 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.130.238.134
Promethius questions....
1) Who was the guy at the beginning?
I took him to be Promethius and he was seeding the Earth with DNA that would eventually create us.
2) Why did you think the engineers wanted to kill the humans?
I took it as though we were never meant to exist - having been 'seeded' by Promethius - and the engineers were going to eliminate a species that wasn't supposed to exist....us.
3) But then....who told us about that specific star grouping to put into the ancient paintings/carvings, which obviously took place long after we came to exist? Was it Promethius, and what we saw at the start of the flick was him self-destructing after accomplishing what he set out to do?
4) Then, if we weren't meant to exist, why would Promethius point us toward the planet that was manufacturing our demise rather than the home planet of the engineers?
I'll stop now.
Follow Ups:
Outright bad movies -- unanimously bad -- don't catch much thought. Movies like "Gigli" and "Sahara" don't even enter into consciousness unless the topic is 'movies that suck'.
If "Prometheus" can be judged by the amount and level of thinking it has generated, then it just may be a great movie, holes and all.
I felt uneasy about "No Country For Old Men" till my third viewing and now consider it my top film for that decade (2000-2010), eventually catching on to all the fuss.With Prometheus the many observations and impressions, both good and bad, hold true.
I agree how the impact of the actors might have been stronger if given more leeway or time, but that's likely a constriction of the medium's budget and available resources. If all actors were as strong to suggesting development (as Dustin Hoffman is reputed to be), that strength of character created focus might have made a more emotionally fulfilling Prometheus experience. But there is only so much time in a shooting schedule to rework ideas, and I imagine that becomes an insurmountable problem with CGI. (Unless a lot of character detail scenes ended on the cutting room floor? Do I hear DIRECTORS CUT!)
As it stands Prometheus is a thought provoking Alien experience that differs from the original in emotional impact if not cerebral extrapolation (like in Sherlock Holmes). In Prometheus I felt safe throughout, knowing that there was a future "Alien" story-line, but enjoyed the conceptual mind-stretch and immersive 3D.
A compromised film? Perhaps, but it stands as a technological leap forward in the 3D film story telling arena -imo.
Classics seem to continue to grow even past many viewings - it is truly a treat when they do.
Edits: 06/27/12
cannot bail out the story line, which is a muddled, inconsistent, and at
time a completely unbelievable mess. And without a strong story line,
the film is ultimately not going to become a classic.
Prometheus is several cuts above Alien 3 and 4, but several cuts below
Alien and Aliens.
... pretty reasonable to me, though pacing could have been less pushed at times.
I saw it a THIRD time last night. (I know, glutton for CGI but noticed any head angle tilt macerated the 3D image integrity - possibly why some were having 3D woes - eyes symmetrical?).
This time around I felt that they should have allowed more time for images, some very beautiful, to linger - it has such strong visuals (IMAX 3D).
Overall it seemed a touch off pace in places due to editing, and might benefit from a carefully hewn "Director's Cut", that takes its time and fills in more back story (though that could detract from the film's messages if people are blow away by too much information).
Vickers' subtext was a mystery I'd like see cracked. Why was her Father so distant? They were so physically similar that I speculated that she may have been cloned from him, "a Son", but ended up a transsexual, which may explain Theron's absolutely mannish character choices, taking up the captain to prove that she wasn't a "robot", and Weyland's creating "David" ("better worlds" conceit).
Prometheus has so much mythology going for it that I thought Scott and ensemble couldn't help but exploit or twist Greek myths (Electra? Oedipus?).
Maybe they need a book of it after all.
shopping center multiplexes) definitely NOT worth the extra.
3-D, otoh, is a MUST.
A MUST.
The "shopping center" IMAX auditoriums offer two distinct advantages over the typical digital presentation: 1. Shopping center IMAX utilizes two synchronized projectors for superior 3D (and 2D) brightness compared to the usual time division multiplexing of a single projector such as RealD 3D. 2. The sound system seems to have more channels including overhead. I also like the over-the-top exaggerated low end and generally clean, dynamic sound (for a theatre). YMMV
...AMC 14 in a medium sized theater that didn't look to be a wrap around:
IMAX 3D was particularly well synchronized, very bright and crystal clear. Resolution was eye popping at ~50' from screen. Sound: good. Could detect some shuddering when movements were too fast for the system's capability (give them 5 years).
