Prometheus *SPOILERS FROM POST 1538*

I really enjoyed it. Some of the criticism is deserved, some not. Characters doing stupid things etc were bad but didn't ruin the film for me.

All the good points have already been mentioned, Fassbender was brilliant and one of the best things about the film. It looks great, had some cool sci-fi stuff like those mapping probe things, the exploding head scene was creepy, the med-pod sequence was a classic. A lot to like here.

I was disappointed how they killed off Vickers (Theron) - seeing as they didn't actually show her getting crushed I fully expected her to come back into it. If she was actually killed, and not being saved for a sequel, then her character just seems pointless, and a terribly lame way to kill her off. Was she supposed to be a robot, or were we meant to be unclear about that?

I don't agree with the criticism on the lack of answers, they were just holding back a lot of stuff for a sequel and I liked that there were things left to our imagination for now.

Re: the med-pod scene, the machine could perform operations on both males and females, it just couldn't perform female operations such as abortion. She had to tell the machine to perform a 'removal of a foreign body' operation, not a C-section.

Psychedelic wrote: »

I really enjoyed it. Some of the criticism is deserved, some not. Characters doing stupid things etc were bad but didn't ruin the film for me.

All the good points have already been mentioned, Fassbender was brilliant and one of the best things about the film. It looks great, had some cool sci-fi stuff like those mapping probe things, the exploding head scene was creepy, the med-pod sequence was a classic. A lot to like here.

I was disappointed how they killed off Vickers (Theron) - seeing as they didn't actually show her getting crushed I fully expected her to come back into it. If she was actually killed, and not being saved for a sequel, then her character just seems pointless, and a terribly lame way to kill her off. Was she supposed to be a robot, or were we meant to be unclear about that?

I don't agree with the criticism on the lack of answers, they were just holding back a lot of stuff for a sequel and I liked that there were things left to our imagination for now.

Re: the med-pod scene, the machine could perform operations on both males and females, it just couldn't perform female operations such as abortion. She had to tell the machine to perform a 'removal of a foreign body' operation, not a C-section.

I'm pretty sure she tells it specifically to perform a section, when shes tapping the buttons to override it, it happened pretty quickly though so cant remember the exact wording of it.

Theron was kinda wasted in this, she was more Ripley than Rapace was, had the ice queen thing down and not letting them bring Holloway back on the ship etc. also there was nothing between Vickers and Shaw after that, she burnt her partner alive and there's zero character confrontation afterwards? even in Alien they show Lambert laying into Ripley after she refuses to let them back on the ship. its obviously mirroring that scene but has no follow up.

Kinski wrote: »

That was just in there to hint that the old guy was onboard.

One big problem with the film was the sheer number of characters. The screenplay needed some heavy editing - some of those characeters had next to nothing to do. The Scottish woman and the two co-pilots could easily have been cut. Also, I didn't like how they introduced Rapace's character's infertility right before the plot development it so obviously was intended to serve; that should have been established much earlier. Some very sloppy writing overall, I thought.

gah yeah that "I cant have kids" thing, that just seemed shoehorned in there to explain why she wouldnt have been on the pill or they didnt use space condoms or whatever they use in 2093 as contraception, no need for it if she was infertile, we get it. But it was just mentioned right before they had sex, it could have been talked about earlier like you said. its a very sloppy script,a nd this isnt nitpicking the sake of it, these are stupid little things that a competent scriptwriter could have worked around or avoided altogether.

like the two guys who have barely had a line who sacrifice themselves with barely any motivation, in Alien they all want to get paid more to go on a rescue missions and Parker is bitching about doing stuff not in his contract throughout the movie, that makes sense, he's just an engineer on a tugboat in space not a rescue worker or explorer. Elbas character at least says he'd do whatever it takes to stop the ship leaving, the other two just stay there for no reason on a whim.

krudler wrote: »

I'm pretty sure she tells it specifically to perform a section, when shes tapping the buttons to override it, it happened pretty quickly though so cant remember the exact wording of it.

