Prometheus Review: Are the Answers Here?

[Mal12345]

I'll let you decide.

 

[Mal12345]

http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html

 

[Totenkindly]

I posted Cavalorn's blog link on my FaceBook page last night. At least he makes a believable case to tie things together, and based on comments by Ridley Scott himself, no less. I just wish the script and shooting had made such concepts a little more accessible.

 

[Mal12345]

I posted Cavalorn's blog link on my FaceBook page last night. At least he makes a believable case to tie things together, and based on comments by Ridley Scott himself, no less. I just wish the script and shooting had made such concepts a little more accessible.

Do you think Vickers is an android? Did she/it get crushed by the alien ship?

 

[Totenkindly]

I don't think Vickers is an android. We've seen her seemingly crushed by the ship, but I can't be sure on that matter. (I can't see the video you linked because I am at work, btw; I have no idea what's in it.) David's creation seems almost superfluous if Vickers wasn't human, it seems to make more sense that he "only had a daughter" but he really wanted a son and so bequeathed that stuff on a mechanical creation that wants to mirror and mimic humans but really has no idea what they are.

I was mostly interested in Cal's tie-in's of all the main concepts -- the notion of sacrifice vs selfishness, and how this theme weaves through the movie, even pulling in the "The King reins and then he dies" line. I think he's made a pretty strong case for what was intended there... although the Space Jesus concept is pretty humorous. Still, what else could have happened 2000 years ago that could have impacted the plot as such? And Ridley himself alludes to it.

 

[Mal12345]

I don't think Vickers is an android. We've seen her seemingly crushed by the ship, but I can't be sure on that matter. (I can't see the video you linked because I am at work, btw; I have no idea what's in it.) David's creation seems almost superfluous if Vickers wasn't human, it seems to make more sense that he "only had a daughter" but he really wanted a son and so bequeathed that stuff on a mechanical creation that wants to mirror and mimic humans but really has no idea what they are.

I was mostly interested in Cal's tie-in's of all the main concepts -- the notion of sacrifice vs selfishness, and how this theme weaves through the movie, even pulling in the "The King reins and then he dies" line. I think he's made a pretty strong case for what was intended there... although the Space Jesus concept is pretty humorous. Still, what else could have happened 2000 years ago that could have impacted the plot as such? And Ridley himself alludes to it.

Vickers is an android. And she didn't die. If there is a prequel, you'll see what I mean. And anyway, it's an old trope that if you don't have a corpus delecti, then you should assume that the person/android is still alive.

Have you seen the translation of the ailen words spoken by David?

"This man is here because he does not want to die. He believes you can give him more life." I think this was on Cal's page. The self-sacrifice motif explains why the alien attacked Weyland at this point, after removing David's head. The human race is the exact opposite of that which the aliens wanted to create. To them, we must seem to be the very epitome of evil.

 

[Totenkindly]

Vickers is an android. And she didn't die.

Can you please quote a source, if you're going to just make a defiant statement that runs against what has been observed in the movie? Is it something in the vid file I already said I couldn't see?

If there is a prequel, you'll see what I mean. And anyway, it's an old trope that if you don't have a corpus delecti, then you should assume that the person/android is still alive.

Lol. Sure. It means nothing, honestly. She might be dead. She might be alive. She might or might not be an android. Working with what was observed, and the inherent themes of the movie (i.e., what was observed, not some "hunch"), we saw a ship roll over her, and she did not behave like any other android that we've seen in any movie at their level of technology. The only scene where it suggests she has any capabilities of being an android is when she throws David against the wall; that could either be David being caught off-guard and humoring her, OR it could be an error in the script, or it could be her being an android; but the other parts of the movie didn't seem to consistently support that.

Have you seen the translation of the ailen words spoken by David?

"This man is here because he does not want to die. He believes you can give him more life." I think this was on Cal's page. The self-sacrifice motif explains why the alien attacked Weyland at this point, after removing David's head. The human race is the exact opposite of that which the aliens wanted to create. To them, we must seem to be the very epitome of evil.

Yeah, I agreed with that. I didn't hear the translation of David's words yet, but that fits with what thematically was happening. Which makes the alien's response even more believable and amusing -- "I'm going to rip off your creation's head and beat you to death with it, a-hole! How's THAT for more life??"

 

[Mal12345]

Can you please quote a source, if you're going to just make a defiant statement that runs against what has been observed in the movie? Is it something in the vid file I already said I couldn't see?



Lol. Sure. It means nothing, honestly. She might be dead. She might be alive. She might or might not be an android. Working with what was observed, and the inherent themes of the movie (i.e., what was observed, not some "hunch"), we saw a ship roll over her, and she did not behave like any other android that we've seen in any movie at their level of technology. The only scene where it suggests she has any capabilities of being an android is when she throws David against the wall; that could either be David being caught off-guard and humoring her, OR it could be an error in the script, or it could be her being an android; but the other parts of the movie didn't seem to consistently support that.