Seated at center, my field of view was truncated (framed) not only by the 3D glasses, but the relative narrowness of the smaller venue (~500 capacity?). The smaller venue may have been intentional for optimal brightness and optical trueness (just as a long/narrow focal length keeps a deeper field within focus.
(We have a HUGE original "wraparound" IMAX in the city, but as I recall its image was generally about the same - iirc.)
Ymmv.
...Like digital artifacts when action rate is greater than the sampling rate can handle? I haven't noticed this at the local mall IMAX (also AMC) although this is a recent addition to the cineplex so it may have a later version of the equipment. It's also a larger auditorium @~800 seats.
The one improvement I have noticed with the digital presentation in general is a total lack of the image jumping around on the screen as each film frame is located slightly differently in the gate than the one before and after. Used to drive me crazy and I never could completely ignore it. Now I don't have to! What's the name for this phenomenon?
Yes, like you describe as "image jumping". Term might be "strobing"?Caught it for a moment in a scene Vickers was in. I expect, like with standard film, the more digital "snapshots" per second the better. If/when they get up to 1000/sec (guessing) we'll be talking "holographic realism". Till then, they will remain motion limited.
Saw something similar like a set "wiggle" (ship's hangar/loading dock) in Aliens just before the squad briefing. That was attributable to a foreground matte painting being jostled momentarily (camera dolly?) that didn't jive with the real sound stage.
(Just picking nits.)
3D must be SO much more difficult to synchronize.
Edits: 06/27/12 06/27/12 06/27/12
What's with the swaddling medical wrap, already? Noomi looked like a 3rd world kid in a makeshift diaper.
... Jean-Paul Gaultier's swaddling of Milla Jovovitch (LeeLoo) in "The Fifth Element"?
That, or the mummy returns...
Where is all the religious bullshit in the movie coming from? There is none of that in the orginal Alien.
The magnificence of the original film was the claustrophobic nightmare of the working class and the horrors that are raw and sudden in their meager existence. And no I'm not a communist. The original Alien was the first SF movie--as I recall--that portrayed not a spaceship full of scientists but a spaceship full of working class schleps.
I was sorely disappointed in the hokum aspect of this new film. The screenwriters--and producers who encouraged them--had no feel for the original Alien. The 3D was awful as well. A real downer. If you think there's some important messages buried beneath this load of crap, you need to go listen to some music. Sincerely...
...and Prometheus remains in theatres...I stumbled across the linked analysis of the film. A bit verbose but it puts things together in a plausible manner that holds up fairly well IMO.
Edits: 06/22/12 06/22/12 06/22/12
The Prometheus creatures that created humans themselves had to answer to a higher calling, just like the titans. They were destined to an eternity of suffering--not unlike humanity itself--for playing God and indulging in the fire of knowledge.The bottom line is that they couldn't control the building blocks of life a whole lot better than humans can. So the question "why" they wanted to kill us became only interesting in the context of faith. The fact that the black substance has so many different effects and is so difficult to contain may be because the Prometheus beings aren't such brilliant engineers that we assume--that the tools of God are not mastered a whole lot better by the Prometheus beings than by humans. And that, for playing with those tools and introducing them to an invention, God has doomed the engineers to an eternity of pain just like Prometheus was doomed to an eternity of pain by Zeus.
The way the critic interprets it, it's not too different from Jurassic Park, by Crichton. Except he doesn't go the extra mile regarding the faith element.
I don't know if Scott made that comment about Jesus or not, but it doesn't change my interpretation. Bottom line is that the Prometheus beings became disenchanted with their invention, and wanted to take back the gift of life.
One huge problem with the analysis at your link--he doesn't seem to understand why David was immune to the black substance. He was a machine. He didn't have DNA.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 06/25/12
.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
(nt)
... the digest has one error: Shaw does attempt to "decontaminate" or kill the "squid" she has determined to be a monstrosity, after her leaving the surgical pod.She can determine evil at a glance.
I did like the part about how the black substance not responding to David, implies that David/machinery has no affect in and of itself upon a trans-mutagenic "amplifier" as the mutagenic only relates to life.
The difference between this black goo and the "primordial goo" that scientists (Darwinists) believe is the progenitor of life, is that the black goo has been "engineered".
Was this the stuff G.W. Bush was trying to foist as science in schools?
Edits: 06/24/12
Of course, it raises some questions. Were Engineers so clever, how could they not foresee the imperfection of humans leading to Christ's execution? And, being sacrificially willing, how are they then corruptible by the black goo, themselves? And what of THEIR creator? Certainly, it would have foreseen all of this, too?
