Christian faith, the ruminations on BigQuestions, and allusions to visual horror initially qualify this work in the realm of GoodIdeasBasedSciFi(TM). The omnipresent effects, production, photography, sets, and creatures, are all good to amazing, and pretty astounding on a home rewatch. At the cinema it was difficult to not feel like the visuals were undermined by 3 decades of Giger imitation, but now that's not a problem. The impact of the horror is genuinely unsettling and powerful. The central performances are good - Fassbender particularly
There are terrific individual moments that come together in a strong drive by the end: the Caesarean scene (bye bye placenta - OW), the aforementioned early montage, a dizzingly lush throne room map, and the sly closing moments that were intended as a hint towards 'ancestry' of sorts. SO - When framed as 'mission gone wrong' versus 'ponderous epic Alien prequel' - it works excellently.
THE LESS GOOD
There are in fact, TOO MANY unanswered questions that serve as blatant sequel bait, and tip the Interest-Scale from 'fascinating' to 'overwhelming'.
The plot and script are almost deliberately unclear and inconclusive - unless if you believe like David, that 'the answer is irrelevant'. This is where the questions become overabundant. The one thing that is hard to dispute even on a second viewing, is that the secondary characters are flat, stupid, weak unlikeable cutouts suffering from lazy dialogue and extremely poor reasoning.
('Let's agree to a 4 year mission without asking what it entails'.'Well, we're the first humans to land on an alien world, what's this dangerous looking slime all about?' 'I'm scared of the 1000-year dead alien, waaargh, run away!' 'OK, I'm feeling chipper now, wanna bait a snake?''Let's take off our helmets!', 'I'm sick, won't say anything', 'He's lost on a strange ominous planet, he'll be fine!' 'An MIA sick grunt? Let him in!' (and worst of all) 'Out of misguided idealism, instead of going home, let's go greet this dangerous, aggressive new lifeform, on their own turf, on our own, unarmed, all out of intellectual curiosity!')
On your first viewing, you may find that the seemingly needless, myriad plot holes undermine the potential atmosphere: HAVING to think, versus being invited to think, during moments of tension, RUINS horror. The often inconsistent pacing and momentum don't do wonders for the internal claustrophobia, often lurching and halting as we move between two ships, and the overdone philosophising and religious overtone (Contact meets Star Trek by way of 2001 lite) only compounds the problem. It's almost as if exploration of character was shoved aside because it was getting in the way of a schoolyard debate. Yet these problems do smooth out on a second viewing now it's out on DVD, as in the light of hindsight not only do expectation and hype vanish, but people stop holding a grudge, so you can grant directorial intention, in a film as ambivalent as this, benefit of the doubt. A mood of ominous existentialism is the name of the game here.
Other things that are stupid at first but forgiveable: Guy Pearce's old age makeup, the bland music irritates, a particular secret involving Theron's character is totally extraneous, and by the end, the Space Jockey mysticism could be somewhat ruined for some. (but on second viewing, I realise that Alien's majestic atmosphere will never be spoiled).
Was it worth it for the final scenes? At first I wasn't sure. Between my unanswered questions, I was left with the feeling of a very diffuse work where you veer randomly between moments of mediocrity and sheer excellence. Now the smoke has cleared, I can see just how excellent, flawless even, the flow and sheer intensity of the action scenes in the second half really are, having been perfectly imbued with some of the spirit of sci-fi's best. Many will leave the cinema both frustrated and a little exhilarated from the rollercoaster vertigo: one of the worst kinds of cinema experiences.
DESPITE ALL THAT - it still works. It makes just enough sense as it needs to, if you view it from the angle of 'humans shouldn't be optimistic, this place is death!' instead of carrying expectanty of Xenomorphology.