Yeah, I agreed with that. I didn't hear the translation of David's words yet, but that fits with what thematically was happening. Which makes the alien's response even more believable and amusing -- "I'm going to rip off your creation's head and beat you to death with it, a-hole! How's THAT for more life??"

LiveJournal knows all!

http://m15m.livejournal.com/23209.html

(I heard they're also good at stealing clickback funds from their journalists.)

 

[Totenkindly]

Yeesh. Can't read LiveJournal at work either. I'm living in a fascist state!

 

[Mal12345]

Yeesh. Can't read LiveJournal at work either. I'm living in a fascist state!

I have a question. Wasn't there an android in each of the original 3 Alien movies? What were there names?

 

[Totenkindly]

I have a question. Wasn't there an android in each of the original 3 Alien movies? What were there names?

Ash, Bishop, Call, and now David. (Although technically David predates them, chronologically.)

Not sure how (M)eredith (V)ickers plays into that.

 

[Mal12345]

Ash, Bishop, Call, and now David. (Although technically David predates them, chronologically.)

Not sure how (M)eredith (V)ickers plays into that.

Easy. The male androids appeared in alphabetical order. So the first female android's name starts with an A. I mean E.

 

[Totenkindly]

Easy. The male androids appeared in alphabetical order. The first female android's name starts with an A.

I really hate it when you make comments like this, as if the answer is obvious, when it's anything but.

Let's look at it:

Male androids
--------------------------------
(movie sequence)
Ash
Bishop
David

(Chronological sequence)
David
Ash
Bishop

Female androids
------------------
Annalee and/or Call (her name is Annalee Call)


Not only does the male pattern not work anymore when you go by gender, but Meredith Vickers still doesn't seem to fit the pattern. Nor does any other woman's name in Prometheus.

So why not actually EXPLAIN what you're thinking, instead of making these enigmatic comments that don't conform to the knowledge that is available here on the forum and expecting people to follow you? I'm not being stupid: Look at the data I just laid out, your reply isn't helping me understand any of it and diminishes my desire to play.

 

[Mal12345]

I really hate it when you make comments like this, as if the answer is obvious, when it's anything but.

Let's look at it:

Male androids
--------------------------------
(movie sequence)
Ash
Bishop
David

(Chronological sequence)
David
Ash
Bishop

Female androids
------------------
Annalee and/or Call (her name is Annalee Call)


Not only does the male pattern not work anymore when you go by gender, but Meredith Vickers still doesn't seem to fit the pattern. Nor does any other woman's name in Prometheus.

So why not actually EXPLAIN what you're thinking, instead of making these enigmatic comments that don't conform to the knowledge that is available here on the forum and expecting people to follow you? I'm not being stupid: Look at the data I just laid out, your reply isn't helping me understand any of it and diminishes my desire to play.

I didn't know Call was a female. But wow you responded fast. Take a look-see at my previous post.

 

[Totenkindly]

I didn't know Call was a female.

Then what pattern were you following? Isn't an erroneous pattern and thus wrong hypothesis, if it doesn't fit the data?

But wow you responded fast. Take a look-see at my previous post.

So now you're suggesting that Elizabeth is an android, even if the robots can't be divied up between gender, and even if chronologically the pattern is out of whack, AND after the entire discussion was based on Meredith being an android? And despite the fact that at best you'd have a pattern of D-E (and no androids in between, presumably) A-B-C, with Bishop being the android in two separate movies while the others were in just one?

It all sounds like shots in the dark, to me.

 

[Mal12345]

Then what pattern were you following? Isn't an erroneous pattern and thus wrong hypothesis, if it doesn't fit the data?



So now you're suggesting that Elizabeth is an android, even if the robots can't be divied up between gender, and even if chronologically the pattern is out of whack, AND after the entire discussion was based on Meredith being an android? And despite the fact that at best you'd have a pattern of D-E (and no androids in between, presumably) A-B-C, with Bishop being the android in two separate movies while the others were in just one?

It all sounds like shots in the dark, to me.

I think you're on to something here. Elizabeth. Brilliant!

 

[Totenkindly]

I think you're on to something here. Elizabeth. Brilliant!

Sigh. Shot in the dark. *bang*

Yes, she certainly looked like an android when they opened her tummy up on the machine that only worked on human beings, or that she was able to be impregnated normally by her boyfriend after the creatures wouldn't touch David because he was an android.

I suppose the fact her name begins with an "E" is more important than all of those things.

