Thoughts on Prometheus
To answer those three questions:
1. Given Ridley’s recent films, I had pretty low expectations for this film. I had high hopes (I really wanted it to be good) but I felt the chances of Ridley making a film on par with Alien were pretty remote.
2. I love Alien and love the franchise. The fourth movie is the weakest but I appreciate aspects of all of them. I do think they progressively get worse with each new installment. And I would say Prometheus is no different. It’s worse than Alien 4 (I don’t count the Alien versus Predator films).
3. I’m actually a big fan of Ridley Scott. While he hasn’t made a good movie in nearly ten years, I’m a big defender of his early 2000s comeback, which started with Gladiator and ended with Matchstick Men.
I know a lot has been written about Prometheus and all the questions/confusion it brings up. Here are some things that bothered me about the film, which I absolutely hated:
- Too many characters. Instead of having just a handful of crew members that you can develop and get to know, you have way too many and as a result, most of them feel thin and not very fleshed out. In the original, you had just enough people on the Nostromo that all of them were developed enough so you got a sense of who they were and what their purpose was. Ditto on Aliens. You really got to know everyone that mattered. In Prometheus, it seemed clear that the abundance of crew members was there only to make up the fact that so many had to die so many different ways.
- The Alien origin story. The opening was a bit confusing – a godlike creature falls to earth only to sacrifice himself to create mankind? What’s the purpose? So we are to believe that the creation of man comes from a bunch of godlike statues that created men just because they felt like it? And now they created a weapon of mass destruction in the form of this alien organism as a way of wiping out mankind? Is that what we have here?
- The convoluted questions that are posed but never answered. I get the sense that this film is just a setup for a sequel, in which some of these questions are answered – who are these godlike, albino creatures? Why does one fall to earth in the beginning of the film? What does he drink before being killed? Who is he killed by? What is the conflict between the creators of man and the creators of the alien weapon? Are they the same people? Different faction? Then you have all the questions about the motivations of the crew of Prometheus. Peter Weyland all of a sudden appears right after Shaw aborts the baby. What is David’s motivations? His intention seemed very muddled. Why does he infect Holloway? As an experiment? Does he expect Holloway will impregnate Shaw? Is he surprised when he finds out she is pregnant? What does he want with her? I never got the sense what his intentions were – on the one hand he seems to have ulterior motives and know more than anyone else (for instance, how the hell does he know how to open the doors in the tunnels? How does he know what the hologram scene is?) . Then on the other hand he seems surprised by the actions of what transpires. One minute he’s fighting to keep a pregnant Shaw docile the next he doesn’t care about her and he’s taking care of Weyland. All of the questions that are brought up seem to be muddled and confusing, not enigmatic and ambiguous. It just seems like bad writing as opposed to thoughtful.
- The technical stuff. It’s hard not to compare this film to the Alien franchise because it does seem to exist in the world of Alien. However unlike the four Alien films, which were very dark, gritty, grimy, “truckers in space” vibe, this film is shiny, clean, and bright – reminiscent of space films that came before Alien, when everything is presented as very sterile. The lighting is so bright here with lots of sunlight and white art direction.
- Putting the franchise aside, the film was neither suspenseful nor scary at all. I think part of this is because of the convoluted script that makes character intention unclear. Who’s the good guy, who’s the bad guy, etc. Whereas in the first film where everything is clear and it’s a battle between this crew and a very scary creature, in Prometheus so much is left a question. I wonder what it would be like if this film was made first. Would people respond as highly to it? Are they responding to it because of it’s relationship to the other films? For instance, the abortion scene feels less like a shocking scene and more of an over-the-top ripoff of the chest-burster scene in the Alien, which truly was shocking.