The optimistic drive sees this work through to its end, but it's not a truly great film because beyond the aforementioned singular idea, unless you are willing to perceive the mood Scott seeks to insinuate, all you have is a bunch of uneven cinematic devices. Great direction doesn't save a script written by those who thrive on the tightrope of ambiguity and incompletion, and you have the writers of Lost to thank for that: what a surprise. If anyone is to blame for these flaws, it's them.
Overall, there is style and content, epic, sublime and intensely unnerving, but no real conclusive narrative form and many easily avoided pitfalls, yet it's forgiveable really. The open-ended approach is both a gift and a curse for those who see one good form of narrative struggling to emerge from about 3 other halfbaked ones at the same time.
Still, you treat this as not-Alien-related and you'll be OK, if you don't spend your time taking apart what is essentially a film about the created-turned-Gods being brought low by their own creators. (Thorkell here seems to be the closest to touching the center of this). This movie is going to be divisive and get people talking - which is what I suspect Lindelhof and Scott, rather cynically, TRULY want.
Put this back in the oven, it's a great film struggling to get out. Or give it a second spin in the microwave, and take it for a second opinion, and you might find you're wrong.
sureup
This movie made me want to watch the Alien movies again because they are much, much better.frankqb
Prometheus probes at grand questions about the reasons for creation while providing a treat for fans of the Alien series by showing the origins of the "space jockey". Its action is watchable and engrossing, but it ultimately isn't more than the sum of its very good parts (including great performances from all).Recommended for fans of Alien, less so for others unless they might like the proto-Alien, proto-horror philosophical mix present here.
Limbesdautomne
Ridley Scott extruding a monster.Read more in French on Prométhée.
IreneAdler
This is a movie that keeps me arguing with myself about how good or bad I consider it. The first time I watched it I was impressed by the great pictures of landscapes and by Michael Fassbender's role, the robot - but I was very disappointed by the way the story was told. Watching the trailer, I had expected so much more mystery and an atmosphere of anxiety and menace, combined with a visionary explanation of what exactly the crew of the Prometheus was going to find. This expectation was only partly met and it turned out to be more of an alien-horror-movie and less of a mysterious story. However I have watched the movie again since and I liked it better than the first time. I'm also hoping that some more facts will be revealed if there's really going to be a second part. All in all, the movie is not bad and I loved Michael Fassbender and Charlize Theron - plus, I'm looking forward to the second part. (By the way, I do not really know the "Alien"-movies.)EDIT: So, some months after seeing the movie for the first time, I have - believe it or not - decided to make it a favourite of mine. For me, it just keeps getting better the more often I see it - and in the end, I DO like movies that asks more questions than they answer... plus, I do hope that there will be a second part and the story will continue. What I just love about the movie is the character David, and I also like Idris Elba as the captain more and more. The overall atmosphere and everything combined finally made me favourite the movie.
Marazmatique
Eyecandy... Though my definition of that word is not the most orthodox one.greenhorg
Every time they show the alien planet, you expect Sigur Ros to start playing in the background.Also there were no scenes in which Guy Pearce was young. So, unless there's going to be some sort of prequel prequel, what was the point of casting him in the role of an old person? Did Hollywood run out of old actors? Do FX makeup people have some sort of sweet contract guaranteeing them work? After J. Edgar and Mr. Nobody, I don't know how much more thick, rubbery, old guy make-up I can take.
swonderlous
VERY disappointing, if only because I can't stand mystical pregnanciesThorkell
"It's not an easy thing to meet your maker!"This quote is taken from Blade Runner but it could have been the tagline for Prometheus. Prometheus has actually much more in common with Blade Runner than the Alien series. Blade Runner was all about the search for origin, meaning of life and escape from death. Same goes for Prometheus, except here mankind is in the role of the NEXUS 6 Replicants facing (SPOILERS) an even more hateful creator (END OF SPOILERS).
I can see why some would not like the religious undertones in this film but I think they would be mistaken to write it off because of it. If you look deeper into the theology you will see that it is rather pessimistic, and if something, anti religious. SPOILERS: There is no meaning, only darkness staring back at us ready to kill us every second. Those who believe choose to believe. There is nothing more to it. It is all very post modernistic. END OF SPOILERS.
Prometheus is a child of 3 films, Blade Runner, Alien and 2001: A Space Odyssey, and it borrows beautifully from all of them but still stands on its own two feet. I am in love with this film. Finally we have a Sci-Fi for grownups which dares to be dark and deep. And it did not hurt that it constantly quoted from Lawrence of Arabia! Maybe I should say that it is a child of 4 films because it has also a lot in common with Lawrence of Arabia. SPOILERS! Search for meaning and ending with emptiness. And no man needs nothing, like the Arab said to Lawrence and David said in Prometheus. Don't go searching for a meaning, you will only come back empty handed. END OF SPOILERS. Or as the tagline to this film says: The search for our beginning could lead to our end.
Stoulia
I thought it was great! Aesthetically beautiful and really entertaining and interesting.avatud2013
I'd say Prometheus is a seriously underappreciated movie. One of only a few sci-fi movies of the last couple of decades that has had any staying power. It was exciting before it came out and it is still exciting 11 years after. I haven't really understood the backlash it has had, I could only speculate and I lean towards a guess that at least some of the viewers might have been threatened by the non-human-centric and hostile world it depicts.The reason this movie hasn't gone over that well with many people I think could be similar to why Lovecraft hasn't really broken to mainstream. To me it seems this movie really honed in on the "lovecraftian" aspects of the Alien films, arguably with more teeth than the original Alien, perhaps over some tolerance threshold for people that want mindless repetition in their action.I personally would rank Prometheus way higher than most movies of the "big budget action-sci-fi/fantasy movie" genre made since the turn of the millennium, perhaps even all of them, excluding "Mad Max: Fury Road".and the "Lord of the Rings" movies. Better than all the super hero, big budget sequel-prequel-reboot movies of the "blockbuster genre", but also some quite supposedly "serious and intelligent" sci-fi movies, often considered classics.I'd say while all of these movies have their strengths, Prometheus beats District 9, Interstellar and Annihilation with not too much effort as an idea-driven sci-fi movie. Yes, all of these films had something going, but all had some faults compared to Prometheus: less ambitious, less original, more sentimental or stuck in some form of ideological world view that made them seem more average than they could have been. That sort of lessened the excitement and staying power of those films, while I am still thinking about and re-watching Prometheus occasionally.
Prometheus is epic and grandiose, although a prequel to a four movie universe, I'd say feels more original, thought and emotion provoking and engaging than any of the critically acclaimed "original films" I listed.
Yes, the scientists could have been smarter in a few situations, but that is a really minor gripe, and the critique that it had "plot holes" could be raised as convincingly to true monumental classics. "2001: The Space Odyssey" and "Solaris" by Tarkovsky had plot holes by this definition, The Matrix and Terminator 2 as well, not to mention Nolan's Batman movies that were more hole-ridden than swish cheese. When someone critiques David Lynch's "Mulholland Drive" for having plot holes I think many would agree with me it is missing the point and perhaps the problem originates from the lack of or fear of imagination by the reviewer. Although definitely a different genre, and more rooted in action tropes and extravaganza, I'd raise that possibility with Prometheus.
I'd argue some people don't like Prometheus not because it is somehow more "mindless" in it's entertainment than most of the action sci-fi spectacle that has been coming out of Hollywood for a couple of decades, but because it was more ambitious, added something extra to the safe escapist formula that might have either flown over the head of many viewers or threatened consciously or sub-consciously a deeply held belief-system.
Either way, that is their loss. I personally will probably be returning to this film in the future as well. A grandiose spectacle, thrilling, thought provoking and original, something similar to what "Mad Max: Fury Road" was to Mad Max movies, a seriously visionary late entry in quite a long series.
Showing items 1 – 15 of 86