**** The Official Prometheus Spoiler Discussion Thread ****

[Plunk13]

Little confused by the snakes/black liquid link

When the team entered the chamber and changed the air content/humdifity/pressure/whatever, then it effected the goo. It reacted in some way that caused it to escape the vases, or maybe in some way it had already escaped and was "waiting" on the ceiling; we see it moving.
So we already saw the worms in the ground. We must assume that the goo mutated these worms into the snake things (possibly something that happened earlier and attacked the other Engineers). It goes and attacks the biologist (head regrowing was supposed to be a worm trait??)
So...
Come into contact with goo - become mutated.
Ingest goo - deteriation of body
Transfer of goo via embyonic form - recipient becomes host?

 

[Plunk13]

Ridley on Prometheous

http://www.slashgear.com/ridley-scott-talks-prometheus-with-slashgear-candid-uncut-02231334/

Quite an interesting read for those of use that were asking the right questions about creation, about our creators- are they the Engineers, or, as Shaw hinted at - or did someone create the Engineers. Was there a single being that really created all life. Are the Engineers the equivbalent of humans creating our own life playthings (David). Imagine if the true "creator" was a huge tentacle monstrosity... what would all of the Religous nuts on Earth think of that, that their deity was a massive squid or a worm or a blob?

Or you can carry on nit-picking about the so-called plot holes.

 

[hola_adios]

http://www.slashgear.com/ridley-scott-talks-prometheus-with-slashgear-candid-uncut-02231334/

Quite an interesting read for those of use that were asking the right questions about creation, about our creators- are they the Engineers, or, as Shaw hinted at - or did someone create the Engineers. Was there a single being that really created all life. Are the Engineers the equivbalent of humans creating our own life playthings (David). Imagine if the true "creator" was a huge tentacle monstrosity... what would all of the Religous nuts on Earth think of that, that their deity was a massive squid or a worm or a blob?

Or you can carry on nit-picking about the so-called plot holes.

So-called? The film is a massive plot hole, all this wild speculation trying to fill the story is clear testament to it. They have put almost every idea they could come up with, stir, not even stitch up and away you go, that is the story ... next people will try to start defending the last 2 Matrix movies ...

 

[413x]

When the team entered the chamber and changed the air content/humdifity/pressure/whatever, then it effected the goo. It reacted in some way that caused it to escape the vases, or maybe in some way it had already escaped and was "waiting" on the ceiling; we see it moving.
So we already saw the worms in the ground. We must assume that the goo mutated these worms into the snake things (possibly something that happened earlier and attacked the other Engineers). It goes and attacks the biologist (head regrowing was supposed to be a worm trait??)
So...
Come into contact with goo - become mutated.
Ingest goo - deteriation of body
Transfer of goo via embyonic form - recipient becomes host?

Ah thanks for that, I had forgotten that the worms were there!

Like someone just said, almost too much happening, should have been 180 mins with that content. Too bitty

 

[NathanE]

[RS] The astrophysics gig… I’ve had nine very high-end scientists sitting at a table, ranging from NASA astrophysicists, I don’t know what you call a serious mathematician, but a serious mathematician at a scientific level. And I’ve said, first question, “who believes in god?” And it’s a bit like looking at a bunch of nine kids and saying “who masturbates?” There’s a total silence.

[DL] Then you get arrested.

This article is brilliant. Ridley comes across as hilarious

 

[NathanE]

[DL] I think another version of your question could be interpreted as “What does the black goo do?”

[RS] Three things! Cleans your teeth…

[DL] [Laughing] Exactly! And I think that one of the things that I love about Ridley’s movies, and have loved long before I worked with him – and it’s very surreal to be on the inside of – thirty-some odd years after Blade Runner we’re all still talking about whether or not Deckard is a robot. So there’s a speculative part of it, so the question becomes “what does the black goo do?” That is the question that you’re supposed to be asking coming out of this movie. The movie demonstrates what it does in certain circumstances. So, here’s what it does if it gets on worms; here’s what it does if it gets on your face; here’s what it does if someone just puts a little bit of it in your drink. So, now we see that that lots of this is headed to Earth. Now, you used the word “weapon”, you’re extrapolating that based on the theory [Prometheus captain] Janek has, because it looks like a payload to him: all these ships are loaded with this stuff, and they’re headed for Earth. The intent has to be to wipe us out, or is it to evolve us, or is it for something else?