First, to answer your questions:
1. Expectations were low; Scott hasn’t made a decent film since Black Hawk Down (2001), and in reality Black Hawk Down was only an above average film (less a solid overall work, and more just a solid display of Scott’s talents as a director), and before that he hadn’t done anything noteworthy since Thelma & Louise (1991); so, that’s more than two decades of filmmaking that just hasn’t lived up to his earliest pictures
2. The original Alien is a classic film in pretty much every way; Aliens is a pinnacle in the science fiction/action genre, but not quite up to par with the original (in my opinion); the trend really starts to spiral downward with Alien3 (even though I feel this film is really ambitious, and could’ve been something special, but it just doesn’t click like the first two), and finally Alien: Resurrection, which is most definitely the worst of the original series (prior to Prometheus)
3. See my response to the first question; Scott reminds me of Walter Hill: a solid early career that doesn’t equate to longevity over an entire oeuvre; The Duellists (1977) is a really, really good film; Alien (1979) is a classic; and Blade Runner (1981), while I consider the film overrated, is still a very fine piece of cinematic art
With all of that in mind, I thought Prometheus was absolutely terrible. Seriously. It’s an impressive first twenty or thirty minutes, and then everything comes crashing down. Any ambition shown at the beginning is thrown away for the sake of convenient plot twists later on. Take for example: the two characters who get stuck in the ruins while the storm is going on; one minute they hear that another life form is in the ruins with them, and their response is to run away as fast as they can, yet five minutes later the same two characters stumble upon another life form in the ruins with them, and now the characters want to be best friends with the life form. This sort of ultra-lazy filmmaking is rampant throughout. When the escape pod crashes near the end of the film, and the main character (Noomi Rapace) goes into the pod, you can see bottles sitting up perfectly in the background, as if the pod had never crashed (I know, I know, what a minor complaint, but I repeat: this kind of ultra-lazy filmmaking is rampant). The captain of the ship has a southern accent for about five minutes at the beginning of the film. He doesn’t talk like that for the rest of the film. The captain and Charlize Theron seemingly have sex for absolutely no reason whatsoever. The alien infection infects everyone differently. One person becomes a super-zombie who kills a bunch of people on board the Prometheus ship, while another person has worms crawl out of his eyes. Rapace gets impregnated (thus infected), and yet nothing happens to her other than having the alien baby (why didn’t she turn into a zombie? why didn’t worms crawl out of her eyeballs?). I could go on and on and on, but I don’t feel like the film deserves all that much discussion. Besides, I’m sure some other folks around here will have their own complaints to log.
1. Low
2. Liked the first one, lowering expectations with the rest of the series.
3. Not sure why Scott decided to revisit, but his commercial prospects have not been good as of late, at least in the US – Robin Hood performed better overseas. I’m thinking Scott is more or less spent as a creative force.
It seems like they just want to reboot the series with a puzzle box approach. The fact that so many people have been picking apart the various lapses in logic is indicative that this might have some issues in the future if they decided to “answer” the questions in the film.
The first film was self-contained as a horror film and they decided to keep the story going. They got lucky the second time around, but the other films were pretty terrible, in someways, the third was annoying more than the fourth because all of Ripley’s work was undone in the first ten minutes of the third.
Prometheus was a good looking film with some credible actors, but I wasn’t wowed by Noomi Rapace and her character. Fassbinder was good.
it almost felt like they went through all the supposed motions for creating a buzz film except creating a worthy film to talk about and discuss.
“Take for example: the two characters who get stuck in the ruins while the storm is going on; one minute they hear that another life form is in the ruins with them, and their response is to run away as fast as they can, yet five minutes later the same two characters stumble upon another life form in the ruins with them, and now the characters want to be best friends with the life form. This sort of ultra-lazy filmmaking is rampant throughout”
I agree 100%. This is really the point in the film when it started to go sour for me. Why would anyone bend down and play with that weird snake vagina without knowing what the hell it is? Weak writing. Such weak writing.
1. Big expectation from the trailer (which was pretty intense). Unease due to Damon Lindelof’s involvement.
2. I really enjoyed Alien. The first ten minutes are particularly great and the score is perfect. Aliens wasn’t my cup of tea. Haven’t bothered with Fincher or Jeunet’s films yet.
3. I don’t particularly like Ridley Scott, and had I not known that he directed Alien and Blade Runner, I’d probably have called him a hack or some other mean four-letter word. That Damon Lindelof (of LOST infamy) signed on to screenwrite was basically the film’s death knell. The guy just can’t write a story without asking hundreds of pointless, unanswerable questions.