 

[Mal12345]

Sigh. Shot in the dark. *bang*

Yes, she certainly looked like an android when they opened her tummy up on the machine that only worked on human beings, or that she was able to be impregnated normally by her boyfriend after the creatures wouldn't touch David because he was an android.

I suppose the fact her name begins with an "E" is more important than all of those things.

She certainly recovered fast from a major "c" section. I realize that she kept shooting herself up with something in her thigh. However, that ended way too soon. And I suspect the stuff in the syringes was the white stuff that comes out of androids when they are injured, like Bishop in Aliens.

 

[Totenkindly]

She certainly recovered fast from a major "c" section. I realize that she kept shooting herself up with something in her thigh. However, that ended way too soon. And I suspect the stuff in the syringes was the white stuff that comes out of androids when they are injured, like Bishop in Aliens.

Well, we're going to have to disagree on this one. I don't think the evidence suggests it, I think it's very flimsy and based on conjecture.

But of course, we won't know until the next movie comes out (if there is one... which if money talks I guess is a distinct possibility).

.....

but maybe it's a good time to talk about how movies convey information. I think Nico is the one who mentioned having an issue with Pinbacker in Sunshine, which could fit into a similar genre of "scifi horror".

I've been watchin Sunshine last night, and while the tone is similar to Prometheus, regardless of any confusion over Pinbacker that perhaps could have been resolved better, the entire movie is organized and written to create a consistent thru-line, explain what is happening without sounding pretentious, and also justify choices that occur later in the movie. This stands in marked contrast to Prometheus. EVERYTHING is telegraphed, similar to how Christopher Nolan typically approaches his own movies, there's usually not something out of the blue later in the film or in a sequel where the audience feels like they were cheated -- everything was legitimately explained within the body of the movie.

For example, the end of the movie demands that Capa get inside the spacesuit quickly and navigate to the end of the ship before the bomb launches. He has enough trouble as it is, but it's believable that he can pull this off because he was required to be in such a suit twice already. The first time he was in the suit, it was because Mace challenged him to fix the shield, as he considered it Capa's error that they were in the mess with the shield to begin with, although Capa was not the best choice to fix the shield. But the natural conflict between Mace and Capa when Capa took too long to transmit his messages home (resulting in Mace not getting to say goodbye to family) contributes to Mace's response here. In another sequence, Mace drops his wrench into the coolant fluid and snags it out immediately, but his hand is still frozen painfully and it hurts him; this sets up our expectations when later he must choose to dive into the coolant in order to fix the machinery so that the computer can be brought back online. Boyle is constantly setting this stuff up for us, so nothing is like, "Wait, really?" (This is why I typically like his movies.)

There are many natural chains of "cause/effect" that play out through the movie, where literally everything is legitimately telegraphed -- no one just pulls something out of the air, it's already been justified by earlier scenes in the movie.

The entire issue with Pinbacker is actually hit again and again earlier in the movie, especially with the fascinating that Searle and Kaneda have with the brightness of the sun and how they "lose themselves in it" -- it's almost a religious experience, it dwarfs them and results in their particular choices... Pinbacker is just a more extreme form of this weird metaspiritual encounter with the power of the sun and whether humans should be trying to prolong their existence in the face of such power and grandeur. (Capa finds a different, albeit still spiritual, answer to this, at the movie's end.) It's all foreshadowed, all you need to do is watch the movie.

So the movie interlocks solidly and beautiful, there aren't really many "lost threads" -- everything "makes sense" especially on repeated viewings.

Things like Elizabeth being an android based on silly name gimmicks and things we didn't see in the movie (as we saw her bleeding profusely when cut open, she has human memories, etc., all in complete contrast to all the android experiences we've seen in every movie, including David's in this one) would at best a dirty trick by the director and writers, rather like David Copperfield making the statue of liberty disappear on national tv by just having someone photoshop it out of the video recording.

 

[Mal12345]

Well, we're going to have to disagree on this one. I don't think the evidence suggests it, I think it's very flimsy and based on conjecture.

But of course, we won't know until the next movie comes out (if there is one... which if money talks I guess is a distinct possibility).

.....

but maybe it's a good time to talk about how movies convey information. I think Nico is the one who mentioned having an issue with Pinbacker in Sunshine, which could fit into a similar genre of "scifi horror".

I've been watchin Sunshine last night, and while the tone is similar to Prometheus, regardless of any confusion over Pinbacker that perhaps could have been resolved better, the entire movie is organized and written to create a consistent thru-line, explain what is happening without sounding pretentious, and also justify choices that occur later in the movie. This stands in marked contrast to Prometheus.

One hour into Sunshine, and it looks to me that they're just setting up one disaster after another. A disaster movie in outer space.