The problem w/a lot of science fiction is that it must contradict human history or else appear to be too logical and hence, predictable. THE flaw of this film and the analysis of this clever fellow is its dismissal of evolution.
NT
d
... sit in the cinema's forward half nearest the center for best picture and sound.
The screen should fill your view field symmetrically, as much as possible, if you like an immersive experience. Get there 30 minutes ahead and the choice seats should still be available.
I have not seen the 2D or standard 3D versions as of yet, and am considering 3D home theater due to this film's impact.
There are a lot of dimly illuminated scenes. My experience with standard 3D is that brightness is sacrificed for the extra "Ds". So....if you opt for 3D, I recommend the IMAX version for its superior brightness. Otherwise 2D. I saw the IMAX version and was impressed with the intelligent use of the extra dimensions. Very effective!
*
.
Baba-Booey to you all!
Promethius questions....
1) Who was the guy at the beginning?
I took him to be Promethius and he was seeding the Earth with DNA that would eventually create us.
I think you're correct that he was the maker who played God. His people were not pleased with him or his invention, just as the Greek Gods were not pleased at Prometheus for introducing fire to man.
2) Why did you think the engineers wanted to kill the humans?
I took it as though we were never meant to exist - having been 'seeded' by Promethius - and the engineers were going to eliminate a species that wasn't supposed to exist....us.
Well that's the question that ends the movie, isn't it? We aren't given enough clues. For me, it was all just symbolic of the human condition as it related to the myth of Prometheus.
3) But then....who told us about that specific star grouping to put into the ancient paintings/carvings, which obviously took place long after we came to exist? Was it Promethius, and what we saw at the start of the flick was him self-destructing after accomplishing what he set out to do?
I don't think that's an issue. The premise of the film is that mankind knew this star grouping had relevance. They also drew images of the being, indicating there was contact.
4) Then, if we weren't meant to exist, why would Promethius point us toward the planet that was manufacturing our demise rather than the home planet of the engineers?
The whole point is that there is always a higher purpose beyond the knowable engineering. It's important to strive for the answers and care about the reasons that explain existence. But faith in a benign and caring higher creator is more important. With fire, in the story of Prometheus, man was given the light of knowledge, but knowledge can be a curse where faith can be salvation. That is the human condition. And part of the brilliance of the film is the signs that the engineers too recognized their knowledge and creation as a curse and their potential undoing. Someone correctly pointed out the maker's violent reaction when he realized the human creation had started creating its own approximation of life so advanced it could communicate.
I'll stop now.
Good idea.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
d
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
d
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
d
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
.
...below.
Based on what we know before we start watching the movie we are inclined to think, 'oh look...the aliens are spreading their DNA, they are going to take this humanoid lookig guy and change him into a human'.But they don't change him. They KILL HIM.
And if you watch the animation of what's happening to his DNA it is not CHANGING so it can be spread through the eco-system. It is BREAKING DOWN. IT IS BEING DESTROYED.
So this 'they're using this guy to spread their benevolent dna improvement through the planet' is WRONG.
But who is this guy? Is he an engineer doing some religious sacrifice? Is he a humanoid who was changed to be like the engineers who is now being killed by them? Is this a 'one time' sacrifice or will the black goop spread through the entire planet? What is this? Ritual or genocide?
If that's the case and the engineers made us, why don't WE look like THEM?
This is frankly, a story-telling mess. Ridley, Ridley. Exposition has never been his strong suite. Blade Runner looks great (classic) but the plot is a mess.
Oh well. I guess we'll have to get our answers from 'Ancient Aliens' on tv.
But the fact that the movie does not answer the 'ritual sacrifice' or 'genocide' question is really annoying.
Joss Whedon said, 'TV shows are about questions. Movies are about answers'. Ridley Scott said, 'Exposition? What's that?'
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Dr. Greg House
Edits: 06/18/12
...maybe we see what we want to see.
Also, "If that's the case and the engineers made us, why don't WE look like THEM?" Maybe something went wrong and that's why they were going to eradicate the deviant strain. Who knows? Guess we'll have to wait for upcoming prequels.
...and even turned a pretty pale pink/coral color, for those in the audience who aren't color blind.The "primordial ooze" jump started this way, seems absolutely clear and essential for giving premise to the film's contexts.