I didn’t want an Alien prequel (although I was excited to see the deal with the Engineers/Space Jockeys); I wanted a self-contained sci-fi horror film that examined philosophical issues in a fresh, sutble way. Sort of like a body-horror version of Solaris. Needless to say, I was disappointed.
Could have been a good film if Noomi Rapace and Damon Lindelof weren’t involved, but I guess that’s a vain wish now.
1: Started high and got lower as the premier drew near.
2. Loved the original and highly enjoyed the sequel. But never saw any others until Prometheus.
3. I never had much feelings at all for Ridley. Sure, I’ve seen many of his films and have even really liked or loved them, but I never associate him with his films, if that makes sense. To (maybe) clarify : When I saw The Tree of Life I thought, Man! Another amazing T. Malick film. When I watched Fish Tank I thought, Andrea Arnold created such a heartbreaking and fascinating look at a single mother who still hasn’t broken through her youthful needs, a great companion piece to Wasp. When I see a Ridley Scott film I just think, I loved it or It was fun or Ugh.
When Prometheus was announced I didn’t think, Ridley is back, I just said, Ooooh a prequel to Alien.
I enjoyed this film. I watch a lot of horror films so I don’t even notice plot holes anymore LOL. I was hoping for more character development though because I thought that in Alien, even with a lot of focus on Ripley and the alien we got a good feel for the other characters. This film tried covering so much material that Shaw and David were the only two who got ample development. After the film I remarked to my boyfriend that they might as well have dressed half the cast in red shirts and called it a day.
Here’s an interesting breakdown from Jim Emerson, along w/comparisons to Alien and 2001:
Favorite part was Fassbender, most certainly.
1. Expectations were lukewarm. Scott is still capable of good work.
2. The Alien mythology is a little franchise of sorts that different people put their spin on, and I’m glad to see that variety. Resurrection was, you know, pukingly terrible. Perhaps it should’ve been called Alien: Regurgitation.
3. See above.
After the film I went home and cracked open my Quadrilogy set and watched all of the extra features for the first Alien film. Learning about its inception was satisfying. They were so lucky to have Giger. Reminds me of the way Peter Jackson relied entirely on Alan Lee & John Howe for aesthetic inspiration. Maybe all studio directors should hire genuine artists to do the important work for them…
@miasma : Touch, touch, touch, touch, touch counts as character development though, right?? I’m counting it.
I think it is arguable that David develops (but I won’t). What I particularly enjoy are those little moments, never explained, when David shows what seems to be personality. Near the beginning Rapace’s lover character asks David why he bothers to wear his spacesuit, and David replies that he only goes through the motions so that “you people” are more comfortable. Later on the planet he opens a door before the characters are prepared and very knowingly mutters, “Whoops.” I like these mysteriously human glimpses into David, or at least as moments which hint at a great deal under the surface that is unexplained.
You’ll notice that I am pleased with the story’s unexplained elements.
1. Average expectations.
2. Only seen Alien; thought it was ok. Why do all of your given options include loving Alien…
3. Pretty neutral towards him.
By far the best thing about this movie was Michael Fassbender. The plot started off with some promise, and then got worse as it turned into a predictable horror movie trying to be Alien again. Overall though, I enjoyed it a fair amount.
I thought it was pretty groovy.
Fassbender is rapidly becoming one of my favorite actors. As good as most everyone was in Inglourious Basterds, I thought Fassbender – in his relatively small part – pulled off the most subtly impressive trick, acting in a manner reminiscent of the movie stars from the old war movies (like an Errol Flynn).
And he was undoubtedly the single best part of Prometheus.
I have never really thought Ridley Scott was a great filmmaker. I liked The Duelists, the original Alien was a good pop corn flick back in its day and Black Hawk Down was decent. Other than that I cannot really say I have been overwhelmed by his work.