 

[TriedandTested]

David didn't tell her. After having his head ripped off David doesn't speak up until the scene where he informs Shaw the Engineer is "coming for her" (although he has no information about it at all, he's on the floor, for all he knows the Engineer popped out to the loo). Shaw conclusion that the Engineer s hate us and that this particular one is heading for earth is based on nothing that we would know of or seen in the movie. She has one conversation with Janek about his presumptions how LV233 is a WMD base where something got out" earlier on, but she's not a witness to any of the black goo happenings, up until the last moments before presuming that vases are meant for earth she believes pathogen that killed Holloway was airborne.

Yes he does - not directly but clearly alludes to Earth being destroyed as they are suiting up to go to see the Engineer. He says something along the lines of 'sometimes things have to be destroyed before they are rebuilt' - something along those lines.

It does annoy me - the amount of so-called issues and plotholes in this movie seem to stem from people forgetting what was said, character intentions/beliefs and generally just switching off during the movie.

 

[Phatjayunoi]

"Sometimes to create, one must first destroy."

And I actually have to agree, most of the time, people just scream plot-hole because they simply do not understand or paid any attention at all, and so just complain for the sake of it.

Remember, this film is a quasi-prequel to Alien, but also is standalone.

 

[oli collett]

This article is brilliant. Ridley comes across as hilarious

I don't suppose he bothered asking them how far 500 billion miles away is in terms of the universe?

Reading that, Scott does come across like a bit of an odd chap

 

[Phatjayunoi]

I don't suppose he bothered asking them how far 500 billion miles away is in terms of the universe?

HAHAHAHA!

The closest other star to our sun is like 4 light years away, so take that for what it's worth.

 

[NathanE]

I don't suppose he bothered asking them how far 500 billion miles away is in terms of the universe?

Reading that, Scott does come across like a bit of an odd chap

Maybe that's because he IS quite old?

 

[v0n]

Yes he does - not directly but clearly alludes to Earth being destroyed as they are suiting up to go to see the Engineer. He says something along the lines of 'sometimes things have to be destroyed before they are rebuilt' - something along those lines.

You are referring to conversation in Engineers cryochamber. So that's it? we are to presume she sacrificed lives of everyone because of one very vague sentence which David based on 30 second animation (which none of them actually see)?

Oddly, by that time she seems to have her mind made up already. She tells Wayland when they meet for the first time "This place isn't what we thought it was. They aren't what we thought they were. I was wrong. We were so wrong. We must leave." And that's even before Janek pops in, to jump into his own wild conclusions.

It does annoy me - the amount of so-called issues and plotholes in this movie seem to stem from people forgetting what was said, character intentions/beliefs and generally just switching off during the movie.

Bad narration and bad scripting just cannot be excused in this story. It could be that I come from a different generation, where even in fiction, character needs proof before they wipe the entire crew, but on the other hand, it's not like Lindelof is known for watertight plots. He likes his Lost type drivels, where he bombards the audience with "tada!" and "watch out" moments and then attempts to tie half of the stuff he threw in audience with vague one liners and "what if it didn't happen". no one does stories like that. That's not scripts are done.

It's fair enough if he does it in his own tv sandbox, but this is Alien franchise. People live for these movies. This movie, with those visuals, deserved to be legendary. It deserved to be written properly, full of characters we cared about, cheered for, cried for, watertight, well paced plot. We didn't need 17 crew just to not know what happened to most of them, we didn't need five types of sea monsters and twenty different plots free falling in different directions.

There is a difference between leaving things vague and stories untold and creating plot holes and annoying inconsistencies. Space Jockey in Alien, that's how you set up mystery. We didn't know who he was. We didn't know where he came from. We didn't know what his mission was. We didn't need to. And the movie was better for it. Making a movie about Space Jockeys and leaving audience none the wiser as to who they were, where did they come from and what their mission was, that's just screwing with the audience. It doesn't create "gasp" moments. It creates "WTF!" moments.

We deserved better.

 

[Glaucus]

I assume it actually says 500billion miles?mmust of missed that bit. Not that most people would know. But why not make bits like that realistic.

Is that 0.08light years?

 

[wedgie]

I'd put money on Lindeloff being responsible for the line where David responds with 'does it matter' when Shaw says she wants to know why the engineers changed their minds. He used the same excuse for answering very little in Lost. Sometimes the answers don't matter, sometimes it's actually better that we don't know, but that doesn't mean it's fine to allude to much but explain almost nothing.

I imagine he thinks it's clever storytelling, for me it's just lazy, or at the very least not to my taste. When you're writing off the back of an already existing mythology (as he was at the back end of Lost and is with Prometheus) it takes skill to figure out which answers does the audience want/deserve, and which are better left ambiguous. I don't want almost everything to be ambiguous, I watch films to be told a story, not to make up 90% of it for myself.

 

[THMRK]

I'd put money on Lindeloff being responsible for the line where David responds with 'does it matter' when Shaw says she wants to know why the engineers changed their minds. He used the same excuse for answering very little in Lost. Sometimes the answers don't matter, sometimes it's actually better that we don't know, but that doesn't mean it's fine to allude to much but explain almost nothing.

I imagine he thinks it's clever storytelling, for me it's just lazy, or at the very least not to my taste. When you're writing off the back of an already existing mythology (as he was at the back end of Lost and is with Prometheus) it takes skill to figure out which answers does the audience want/deserve, and which are better left ambiguous. I don't want almost everything to be ambiguous, I watch films to be told a story, not to make up 90% of it for myself.

This. Absolutely this.

 

[icecold]

I haven't read the whole thread, but...

A lot of the "plot holes" that I have seen mentioned have either been people misunderstanding aspects of the film, or are simply unanswered questions.

Some of the misunderstandings have been explained by others in the thread, but it seems like a lot of people want to be overly negative about the film. I'm not saying its perfect, as there are definitely some awkward moments. There is also the argument that the actual plot shouldnt be hard to tease out from your viewing experience, and I think that's where the film falls down the most, and also why we see some of the more awkward and jarring moments (cpt telling theron about the weapons of mass destruction :/).

 

[hola_adios]

I haven't read the whole thread, but...

A lot of the "plot holes" that I have seen mentioned have either been people misunderstanding aspects of the film, or are simply unanswered questions.

Some of the misunderstandings have been explained by others in the thread, but it seems like a lot of people want to be overly negative about the film. I'm not saying its perfect, as there are definitely some awkward moments. There is also the argument that the actual plot shouldnt be hard to tease out from your viewing experience, and I think that's where the film falls down the most, and also why we see some of the more awkward and jarring moments (cpt telling theron about the weapons of mass destruction :/).

It is poor story telling, I would recommend to watch good films, and then come back and compare with with what RS has done here, which is just allow a mediocre and incoherent film to be released. The plot holes I could leave with, but not the total lack of coherence or poor character development. May be good enough if your film list is topped by transformers or star wars though.

 

[i-bert]

It is poor story telling, I would recommend to watch good films, and then come back and compare with with what RS has done here, which is just allow a mediocre and incoherent film to be released. The plot holes I could leave with, but not the total lack of coherence or poor character development. May be good enough if your film list is topped by transformers or star wars though.

 

[TriedandTested]

It is poor story telling, I would recommend to watch good films, and then come back and compare with with what RS has done here, which is just allow a mediocre and incoherent film to be released. The plot holes I could leave with, but not the total lack of coherence or poor character development. May be good enough if your film list is topped by transformers or star wars though.

You know, when you (slyly) try and insult someone else's opinion (or preference in film) in order to bolster yours you do realise that it completely voids you own, don't you? Such a weak minded thing to do.

 

[hola_adios]

You know, when you (slyly) try and insult someone else's opinion (or preference in film) in order to bolster yours you do realise that it completely voids you own, don't you? Such a weak minded thing to do.

I cannot see any insults here, but yours, hence following your weak logic ...

The attempts to defend this film are just based on comments like: "plot holes do not matter, and if you cannot get over inconsistencies then you have no imagination" ... which says a lot.