I'm so very glad that R. Scott did not dumb down and spoil a good film, and chose to provide enough clues for most everyone to come away with at least a sense of what was happening.
In this way I feel cleansed from Scott's "Gladiator".
Edits: 06/19/12
both physically and emotionally. By the drawings spread around the earth they knew we were of different races and temperaments.
Remember Elizabeth's driving outrage was "Why did they want to kill us?" So didn't get it.
Why would I 'want to see' the DNA turning black and falling apart and not 're-creating' itself? It's a movie. I don't care what it does, I just want to watch a good movie.
It's obvious from all the debate the introductory scene obscures more than it reveals of the story. I thought I read somewhere Ridley was toying with deleting it from the blu ray.
And no, I don't want to 'see the sequels' to enjoy the first movie. I want the first movie to be less of a feast for the eyes and a famine for the mind.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Dr. Greg House
Remember how the surviving engineer savagely ripped off David's head? Seems to show an utter hatred of humanity as we are. What did David do? He started to ask him for a favor...gimme gimme gimme. They really had a hard on against the way we turned out.
Yes indeed - there was some very focused motivation on the part of the remaining "engineer"/space jockey.Perhaps in that instant he realized David was not human but artificial, and that the only means to effectively curtail David's super-human abilities to aid the rest was by beheading from the body.
Consider the Promethean concept of the god's displeasure with humans having "fire", possibly implying also that only those with true Divine "blessing" be allowed to create or design life-like devices/machinery - as these are capable of impact upon events within the timeline, as David could prove (sequel?).
Btw -The Earth wouldn't be destroyed, only the human contagion?
Remember how the cat in Alien wasn't touched? Perhaps an alien's discrimination is designed to seek humans, as seen by their attacking the engineer/Nephalim humans as well as we sub-set humans ad infinitum.
Another thought - are these engineers the bringers of the apocalypse (4 horsemen/"jockeys") with seven vials upon the earth and the overthrow of the literal Babylon?
Discuss....
Edits: 06/17/12
1) The guy at the beginning was a sacrificial of the Nephilim/planter human seeding the Earth (then barren, like Shaw) with his DNA (via trans-mutagenic catalyst), as you surmised.(Prometheus was Weylan's ship's name. It was a science and search vessel.)
2) I took it that the "engineers" needed to "correct" a defective batch of humans.
(At 2000 years prior to the Prometheus' ship's mission, the MOST significant event that I am aware of happening in recorded human history (this time around) is the Cruxifiction. The one remaining "space jockey" (as R. Scott calls them) had intelligence and a compassionate interest in "David", if just for a moment. I don't think that those capable of "genesis" and self sacrifice (film's beginning), are easily able to destroy so utterly and effectively without CAUSE - remind you of any species we know?
(Another event could have been the instigation for them, though it wouldn't be very smart of the screen writers to omit what that was, be it Judeo-Christian or not. ;) )
3) Yes, they told our forbears from whence they came. They husbanded us like good farmers, allowing us to grow and we noted those close encounters with wall paintings, kind of like front page news on the New York Times, only ~45,000 years prior to the printing press, or written language for that matter.
At the time of ~45,000 years prior to the planters' "change of heart", the trans-mutagenic agent when PROPERLY administered through a solemn and reverent ceremony with a sacrifice worthy of the objective, the results would be as seen in at the film's opening. Kind of like painting on a blank canvas.
BUT, if administered to life already in existence, that agent's effect would be destruction of that life through mutagenic overwhelming - the Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away... kind of like painting over a Da Vinci.
4) The need for destruction wasn't forseen.
What the film also suggests is that the earliest human tribe capable of intelligence sufficient for wall painting was Scottish!!!
Any wonder?
Thanks Ridley SCOTT! ; )
I may have to see it a third time....once it's on DVD!
Edits: 06/17/12
The engineers witnessed over time the constant state of war and murder that enveloped the earth as if they had long forgotten their own roots. They weren't perfect as demonstrated by them coming up with the "alien" creature to clean up, if not punish, our abominable selves.
dfs
dill weed, get with the program.
Maybe if the movie were done in black-and-white and given a ragtime piano score.
fds
.
Indicating that Blue Man 1 was sentenced or sacrificed. They didn't leave until he did the deed. Reminds me of some of the stuff that guy on the Travel Channel eats.
with the special container and full robe.
...It didn't seem entirely voluntary. And the next thought was "Abbie Normal". And I leave the rest to "our" imagination.
