If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Badass Digest)   Turns out the 'Prometheus' you saw was not the 'Prometheus' that was planned. It was originally titled 'Alien: Engineers', took place on LV-426, acknowledged the stupidity of the scientists, and had a much better ending   (badassdigest.com) divider line 221
    More: Sad, Jon Spaihts, alien prequel, Prometheus, Damon Lindelof, stupidity  
•       •       •

10310 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 12 Nov 2012 at 6:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



221 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-12 09:43:40 PM

RoxtarRyan: Scott took a concept that was awesome as fark, highly anticipated, and turned it into a teen horror movie where everyone has shiat for brains.


Kind of seems like the point, doesn't it? Hollywood wants megablockbusters. They don't want thoughtful, slow, deep thinkers for hardcore scifi freaks. They want popcorn movies for the masses. Why bother investing a ton unless you expect a ton?

Also, as someone who enjoyed the last season of Lost, Prometheus was garbage. The second half of the movie, once the husband dies and Noomi has to cut out the alien baby is pretty decent. All it took was killing off all of the unbelievable, terribad characters until all you're left with are the only 2 charismatic personalities in the entire bunch: Noomi and David, as well as some scary aliens and some scary hallways and some Geigeresque sets. Still, even then, it's not much more than an Alien ripoff that pushes too many wrong buttons, such as the pervo drunk captain and the strangely braindead type A mission lead and the vaguely homoerotic pilots. And it ends on such an obvious "Go see Prometheus 2" ending that you're left feeling empty and used.

A lot of what was on the screen could have worked, but it needed better actors, better writing, better sets, better directing, and better editing. I hope someone eventually does a fanedit, cuts out all the fat and just leaves the meat.
 
2012-11-12 09:45:11 PM

CujoQuarrel:

There are two crew members lost and no one on the ship maintains communication with them (ok. it was because he was going to get to bang CTheron but still ...



In her ship at LV-426, Dead Ctheron waits dreaming.
 
2012-11-12 09:45:19 PM

wildcardjack: theorellior: wildcardjack: Was I the only one who thought "If you have fusion plasma propulsion you don't need to crash into him, you just need to get him in your wake"?

They had a drive capable of single ship planet-to-planet transit. Those engines would have to be putting out gigawatts of energy.

Sadly, very few people in sci-fi have learned the Kzinti Lesson.

Actually I was thinking more from the time I watched an F-15 dig holes in a runway with it's afterburner.

Also, Heinlein went over the problem of launching a rather large ship from earth in Farmer in the Sky, noting that to launch the interplanetary ship from surface would have left a scorch mark the size of the Mojave. I'm going over instances of engine wash used as a weapon and I'm coming up Mythbusters. I remember them using shuttle engines on Moonraker to torch the 747, but that was worse BS than if a Creationist got the green light on their version Jurassic park.


The did that in the Halo video game series. Destroyed a large city if I remember right
 
2012-11-12 09:47:31 PM

natmar_76: RoxtarRyan: Scott took a concept that was awesome as fark, highly anticipated, and turned it into a teen horror movie where everyone has shiat for brains.

Kind of seems like the point, doesn't it? Hollywood wants megablockbusters. They don't want thoughtful, slow, deep thinkers for hardcore scifi freaks. They want popcorn movies for the masses. Why bother investing a ton unless you expect a ton?


I guess this is correct. I think the last Sci-Fi film I really liked was 2007's Sunshine.
And even there it didn't need the faux antagonist. The journey was harrowing enough.
 
2012-11-12 09:49:32 PM
Which is odd, because The Darkest Hour was utter shiat.

/I had to review it
 
2012-11-12 09:51:09 PM

natmar_76: A lot of what was on the screen could have worked, but it needed better actors, better writing, better sets, better directing, and better editing. I hope someone eventually does a fanedit, cuts out all the fat and just leaves the meat.


It needed to include Space Jesus.It's the one piece that makes most of the plot fit.

Here's a vid of a chick with pink hair going into it.
 
2012-11-12 09:51:53 PM
Is Looper a sci-fi film, or an action thriller w/ a sci-fi setting?
 
2012-11-12 09:51:55 PM

RoxtarRyan: Here's a vid of a chick with pink hair going into it.


Link fail.
 
