Ridley Scott's "Prometheus"

[JimKiler]

Did anyone see this:

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/24147/-prometheus-disc-has-30-mins-more

Scott tells Collider that the home release of "Prometheus" will have up to half-an-hour of deleted scenes.

 

[Ichinisan]

Saw it earlier today. Not bad at all.

Questions: (SPOILERS) - how could it be a prequel for a certain movie while it was years later? I thought the oxygen would last for hours (

Spoiler

the two guys would stay out overnight) but the main female character ran out so soon (when she had to jump back into the lifepod). And why certain group hate humans so much? And what was the meaning of that "thing" drank the liquid and then disintegrated into the river?

Spoiler

The Engineer structure was generating its own oxygen.

 

[Gunslinger08]

The more I think about it, the more I'm disappointed with the movie. I agree with most of the things said here. The characters were all pretty flat (except the android, which is ironic), the story had some holes, and we just didn't get enough information. To me, it mostly just seems like a filler/setup movie so they can make a sequel or two that actually tells the backstory of the architects (who they were/are, where they came from, why they seeded life, why/if they changed their mind about us, etc.).

The early scenes did really make me want to go to Scotland though. Looks pretty incredible.

 

[randomrogue]

The early scenes did really make me want to go to Scotland though. Looks pretty incredible.

Wasn't that Iceland? Also I'm pretty sure the Waterfall scene is in Zimbabwe.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Wasn't that Iceland? Also I'm pretty sure the Waterfall scene is in Zimbabwe.

I thought the dig site in 2083 said Scotland. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Ichinisan]

Spoiler

I alos wondered that. However, it sort of looks like there is a picture of an "Alien" in the mound on the roof, so I don't think we are supposed to believe that this movie caused the creation of them. I could be worng. Anyone else care to weigh in?

Spoiler

Weyland told David to test the black ooze on the guy. Before doing it, David asked the guy: "What would you do to meet your maker?" -To which he answered: "Anything." David then proceeded to test the black ooze on him.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Spoiler

Weyland told David to test the black ooze on the guy. Before doing it, David asked the guy: "What would you do to meet your maker?" -To which he answered: "Anything." David then proceeded to test the black ooze on him.

David totally made the movie for me. Without him it would have went straight from suck to blow.

 

[randomrogue]

I thought the dig site in 2083 said Scotland. Maybe I'm wrong.

It does. I was talking about the opening scene with the Glaciers and Waterfall.

 

[Ichinisan]

Just for the record. The AvP movies (and the skull from Predator) do not count at all towards canon.

Correct. I'm not even sure if Cameron's Aliens is canon in Ridley's universe.

 

[torpid]

I have to believe the "interview" with Scott referencing Jesus is a hoax. So Jesus was a gargantuan, pasty-white dude now?

 

[JimKiler]

I have to believe the "interview" with Scott referencing Jesus is a hoax. So Jesus was a gargantuan, pasty-white dude now?

then you will say how can the engineer DNA match was looks to be 100% with human DNA even though they are taller and have way more muscle than us humans. Even though i enjoyed this movie it has a lot of holes.

 

[torpid]

then you will say how can the engineer DNA match was looks to be 100% with human DNA even though they are taller and have way more muscle than us humans. Even though i enjoyed this movie it has a lot of holes.

It need not have been 100% but yeah, that was on my list of questions too.

 

[Aikouka]

I think that was just bad wording. It looked to me like the DNA wasn't the same, but that the human DNA was a "subset" of the engineer DNA. I'm referring to the graph thing that they had on the device.

 

[JimKiler]

It need not have been 100% but yeah, that was on my list of questions too.

Also why was there almost no damage to the engineers ship after the Prometheus crashing into it?

 

[CZroe]

Spoiler

I think that all of it is about a virulently adaptable DNA "bomb" that they used both to seed life and to destroy it. The stuff the Engineer uses to seed the proto-planet is similar to the technology that created the Xenomorph and all the other horrors. It seems to me that they may have always intended to come kill us off and only seeded the planet so that life would adapt it to their physiology over billions of years.

They probably did not "change their minds." They probably did not send "Jesus" to us to be crucified. They were probing to see if the planet was ready for them yet and left the pointer only after civilization advanced enough that they needed to pull out to protect themselves. A few more millennia of development and the problem would take care of itself.

Why did the engineer race completely abandoned any further attempt to destroy earth after the initial failure?

How did the aborted alien grow? What did it feed on? As I understand the story it was abandoned and locked up in a sterile room.

I am just having fun here, I loved the movie.[/SPOILER]

Spoiler

They didn't. Wake up another crew from another buried ship (they did say that there were more) and they will continue their mission as well.

The aliens in Alien did not feed either. They used people to incubate their young and only brought the bodies to the facehugger nests (removed from the original cut).

then you will say how can the engineer DNA match was looks to be 100% with human DNA even though they are taller and have way more muscle than us humans. Even though i enjoyed this movie it has a lot of holes.

Spoiler

Humans are taller or more muscular than other humans. A Great Dane and a Teacup Chihuahua are every bit as different as Ebgineers/Space Jockeys and humans. There can be a lot of variability with the same DNA, especially considering external factors.

 

[JimKiler]

The director's cut is infinitely better than the theatrical release, i.e. makes sense

Agreed. I hated KoH the first time i saw it but the Directors Cut was a lot better at explaining it. Also knowing a lot of the movie was true to history (but not all) made me appreciate it more. Too bad they did not go with the true ending.

 

[Ichinisan]

then you will say

Spoiler

how can the engineer DNA match was looks to be 100% with human DNA even though they are taller and have way more muscle than us humans.

Even though i enjoyed this movie it has a lot of holes.

Our DNA is a 98% match with a chimpanzee.
Our DNA is a 92% match with a mouse.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Our DNA is a 98% match with a chimpanzee.
Our DNA is a 92% match with a mouse.

Our DNA is a ~99.9% match with those of Neanderthals, who were way more muscular and shorter than we are.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Spoiler

I never quite agreed that the engineers were on their way to Earth. Out of all the systems/stars/planets in the map, he pulls out Earth, then says they were headed there. I thought that was quite a jump to a conclusion when looking at a map of the universe. For all he knew it was a map of all seeded planets and he (being a computer) was able to recognize Earth easily among the 1000's of others.

I know I'm probably reading much more into it than what it is, but...

 

[Ichinisan]

Our DNA is a ~99.9% match with those of Neanderthals, who were way more muscular and shorter than we are.

...yeah. That can be correctly stated as a "100% match."

 

[randomrogue]

ALL ABOUT DNA TESTING ACCURACY

Why will results claiming probable inclusion never equal 100%?

In paternity testing, no man will ever be 100% included as the biological father because there is always the slight possibility that the DNA profile of the alleged father matches the DNA profile of the child by mere chance. The likelihood of this happening is usually well below 0.001% (1 in 100,000), but it depends in large part on the ethnic origin of the individuals involved. In addition, it important to note that the certainty usually increases with the number of DNA loci (locations) analyzed. Look for a company that routinely checks at least 15 different loci and that will run additional tests on more locations if there are mutations or inconsistencies.

I'm not expert but this is interesting nonetheless. I don't think the movie is really worried about this though.

Spoiler

We're just supposed to take the match at face value and accept that they are us. It confirms panspermia.

 

[Arkaign]

Ugh. So first we have James Cameron going from making outstanding work to utter drivel like 'Avatar', and now we have Ridley Scott turning out generic muck? What the helll, guys? At least Martin Scorcese's 'Hugo', while obviously a family film, is quite well made on every respect. Even S can't be totally excused though, as that Shutter Island was disappointing (had good elements, but wasn't great overall).

SIIIIIGGGGGHHHHHH

David Fincher and Christopher Nolan, please save us bad films! And that's funny to say, considering Fincher made an even worse Alien film, though I think it was the fault of that toilet paper script they had.

 

[torpid]

Spoiler

I never quite agreed that the engineers were on their way to Earth. Out of all the systems/stars/planets in the map, he pulls out Earth, then says they were headed there. I thought that was quite a jump to a conclusion when looking at a map of the universe. For all he knew it was a map of all seeded planets and he (being a computer) was able to recognize Earth easily among the 1000's of others.

I know I'm probably reading much more into it than what it is, but...

Spoiler

If this were the real world and we witnessed the events in the movie then I would agree and this was my initial gut reaction. But do you really think they intentionally wrote and then filmed and included in the final cut a scene where they explicitly say that they were going to destroy humans if they didn't mean for us to believe that as the audience? This movie is not Rashomon or similar so I guess I assume that they didn't do something so nuanced as to have a character say that in an expositional manner without it being what we are supposed to then think going forward.

 

[Aikouka]

Ugh. So first we have James Cameron going from making outstanding work to utter drivel like 'Avatar', and now we have Ridley Scott turning out generic muck? What the helll, guys? At least Martin Scorcese's 'Hugo', while obviously a family film, is quite well made on every respect. Even S can't be totally excused though, as that Shutter Island was disappointing (had good elements, but wasn't great overall).

Wasn't Ridley Scott's Robin Hood not really favored either?

 

[Arkaign]

Wasn't Ridley Scott's Robin Hood not really favored either?

Not so much. It's not that it was really that bad, it was just kind of uninspired and workmanlike. It felt very much like basically everyone involved just kind of showed up, did their bit half-heartedly, and went home without ever caring about making things exceptional.

If given a choice between re-watching Robin Hood and going back to rewatch the often horrible Costner version, I'll take Costner's every time. It's just got so much more personality and fun to it.

Now Body of Lies, American Gangster, Black Hawk Down, Gladiator, Alien, etc? hell yeah! That's the good stuff!