Prometheus *SPOILERS FROM POST 1538*

Cokeistan

Deleted User wrote: »

My thought on that is that the planet they discovered could have been whatever planet she had flown to

Yeah I was thinking the same myself!

krudler

FlashD wrote: »

Yeah man, pretty much mixed reviews,

I have just found in the past something stellar or solid will normally sweep the board with maybe a couple of average reviews here and there but so far this is just pulling in average reviews all round which is really disappointing.

Alien was savaged on release, look what happened there. this was always going to be compared to the first two movies which are bonafide classics, disappointing sure, but a turkey? nah.

FlashD

Beefy78 wrote: »

So if the reviews are average then how can it be a turkey?

A film that is heavily hyped can carry a ton of enthusiasm with it at on the initial release, this is depite it being good, bad or average.

After the first few days the excitment dies down then the word of mouth spreads and the reviews begin to drop their ratings.

If this is already at average well then you see what I mean.

FlashD

krudler wrote: »

Alien was savaged on release, look what happened there. this was always going to be compared to the first two movies which are bonafide classics, disappointing sure, but a turkey? nah.

Yeah, but ALien in its day was a totally original concept, people just didn't get it, many of the classics we know and love had these kind of beginnings.

I just don't think it happens so often these days, small indie films yes, but with blockbusters definately not.

tok9

FlashD wrote: »

Yeah, but ALien in its day was a totally original concept, people just didn't get it, many of the classics we know and love had these kind of beginnings.

I just don't think it happens so often these days, small indie films yes, but with blockbusters definately not.

People didn't get what? It's a pretty straightforward movie.

david75

I'm somewhere between don't bother seeing this in 3D and dont bother seeing this at all.
It looks amazing but it just doesn't meet the hype or expectation hanging on it.
The darkest most useless 3D transfer i've ever seen and what should have been a goldmine of storyline potential isn't touched and is acted badly.
If you do go, don't bother with the 3D at all.

Fassbender is the least robotic thing on screen weirdly enough. He does play a good part.

Sat there the whole time thinking..'Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the crystal skulls'.

barely deserves a meh.

Technocentral

david75 wrote: »

I'm somewhere between don't bother seeing this in 3D and dont bother seeing this at all.
It looks amazing but it just doesn't meet the hype or expectation hanging on it.
The darkest most useless 3D transfer i've ever seen and what should have been a goldmine of storyline potential isn't touched and is acted badly.
If you do go, don't bother with the 3D at all.

Fassbender is the least robotic thing on screen weirdly enough. He does play a good part.

Sat there the whole time thinking..'Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the crystal skulls'.

barely deserves a meh.

Am definitely going to a 2D showing, don't like 3D in general and from what I hear this one in particular's projection is too dark in its 3D form.

FlashD

tok9 wrote: »

People didn't get what? It's a pretty straightforward movie.

:D Yeah, I agree, one of my favourites. What is there not to get? I'm asking you.

krudler

Technocentral wrote: »

Am definitely going to a 2D showing, don't like 3D in general and from what I hear this one in particular's projection is too dark in its 3D form.

the new cinema in Limerick does do good 3D as its nice and bright, its only open a few weeks so its all brand new equipment so I'll give it a go in 3D (also cos they have no 2D showings and I'm not going to the crappy, freezing cinema with broken speakers for this)

pinksoir

I thought the 3D was handled very well. I'm sick of 3D at this stage and I'm generally way too aware of having glasses on, but I was happily immersed in this.

It's definitely no masterpiece. Definitely not a classic. I avoided the hype and reviews before seeing it and all I wanted going in was a movie set in the universe I love that wasn't a total abortion. This movie far exceeded that desire. I agree about it feeling slightly rushed in parts and the final act is certainly much weaker than the first 2/3. Some characters are non-entities indeed and it lacks a classic monster.

That being said, I wasn't underwhelmed. I guess my expectations were low so when it was well above average I was happy. There's so much good stuff about the movie that if it had been stretched out another half hour and paced a bit better it cold have been so much more. I wasn't enamoured with the Space Jockeys but I thought they were good enough.

When they brought the head back to the ship and discovered that what they thought was an exoskeleton was in fact a helmet I was pleasantly surprised

I thought that the alien lore was handled with respect. Perhaps the problem is that the story is almost too conventional and not daring enough. It's completely unfair to compare this to the first two movies, it feels more like an extended film version of the sort of anime shorts that were made to accompany the Matrix or Batman movies. Or indeed a Star Wars game set in the same universe. As such it elt like there were restrictions as to where it could go. It straddles the territory between standalone movie and companion piece. I love that type of stuff though, so for me it worked.

Mickeroo

Those of you who've seen it, is this a direct prequel or not? Just a yes or a no will do

My expectations are lowered somewhat now, which might be a blessing in disguise tbh!

Sarn

Just saw it there, a watchable movie if nothing spectacular. As an origin story I think it worked quite well. I had avoided all of the hype beforehand so didn't have high expectations. I didn't notice much in the way of 3D in it, so I would opt for the 2D if you were in two minds.

ricero

I think the trailers and hype over rated this film for a lot of people.it's a decent movie but I had to laugh at people considering it for blockbuster of the year.I found it far to simmilar to your typical sci fi alien horror film. It brought nothing new to the table. July 20th tdkr folks film of year

speedboatchase

Mickeroo wrote: »

Those of you who've seen it, is this a direct prequel or not? Just a yes or a no will do

My expectations are lowered somewhat now, which might be a blessing in disguise tbh!

It's telling its own story but it's set within the same universe and takes place before the events of Alien

opinion guy

Tusky wrote: »

Just back from the midnight screening in Cineworld (did anyone else find it horribly hot? Was like a sauna).

Yeah very uncomfortable. Not helped by the rain outside after

The sheer unprofessionalism and stupidity of the crew members - who are on what is a very important and expensive mission - really annoyed me. They basically go around poking everything in sight.

Very much agree. Especially Dr Hollywood. Yeah lets all take our helmets offf YAY!!!!! :rolleyes:

Deleted User wrote: »

When they first entered the room with all the vases, they see a mural on the wall and in the middle of this, is what distinctly looks like an Alien. Hell, even at the end, the creature that came out of the Engineer's stomach, looked almost identical to the xenomorphs.

That was the point - this was how the Alien was created in the first place. What I couldn't figure out was were the primordial Alien reptile thingies a result of the Engineers weapons gone wrong, or were they some other alien race

david75 wrote: »

I'm somewhere between don't bother seeing this in 3D and dont bother seeing this at all.
It looks amazing but it just doesn't meet the hype or expectation hanging on it.
The darkest most useless 3D transfer i've ever seen and what should have been a goldmine of storyline potential isn't touched and is acted badly.
If you do go, don't bother with the 3D at all.

3D transfer ?!?! This was shot entirely in 3D. Also are you INSANE?!?!?!?! The 3D was simply mindblowing. I absolutely loved it. Its the most visually stunning thing I've seen since Avatar - and actually I think its better than Avatar. Also its dark, because they were on an alien planet and indoors.

People - if you don't see this in 3D you are simply not seeing the same film.

Mickeroo wrote: »

Those of you who've seen it, is this a direct prequel or not? Just a yes or a no will do

My expectations are lowered somewhat now, which might be a blessing in disguise tbh!

Yes. Very much so.

Adolf Hipster

krudler wrote: »

Technocentral wrote: »

Am definitely going to a 2D showing, don't like 3D in general and from what I hear this one in particular's projection is too dark in its 3D form.

the new cinema in Limerick does do good 3D as its nice and bright, its only open a few weeks so its all brand new equipment so I'll give it a go in 3D (also cos they have no 2D showings and I'm not going to the crappy, freezing cinema with broken speakers for this)

Add in digital screens and digital sound, showtime is the best cinema in limerick atm.

Sad Professor

I thought it was excellent. It's no Alien, though. I don't mean it's not as good as Alien, I mean it's just not anything like Alien. Alien was an atmospheric horror film; Prometheus is just a straight Sci-Fi film. There's a bit a horror, a bit of action, but anyone expecting Alien or Aliens will be disappointed. This isn't a flaw, it's just different. The link to Alien is as tenuous as Scott and Lindelof said it was in interviews. I wouldn't consider it a prequel.

After all the talk of unanswered questions, I was left scratching my head. What unanswered questions? There's really only one worth talking about:

why David infects Holloway

. But I'm glad that wasn't answered. It makes the character even more interesting. The other stuff was deliberately mysterious, but overall Prometheus is no more mysterious than Alien. It seems like a lot of people saw Lindelof's name in the credits and saw another opportunity to moan about Lost.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing it again - in 2D. I reluctantly ended up going to the 3D showing, and as said above, it's a pretty terrible. Dark and murky even with the glasses off. It might be better in some cinemas, but if anyone knows of any cinemas in Ireland that are capable of vibrant 3D projection comparable to 2D I'd like to hear about them. Even putting aside the image problems, 3D glasses make the screen look smaller.

opinion guy

Sad Professor wrote: »

why David infects Holloway

Try harder

ebbsy

Just back from it, I enjoyed it a lot. Moved along nicely as well, nothing was dragged out.

