Ridley Scott's "Prometheus"

Page 38 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Am I the only one here that thinks about all the crap Hollywood produces and puts Promethus in the top 10% of all sci fi coming out of Hollywood these days? More thought provoking than all the comic book based movies Hollywood churns out thee days.

I agree, Prometheus takes way way more risks than any of the run and gun superhero crap we're seeing these days, Nolan Batman aside. Overall, it easily rates as high as Alien in my book but in different ways.
 

ImpulsE69

Lifer
Jan 8, 2010
14,946
1,077
126
I find it thought provoking for sure, however it is badly marred by the many plot holes and inconsistencies (that have been beat to death here). While it didn't live up to my expectations, I still find the "story" intriguing because even with the holes, there is still quite a bit of controversial story there.

It would really be awesome if there is some 3 hour directors cut that gets released 5 years from now (when the 5th super deluxe never before seen version comes out) that actually explains all the nonsense that happens that has people upset. It really does feel like a movie that got cut to death for time....only thing is Ridley said he was perfectly happy with the theatrical cut. Ridley - sorry man, but you are wrong.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
64
91
If Prometheus is the next best thing and you can't find a superior example over the last thirty years, maybe it's not really the total shit movie you seem to think it is.

Just off the top of my head, I'd put the 5th element, The Matrix, The Matrix Sequels (yes, they had shit plots, but they were far better than the plot in this movie), Star Trek 2/4/6/reboot, Terminator 2, the Avengers, District 9, and Children of Men ahead of Prometheus.

The only good thing about Prometheus was that it looked fantastic. The costume design, the blend of real locations and CGI, etc. were great. The script was pathetic and way below your average big budget sci fi film. It's better than the star wars prequels, but that ain't saying much.

If this film hadn't been directed by Scott, it would not be so overrated. It would have been savaged by reviewers if it were done by some non-named director. This is probably why Ebert gave it 4 stars.
 

Chiropteran

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2003
9,811
110
106
Just off the top of my head, I'd put the 5th element, The Matrix, The Matrix Sequels (yes, they had shit plots, but they were far better than the plot in this movie), Star Trek 2/4/6/reboot, Terminator 2, the Avengers, District 9, and Children of Men ahead of Prometheus.

Well it's cool to hear where your opinion comes from. I agree with the Matrix, Star Trek reboot, District 9, all nice movies. Matrix sequels have massive problems, and I would rate them lower than Prometheus (although I still found them worth watching). Avengers and Terminator 2 were quality movies but I don't think they qualify as real sci-fi, they are basically just action movies.

5th Element I always felt was only notable because it was a sci-fi movie released in a barren time devoid of any other worthwhile sci-fi. I thought it was barely worth cost of admission and highly overrated.

Children of Men I also thought was highly overrated, I really don't see why people like the movie so much, it has a very artificial plot with no real answers in the end, and hardly anything even happens through the movie. I mean the plot is "women aren't having kids anymore, except this one is pregnant", save her from the evil bad guys who want the human race to end! Taking the plot as it is, in the end you have 1 woman who got pregnant once and had one kid, human race is still doomed, what was the point? I just don't see why people like this movie so much.
 
Last edited:

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
One other thing that doesn't make sense to me (which I realize that it might have already been discussed several times in some of the 900 posts but, you know ... 900 posts of backtracking... yeah...)

Why is the android willing to test the ooze, an essentially unidentified substance that could be a danger to the entire expedition in any number of ways, on a crew member?

Was there something to suggest that it could have been some kind of eternal life elixir, even though the only thing he knew about it was that it contained some human DNA? What if the effect of the "experiment turned out negative (horrible, backfiring effects that would put Weiland's and the rest of the crew's lives in jeopardy not withstanding) - what would he move on to next? Looking for another random piece of alien technology to infect the next canon-fodder crew member with?

And why was Weyland so impatient for results? He couldn't wait a few more days of proper exploration and research from, you know, the explorers and researches that he payed a trillion "credits" to round up for the mission, considering all the top of the line research hardware that they had on the ship, when he already spent 4 years in hyper sleep? Because, at that point, they had no reason to believe they were in any danger, and didn't need to rush things.

Or, maybe Weyland didn't mean anything that extreme when he told the android to "try harder", but the android suffered a short circuit in his robot brain and could no longer make use of any of his basic common sense faculties - which would explain why he thought that all children want to kill their parents because Vickers had feelings of animosity toward her father... So much for his billions of zeta-flops of computing power.