2012-11-12 09:52:22 PM
Ok so I finished reading the script (had to go home and eat and all that)

MASSIVE SCRIPT SPOILERS

Main differences:
It happens on LV-426
Ship is named Magellan
Weyland only cares about the terraforming technology which was not brought up in the movie at all. Vickers is also not related, but does have big aspirations in the company
There is a reference to Engineer Jesus, but Watts (who was religious in the movie) laughs it off
The main archaeologists (Holliday & Watts) are very intelligent and extremely excited when they find the dead bodies, unlike the movie when he went all emo on discovery
There are a couple extra characters in the story, mainly scientists
Vickers also brigs 4 soldiers as bodyguards and protection, armed to the teeth.
Fifield and the other guy are given a toast for being stupid enough to get lost and left in the pyramid, pretty funny.
Would've been A LOT gorier than the movie, a lot. The med pod scene alone would've made some puke in the theaters
The Pyramids are terraforming devices, and they are made of living biological matter, capable of seeding worlds as long as they're fully terraformed. Kinda explains why stuff evolved (like the facehuggers)

David does not poison Holliday at all, but Holliday does die by falling deeper into the pyramid and getting facehugged by an evolved facehugger (I'm assuming the ones that escaped and killed the last Engineers, they never explain why that facehugger was different). He gets back to the ship, is about to do Watts, and ends up going into convulsions and chestbursted. The alien escapes (it's a weirder T-1000 like xenomorph) and ends up killing a bunch of the misc. crew.

BUT David is a huuuuge dick nonetheless. He figures out the Engineer ship is a doomsday ship named Juggernaut and it was meant to deliver a lethal payload of xenomorphs to Earth, but they were attacked and killed by their own creatures. David has 2 protocols, the first was to discover the terramorphing abilities, and the second was to eliminate the scientists. He grabs Watts, brings her to the "armoury" (where the ORIGINAL facehugger eggs are) and has her impregnated with an old school xenomorph.

Watts does use the med bay, but it's to remove the new alien, not a squid thing. The alien escapes through a grate and Watts is left in the med pod for hours (not minutes like the movie), and she gets crazy extensive surgery. When she awakes she sees a soldier coming in and he is killed by the alien. While he's being fed on, she slowly gets out, grabs his gun, and unloads on the alien, killing it.

The remaining crew (Vickers, Watts, a couple soldiers, and couple randoms) go in to find David because he locked the engine controls to get the fark off the planet. They find David, he resurrects an Engineer that was in stasis (last to survive massacre) and Engineer goes apeshiat, rips David's head off, and attacks the others. Most escape, but Vickers and a soldier find resurrected Fifield (he's much grosser than the movie) and he attacks. He mortally wounds soldier, jumps on Vickers, but soldier shoots him and he erupts acid all over Vickers, essentially melting her (she was a biatch anyway).

The Engineer gets to the captain's chair (like in 'Alien' where he's found) and starts to take off. Meanwhile Watts is driving back to the Magellan. Janek (ship's pilot) is in the command center when evolved weird alien attacks. it bites him, but Watts comes in and kills it with multiple head shots. They take off determined to ram the engineer's ship. During that the engineer's chest erupts and a super alien comes out (because they're based on what they come from) thus leaving the engineer where he was in the first 'Alien'. Ship starts descending, but Head of David radios Watts and says auto-pilot is engaging. They ram the ship, Janek is killed, but Watts escapes in a pod. She has to do the same run away as Vickers did in the movie from the engineer ship, but she does the smart thing and turns 90 degrees.

Finally she has to fight the super xenomorph, kills it, and lives in Vicker's luxury pod while waiting for a rescue party and playing chess with Head of David. THE END


TL/DR
Many changes to it. They farked up big time not doing this script. In my opinion it would've been much, much better. 
 
2012-11-12 09:54:42 PM
Am I the only one who really liked Prometheus? Kinda surprised by all the hate here.
 
2012-11-12 09:55:21 PM

Virtual Pariah: natmar_76: RoxtarRyan: Scott took a concept that was awesome as fark, highly anticipated, and turned it into a teen horror movie where everyone has shiat for brains.

Kind of seems like the point, doesn't it? Hollywood wants megablockbusters. They don't want thoughtful, slow, deep thinkers for hardcore scifi freaks. They want popcorn movies for the masses. Why bother investing a ton unless you expect a ton?