Prometheus suffered from having no “wow” moment or any element of surprise. We as an audience knew what would be found on the planet; the discovery they went in search of was never concluded with any satisfactory answer. It was a well produced and acted production that lacked any strong point of view or any impact. Fassbender was fantastic; he was the best element of the film. But at the end of the day; the film was essentially made to pave way for Prometheus 2.
1. I would say that my expectations were fairly low—given the way Santino and others trashed the film, I was expecting the worst.
2. I liked the first film and really like the second film. I haven’t seen the third film, and I think the fourth film is utterly horrid—far worse than this film, imo.
3. I think Ridley is a very competent director—at least in terms of visuals. My sense is that his narrative sense or other skills not related to the visuals (acting, perhaps) aren’t that strong. A part of me feels he cares more about the visuals and too little about the story, characters or even themes—or he is not very good and developing any of these.
@Santino
It’s worse than Alien 4…
I don’t get this. It’s been a while since I’ve seen 4, but I thought it was awful. The concept of Ripley’s child might have had potential, but the execution of the idea was so terrible, imo. I felt embarrassed for Sigourney Weaver, who is a fine actor, especially towards the end of the film. Winona Ryder is not very good in this, too.
While he hasn’t made a good movie in nearly ten years, I’m a big defender of his early 2000s comeback, which started with Gladiator and ended with Matchstick Men.
Middling and mediocre are the words that come to mind when I think of those films. Not utterly terrible, but OK at best.
Too many characters
The bigger problem, imo, is that the characters aren’t well-developed or interesting. Fassbinder’s performance is good, but his characters isn’t well-written or developed, imo. I agree that the secondary characters aren’t as interesting as the secondary characters in Aliens.
The Alien origin story. The opening was a bit confusing – a godlike creature falls to earth only to sacrifice himself to create mankind? What’s the purpose? So we are to believe that the creation of man comes from a bunch of godlike statues that created men just because they felt like it? And now they created a weapon of mass destruction in the form of this alien organism as a way of wiping out mankind? Is that what we have here?
That sounds about right. I’m a little disappointed we don’t know more, especially regarding how and why the alien is left on the planet, and what he was hoping to do. Was he committing suicide (as he seems to ingest the same thing that David gave to Charlie)? Or was he intentionally trying to plant DNA that would lead to life on Earth?
My guess is that the film doesn’t want to answer these questions—or it doesn’t have satisfying answers so it is intentionally vague. On some level this is unsatisfying, but on another level I accept it as well. But I also have the sneaking suspicion that Scott either doesn’t think these issues through because he’s oblivious or indifferent—either way, that’s not a good thing.
The convoluted questions that are posed but never answered. I get the sense that this film is just a setup for a sequel, in which some of these questions are answered – who are these godlike, albino creatures? Why does one fall to earth in the beginning of the film? What does he drink before being killed? Who is he killed by? What is the conflict between the creators of man and the creators of the alien weapon? Are they the same people? Different faction?
Huh. The thought that there were two group of aliens—those who created humans and those who wanted to destroy them—never occurred to me. I can see how you would get that, but that reading seems to be a stretch, imo.
Then you have all the questions about the motivations of the crew of Prometheus. Peter Weyland all of a sudden appears right after Shaw aborts the baby. What is David’s motivations? His intention seemed very muddled. Why does he infect Holloway? As an experiment? Does he expect Holloway will impregnate Shaw? Is he surprised when he finds out she is pregnant? What does he want with her? I never got the sense what his intentions were – on the one hand he seems to have ulterior motives and know more than anyone else (for instance, how the hell does he know how to open the doors in the tunnels? How does he know what the hologram scene is?) . Then on the other hand he seems surprised by the actions of what transpires. One minute he’s fighting to keep a pregnant Shaw docile the next he doesn’t care about her and he’s taking care of Weyland. All of the questions that are brought up seem to be muddled and confusing, not enigmatic and ambiguous. It just seems like bad writing as opposed to thoughtful.
I largely agree with the “muddled” description. I suspect he infects Charlie because he wants to kill him. How does he know the chemical will kill Charlie? He can read the alien language. This explains how he knows about the hologram scene and other details about the aliens. (There’s a lot of writing on the walls, literally.) My guess is that he doesn’t know exactly what the chemical will do to Charlie—that it might alter his DNA and that might be transferred to Elizabeth. (He doesn’t know that they’re going to have sex, either, I assume.)