She told it to perform a Cesarean section, but it wouldn't, so she had to tell it to perform a 'removal of a foreign body' operation instead. I don't think she had to override the machine to do this, it was just an alternative operation with the same result i.e. getting the thing removed from her body.

opinion guy wrote: »

The multibillion one of twelve ever made machine calibrated only for males didn't cop on it was a woman when it did the scan ???

Seems to me a basic safety feature would be recognising people its not calibrated for.

the Tensionbot 2000. :pac:

Mickeroo wrote: »

And the new testament is about a hippy with super powers, whats your point?

Just because its a sci-fi doesn't mean it can't be profound, arguably real sci-fi should be profound. I'm not saying Prometheus filled any of its lofty ambitions or explored its phylosophical themes to their full potential but the aliens and space-ships weren't the reason it failed to do so.

I couldn't have said it any better.

krudler wrote: »

I genuinely can't understand casting Pearce to play the older Weyland, he's unregonisable in sub-Jackass old man makeup anyway, why not just cast an older actor, if AVP hadnt already done it they could have just cast Lance Henriksen.

Yeah the makeup on the old man was a massive "wtf" moment? it looked way over the top and really bad as a special effect considering how everything else looked amazing.

krudler wrote: »

true the landscapes did look lovely, the waterfall sequence in the opening looked gorgeous. actually about the opening, dafuq was that about?
and yeah the

rock protecting Rapace was stupid, stupid, stupid. in Alien when the Nostromo lands you see massive sections of rock being crushed by the weight of it, same thing should have happened here

oh and also

the jockeys have perfected interstellar travel, growing organic life from nothing but primordial goop, have constructed incredibly intricate ships and terraformed planets. yet the ignition key for their ship is...a whistle.

Yeah that was weird i mean what the hell lol

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

[Extract from conversation between two 20th Century Fox producers as they are polishing their money]

Producer 1: Hmm, looks like Prometheus doesn't have enough Oscar winners in it.
Producer 2: I think Charlize Theron has a weekend off from Snow White?
Producer 1: Interesting. Who can she be in it?
Producer 2: Space jockey?
Producer 1: Don't know... we already have one well-known actor in unconvincing make-up.
Producer 2: Guess we'll just make it up when she gets on set. She can be someone's daughter or something. As long as she gets to scowl menacingly at some point.
Producer 1: Sold! Dude, you've done it again!

[Producers continue polishing their money]

ever seen The Majestic? the opening scene is basically that, brilliant take on filmmaking by commitee

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

She says C-Section, then the machine 'tells' her its calibrated for males, and then she desperately programmes in the 'foreign body' removal op.

I agree about Theron's character though. Pretty sure the film would function completely as intended minus her presence (although to a degree I think Weyland's presence is narratively and thematically appropriate, appalling make-up or not). Especially all the vague 'Is she a robot?' nonsense (she's wearing the same suit as David!), which to me was an attempt at some sort of Blade Runner-esque commentary on robotics, but alas fell flat on its face.

I couldn't help but compare Blade Runner's vital "I need more life, father" scene with the scene where Theron uses the term father while stomping her foot and whining about not getting her inheritance yet.

Why are people getting bent outa shape about the dna? I have the same dna as a 7 foot black man. Doesn't mean to say we have the same genes switched on.

So do we think the guy at the start was some kind of renegade, who wanted to kick start life because he could? This would mean we weren't actually planned, which in turn would make our rapid technological advancement a threat?

Some other things I've just remembered which are puzzling me:

Shaw asks David to take the thing out of her, but he, in an oddly hostile way, refuses to. He then sticks a needle in her back to knock her out. She wakes up, ends up removing the thing herself, but doesn't confront him afterwards, nor does she mention to the rest of the crew how weird David was acting and that he refused to remove that squid from her. There were other instances of David acting weird that the crew didn't really respond to.

Another thing is the end, when Shaw decides to get on one of the space jockey ships and go off in search of the space jockey's planet - what about food, water and other supplies required for her to live?