Prometheus: Film Studios do not Make Movies on Straight Lines.

I’m not intending this blog to be a review of Prometheus, I liked the movie, I’ve been a fan of the original Alien movie since 1979, & only later I began to appreciate what the movie more deeply.

So now, over 30 years later, Ridley Scott returns to the genre he helped define (sorry for the cliche) with Prometheus, a sci-fi horror with art direction inspired by HR Giger & a whole new audience to scare the bejesus out of.

Having seen the movie, I did book the first 3D showing in Helsinki for the biggest screen available I was not too disappointed, in fact after 4 days I had this nagging thought in my head, reviews were split, 50/50. People either loved it or hated it, simple. Why? Some complained about the script, story & flaws, flaws? What flaws? I came out asking questions, thinking about the story & what wasn’t said. The movie was busy, but in a good way yet a lot of people didn’t like it, & I have a theory as to why.

Summer is a time for blockbuster movies, personally I don’t go to see these type of movies as they are not to my taste, although I did enjoy The Avengers, as did 99% of the people who went to see it. Prometheus is different, it makes us think about what really happened & what might happen, and even more it’s telling the viewers there is no god!! Now this is fine for me, I’m an atheist, Ridley Scott is telling me nothing I already know, but do cinema audiences really want to be told this? I don’t think so.

Xenomorph

I turned this question around to make it a little easier on myself, what if they discovered that god was on LV-223 & had created life on earth, a spiritual being that was responsible for all religions, thus controlling the paths of billions of people, would I have enjoyed the movie? No. I would have been insulted & felt cheated after 30 years of still seeing a Xenomorph in my dreams & waking up in a cold sweat.

20th Century Fox got the release date wrong, & with a little less hype I think this could have been the movie we all wanted. Incidentally, the viral promotion is without a doubt one of the best marketing campaigns I’ve ever seen for any movie, inspiring ideas.

*On a slightly geekier note, all androids in the Alien movies make up the beginning of the alphabet. A, B, C, D. Ash, Bishop, Call & David.

So to sum up, a great film, stunning visuals as you would expect from Ridley Scott, & a typical stoned hippy late night event for those wishing to expand their minds on the fundamental design on life. It was a hard act to follow, but I feel they managed it, with some room to spare. Just remember, it is just a movie, but I’m still thinking about little bits of details….

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Prometheus: Film Studios do not Make Movies on Straight Lines.

  1. I thought the movie was gorgeous. The 3D was amazing, light years better than anything I’ve ever seen before. It was incredibly engaging on the whole and most of the story problems started bothering me only afterward. So I didn’t love it but nor did I hate it.

    High spoiler warning going ahead.
    There were things that bothered me about the story so very much afterward. Like when the half-alien geologist/biologist (I’m not sure which one it was in the end) coming back to the ship felt a forced and mostly just an attempt to add the action to justify blockbuster-status. The death of Vickers felt random and unjustified for a character that has been shown throughout the movie to have high survival instincts and physically and mentally capable of taking action. I’m a flabby office worker and even I had the presence of mind to immediately direct my path to safer ground when ice started crackling underneath my feet. Someone who on a regular basis faces dangerous situations wouldn’t just keep running in front of a heavy, faster moving object, headed straight toward them when there’s somewhere to go to besides forward. Sure, it was visually stunning but from the character’s point of view it was stupid beyond the pail.

    The religiosity bothered me for a whole different reason. The rate of atheism keeps rising dramatically in scientific circles (http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm) as well as outside the sciences, the belief in creationism going down even faster. Last year people who don’t believe in any gods surpassed the people who do in the UK and still somehow, in the year 2090 nonetheless, Weyland managed to find a 17 person crew consisting mostly of scientists who absolutely believe not only in creationism but in a creator god. That seems awfully implausible.

    The DNA match bothered me for a bunch of reasons, most of all because it does away with evolution. This was actually the only thing that bothered me enough to throw me out of the story at the time of watching. A 100% DNA match is possible only when comparing two DNA samples from the same donor and even then not always, see chimera syndrome. The other thing is that even if they did have an average compiled out of human DNA, even then the DNA wouldn’t match 100% unless they were humans and they obviously weren’t. Also, DNA is some of the biggest evidence for evolution since we share DNA with every living thing on this here Earth. But our DNA doesn’t match exactly with chimp DNA, it just matches more closely than it does with gorilla DNA and so on so forth. The ancestor that was basil to both us and the chimps has DNA that matches neither completely but matches both somewhat.

    Anyway. Now that I have that off my chest, I still maintain that I enjoyed it very much. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • I agree with you – Ridley is not an astronomer or a biologist. But most people wouldn’t know that stuff, so I let it go and just enjoyed the movie.

      • Yes, but there’s certainly enough crew on the movie for someone to at least ask about DNA enough to not make that mistake. And it’s such a needless mistake too. I still maintain that not only could they have done it right and with roughly the same amount of lines. The movie would have been better if they’d done it right. ๐Ÿ˜‰ Besides, Ridley didn’t write the script, so Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindeloff could have done a better job and at least search the Wikipedia article for DNA. Like I said, it’s not something that utterly ruins the movie but for me at least, it threw me out of the story. And for a movie that’s otherwise so engaging that’s kind of egregious.

        The thing about those kinds of mistakes on a science fiction movie is that science fiction in general garners a more science-literate crowd than mainstream movies. It’s going to bother a lot of other people too and 5 minutes of googling would have done away with that, even if they aren’t biologists. I mean come on, James Cameron changed the sky in Titanic’s re-release because one astro-physicist (Neil deGrasse Tyson) complained enough about it. ๐Ÿ˜‰ And 99,99999% of the audience probably did not know or notice that the star patterns weren’t right for that place at that time.

    • Well, you were still sitting in the cinema when we left (we had a table booked) & you did look deep in thought… Now I see why ๐Ÿ˜€
      I think we can analyse this until the (made by engineers) cows come home, & im quite happy to do this.
      I will go see the movie in 3D once more before the BluRay comes out, the cinematography has to be seen again this way, as my 42″ LCD TV isn’t quite the same.

      • It was partly that and partly the fact that we always stay to watch the credits for movies we like. Sometimes even for movies we don’t like. Because hey, the makers deserve the credit. :-p

  2. Thanks for pointing me to your not-a-review post!! Very interesting and I’m glad you had such a good connection with the film! I think I disagree about the idea of people not liking it because of the god issue as I think that’s irrelevant. I personally hated it because I didn’t find it tense or scary and I thought most of the interesting startups were dropped far too early!! It seems like you have a pretty good knowledge of Alien though which is perhaps an essential to getting the most out of the film?

    Thanks for a though provoking not-a-review!

    xx GnG xx

    • Its an on-the-fence view, mainly as Im still thinking about what is being said, & to be honest Alien was the same. 2001: A Space Odyssey is also one of those movies that annoys you, your not sure if you like it, but when you finally decide you do, your at peace, then the analysis begins ๐Ÿ˜€

  3. I like your theory, though I can definitely see why people didnโ€™t like it beyond the atheism. I think many of the questions the film raises are not answered, and the ending felt as if it was Part 1 of a 2 part film, but like I said in my review, itโ€™s a minor blemish.
    Itโ€™s nice to see a modern action sci-fi film with reverence and respect for the films that came before it.
    Also, as a side note I was one of the 1% who really did not like The Avengers. Prometheus was much more up my alley.
    http://thelensgrinders.com/

    • Haha, thanks.
      I enjoyed The Avengers mainly as it was fun, but not in a way like Transformers…

      Ridley Scott has been give more detailed interviews regarding the Engineers this week, mentioning that the opening scene was similar to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ!! (This will surely anger a lot of people, hinting jesus was an alien) but his direction was more towards religion with these guys (which I immediately got when watching the movie). But Prometheus goes on release today in the states, I can feel a storm coming… Batten down the hatches!!

  4. Flashlights. Why do they suck so bad in the future? Did you ever see the gear on a deep sea diver or a cave explorers? Yet 80 some odd years from now we take tiny led flashlights. Why do people keep running in front of a moving wheel? Why does the black ooze make different stuff with combined with 100% DNA matched peoples? Just to many stupid things for me to take. Whose agenda was the android following?

  5. Pingback: Prometheus: Hollywood Evolves. | Stippidoo

  6. Hmm, don’t agree with this theory at all. I’m an atheist and the unthinking ‘it’s what I choose to believe’ mentality was one of the things that irritated me – it seemed to be validating not thinking – pretty weird for a character who’s a scientist. In fact Holloway and Shaw seem like no scientists I have ever met anywhere (besides the fact they look too young even to have their PhDs let alone be prominent in their fields).

    The real thing that seems to be alienating people from this film (ha, see what I did there?) is that the characters are forced to do things for the sake of the plot that are frankly unbelievable. There’s no discernible chain of command (on a trillion dollar expedition?), most personnel have not been briefed and the scientists have no discipline and no contact protocols. If my child went on a preschool expedition that badly organised (people just wandering off because they’re scared/because they want to), I’d sue.

    Also there’s just no rhyme or reason for so many things in the film. Why is Holloway drinking on the ship? Why does David spike his drink with alien goo? This plot strand seems to have nothing to do with the Weyland/eternal life strand. They’re travelling to the stars but infertility is still a problem. Why? The biologist is so terrified he abandons the expedition but when he meets a weird unknown squid thing he coos over it like it’s a stray kitty. Uh huh.

    And so on. There are literally dozens of other sloppy things like this in the film. I do wonder what audience Scott was aiming for – aging Erich von Daniken enthusiasts?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s