The technical stuff. It’s hard not to compare this film to the Alien franchise because it does seem to exist in the world of Alien. However unlike the four Alien films, which were very dark, gritty, grimy, “truckers in space” vibe, this film is shiny, clean, and bright – reminiscent of space films that came before Alien, when everything is presented as very sterile. The lighting is so bright here with lots of sunlight and white art direction.
Good points, and nice observation about the “white” approach in this film.
For instance, the abortion scene feels less like a shocking scene and more of an over-the-top ripoff of the chest-burster scene in the Alien, which truly was shocking.
I think this explains the reason the film isn’t more suspenseful. We’ve seen this stuff before. While David’s character is a bit ambiguous (He’s essentially serving Weyland), the creatures and the godlike alien are basically the monsters—that’s clear enough, right? But the humans behave in the silly ways that they do in horror movies and we’ve seen much of the suspense and horror before. Plus, did you find Rapace appealing or likable? I found her bland, and I felt largely indifferent to her.
@ Jazz -
“The concept of Ripley’s child might have had potential, but the execution of the idea was so terrible, imo.”
I agree. I felt like the story ended perfectly at the end of Alien 3. Bringing Ripley back was a big mistake. So I won’t be arguing the merits of this film.
But, at least it looked and felt like an Alien film. At least it felt like it could passably exist in the Alien universe. And at least it had one cool sequence – the sequence with the aliens underwater. Prometheus had none of that – it didn’t look or feel like an Alien film, none of the sequences were memorable, and they give a backstory to the aliens which completely takes away from the power and mystery that helped to define the franchise.
In other words, it’s easy to dismiss and forget about Alien 4 since it takes place after the first three films. But Prometheus precedes the first Alien, which is my mind tarnishes the subsequent films.
“The bigger problem, imo, is that the characters aren’t well-developed or interesting.”
I think if they had less characters, it would’ve been easier for them to develop and define the supporting characters. As it stood, most of the characters just felt like props.
“My guess is that the film doesn’t want to answer these questions—or it doesn’t have satisfying answers so it is intentionally vague.”
Oh, I think they have the answers. I think the writers mapped all this out. And that’s part of the problem – it felt like a movie that was leading to another movie. In other words, it felt like a TV show’s season finale, leaving a cliffhanger to get you to come back for the next season. This is the problem of hiring TV writers to write your screenplay.
“He can read the alien language.”
I think that’s true but how? How is he able to read and understand these aliens? I’m not saying it’s not possible but he’s a man-made machine and I feel like a little bit of explanation into David’s abilities is necessary here.
“We’ve seen this stuff before.”
I think this sums it up succinctly. Whereas Alien was truly shocking and original, Prometheus is not. That may not be fair to expect Prometheus to be a game changer the way Alien was but given the history of the franchise and the director coming back, it’s hard not to make those comparisons and be a bit disappointed.
“But the humans behave in the silly ways that they do in horror movies.”
Yes, this is a big reason why I love Alien so much – because the characters don’t behave like stupid, one-dimensional screenwriter pawns. It’s very difficult to achieve this in horror, which is why so many horror movies are generic (or even terrible). And unfortunately, Prometheus is no different.
As for Rapace, she didn’t bother me. Her character was not very interesting but her acting didn’t annoy me.
@Santino
But, at least it looked and felt like an Alien film. At least it felt like it could passably exist in the Alien universe. And at least it had one cool sequence – the sequence with the aliens underwater. Prometheus had none of that – it didn’t look or feel like an Alien film, none of the sequences were memorable, and they give a backstory to the aliens which completely takes away from the power and mystery that helped to define the franchise.
The fact that the film employed a look that was the opposite of the “truckers in space” vibe (I like that description) wasn’t really a problem for me; and think this is because I felt the film was more about the white aliens versus the xenomorphs. (The beginning of the film establishes this, imo.)
I think if they had less characters, it would’ve been easier for them to develop and define the supporting characters. As it stood, most of the characters just felt like props.
Right, but I’m not sure if decreasing the characters would have helped.
Oh, I think they have the answers. I think the writers mapped all this out. And that’s part of the problem – it felt like a movie that was leading to another movie. In other words, it felt like a TV show’s season finale, leaving a cliffhanger to get you to come back for the next season.
You could be right, but I didn’t get that sense. Think about it: the questions, where we come from? why we were created and how we were created are fundamental questions that all human beings want to understand. These are huge mysteries. If a film is going to answer these questions, the answers better be incredibly good—otherwise, you’re better off leaving them as mysteries. I felt the film wanted to preserve the mystery—especially at the end—but at the same time emphasize how much we want to know the answers to these questions. (Elizabeth going off into space to find these answers.)
On a sidenote, do you think knowing why the aliens changed their minds (i.e., decided to wipe out humans) is important? I have mixed feelings about this, but I lean towards believing the answer is important.
I think that’s true but how? How is he able to read and understand these aliens? I’m not saying it’s not possible but he’s a man-made machine and I feel like a little bit of explanation into David’s abilities is necessary here.
He mentions that for two years he’s been studying all types of languages, and he believes there’s a good chance he’ll be able to speak and understand the language.
Whereas Alien was truly shocking and original, Prometheus is not. That may not be fair to expect Prometheus to be a game changer the way Alien was but given the history of the franchise and the director coming back, it’s hard not to make those comparisons and be a bit disappointed.
Right—and no one forced him to make the film. These challenges speak against making the film, imo. But if they had explored the god-like aliens and the Big Questions, I would have been interested in that. Of course, I probably would have been disappointed, but still, that would have warranted a prequel more than the film we got.
Btw, I can understand if people feel disappointed and highly annoyed by the bait-and-switch of the film. It starts off like 2001, but then seems to lose interest in these questions and turns into a silly monster movie.
Yes, this is a big reason why I love Alien so much – because the characters don’t behave like stupid, one-dimensional screenwriter pawns. It’s very difficult to achieve this in horror, which is why so many horror movies are generic (or even terrible).
Is making characters behave in sensible or believable ways really that difficult? I’d be surprised if this is the case. (I think it might be fun to try and “re-write” the scenes with the characters behaving in more plausible ways. This film really has some bad and inconsistent behavior. I’m thinking specifically of the biologist who wants to quickly leave get back to the ship. He’s not even a little torn about leaving the discovery of new life forms? What kind of biologist is he, and why did Weyland pick a clown like him? OK, fine. But when we get to the cobra creature, why is he so brave all of sudden; and he’s saying stupid things like, “Oh you’re so cute,” or something to that effect. This is really bad writing, imo.)
As for Rapace, she didn’t bother me. Her character was not very interesting but her acting didn’t annoy me.
She didn’t annoy, but her performance, screen presence and character were flat. This might not be so surprising or disappointing if I hadn’t seen her in the Dragon Tattoo films.
(Edit: Oh, I just noticed Thomas already commented on the biologist and his “pet cobra.” I also agreed with this line from Thomas: “It’s an impressive first twenty or thirty minutes, and then everything comes crashing down. Any ambition shown at the beginning is thrown away for the sake of convenient plot twists later on.” Yep.
I agree about Idris Elba’s accent—which was bad to begin with. He’s a good actor, but he can’t do the accent, and it hurt his performance.
Thomas said, The alien infection infects everyone differently.
I didn’t have too much of a problem with this. I assumed there were different types of biological weapons.
“On a sidenote, do you think knowing why the aliens changed their minds (i.e., decided to wipe out humans) is important? I have mixed feelings about this, but I lean towards believing the answer is important.”
I think it’s important because they make it feel important. The film makes a point to show the albino humanoid commit suicide to create mankind. And it also makes a point to show that there was some sort of conflict where these aliens wanted to destroy mankind. It feels so plotty that these questions deserve to be answered (if for no other reason than because it seems like there is a reason).
“Is making characters behave in sensible or believable ways really that difficult? I’d be surprised if this is the case.”