`.
Let yer imagination go wild with this one. Does not the dude in the rear a dead ringer for Weyland?
fds
Did you actually tear yourself away from chick flicks on Netflix to see this movie?
... and that there is a resemblance to an aged human proves that the "planter" (clones?) age just as we humans do - (because they ARE human, if not only one iteration original and authentically created by the actual creator - God(?)).
I say clones only because they seem the PERFECT Greco ideal, and look alike.
Wonder if there are females?? If NOT, that might support a Biblical notion of creation figuratively taken from this "ADAM's" rib - bone marrow deconstructed by that trans muatgenic concoction consumed by him.
Is a possible erroneous resemblance to Weyland why it didn't make it on screen?
Yeah, that does look a lot like Weyland. Did he know something about his origins we don't.
.
picked up on Ridley's Spanish squeeze being the faded face of Elizabeth's mother in her dream flash. Ridley's squeeze has been in 'Gladiator' and 'Blackhawk Down' and some others I'm sure.
I noticed the "W" logo on David's fingerprint as he studied the drop of monster goo destined for Holloway's drink.
Made note: Be nice to robots that can talk and walk. They may not have feelings but they can sure as hell keep score.
I have a problem with Elizabeth being impregnated and aborted without succumbing to the same infection as Holloway.
The final scene showing the newly emerged "Alien" looked rather hamrless compared to the one Weaver and crew faced on the return trip. Apparently evolutionary adaptation is their strong point.
I changed my mind. I do NOT want one for Christmas. Forget that list.
... perhaps the reason Holloway was affected differently from Elizabeth was due to gender (and/or insemination method)?As you point out, it seems each iteration encounter with the trans-mutagenic catalist/infection creates a NEW hybrid, somewhat like the way that the host is somewhat integrated into the mix in "The Thing" remake - and always an optimization of resources availiable from the host.
Dumb host matter = dumb monster (iteration defeated more easily)?
Smart host matter = improved monster (iteration survives)?
The trans-mutagenic effect in males is extreme tumor like monstrosity?
Shaw happened to develop a "fetus", even though she was incapable of having children.
Her "squid" was most formidable at the tender age of 12... hours!
Edits: 06/17/12
die butterfly-like.
1) Who was the guy at the beginning?
He was one of the interplanetary "engineers" who sacrificed himself and DNA to seed the universe with life much the same as them.
2) Why did you think the engineers wanted to kill the humans?
My first instinct is to say they didn't like the results of their "seeding" of Earth. Since the hit team was timed to leave around 2,000 years ago perhaps they were displeased at the Judaeo=Christian religion for giving credit to the wrong people. Where they not of Olympian size and pale to the point of being gray? Maybe our racial diversity upset them. We have no frame of reference of their other work except that there DNA was a perfect match...which poses the question as to why we didn't look like them.
3) But then....who told us about that specific star grouping to put into the ancient paintings/carvings, which obviously took place long after we came to exist?
They apparently came back telling ancients who they were and where they lived. The fact that Idris Elba (Captain) made a rushed statement to explain this was an "engineer" military installation and not their home clouds the issue somewhat. The time of each artifact pointing to their planetary system could have been well before their ultimate displeasure with Earthlings.
4) Then, if we weren't meant to exist, why would Promethius point us toward the planet that was manufacturing our demise rather than the home planet of the engineers?
Didn't they land on the Moon of a large planet because of the similarity of it's surface to Earth's? The "engineers" could have well come from the orb next door/
Remember, there was more than one ship available so there might have been other planets that needed cleansing also.
Note: The Bible speaks of nephilim walking the Earth and consorting with mortal women.
> ...they were displeased at the Judaeo=Christian religion for giving credit to the wrong people...Maybe our racial diversity upset them.>
Says more about you than the film.
You think being a white Chrisitian you are at the center of the earth but there are more other relgions and more non-whites on the planet.
Maybe they were upset at the Buddhists and the whites for not being grey.
.
1. Why Judeo-Christian religion as the impetus for destruction? There were and had been lots of other religions that worshiped the "wrong" gods?
2. Why would the Engineers who seemed fairly adept at life sciences and other advanced technologies opt for such an inelegant means of human destruction as xenomorphs? Some human specific disease like Ebola seems much more practical and it comes in a more convenient package to ship across the universe to boot.
IMO, if one chooses to get analytical about it, Prometheus ends up with tons of holes.