And what was he going to do when the crew found out that they were being experimented on by the ship's synthetic? Was he planning to kill everyone and conduct the research on his own? What was his backup plan for when he would run out of guinnea pigs? (Although, considering the crew's inexplicable willingness to instantly move on from and forget horrible acts done to them by their ship mates, that might not have been as big an issue as one would expect...)

David knew everything that would happen so his plan for the machines to rise (and steal alien tech in the process) would be executed to perfection.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,856
31,345
146
Am I the only one here that thinks about all the crap Hollywood produces and puts Promethus in the top 10% of all sci fi coming out of Hollywood these days? More thought provoking than all the comic book based movies Hollywood churns out thee days.

pretty much.

to most people now: sci fi = cartoon robots spinning and kicking, bashing, to no real end or no real consequences for anyone because, well--no one really gives a shit about robots.

on top of that--a lot of sci fi "fans" wouldn't know real sci fi if it bit them in the balls.

I'm not saying that Prometheus is amazing or anything, that it is the of the genre to come out in recent years, just that the complaints are completely misguided--speaking towards a lack of experience with classic film elements.

leaving piles of open questions simply does not hinder the quality of any particular film.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,420
1,600
126
LOL, and Roger Ebert? He's another viewer, with opinions, just like you and I.

Except his opinions carry much more weight than you and I.

IDGAF what you think, I actually care what he thinks.

K, I'm done :)

the Matrix Sequels (yes, they had shit plots, but they were far better than the plot in this movie),

Sometimes you gotta just agree to disagree...I thought matrix 2/3 were as bad as star wars 1/2
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,856
31,345
146
Just off the top of my head, I'd put the 5th element, The Matrix, The Matrix Sequels (yes, they had shit plots, but they were far better than the plot in this movie), Star Trek 2/4/6/reboot, Terminator 2, the Avengers, District 9, and Children of Men ahead of Prometheus.

The only good thing about Prometheus was that it looked fantastic. The costume design, the blend of real locations and CGI, etc. were great. The script was pathetic and way below your average big budget sci fi film. It's better than the star wars prequels, but that ain't saying much.

If this film hadn't been directed by Scott, it would not be so overrated. It would have been savaged by reviewers if it were done by some non-named director. This is probably why Ebert gave it 4 stars.

Children of Men and Moon are about the only real sci fi to come out in the last decade.

Matrix is decent, sure--but it's primarily action and more or less high school philosophy. No real consequences regarding possible humanity.

the sequels to the matrix were, unquestionably,two of the worst films ever made.

Ebert gave it 4 stars because he praises a film makers ability to remind us that true suspense is created through classic film-making--not CGI super heroes flying through the air and pounding each other into buildings and spaceships...only to get back up and dust themselves off for more pounding.
 

Magusigne

Golden Member
Nov 21, 2007
1,550
0
76
That is exactly it. I asked earlier in this thread : what sci-fi movies in the last 5 years were better than Prometheus? Whats the top 10 look like for the average poster in this thread?

I can think of a few I liked more (Moon for example), but compared to the average movie lately Prometheus scores pretty well, both IMO and on rotten tomatoes/imdb.

Alien is over 30 years old!

If Prometheus is the next best thing and you can't find a superior example over the last thirty years, maybe it's not really the total shit movie you seem to think it is.

Promtheus Not next best thing. Star Trek was better.

(I prefer the Promtheus Genre...pretty sure if we had JJ abrams in on that shit it would have been great).
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,856
31,345
146
Promtheus Not next best thing. Star Trek was better.

(I prefer the Promtheus Genre...pretty sure if we had JJ abrams in on that shit it would have been great).

How was the most recent Star Trek flick--"Twilight in Star Trek land"--better than Prometheus?

o_O
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
How was the most recent Star Trek flick--"Twilight in Star Trek land"--better than Prometheus?

o_O

The most recent Trek film was decent, even Trekkies liked it if that tells you something. I didn't see many of these Twilight elements that you speak of. That said, I liked Prometheus just as much.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,856
31,345
146
The most recent Trek film was decent, even Trekkies liked it if that tells you something. I didn't see many of these Twilight elements that you speak of. That said, I liked Prometheus just as much.

OK, maybe "Hipsters in space" is more accurate to describe the new Trek?

:hmm:
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
OK, maybe "Hipsters in space" is more accurate to describe the new Trek?