Tusky

opinion guy wrote: »

Try harder

Care to elaborate? That wasn't clear with me either. I thought Halloway was an awful character though.

pinksoir

opinion guy wrote: »

Try harder

Exactly. But then

it seems a little too convenient that it would result in the birth of an alien/proto-facehugger. And that David could know this would even be a possibility. For me, something just didn't sit right with that.

. I hated Holloway's character, though. Way too much of a jock to be a scientist.

It's interesting when Stringer Bell says that

the moon they're on is a weapons factory, probably far away from the homeworld. If this is the case, as it seems to be, why are the markings on Earth directing us there?

Also,

What the hell is the story? Surely the Space Jockey's aren't extinct. So if they did want to destroy us (for whatever reason), presumably they could have done it in the interim. David says there are other ships, one of which himself and Shaw fly off in. And one of which presumably crashed on LV426. Shouldn't they have come to Earth to destroy us by now. I may be wrong, but I presume that LV44 wasn't the only place they were experimenting with xenomorphs. Maybe it was...

pinksoir

Tusky wrote: »

Care to elaborate? That wasn't clear with me either. I thought Halloway was an awful character though.

Yeah,

it definitely felt like David was privy to some extra information. Which I guess is a trait of all the Alien movies. Though in this case he really couldn't have been as this was the first time they'd ever come in contact. "Try harder" was Weyland urging David to do all he could to find the secrets of the Jockeys. Maybe David infecting Holloway was merely an attempt to see what the black goo would do, and not based on pre existing knowledge.

krudler

Adolf Hipster wrote: »

Add in digital screens and digital sound, showtime is the best cinema in limerick atm.

hell yes it is, they're good for updating things and answering questions on their facebook page as well. even the mid size screens are huge, love that they play those digital sound demos before the movie, and loads of trailers, I havent been there yet where there wasnt at least 4 trailers before the movie. you're lucky to get one in Storm.

Sin City

anyone know which is better

3D or normal for watching it?

tok9

Booked, looking forward to it now after Sad Professor's feedback!

CiDeRmAn

David was

only following orders, from his master, he wasn't free to follow his own moral agenda until Weyland was dead

Technocentral

I really enjoyed this, seen it in 2D (the way I wanted to) in Rathmines earlier. I didn't get caught up in the hype so hadn't huge expectations for it, happily its not a blockbuster, as blockbusters mean dumb, unoriginal, bubblegum flicks to me (Battleship, John Carter etc) it's so much more than that, a little bit of the first film (body horror elements) and Blade Runner combined. I thought Fassbinder was fantastic as the Lawrence of Arabia loving polite-bot and the rest acquitted themselves well enough, though I don't think there was ever a ship with less crew loyalty or concern for each other and you didn't really care if they lived or died as a consequence! Don't relate it to Alien too much or you'll be very disappointed, think of it as a sci fi/body horror flick set in the same universe. There was enough horror and gory bits for me anyway, plus some really nice touches like

the little sphere scanners emitting redligh

and

the badly rendered holograms of the big lads running throgh the ship at the beginning

. The end was fine apart from

the big lad fighting the octopus, a bit silly

. Theron looked amazing in it btw. In conclusion I'll probably buy it on blu ray when its released.

A_Sober_Paddy

Just back from it...

I enjoyed it but I have a few questions...

Question 1

Why did Dave(Fassbender) poison Charlie with the black liquid?

Question 2

Why didn't everyone die at the end?

I'll be back with a few more questions I'm sure:D

Technocentral

A_Sober_Paddy wrote: »

Just back from it...

I enjoyed it but I have a few questions...

Regarding Q2 (don't know or care really about reason for your first question!)

Apart from Brown and David they all did, probably need 1 or 2 characters for inevitable sequel/prequel

Creature

I'm very pleased with it. It's a good solid science fiction story that moves along nicely with bursts of violence and action. Just forget about the whole is it/isn't it a prequel debacle, its relationship to Alien is quite flimsy. Unfortunately the final scene somewhat goes against this and seems only to be there to agitate the fanboys and create the possible starting point for a squeal.

Also the effects are very well done. There's a healthy mix of old fashioned physical effects and cgi when needed. I loved every moment

an engineer

was on screen, their look and design was excellent, I wish we could've seen more of them.

Sad Professor wrote: »

There's really only one worth talking about:

why David infects Holloway

My understanding was that Weyland wanted an alien specimen to take back and study. Remember David seemed very nonchalant and somewhat happy when discussing the "pregnancy" with Shaw. Also remember it is "the company" we're talking about, the very unscrupulous company who constantly want to infect and study people in the later films. Or if you mean why Holloway in particular? I don't know. Maybe because he was a dickhead toward David for most of their scenes and if you've got to to it to someone, why not him.