I guess this is correct. I think the last Sci-Fi film I really liked was 2007's Sunshine.
And even there it didn't need the faux antagonist. The journey was harrowing enough.


heh, I'm watching that right now, or at least it is on in the background as I study. Underrated movie, awesome score.
 
2012-11-12 09:58:23 PM

scottydoesntknow: The Gentleman Caller: The ship wasn't called Prometheus? Was it Serenity? Because that sure as hell looked like Serenity. Like "add-two-engines-and-call-it-a-day" Serenity.

The script has it as Magellan, a much better name for an exploratory ship.


Dammit that's already way better. If I read this script I'm going to be angry and what could have been.
 
2012-11-12 09:59:13 PM
Ohh and I should say, the Engineers are given a much longer introduction at the beginning. They seed the world by using a sacrificial engineer to create all the life. The Pyramids they use resemble the Egyptian Pyramids (and were built in remembrance). They were considered gods (like Rah and all that), and even though Watts said laughed off about engineer Jesus, it could've been possible. They did date the dead ones at the site at around 2000 years.
 
2012-11-12 09:59:16 PM

BigLuca: Virtual Pariah: natmar_76: RoxtarRyan: Scott took a concept that was awesome as fark, highly anticipated, and turned it into a teen horror movie where everyone has shiat for brains.

Kind of seems like the point, doesn't it? Hollywood wants megablockbusters. They don't want thoughtful, slow, deep thinkers for hardcore scifi freaks. They want popcorn movies for the masses. Why bother investing a ton unless you expect a ton?


I guess this is correct. I think the last Sci-Fi film I really liked was 2007's Sunshine.
And even there it didn't need the faux antagonist. The journey was harrowing enough.

heh, I'm watching that right now, or at least it is on in the background as I study. Underrated movie, awesome score.


Really good movie. Nice and slow with good tension. Love rose Byrne
 
2012-11-12 10:03:25 PM

pute kisses like a man: DamnYankees: I'm still one of the 7 people who defend Prometheus. It will probably end up on my top 10 of the year.

I Iiked it. it's a scott movie, he wants his little, "what does it mean to exist" themes in there. similarly themes to bladerunner.

my problems with the film were not devastating, but noticeable.

1) why have guy peirce as an old man? why not have an old man?


1. There are some deleted scenes featuring Guy Pearce playing the "young" Charles Weyland. There's a TED talk on YouTube.

I still can't over the guy WITH THE FARKING MAGIC LASER MAP GETTING LOST.
 
2012-11-12 10:05:08 PM

Mad Tea Party: Am I the only one who really liked Prometheus? Kinda surprised by all the hate here.


No, you're not alone. But explaining why on an internet board is too long and frustrating to voice a lot of defense of the movie (at least as I saw it).
 
2012-11-12 10:05:10 PM
I was really happy Charlie died, because I didn't know how much more of his "They're all dead, I'll never be able to ask them WHY!" bellyaching I could take. He didn't realize he wasn't in the ruins of a city, that the Engineers didn't actually LIVE there. Because he was f*cking stupid. Like a while race of space-traveling Engineers lived in one mound and they're all gone forever!

F*cking moron. I wish they could have killed him twice.
 
2012-11-12 10:05:30 PM

OnlyM3: IlGreven


This is why we can't have good sci-fi.

No, not the hacking apart of the orgiinal script. The fanboys who tear absolutely everything apart if it isn't 100% perfect in their eyes.
We can't have good sci-fi because when someone makes crap the fans call them on it?

oookay then.


That's the problem with having stupid people write SF. Hard SF tries to ground itself in science, and then use that science as a foundation from which to speculate. That's why, when crap SF shows up, we slam it - because if it's easy enough to have a single SF fanboy tear it apart in a matter of minutes, well, your writers need to collaborate with someone that has half a clue, then rework their script accordingly.

For example, when I watch a movie about explorers taking a trillion-dollar mission to explore an exoplanet, I want people that, in the future, act as if they have more information that we do now. Currently, we map a planet before we choose a landing site. One of the reasons we've successfully landed rovers on Mars, including one the size of a friggin' car, is because we knew where we wanted them, why we wanted them there, and knew to the foot what those landing sites looked like - and we did this because we learned from the Apollo missions, where we did our best to map landing sites a half century earlier before we used a separate vehicle to land on the friggin' Moon.