From a writing perspective, I think it is. Because in horror, your goal is to manipulate your audience (probably more so than any other genre of film). Your goal is to scare them, make them afraid, anxious, etc. This is difficult when you’re trying to ground your characters in reality and have them behave sensibly. It’s much easier to have the young blonde run upstairs and face certain death than to have her run outside the house, away from the killer. Because if you have her run outside, like any sensible person, you gotta come up with a more creative way to have her die. You know what I mean? In Prometheus, lets say the guys who get trapped in the storm don’t treat the vagina snake like a cute little puppy. Then what? How do you kill these two guys off? By running and getting attacked from behind? By trying to kill the creature?
Compare that scene to the scene in Alien when Harry Dean Stanton and Yaphet Kotto get killed. It’s the difference between benign, static filmmaking versus true terror and suspense.
I think it’s important because they make it feel important.
But suppose these events actually happened. Suppose we found out that humans were created by aliens and they later changed their minds and set about wiping us out? David doesn’t understand the need to know the reason for this. If they’re trying to kill you, isn’t that all you need to know (and then you can act accordingly)? Certainly, I’m curious to know why they changed their minds, but is it fundamentally important? I guess it is. (I’m not sure why I’m wavering on this question.)
The film makes a point to show the albino humanoid commit suicide to create mankind. And it also makes a point to show that there was some sort of conflict where these aliens wanted to destroy mankind.
I don’t know if the albino commits suicide. At first, I thought he was transforming himself, but something went wrong and he fell into the river. But that doesn’t really make sense or seem believable. Suicide seems to be the beset answer, but I’m not sure if it’s the correct answer, either.
When you say “conflict,” do you mean between two alien factions? How do you get that? Why couldn’t there have been consensus on this?
It’s much easier to have the young blonde run upstairs and face certain death than to have her run outside the house, away from the killer. Because if you have her run outside, like any sensible person, you gotta come up with a more creative way to have her die. You know what I mean?
Right, but then you find a creative way to make her unable to leave the house—or something else. Consider the cobra scene. What if the filmmakers made the “cobra” corner the biologist? The biologist could have been terrified (which would have been at least consistent) and the “cobra” still could have done its damage. That’s not exactly the best solution, but isn’t it better than what we got?
But a part of me believes you can make the characters behave in believable ways and create horror and suspense around that. Yes, that’s challenging, but a good filmmaker should be able to do this. But I’ve never tried to seriously write or solve these issues, so what do I know.
“Suppose we found out that humans were created by aliens and they later changed their minds and set about wiping us out? David doesn’t understand the need to know the reason for this. If they’re trying to kill you, isn’t that all you need to know (and then you can act accordingly)? "
I think it is important because it deals with intent. If we have learned that they created us, there’s a reason for that. It’s to explain where we came from. It’s to develop this alien race. But you can’t just leave it there. It’s one thing for an alien to want to kill you (that’s fine – we don’t need to know why in this case. For instance, in all the previous Alien films, we never stop to ask why this aliens are killing people. We just accept that they’re killing machines). But if we learn more about an alien race, that they are our creators and now they’ve created a weapon to kill us, I think that warrants an explanation. To just leave it at that seems lazy (and boring).
“Suicide seems to be the beset answer, but I’m not sure if it’s the correct answer, either”
I agree – it’s unclear. And that’s a problem. If you’re going to open your film with a scene that is never clearly defined, that’s bad.
“The biologist could have been terrified (which would have been at least consistent) and the “cobra” still could have done its damage. That’s not exactly the best solution, but isn’t it better than what we got?”
Absolutely. Actually, anything would’ve been better than what we got. lol
But if we learn more about an alien race, that they are our creators and now they’ve created a weapon to kill us, I think that warrants an explanation. To just leave it at that seems lazy (and boring).
In terms of what a film provides, I would normally agree with you, but we’re talking about some of the biggest questions we have about ourselves. By not answering the questions, the film might be saying we’ll never know the answers to these questions—but we will always really want to know them. (I’m not explaining myself well.)
If you’re going to open your film with a scene that is never clearly defined, that’s bad.