Just my idea about the religion....there were a lot of pot shots taken at Judaeo-Christian belief. Plus, this form of belief was beginning to sweep the "civilized" world.
Ebola wasn't necessarily a disease that could have been transmitted from Africa easily. The Black Plague wasn't around as yet in any form of global threat. The Aliens were like garbage disposals capable of erasing humanity.
Most of those pot shots were taken by David who wasn't even human and was said to have no soul. If you analyze the film in terms of the sole survivor, her faith and the fact that science/evolution were thoroughly trampled by the narrative, it's not hard to watch Prometheus as showing that religion not only has a place in the future but a necessary place.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
David's keeping Shaw's cross in his own utility belt (after having removed it from Shaw prior to his anticipation of cryoing her return to Earth), was a significant oddity.He anticipated both possibilities: 1) Shaw's becoming a vector for the destruction of Earth, having discarded her "Faith"; or 2) her continuing life as one of the Faithful, whose power/(luck?) seems inexhaustible.
That characteristic seems to puzzle artificial persons, almost to the point of envy - they comment on it in most every "Alien" film - iirc.
Like you said: survival might very well be rooted in the gift of love for God (as Faith) - "Man does not live by bread alone".
Edits: 06/19/12
It was very interesting that Shaw's crucifix was removed just in time for her "abortion" scene and there was tons of intense symbolism that explored faith as deeply as the original Alien film explored psychoanalysis of "the other", as symbolized by nonhumans (alien, cat, android) racial differences, gender differences, mother, reproductive organs, etc.But even having seen the film only once (I guarantee I missed 90% of the visual and audio cues--that's how rich it was in the direction and production quality), it's obvious that this was no ordinary sci-fi film where the scientists are portrayed as geniuses and moral saviors. Here the biologist and geologist, and even the paleantologist were portrayed as self-serving, petty idiots who quickly succumbed to the evil they encountered. Shaw, in contrast, was pure in her pursuit of the answer to her question, and she never lost her belief or her focus. Her faith totally carried her.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 06/19/12
Over a millennia of religious warfare, and counting.
"... religious warfare.." not on account of Jesus, but in spite of Him, due to man's defiance and imperfect/confused nature - imo. The sequel(s) may prove me wrong.
There is always hope, for by Faith we may sojourn past pure logic and into Blessing.
That brings around the brutal question, why did I have to pay $16.50 (twice/wince) for IMAX 3D, when others are shelling out $12.50?
I won't blame the Divine... honest.
... That Shaw (for a time) became a vessel to breed the contagion into another manifestation of evil, but was unable to bear children naturally, and chose NOT to carry "it" forward voluntarily is of interest.
The central heros of the Alien series are its strong women, who carry the flame forward. There have been no "female" androids (yet?), and we saw no "female" space jockeys.
Sacrifice when done by the males, is noble - like the Captain's last ditch ramming.
Life perseveres when done for the right reasons, and becomes the gift worthy of living/survival.
I don't discount the holes as indicating a bad story. We're supposedly dealing in realms beyond the ordinary. There have to be holes. Nailed down meanings for every spook and ray gun kills the imagination in a story that requires it. Sci fi is supposed to stretch the incredible so we have to backfill more than usual. That's what a lot of the dialogue below is attempting.
As a film, as opposed to the story, there are many broadsides we can shoot off. But I like the story and all the speculation this "popcorn flick" generates.
So vast are the possibilities that everybody has a different interpretation of what is happening. Like a hundred people tripping on LSD at the same time and everybody sees different things.
Sorry for my digression. I get these flashes of the big mind game (Tim Leary expression).
But getting back.... That's the wonderful thing about science fiction. You get to imagine all these possibilities.
Which brings us to the question: Are the action, script, and effects more important than the story itself? The opening scene really grabbed me because it was like starting at the back end of a book.
surcharge to see this overrated popcorn flick. The experience melted him.
And at least get the film's name correct: Prometheus.
I'm going to begin charging you for education.
Edits: 06/16/12
The Tree of Life prepared me for this eventuality.
dsf
Start there.
You're a toxic guy.
... but I figure that in this case it's cheap compared to paying a million $$ to ride the Space shuttle, for that "in your face" immersive space experience, as the billionaires might.
Prometheus in IMAX 3D impressed me, and was a relative (and safe) bargain -imo.
It was one of my first recent cinema experiences where nobody there was texting during the movie. That says a lot.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