I want to see continuity. This was a prequel to "Alien", yet the humanoid artificial lifeform in this movie looked, moved, sounded, and acted better than the humanoid artificial lifeform in "Alien", Really? We typically don't take huge steps backwards when it comes to technology. The interfaces and implementations in "Prometheus" were a damned sight more modern than the CRT-and-switch interfaces in "Alien", even though they were supposedly far older. Project Prometheus was, according to their own site, launched on 2081 - just 69 years from now. "Alien" takes place in 2122, 41 years after Prometheus launches, and yet their ship's interfaces and implementations look radically different, and much older, than what we saw in "Prometheus." What we saw in "Alien" supposedly took place 110 years in the future, but it looked positively ancient when compared with what was shown in "Prometheus". No continuity. Not even a little. We're not talking about "sexy" technology, either - everything from access panels to tools is radically different.

I want to see professionals. A crew that actually acts like this is a trillion-dollar mission - trained for the mission, with processes and protocols in place for dealing with all of the situations they instead fumbled and farked up in "Prometheus." We've been doing this for decades now, and there's no reason to doubt that the successful processes and protocols we've developed since the 1950s wouldn't be, in part or in whole, enacted here. Instead, we get the friggin' Keystone Kops in Space, with "scientists" acting like morons and "managers" acting like badly constructed stereotypes. The folks in "Alien" actually looked and sounded like they were trained for their jobs - it's just that their jobs didn't involve exploration of an exoplanet. The whole friggin' point of Project Prometheus was to explore an exoplanet, but they came off looking like complete morons. As characters, they were simply unbelieveable - as a SF fan, I couldn't open my window of disbelief wide enough to let that kind of stupidity in.

"Prometheus" was visually stunning, but the writing and plot was, quite simply, shiatty. It's yet another bad movie with good CGI, and a huge disappointment given the run-up to the movie.
 
2012-11-12 10:05:56 PM

Sgt Otter: pute kisses like a man: DamnYankees: I'm still one of the 7 people who defend Prometheus. It will probably end up on my top 10 of the year.

I Iiked it. it's a scott movie, he wants his little, "what does it mean to exist" themes in there. similarly themes to bladerunner.

my problems with the film were not devastating, but noticeable.

1) why have guy peirce as an old man? why not have an old man?


1. There are some deleted scenes featuring Guy Pearce playing the "young" Charles Weyland. There's a TED talk on YouTube.

I still can't over the guy WITH THE FARKING MAGIC LASER MAP GETTING LOST.


Not to mention the guys running into the worst possible room.
 
2012-11-12 10:07:19 PM

scottydoesntknow: She has to do the same run away as Vickers did in the movie from the engineer ship, but she does the smart thing and turns 90 degrees


It was worth the read just for that.

Good synopsis.
 
2012-11-12 10:07:26 PM

Virtual Pariah: natmar_76: RoxtarRyan: Scott took a concept that was awesome as fark, highly anticipated, and turned it into a teen horror movie where everyone has shiat for brains.

Kind of seems like the point, doesn't it? Hollywood wants megablockbusters. They don't want thoughtful, slow, deep thinkers for hardcore scifi freaks. They want popcorn movies for the masses. Why bother investing a ton unless you expect a ton?


I guess this is correct. I think the last Sci-Fi film I really liked was 2007's Sunshine.
And even there it didn't need the faux antagonist. The journey was harrowing enough.


I was pleasantly surprised by Sunshine. That movie is undervalued.
 
2012-11-12 10:12:47 PM

FormlessOne: We typically don't take huge steps backwards when it comes to technology. The interfaces and implementations in "Prometheus" were a damned sight more modern than the CRT-and-switch interfaces in "Alien", even though they were supposedly far older. Project Prometheus was, according to their own site, launched on 2081 - just 69 years from now. "Alien" takes place in 2122, 41 years after Prometheus launches, and yet their ship's interfaces and implementations look radically different, and much older, than what we saw in "Prometheus." What we saw in "Alien" supposedly took place 110 years in the future, but it looked positively ancient when compared with what was shown in "Prometheus". No continuity. Not even a little. We're not talking about "sexy" technology, either - everything from access panels to tools is radically different.


In defense of this, the older movies were more or less surrounded by military tech. If the future bears any resemblance to today, I'm shocked military hardware is only a hundred years or so behind. ;)
 
2012-11-12 10:14:02 PM

FormlessOne: OnlyM3: IlGreven


I want to see continuity. This was a prequel to "Alien", yet the humanoid artificial lifeform in this movie looked, moved, sounded, and acted better than the humanoid artificial lifeform in "Alien", Really? We typically don't take huge steps backwards when it comes to technology. The interfaces and implementations in "Prometheus" were a damned sight more modern than the CRT-and-switch interfaces in "Alien", even though they were supposedly far older. Project Prometheus was, according to their own site, launched on 2081 - just 69 years from now. "Alien" takes place in 2122, 41 years after Prometheus launches, and yet their ship's interfaces and implementations look radically different, and much older, than what we saw in "Prometheus." What we saw in "Alien" supposedly took place 110 years in the future, but it looked positively ancient when compared with what was shown in "Prometheus". No continuity. Not even a little. We're not talking about "sexy" technology, either - everything from access panels to tools is radically different.


Maybe, just maybe, for the purposes of suspending belief, I can try to answer this.

If you look at the functions of the various ships, the one in Alien was not top of the line. It was an industrial ship and it's controls and displays didn't have to be as fine as a science vessel.
As a matter of fact, if you liken the original ship to a construction vehicle in 2012, you would see things like industrial switches and toggles vs touchscreens and the like. They would be considered more robust and less prone to failure which would be cheaper for a mining company to maintain.

Just throwing that out there to account for the 30 yr CGI advancements in the movies.
 
2012-11-12 10:18:00 PM

FormlessOne: OnlyM3: IlGreven


This is why we can't have good sci-fi.

No, not the hacking apart of the orgiinal script. The fanboys who tear absolutely everything apart if it isn't 100% perfect in their eyes.
We can't have good sci-fi because when someone makes crap the fans call them on it?

oookay then.

That's the problem with having stupid people write SF. Hard SF tries to ground itself in science, and then use that science as a foundation from which to speculate. That's why, when crap SF shows up, we slam it - because if it's easy enough to have a single SF fanboy tear it apart in a matter of minutes, well, your writers need to collaborate with someone that has half a clue, then rework their script accordingly.

For example, when I watch a movie about explorers taking a trillion-dollar mission to explore an exoplanet, I want people that, in the future, act as if they have more information that we do now. Currently, we map a planet before we choose a landing site. One of the reasons we've successfully landed rovers on Mars, including one the size of a friggin' car, is because we knew where we wanted them, why we wanted them there, and knew to the foot what those landing sites looked like - and we did this because we learned from the Apollo missions, where we did our best to map landing sites a half century earlier before we used a separate vehicle to land on the friggin' Moon.

I want to see continuity. This was a prequel to "Alien", yet the humanoid artificial lifeform in this movie looked, moved, sounded, and acted better than the humanoid artificial lifeform in "Alien", Really? We typically don't take huge steps backwards when it comes to technology. The interfaces and implementations in "Prometheus" were a damned sight more modern than the CRT-and-switch interfaces in "Alien", even though they were supposedly far older. Project Prometheus was, according to their own site, launched on 2081 - just 69 years from now. "Alien" takes place in 2122, 41 years after Prometheus ...


This , so much this.

I can forgive the fantastic science (warp drives, etc)

Can't forgive the stupidity.
 
2012-11-12 10:18:03 PM

Mad Tea Party: Am I the only one who really liked Prometheus? Kinda surprised by all the hate here.


I went in trying to like it, but for a movie that relied so heavily on sucking you in via atmosphere, I had entirely too many WTF moments that completely shattered my suspension of disbelief to even begin to enjoy myself.
 
2012-11-12 10:19:14 PM

Virtual Pariah: FormlessOne: OnlyM3: IlGreven


I want to see continuity. This was a prequel to "Alien", yet the humanoid artificial lifeform in this movie looked, moved, sounded, and acted better than the humanoid artificial lifeform in "Alien", Really? We typically don't take huge steps backwards when it comes to technology. The interfaces and implementations in "Prometheus" were a damned sight more modern than the CRT-and-switch interfaces in "Alien", even though they were supposedly far older. Project Prometheus was, according to their own site, launched on 2081 - just 69 years from now. "Alien" takes place in 2122, 41 years after Prometheus launches, and yet their ship's interfaces and implementations look radically different, and much older, than what we saw in "Prometheus." What we saw in "Alien" supposedly took place 110 years in the future, but it looked positively ancient when compared with what was shown in "Prometheus". No continuity. Not even a little. We're not talking about "sexy" technology, either - everything from access panels to tools is radically different.