Again, generally, I’d agree, but…think of various creation stories. They give us some idea about the nature of creation, but there is also mystery and parts that aren’t so clear. A part of me feels the film is trying to do something similar. (Btw, if he’s just committing suicide, why do we see his DNA being altered?)
Actually, anything would’ve been better than what we got. lol
Yeah, unfortunately, that’s not so far off.
“Again, generally, I’d agree, but…think of various creation stories. They give us some idea about the nature of creation, but there is also mystery and parts that aren’t so clear. "
I think if we’re talking about a movie like 2001 or The Tree of Life, sure, I’d agree. But this is Prometheus and it feels like it wants to have it both ways – a meditation on the creation of life and also a standard horror/sci-fi film. I don’t know how you jive those two together but Ridley clearly didn’t succeed.
But this is Prometheus and it feels like it wants to have it both ways – a meditation on the creation of life and also a standard horror/sci-fi film. I don’t know how you jive those two together but Ridley clearly didn’t succeed.
Oh, I agree. I don’t think the film works as on a horror level or a more serious level, either. But I don’t think the film fails because it doesn’t provide clear-cut answers to the why we were created, etc.—or at least I don’t have as much of a problem with this as you seem to.
I think the lack of answers is only a small part of my problem with the film. I think the backstory as to how the aliens were created is a bit stupid (created by these humanoids as some sort of weapon) and I think the lack of clearcut storytelling was also a problem (the thin characters, their stupid behavior, etc – stuff we’ve talked about).
Right. I didn’t mean to imply that was the only problem you have. There are many problems in the film!
I think the backstory as to how the aliens were created is a bit stupid (created by these humanoids as some sort of weapon)
You mean the xenomorphs, right? Well, the interesting part (or potentially interesting part) is that xenomorphs have our DNA (which relates to their name, I would imagine). In the standard sci-fi trope, this would symbolize the way our creations come back to destroy us, but, in this case, I don’t think the humans can be blamed (unless we count the albino aliens as “humans”). The DNA link might also make the storyline in Alien 4 interesting—but the results are quite the opposite, imo.
The more I think about how Prometheus failed, the more I think it would’ve been better to leave well enough alone and not try to explain the origins of the alien. I think if they wanted to explore the origins of the space jockey, fine. That would’ve been cool. But I don’t necessarily think it had to be related to the origins of the aliens. I think leaving that a mystery is much more compelling.
But I don’t necessarily think it had to be related to the origins of the aliens. I think leaving that a mystery is much more compelling.
FWIW, I don’t think the film really diminished the xenomorph, but what it adds doesn’t warrant the making of the film. I agree exploring the albino aliens and the issues related to them were worth exploring though.
the film might be saying we’ll never know the answers to these questions—but we will always really want to know them. (I’m not explaining myself well.)
Yes, but did Prometheus even do that well? By no means do I have a problem with a film grappling with large questions and eventual ambiguous answers. But couldn’t it be argued that the execution of such an answer was just poorly done?
Anyway, everyone knows the answer to life is 42.
@Sebastian
Yes, but did Prometheus even do that well? By no means do I have a problem with a film grappling with large questions and eventual ambiguous answers. But couldn’t it be argued that the execution of such an answer was just poorly done?
Yeah, I would agree with this.
Santino
Now that Prometheus has been out for over a week and the general consensus seems to be very divisive (either you love it or you hate it), I’d like to discuss with people why this film has generated so much emotion. Surprisingly, there hasn’t been a thread devoted specifically to this film and it’s overall impact on moviegoers (and specifically cinephiles).
So what do people think of this film? I think to answer this question, a couple things should be addressed first:
1. What was your expectation? High? Low?
2. What is your opinion of Alien and the franchise? Love the first one but hate the rest? Love the first and second one but hate the rest? Love them all for different reasons?
3. What is your opinion of Ridley Scott and how do you feel about him returning to the franchise?
I think some of these qualifiers will help give a better understanding into what your response to the film was.
FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOT SEEN THE FILM, DON’T READ THIS THREAD. SPOILERS GALORE!