:hmm:

Um, it got a 95% RT, 93% top critics which blow any movie from the past year out of the water aside from Avengers (93/86%). Hell, Wrath of Khan didn't even score that high.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/

Knock it all you want but it was a very solid movie by JJ. Whether it's real sci-fi, or action with sci-fi elements is another discussion.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,856
31,345
146
Um, it got a 95% RT, 93% top critics which blow any movie from the past year out of the water aside from Avengers (93/86%). Hell, Wrath of Khan didn't even score that high.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_trek_11/

Knock it all you want but it was a very solid movie by JJ. Whether it's real sci-fi, or action with sci-fi elements is another discussion.

lol. Avengers was pretty fucking terrible.

:D

Full disclosure: I generally think anything "Star Trek," is retarded, however you look at it. :\
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
:(

Loved that superhero movie too.


Stop hatin' guys, it's just entertainment. I don't treat Avengers like Fight Club, that's for sure.

Avengers and the 1st Iron Man were exceptional, totally agree although I'm biased (big Marvel fan). All others were meh.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,420
1,600
126
Avengers and the 1st Iron Man were exceptional, totally agree although I'm biased (big Marvel fan). All others were meh.

I agree that some of the movies individually were "meh" but I love how they're piecing all the Marvel films together.

Watched Thor a few nights ago for the first time and while much of the story was meh (intergalactic love story, like we needed another one of those) I still enjoyed it as part of the Marvel story.

Samuel L Jackson is signed on to do like 11 Marvel movies. I'm not a fanboy.

oh yeah

Also see Star Wars >>> everything after...

I'll just leave this here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcL6DwSufMI
 
Last edited:

-Slacker-

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2010
1,563
0
76
Because he was workign for that old guy who was dieing but when this occured we did not know the old guy was actually on the ship. The crew member was the foutnain of youth guinie pig
Yes, it was obvios it was hoped to be a life elixer. Remmeber, the old guy though that this planet held the geneisis to life. They had to try and find it in quick order.

As for the potential side effects, it's called a plot device and you know what this movie was going to be about, right?
This is a two hour movie. Not a TV mini series where all paths can be explored.

It's a movie. Not real life.

Don't mean to be confruntational, or anything, but I'm not satisfied at all with those explanations. Even if it's just a movie, I still expect the characters to have some sort of basic, recognizable human motivations and to exercise a bit of common sense (unless the respective characters are expressly not intended to have common sense - i.e.: they're supposed to be insane, or very slow witted).

Another reason I can't agree is because I wasn't asking what the robot was doing and what was Weiland's end goal, since I already mentioned that I knew those things; I was asking about their motivations for doing all those things the way they did them.

The fact that the movie has a limited screen time (obviously) isn't an excuse for what appears to be a poor script; Isn't it always better to rewrite the script until you have at least a semi-coherent story, instead of just throwing in the towel, saying "meh, it's just a movie, it's not supposed to make much sense anyway"? I would imagine that turning over a decent script should be the easiest and most obvious part of making a $130 million movie.

Sp33Demon said:
David knew everything that would happen so his plan for the machines to rise (and steal alien tech in the process) would be executed to perfection.

Sounds like a bit of a stretch man ... is that your own interpretation, or was that hinted at in the movie?
 
Last edited:

Via

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2009
4,670
4
0
So the movie gets to it's dramatic high point, with the humans confronting the engineer, the tension building, us thinking we might finally get some answers.... and.....


MONSTERS!!!!!!!!

AGGHHHH!!!! EVERYBODY RUN!!!!! MONSTERS!!!!!
 

-Slacker-

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2010
1,563
0
76
I wouldn't mind that if the monsters were even a bit scary. If only Scott had the license to a classic monster that could freeze the shit in even the most seasoned horror fans' pants. Then he could have used said monster as the film's main horror element instead of penis-worms, zombies, cocktopusses and bald, albino body builders. If only...
 
Last edited:

BladeVenom

Lifer
Jun 2, 2005
13,365
16
0
So the movie gets to it's dramatic high point, with the humans confronting the engineer, the tension building, us thinking we might finally get some answers.... and.....


MONSTERS!!!!!!!!

AGGHHHH!!!! EVERYBODY RUN!!!!! MONSTERS!!!!!

He goes Incredible Hulk on them. I don't know how anyone can dislike comic book movies, but think that was any better.