Maybe, just maybe, for the purposes of suspending belief, I can try to answer this.

If you look at the functions of the various ships, the one in Alien was not top of the line. It was an industrial ship and it's controls and displays didn't have to be as fine as a science vessel.
As a matter of fact, if you liken the original ship to a construction vehicle in 2012, you would see things like industrial switches and toggles vs touchscreens and the like. They would be considered more robust and less prone to failure which would be cheaper for a mining company to maintain.

Just throwing that out there to account for the 30 yr CGI advancements in the movies.


I took it into account, but even so, I'm left with a disjointed impression when comparing the two. That's also why I mentioned the other aspects, such as tools, doors, hinges, markings, and so on - there's too big a disparity to easily write off, a marked lack of continuity that forces a mental separation between "Prometheus" and "Alien".
 
2012-11-12 10:20:51 PM

sprawl15: Mad Tea Party: Am I the only one who really liked Prometheus? Kinda surprised by all the hate here.

I went in trying to like it, but for a movie that relied so heavily on sucking you in via atmosphere, I had entirely too many WTF moments that completely shattered my suspension of disbelief to even begin to enjoy myself.


Same here. I'm a big fan of the Alien universe, and I wanted to enjoy "Prometheus", but at the end of the movie, I just threw up my hands (metaphorically speaking) and walked away. It was frustrating.
 
2012-11-12 10:23:01 PM
I don't get all the Prometheus hate, I liked it. I've watched it half a dozen times so far.

Only 2 things that bother me are; 1. paintings on caves = aliens engineered us? how do u get there exactly? and 2. hey, this alien world is a weapon plant. huh?

Its a good movie, I'm willing to give them a sequel to answers some of the mysteries
 
2012-11-12 10:24:11 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: I don't get all the Prometheus hate, I liked it. I've watched it half a dozen times so far.

Only 2 things that bother me are; 1. paintings on caves = aliens engineered us? how do u get there exactly? and 2. hey, this alien world is a weapon plant. huh?

Its a good movie, I'm willing to give them a sequel to answers some of the mysteries


I liked it miles better than Avatar.
 
2012-11-12 10:28:50 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: I don't get all the Prometheus hate, I liked it. I've watched it half a dozen times so far.

Only 2 things that bother me are; 1. paintings on caves = aliens engineered us? how do u get there exactly? and 2. hey, this alien world is a weapon plant. huh?

Its a good movie, I'm willing to give them a sequel to answers some of the mysteries


My issue is I left with more questions than answers. All you got from this was what the engineers looked like. Everything else was so far outta left field as far as Alien mythos is concerned it made no sense. You wouldn't even know it was in the Alien universe if they didnt show the Engineer's suit/chair and the second mouth on the ending shot xenomorph.
 
2012-11-12 10:29:44 PM
It's amazing - and not in a good way - that so many of you take this crap soooooooo seriously.

It's a movie. Nothing more, nothing less.

Farking allah, maybe if some of you had a church or temple or even some kind of farking hobby besides your obsession over farking movies you might actually have lives.

No guaranty, mind you, but it would certainly help.
 
2012-11-12 10:30:39 PM
It was a pretty looking movie with a Swiss cheese plot. Honest Trailers (YouTube link) did a pretty good job of pointing out some of the more glaring dumbness... 

/Probably got that link from the initial thread
//if so, hat tip to the original poster.
 
2012-11-12 10:33:30 PM

Virtual Pariah: Spanky_McFarksalot: I don't get all the Prometheus hate, I liked it. I've watched it half a dozen times so far.

Only 2 things that bother me are; 1. paintings on caves = aliens engineered us? how do u get there exactly? and 2. hey, this alien world is a weapon plant. huh?

Its a good movie, I'm willing to give them a sequel to answers some of the mysteries

I liked it miles better than Avatar.


Don't get me started on "Blue Monkeys Farking: The Movie".
 
2012-11-12 10:36:26 PM

Fano: Sgt Otter: pute kisses like a man: DamnYankees: I'm still one of the 7 people who defend Prometheus. It will probably end up on my top 10 of the year.

I Iiked it. it's a scott movie, he wants his little, "what does it mean to exist" themes in there. similarly themes to bladerunner.

my problems with the film were not devastating, but noticeable.

1) why have guy peirce as an old man? why not have an old man?


1. There are some deleted scenes featuring Guy Pearce playing the "young" Charles Weyland. There's a TED talk on YouTube.

I still can't over the guy WITH THE FARKING MAGIC LASER MAP GETTING LOST.

Not to mention the guys running into the worst possible room.


Or a scientist not recognizing that that snake-thing was in a very blatant hostile/defensive posture.
 
2012-11-12 10:37:35 PM
I like this thread. Legitimate reasons to not like the movie and people who like the movie aren't trying to assert that those people are wrong, just that that didn't bother them. Faith restored.
 
2012-11-12 10:38:41 PM

scottydoesntknow: GRCooper: I guess I'm a moran, or I missed something - I thought Prometheus took place on LV-426

Nope, they land on LV-223


I thought they were on LV-227.
 
2012-11-12 10:40:57 PM

Sgt Otter: Fano: Sgt Otter: pute kisses like a man: DamnYankees: I'm still one of the 7 people who defend Prometheus. It will probably end up on my top 10 of the year.

I Iiked it. it's a scott movie, he wants his little, "what does it mean to exist" themes in there. similarly themes to bladerunner.

my problems with the film were not devastating, but noticeable.

1) why have guy peirce as an old man? why not have an old man?


1. There are some deleted scenes featuring Guy Pearce playing the "young" Charles Weyland. There's a TED talk on YouTube.

I still can't over the guy WITH THE FARKING MAGIC LASER MAP GETTING LOST.

Not to mention the guys running into the worst possible room.

Or a scientist not recognizing that that snake-thing was in a very blatant hostile/defensive posture.


Don't forget about people and things showing up exactly when it was convenient then disappearing when it wasn't (guns, generic crew members, space axe, etc).
 
2012-11-12 10:48:02 PM

Austinoftx: pute kisses like a man: it sounds like all my problems are with the editing.... I admit, he kept the movie at a respectable time, so maybe the cuts were necessary. although, i don't mind a long movie if it is engrossing. for the most part, i was engrossed in the movie.

Okay, the problems aren't editing. The problems are inexcusable retardation.

The crew take their helmets off in the base at the first opportunity, as though there is no such thing as poison and contagion to worry about. These are supposed to be scientists. Then they howl.

The red-headed mineralogist who is in charge of mapping the base with his flying orbs... gets lost. A few scenes later, the Captain calls him for his position. Which he provides instantly. Yes, they're still quite in touch with the ship. Where there is a 3D image of the base appearing on the table, along with blobs showing the location of the teams. And he's still lost.

Later, the biologist who ran in terror from a safely dead alien wants to go pet a glistening, sticky live one. He calls it "Baby". I mean, we know he's gay, and he and his red headed buddy have been flirting with each other since they got thawed out, but really now.

These characters simply do not act like people! Nothing about what they do makes sense! And it's not from too many explanatory scenes being cut out. Visually, the movie was awesome. But everyone involved in the writing and editing should be blacklisted from making movies ever again.


Here's how I rationalize it: the cryo-sleep technology hadn't been perfected yet, and resulted massive brain damage to every human member of the crew.

Think about it. Suddenly all their actions make sense, because they all have brain damage.

It explains everything.
 
2012-11-12 10:50:27 PM

andino: Here's how I rationalize it: the cryo-sleep technology hadn't been perfected yet, and resulted massive brain damage to every human member of the crew.

Think about it. Suddenly all their actions make sense, because they all have brain damage.

It explains everything.


It doesn't explain why they didn't brief ANYONE about ANYTHING until after the years long trip to the moon. Or why the Engineer decided to go full retard and try to punch out some girl instead of just getting on another ship to deliver his deadly space jizz to Earth.
 
2012-11-12 10:54:55 PM

sprawl15: It doesn't explain why they didn't brief ANYONE about ANYTHING until after the years long trip to the moon. Or why the Engineer decided to go full retard and try to punch out some girl instead of just getting on another ship to deliver his deadly space jizz to Earth.


Okay, yeah, you got me there. But it explains SOME things.
 
2012-11-12 10:55:10 PM

thecpt: I like this thread. Legitimate reasons to not like the movie and people who like the movie aren't trying to assert that those people are wrong, just that that didn't bother them. Faith restored.


Actual discourse - a rarity since the "September that never ended" - is always enjoyable.
 
2012-11-12 11:01:27 PM

BalugaJoe: scottydoesntknow: GRCooper: I guess I'm a moran, or I missed something - I thought Prometheus took place on LV-426

Nope, they land on LV-223

I thought they were on LV-227.


Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?
 
2012-11-12 11:03:25 PM

scottydoesntknow: My issue is I left with more questions than answers.


Man, that's what I liked best about it.
 
2012-11-12 11:05:13 PM

scottydoesntknow: GRCooper: I guess I'm a moran, or I missed something - I thought Prometheus took place on LV-426

Nope, they land on LV-223


I thought it was Seta Alpha V.
 
2012-11-12 11:06:13 PM
I liked Prometheus, kind of. For every stupid scene there is a pretty decent one (The med pod scene is the best, David at the star map, pretty much every David scene is good despite context being lacked).

For people who complain that it looks too new and Alien looks older after wards, I have a decent solution to explain that annoyance away. The reason Alien has more antiquated technology is: It's cheaper. Corporations will skimp at EVERY bottom line they possibly can, and for a bunch of low level peon miners or whatever workers they were in Alien, they get the BARE MINIMUM of advanced technology.

At one of my old jobs, we used a DOS based program for ordering stuff for customers. It was only in the last year they did an upgrade to Windows XP. That's right love, they replaced a 30 year old antiquated OS with an 11 year old antiquated OS.

So it doesn't surprise me in the least to see those kinds of computers in the future, and just reminds me how shiatty and evil corporations will be to save their bottom line. I think it's even more true now than in the 70s.
 
2012-11-12 11:12:31 PM

sprawl15: andino: Here's how I rationalize it: the cryo-sleep technology hadn't been perfected yet, and resulted massive brain damage to every human member of the crew.

Think about it. Suddenly all their actions make sense, because they all have brain damage.

It explains everything.

It doesn't explain why they didn't brief ANYONE about ANYTHING until after the years long trip to the moon. Or why the Engineer decided to go full retard and try to punch out some girl instead of just getting on another ship to deliver his deadly space jizz to Earth.


The link's script actually addresses the first one...triple pay for a classified mission that they would be briefed on when necessary. I'm floored this couldn't have been included in the movie.
 
2012-11-12 11:14:46 PM

andino: sprawl15: It doesn't explain why they didn't brief ANYONE about ANYTHING until after the years long trip to the moon. Or why the Engineer decided to go full retard and try to punch out some girl instead of just getting on another ship to deliver his deadly space jizz to Earth.

Okay, yeah, you got me there. But it explains SOME things.


It could be that the Engineer looked at the actions of the crew and seeing how stupid the humans had become could not help himself from trying to kill them all.

As good an explanation as any.
 
2012-11-12 11:15:16 PM

Mad Tea Party: scottydoesntknow: My issue is I left with more questions than answers.

Man, that's what I liked best about it.


Problem was, the only questions I cared about were questions about why people were acting like idiots. I still didn't know why the aliens were doing anything they were doing, but that's the question I started with and slogging through another 2+ hours to maybe get something approaching an attempt to answer was ridiculous - the entire movie could be replaced with a poster of an Engineer wearing a Matt Lesko suit and shrugging.

Nuclear Monk: The link's script actually addresses the first one...triple pay for a classified mission that they would be briefed on when necessary. I'm floored this couldn't have been included in the movie.


Yup. One line. "I know we've been keeping you in the dark so far - and you're being paid well to be so confused - but we wanted to wait until we verified that this exists before letting you out of the dark. What we have here is a bla bla bla"
 
2012-11-12 11:15:52 PM

Mad Tea Party: scottydoesntknow: My issue is I left with more questions than answers.

Man, that's what I liked best about it.


Yeah but all the questions started with something like "How could they be so stupid that they ..."
 
2012-11-12 11:19:18 PM

Mad Tea Party: scottydoesntknow: My issue is I left with more questions than answers.

Man, that's what I liked best about it.


Not when the questions are "Where did that axe come from?"
 
Displayed 50 of 221 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report