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

Curio said:
Ouch. That hurt, man.

So do you dispute that the hand-picked band of elite scientists appeared to be completely retarded on several occasions?

Although I enjoyed the film, it had some serious issues from a film-making standpoint. It also had some completely awesome parts as well.
Click to expand...

The only thing that I didn't like was that scientists that thought it would be wise to play with a snake.

I can forgive them for not running out from underneath the falling ship as there was falling firebombs dropping from the collision.
 
Last edited:
i-bert said:
The only thing that I didn't like was that scientists that thought it would be wise to play with a snake.
Click to expand...

What about geologist tasked solely with mapping the caves, who promptly decided not to see any rocks, got immediately lost in circular cave he was mapping, and then got stoned on weed he put in his breathing equipment. But at least he was one of only 8 characters most of viewers remembered by name and one of just 11 most of us would recognise. In a crew of 17 (plus possibly 3). ;)
 
Idiot No1's interaction with the 'snake' was by far the biggest errm what?? moment in the entire movie (it actually makes Charlize Theron's check out seem logical in comparison). I'd expect a similar reaction upon meeting a very cute and lovable puppy, so dumb.
 
NathanE said:
No that's not my opinion. A "bad" film has a IMDb score of, typically, below 5.0.

Average joes exit the cinema after seeing Prometheus and think "hang on that movie just tried to convince me that I was created by a extraterrestrial called an Engineer" quickly followed by "that simply isn't true!"
Click to expand...

You are really, really reaching if you're trying to say that people are hating on Prom because of their RL religious beliefs.

To many of us it is simply a film with a terrible script.
 
wedgie said:
Idiot No1's interaction with the 'snake' was by far the biggest errm what?? moment in the entire movie
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. How many contributors to this very forum wouldn't be immediately fascinated, mesmerised and enthralled, if confronted by a vagina-headed snake?

I think the scientist showed enormous restraint in only reaching toward it with, presumably, the intent of poking it with his finger, rather than immediately taking down his space trousers. (if Stanley Kubrick were directing, I am sure this is what would have happened. Either that or he'd take his helmet off and try licking it)
 
i-bert said:
This was a state of the art research vessel, not a mining ship.
Click to expand...


And how long does it take for tech to trickle down? And how much later was Alien set? The problem is a simple one: the producers know that the main audience wants to see lots of special effects, so they showed them. If anyone did sit down and try to work out what level of tech they should show they got over-ruled. Lazy, lazy, lazy.


M
 
Meridian said:
And how long does it take for tech to trickle down?
Click to expand...

Potentially a very long time.

The Nostromo was a "commercial towing vehicle". It was basically a tug boat. And just think whenever you see a tug boat (as in on water :p) how rustic and industrial they look. They are built "to last" as they say.

There is also the fact that we don't know how long Nostromo had been out in space. If it had been out there for 20 years say. That is a very long time in which massive technological developments are made.

Have you ever thought that in the future we might send a Spaceship 1 to X. Then 5 years later send Spaceship 2 to X but because it has substantially newer technology and engines, it actually *beats* Spaceship 1 to X despite Spaceship 1 having a 5 year head start. Yes, those would be some mightily peed off colonists onboard Spaceship 1 when they arrived...
 
markweatherill said:
I don't know about that. How many contributors to this very forum wouldn't be immediately fascinated, mesmerised and enthralled, if confronted by a vagina-headed snake?

I think the scientist showed enormous restraint in only reaching toward it with, presumably, the intent of poking it with his finger, rather than immediately taking down his space trousers. (if Stanley Kubrick were directing, I am sure this is what would have happened. Either that or he'd take his helmet off and try licking it)
Click to expand...

He probably wasn't expecting it to deepthroat him though. :eek::o
 
NathanE said:
No that's not my opinion. A "bad" film has a IMDb score of, typically, below 5.0.

A lot of what went on in Prometheus has been speculated on for decades. And a lot of that speculation turned out to be true. I think that's why some people are fundamentally disappointed with Prometheus. Because it was too predictable i.e. it went down the route that they always suspected it would. Then there's people that thought they were going to see a "sci-fi horror slasher" movie like Alien and were left disappointed. In reality it is just a pure "sci-fi" movie.

Historically, films that try to wrap fiction around the origins of the human species tend to be hugely divisive just like Prometheus has been. Think back to when Stargate came out. It got panned, and even today it still only has a 6.8 on IMDb. And yet in any sci-fi buff's opinion this movie is a total classic. How about Contact? A 7.3 on IMDb, not too bad, but still in any sci-fi buff's view this is a 8.0 minimum type movie. It is simply brilliant. Mission To Mars is another victim. It's a genuinely decent piece of sci-fi but in pop-culture, like Contact and Stargate, it gets ridiculed.

Average joes exit the cinema after seeing Prometheus and think "hang on that movie just tried to convince me that I was created by a extraterrestrial called an Engineer" quickly followed by "that simply isn't true!"

Whereas with Alien in 1979 they exited thinking "yes yes yes that really looks like how the future will be, and I'm sure somewhere out there a nasty alien like that really exists so that whole movie was quite plausible to happen in a couple centuries time."
Click to expand...

thats 3 not particularly good films you've named there.
contact was the best of the 3 but the ending was weak.
i don't see why i should suffer poor scripts and characterisation just because its a sci-fi.
sci fi is realistic if people behave like real people - that didn't happen in prometheus. the science bit is almost irrelevant, although they screwed that up as well.

basic rules of film making and story telling were not followed in prometheus - thats why people don't like it.
 
^ exactly this.

You can forgive tons of stuff in, say, Star Trek - even though it's supposed to be based on a future reality - because it treats itself as pure fun entertainment. If you're going to make a serious, deep, compelling film about the origins of man you better back it up with good writing and believable characters. That's why so many of us are frustrated - on the one hand it tries to challenge us with interesting ideas, on the other hand it serves them up in an unforgivably clumsy fashion. <analogy> like going to a high-end restaurant and having the food served on Scooby-Doo picnic plates </analogy>
 
What if that running away from the giant doughnut in a straight line was supposed to be a joke?

I reckon Prometheus was supposed to be a comedy, but they got mixed up, its the only explanation that makes any sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom