User Tag List

First 4567816 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 302

Thread: Prometheus

  1. #51
    violaine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I like director's cuts, and yes, I think editing a movie impacts it a great deal. I'm a musician and an editor of text and am pretty aware of all the big-picture aspects of the conveyance of art and development of ambiance, and I also typically watch theatrical/director's cuts and compare. (Just watched the Grudge this past week, to do a compare on that movie.)

    (Most infamous example of how cutting can change a pic -- the "love conquers all" version of brazil versus the theatrical cut vs what Gilliam wanted to release)

    I do think the emotional arc / timing was off in the Prometheus theatrical cut, there were scenes that just seemed disjointed / missing something, they didn't build or transition properly, so the entire movie felt kind of flat to me. I'd like to see if there was anything cut, I'm just not aware based on what Ridley Scott said that there will be that much to cut back into it. Usually the cuts result in more change when the director is being forced to release a picture he didn't plan to release.
    There apparently were a few key scenes cut and one which alluded to why the Engineers changed their minds about humanity. And which I personally wondered about during the movie, given the carbon dating of the head. And because I edit film and video, I'm looking for little clues and foreshadowing along the way - so when I guess right, it's a really neat thing. There were a couple of other little clues, like the line about don't all children really want their parents dead which seemed portentous - and I loved seeing how that played out - why Weyland might have favored the closest thing he has to a son over his actual daughter in some ways, though David clearly has disdain for humanity, his creators... And the tension kept through the whole movie between creator and created, and as in the myth of Prometheus, the risks associated with pushing too far, that it can be disastrous. Also, the line about not minding that it hurts and then watching David incorporating that. And the similarity between David and Shaw in that regard though for different motivations and for the same motivation - hard won survival, though through different methods. Loooved all of those allusions and themes. I like looking for a different kind of consistency and when that is present, I can really enjoy certain movies - it's the same for my other friends who are tv and film editors and cinematographers. Actually, dissecting the technical elements of a movie with one of my friends is often the second part of the movie experience and greatly impacts my enjoyment. I feel like I could see why they cut things the way they did, (probably because I'm looking for reasons as to why with very experienced directors), and I don't blame them for trying to get another franchise up.

    I also really loved elements of the production design that they weren't able to show in the Alien franchise because they didn't have the technical prowess and because it didn't fit the story. The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. No, they didn't get there with the emotional elements pertaining to the humans' interactions... Though, I think it was deliberate even though that can happen when you make too many passes on a piece. I know they expanded the role of Meredith Vickers, but I really had the sense that they were all just playthings. And I liked that a lot. (Film directors and god complexes and all that). I think they wanted it as tight as it could be and as an intro to a new franchise, which means sacrificing the fullness of this story. I don't think it's meant to stand alone ideally. Even if it did, it's good enough as is, though madly tantalizing.

    It did make me wonder about previous cuts several passes back. One of my pet points when I cut something is to bring in fresh eyes late in the process to make sure I didn't cut anything integral to the story and I wonder if that happened with this piece, (always wondering about process). I really do get the sense they were going for short, staccato interactions, almost horror-movie style in terms of character development.

  2. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mace View Post






    Arguably could be the best sci-fi movie of all time.
    I do think its very good, I was thinking about going to see it a second time.

    There's excellent visual references of other classic films, the obvious one is Alien or Aliens since it is supposedly from the same universe or mythose, although I thought that it was also referencing the modern and older The Thing movies too, an octopus like creature at one point looks like the monster which emerged from the corpse of the wolf in the modern film and there is a big humanoid creature which resembled the alien monster from the black and white movie The Thing which was played by Boris Karloff.

    I dont know what the whole excitement was abour denying its association with the film Alien or denying that it was a prequel, I know that perhaps it was because they were trying to get a different or broader audience than has since grown up around those movies or the AVP movies but it was over done.

    I remember reading books about the Alien movie and a lot of the things they wanted to do but which never appeared in the film for different reasons, at that point I thought that they'd remake Alien one day with all those things in it, in some ways this is it, although I think there's way more of the "grey goo" sci fi bodyshock horror in this movie than in any of the other Alien films.

    Although it has to be said that the two or three hypothesis which are given by characters for what is happening throughout the film, ie military installation, the aim of wiping out humankind etc. are not really confirmed in any way.

  3. #53
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by violaine View Post
    There apparently were a few key scenes cut and one which alluded to why the Engineers changed their minds about humanity. And which I personally wondered about during the movie, given the carbon dating of the head. And because I edit film and video, I'm looking for little clues and foreshadowing along the way - so when I guess right, it's a really neat thing. There were a couple of other little clues, like the line about don't all children really want their parents dead which seemed portentous - and I loved seeing how that played out - why Weyland might have favored the closest thing he has to a son over his actual daughter in some ways, though David clearly has disdain for humanity, his creators... And the tension kept through the whole movie between creator and created, and as in the myth of Prometheus, the risks associated with pushing too far, that it can be disastrous. Also, the line about not minding that it hurts and then watching David incorporating that. And the similarity between David and Shaw in that regard though for different motivations and for the same motivation - hard won survival, though through different methods. Loooved all of those allusions and themes.
    Yes, all the things you mentioned are tidbits that I was just expect to see fleshed out, the stubs of the threads were there, and then it was just... gutted or ignored. I don't understand why they were not followed up on. I think where I disagree with you about intentions is that (1) a popular movie doesn't have to run from asking questions and it even improves the popularity and longevity of the movie, look at Inception for example, or Silence of the Lambs; and Scott seems to be a talented enough director to know that and have perpetuated in that philosophy in many of his other movies, and (2) EVERYTHING seemed to be stubbed and gutted, to the level of a popcorn TV series episode. I have trouble believing that someone would want to make a movie with all those potential directions in place and then just choose to remove ALL of them.

    If what you suggest is true that there was a reason for removing all depth from the movie, I see this as a failure of the movie-making process because what could have been a compelling work of art instead because an over-priced evening of dumbed-down entertainment.

    I did miss the connect between Wayland having a daughter but needing to create a son... which is too bad, because his daughter was damned impressive even if tightly wound, and David was kind of an asshole. (And I still can't wonder if it's some homage to AI as far as the name, although that David was very very different -- he was about feeling and presenting as a "real boy" while this David was meant to be functional and to carry out his father's wishes.)

    I like looking for a different kind of consistency and when that is present, I can really enjoy certain movies - it's the same for my other friends who are tv and film editors and cinematographers. Actually, dissecting the technical elements of a movie with one of my friends is often the second part of the movie experience and greatly impacts my enjoyment. I feel like I could see why they cut things the way they did, (probably because I'm looking for reasons as to why with very experienced directors), and I don't blame them for trying to get another franchise up.
    I think I do blame them, because I think they gutted the longevity of the franchise. Alien itself wasn't dumbed down, and it's still considered one of the best movies ever made, it's still popular 30+ years later. Do you still see Predator vs Alien around? There's a dumbed-down version meant to appeal to the masses, and it made its easy money and then faded into oblivious. Oh well, a king has his reign, and then he dies, I suppose.

    Even the whole ending of this movie was terrible -- it come off as a ripoff of Alien + ST:TNG, rather than as a homage.


    I also really loved elements of the production design that they weren't able to show in the Alien franchise because they didn't have the technical prowess and because it didn't fit the story. The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. No, they didn't get there with the emotional elements pertaining to the humans' interactions... Though, I think it was deliberate even though that can happen when you make too many passes on a piece. I know they expanded the role of Meredith Vickers, but I really had the sense that they were all just playthings. And I liked that a lot. (Film directors and god complexes and all that). I think they wanted it as tight as it could be and as an intro to a new franchise, which means sacrificing the fullness of this story. I don't think it's meant to stand alone ideally. Even if it did, it's good enough as is, though madly tantalizing.
    We'll see how it works for people in five years and if the movie is still around aside from the hard-core horror and scifi fans. Honestly, I'm bored with the idea of rewatching this. I found the movie "50 First Dates" more watchable, which is probably an insult of some sort.

    It did make me wonder about previous cuts several passes back. One of my pet points when I cut something is to bring in fresh eyes late in the process to make sure I didn't cut anything integral to the story and I wonder if that happened with this piece, (always wondering about process). I really do get the sense they were going for short, staccato interactions, almost horror-movie style in terms of character development.
    Again, it didn't have to be so. Even the first two Alien movies had far more characterization and depth, and yet are still popular decades later. I have trouble even remembering who the members of this crew were, they were just indistinguishable. I'm far more likely to suspect they were screwing around with the effects and 3D stuff so much, they dropped the ball on other aspects of the movie. Did you see how much they invested in Wayland's aging makeup? But it was too much -- he reminded me more of the shoddy job with Biff in Back to the Future 2, I had trouble taking him seriously, I saw him as an actor buried under pounds of latex and cosmetics. There just seemed to be excess on the visuals.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #54
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Well, we can discuss the execution of the opening sequence, which I didn't really piece together until far late in the movie despite various strands pointing to it. Which is sad, because I'm typically really good at figuring out context early in a movie.



    And then there are dumb questions, like, "If the Engineers visited earth before life/humans existed, where did humans get the knowledge to paint the star system pictures on the walls? if the Engineers had come back to visit earth in the years after humans did exist, wouldn't they be trying to kill us instead as they are now once they found us?"
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #55
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    I'm putting my thoughts down before I read any more of other peoples' posts.

    I thought it was pretty good; not the greatest movie I've ever seen, by any means, but decent.

    I'd probably give it somewhere around an 8/10; need to let it marinate for a bit, though.

    I was thinking it was gunna answer some questions.

    Instead, now there are a whole bunch more questions.

    I'm still trying to sort out all the different things it leaves open.

    One of my first thoughts after I finished it: "I need to talk to an Ne user."

    The first one I hit up said something stupid, which kinda curtailed the desire.

    I'm still sorting my thoughts out on it; probably time to read the thread.

  6. #56
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    One of my first thoughts after I finished it: "I need to talk to an Ne user."
    That's amusing. I thought the questions it asked never moved out of adolescence, as the point for Ne is not just to ask questions but to explore them. You don't need to arrive at "The Answer" because often there is no "The Answer" and any answer reached will be partial if not contrived -- but it's the exploration that counts... and the film really did not explore questions, it just hinted at them and then dropped them.

    What does it mean for a "king to reign, and then to die"?
    Or "big things have small beginnings?"
    Or to live by the notion that the point is not to avoid pain but to "not mind that it hurts"?
    Or to believe in something that makes no sense?

    The movie seemed to just toss a bunch of junk on the table and not bother to actually look at it.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #57
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    I thought it was crap.
    Would you care to expand on that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    That's cause it was.
    I didn't think it was.

    Quote Originally Posted by prplchknz View Post
    now I'm glad i didn't waste my money on it, if it's as bad as everyone's saying
    It's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    It would have been better to have just stuck with the trailer....it was better than the movie.
    I thought the movie offered up plenty of food for thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    Have heard mostly disappointing reviews. Bummer, because I really wanted this movie to rule. Will still see it at some point.
    See it.

    Form your own opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ü View Post
    Also, what exactly was the point in having Charlize Theron in the movie? (Or her character for that matter?)
    I see plenty of reason for her to have been in the movie.

    If that's one of your criticisms, I can't help but to question your value as a critic.

    Quote Originally Posted by violaine View Post
    They didn't find their feet w this one but I still liked it. I would love to see a different, expanded cut. I am rather taken with the Engineer storyline (and all of the things I hope the next movie(s) might reveal).
    This is the fairest review I've seen thus far.

    I don't know whether a primary thing I'd say is that they didn't find their feet, but I could at least imagine that being a defensible statement.

    I'm not particularly anxious to see a different cut, but I'd definitely be willing to watch it, and I agree with you about the Space Jockeys/Engineers -- I feel like they just totally opened up the Alien universe (cinematically, at least [this material has been explored already in other media]).

    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    I think uber is the only person I've ever encountered that slammed Gladiator.
    I had a substitute teacher my senior year of high school who did as well. I'm pretty sure he represented the beginning of the hipster movement. I got in an argument with him about it in physics class. He said it was just a Braveheart redux. I kind of agreed with him to an extent, but, I mean, read some Joseph Campbell. The stories we tell are often extremely similar. He also said that Braveheart sucked. At that point, I realized that, despite the fact that he was probably in his late 20s, and I was only 17, I was pretty sure, if I needed to, I could kill him with my bare hands. In fact, I probably would've put money on my sister if the two of them were fighting. That was my first encounter with the thought that later became applicable to almost all hipsters: that some men's absence of masculinity leads them to trash "traditional" masculinity, and the things that honor/respect/uphold it, because, if it came down to it, they would likely get their ass kicked by most athletic girls.

    I, personally, very much like Gladiator, but I know there are a fair number of people who will criticize it, and I don't think it's completely out of the realm of "criticizeability" (although, in general, I think the people who will criticize it will do so mostly because they don't like those kinds of movies).

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I agree. She was wasted... which was too bad, because she played what little part she had very well, I wanted to find out more about her.
    I can agree more with this.

    She probably could've been better utilized.

    But, I mean, the story is the story; what more did she need to do?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Never found the courage to watch that dog yet.


    Me neither.

    I love the first one; saw the second one before I ever saw the first one, when I was really young (same thing for T2 vs T1), and loved it, so, while it's definitely hokier than the first (once again, just like T2 vs T1 [although T1 has some hoke, too]), it's still an enjoyable film to watch, and I give it two thumbs up; the third I remember kinda watching a bunch of times, but I always thought it kinda was crap; the fourth, I just have/had absolutely no desire to see (and I saw both AVP movies!).

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post
    I enjoyed watching it. I don't think its the best sci-fi I've ever seen. Nor do I think it had the most interesting plot. It felt like they have dragged the plot line out to make more than one film, which left the first one a little lacking.
    I can agree with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post
    Charleze Theron's character was an interesting example of sp instinctual stacking to the extreme.
    Funny you say it, cuz I thought the exact same thing during the movie.

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post
    If you havn't seen the movie don't read on...



    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post


    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post
    Yeah, I thought that was an interesting touch.

    I think it mostly served to introduce the uncanny valley.

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post
    What movies are you thinking of?

    Quote Originally Posted by CreativeCait View Post


    [going to respond to a few more, but going to post now just in case my browser crashes]

  8. #58
    Senior Member Elisius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    2w1 so/sx
    Posts
    157

    Default

    I just saw it. I thought it was amazing.
    The deeper meaning isn't too great, it's one of those things where it's unknown enough that we can construct what we want out of it, and by that we can learn something about ourselves and build up our own ideals and beliefs instead of letting a movie illustrate it for us.
    A mind that is stretched by a new experience can never go back to its old dimensions. - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

  9. #59
    Member CreativeCait's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    PING
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ü View Post
    The spoiler you mention about Charlize Theron's character was one of my biggest problems.
    This is what I thought was the point of her character in the movie:


    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Oooooh, I like your hypothesis on what the opening scene meant and how that might play out in the rest of the movies And yes, the fact that the opening scene wasn't contextualised in the rest of the film was immensely frustrating and left me getting distracted during the rest of the movie, thinking but, but, but what has this got to do with the opening scene...., I can only assume that it will sit better in the context of the movies as a whole.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    ... and the film really did not explore questions, it just hinted at them and then dropped them.
    The movie seemed to just toss a bunch of junk on the table and not bother to actually look at it.
    Yeah I agree, it was annoying, but I assume this was to set them up to be explored in the next movie....hopefully.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    exactly, me too...maybe the exit strategy was less obvious from the persepective they were working from...

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post


    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yeah, I thought that was an interesting touch.

    I think it mostly served to introduce the uncanny valley.



    What movies are you thinking of?
    Ooooh, I love the uncanny valley premise, I had not heard of that before you mentioned it. That's a terribly interesting phenomenon. Artificial Intelligence is the one that's sticking in my mind the most.



    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post

  10. #60
    Member CreativeCait's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    PING
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Ooohhh, and Red Dwarf wth Kryten

Similar Threads

  1. The Vatican's Opinion of the Movie 'Prometheus'
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10-08-2012, 05:37 PM
  2. Prometheus Review: Are the Answers Here?
    By Mal12345 in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 06-29-2012, 06:10 PM
  3. [NT] The Prometheus spirit
    By yenom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-06-2012, 05:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO