 
|
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 |
108.255.78.50
In Reply to: RE: Really? posted by mkuller on August 03, 2014 at 11:34:00
The fact remains that nothing in the movie supports that. It takes place during Xmas, and the Xmas tree and crucifix are important symbols. But by all accounts in the film, the engineers were huge, hulking aliens. So I don't see anything there to support the idea that Jesus was an engineer.
Follow Ups:
...these are exerpts from my favorite analysis of the film:> Yeah. The reason the Engineers don't like us any more is that they made us a Space Jesus, and we broke him. Reader, that's not me pulling wild ideas out of my arse. That's RIDLEY SCOTT.
So, imagine poor crucified Jesus, a fresh spear wound in his side. Oh, hey, there's the 'lifegiver with his abdomen torn open' motif again. That's three times now: Prometheus, Engineer mural, Jesus Christ. And I don't think I have to mention the 'sacrifice in the interest of giving life' bit again, do I? Everyone on the same page? Good.>
> The 'Caesarean' scene is central to the film's themes of creation, sacrifice, and giving life. Shaw has discovered she's pregnant with something non-human and sets the autodoc to slice it out of her. She lies there screaming, a gaping wound in her stomach, while her tentacled alien child thrashes and squeals in the clamp above her and OH HEY IT'S THE LIFEGIVER WITH HER ABDOMEN TORN OPEN. How many times has that image come up now? Four, I make it. (We're not done yet.)
And she doesn't kill it. And she calls the procedure a 'caesarean' instead of an 'abortion'.>
> Here's where the Christian allegories really come through. The day of this strange birth just happens to be Christmas Day. And this is a 'virgin birth' of sorts, although a dark and twisted one, because Shaw couldn't possibly be pregnant. And Shaw's the crucifix-wearing Christian of the crew. We may well ask, echoing Yeats: what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards LV-223 to be born?
Consider the scene where David tells Shaw that she's pregnant, and tell me that's not a riff on the Annunciation. The calm, graciously angelic android delivering the news, the pious mother who insists she can't possibly be pregnant, the wry declaration that it's no ordinary child... yeah, we've seen this before.
'And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.'
A barren woman called Elizabeth, made pregnant by 'God'? Subtle, Ridley.>
You see what you want to see...
Edits: 08/03/14 08/03/14
I agree with some of that, especially the significance of the abortion scene, which most certainly WAS in the movie. The space Jesus WAS NOT in the movie, and the idea that engineers living millions of light years away would have been upset about the crucifixion of a single man (the Romans crucified about 10,000 people and murdered a million in their conquest of Judea. Moreover, every life form shows cruelty, it's not just humans.
My interpretation of why the engineers turned against humanity is that humans were developing the ability to harness technology in ways that reminded the engineers of their own shorcomings, and were using technology in harmful ways. This is paid off by the large role David played in the film, and the hostility of the surviving engineer. The way that scene unfolded was very significant, when confronted by David and Weyland, the engineer yanked off David's head and used it to strike Weyland as if the intent was to punish humanity for its own technological attempt to create life.
...they would only be concerned about that single Man if they had put Him here.
That interpretation takes into consideration things Ridley Scott has said about the film.
Interpret the film any way you want.
You mean things Ridley Scott supposedly told a journalist, who supposedly wrote an article, which was supposedly read by someone who posts on a blog that you supposedly like. As wonderful as all that is, no mention--not even a small hint--was made in the movie of an "engineer Jesus" that the engineers might have put in Bethlehem. If you want to talk about the movie, you'll have to admit that it just doesn't support that idea.
Edits: 08/03/14
meaningful. A person looking for a thread will find thousands of them. Whether or not they are meaningful is a question for common sense. Would Scott make a gigantic Christian allegory film? I doubt it.
(nt)
...with you it's always a zero sum game.
You have to be right and everyone else is wrong.
Get over yourself.
As I said, interpret it however you want.
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 © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
