-
Tanfan said...
Game over man.
solid reference to Hicks, if this was your intent.
and if you want to get too deep in the movie, spend 10 minutes and read this:
http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/uswn1/prometheus_everything_explained_and_analysed/
This post was edited by Steven Wright on 6/11/2012 at 5:47 AM
I bought some batteries, but they weren't included... so I had to buy them again. What do batteries run on?
Steven Wright
- 5 stars Rating: 87
2271 votes total - 11000+ posts on tRCMB
- (7485)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Ted Brogan said...
I think the crux of the matter here is the difference between well-formed ambiguity and lazy ambiguity.
David Lynch films are an example of well-formed ambiguity. His movies are incredibly weird and difficult to discern, but they are self-contained. Whatever your interpretation may be, you can find elements in the film to support it. Another good example is Inception. The story is resolved, and the ambiguous aspect of whether the end is a dream or not doesn't affect the main point of the ending - Cobb doesn't care if the top is spinning or not. You can use certain elements of the movie to support claims that it's all a dream (e.g. the chase in Mombasa where Cobb runs through the alley with the walls narrowing is a manifestation of dream anxiety). You can use other elements to claim its real (e.g. Cobb only wears his wedding ring in the dream world). Either way everything you need is in the movie itself. No wikipedia research necessary.
On the other hand, lazy ambiguity stems from poor scripting and half-baked ideas. Lindelof tries to argue that ambiguity is a good thing and that he audience doesn't need to know everything, but he's just covering up his lazy writing and inability to resolve the big ideas with which he likes to entertain himself. People tortured themselves trying to figure out what Lost meant, when all along it didn't mean anything because it was lazy mishmash of uninformed scientific concepts and religious superstition.
I'm trying to avoid thinking about Prometheus because I'm not going to fall into the trap of wasting my time thinking about what the movie means. I enjoyed it as a Ridley Scott film, but as I contemplate the story and plot elements I find strong correlations to the same writing weaknesses that plagued Lost. I hope that if Sir Ridley does a sequel, he finds a better writer. The basic plot elements are there, but the details tasked to Lindelof and Spaihts are poorly executed.
Example of bad writing - that botanist guy says he's afraid of alien fossils, then wants to pet the snake creature. It's just little things like that which scream bad writing. But if Ridley didn't think these things were a problem, he shares some of the blame.
Again, solid, enjoyable movie (7/10), but surface flaws indicate much deeper problems with the script.
edit - damn, Forbes lays it down
"a thoroughly vacuous prequel to the series he kicked off, masquerading as a film about the cosmic origins of humanity."
WE {Izzo} ARE {CoachD} ONE {spartan} My spartan is: #23 Draymond Green.
-
JonEintheD said...
But then again - it sounds to me like there is going to be a sequel. And it sounds as if they were planning on a sequel since the very beginning. So ambiguity isnt necessarily lazy- not if it hides the larger story arc. We just dont know yet.
And look - that little alien was 3-4 inches tall- no one thought that it was going to be able to break his arm.
This post was edited by Tanfan on 6/11/2012 at 6:23 AM
Keeping the sunshiners in check since 2000.
-
Plate of Shrimp
- 4 stars Rating: 76
4468 votes total - Up with People
- (3543)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Fletch said...
Right. To say this movie "sucks" is a slap in the face of movies that really work hard to suck like Battleship or Transformers or 99% of what comes out in the summer. This was creative, somewhat thought provoking and beautifully shot. That's better than most movies this time of year.
RCMB Premium Poster
Count gHostula ●
- 4 stars Rating: 62
15104 votes total - (7373)
- 20 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
stlspartan said...
Very true, as a stand-alone movie it has a lot going for it. It's visually appealing and the pacing is good. I can't say the acting is bad, because I don't recall much acting. District 9 was similarly fun to watch and had similar plot holes. I didn't expect that movie to be great and was surprised by how good it was.
Alien/Aliens created a good basis for a franchise and everyone was hoping for a great film. Unfortunately, it fell down like the Phantom Menace did for Star Wars. The fact that the first writer was canned should have been a warning. It's a good movie, just not a great one.
This post was edited by Steven Wright on 6/11/2012 at 11:09 AM
I bought some batteries, but they weren't included... so I had to buy them again. What do batteries run on?
Steven Wright
- 5 stars Rating: 87
2271 votes total - 11000+ posts on tRCMB
- (7485)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Count gHostula said...
It's all about expectations. Plate is so angry and has dissected the movie ad nauseam but let's turn the table on him for a minute- any pretentious movie snob (like plate) shouldn't even bother seeing this movie to begin with! It's counter intuitive for a movie snob to even waste time seeing a summer blockbuster. You have expectations - set them! I decided, prior to going in, that I just wanted to chill in nice reclining leather chairs, have food served to me, and enjoy a summer blockbuster. I wasn't expecting to see an Oscar nominee for best picture. Plate STFU and movie on you look silly.
Plate of Shrimp
- 4 stars Rating: 76
4468 votes total - Up with People
- (3543)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Plate of Shrimp said...
BTW, you are aware this was a Ridley Scott film, right? If I had any expectations (which I really didn't) it was that one of the greatest living directors, Scott, would deliver a film worth the price of admission. Every time the guy begins production, the movie is on a short list of Oscar contenders because the man is, supposedly, that good at his craft.
-
Plate of Shrimp said...
If liking good story structure and execution makes me look silly then so be it. I'm not going to pretend this is a good film because my seat was leather and it's sunny outside.
BTW, you are aware this was a Ridley Scott film, right? If I had any expectations (which I really didn't) it was that one of the greatest living directors, Scott, would deliver a film worth the price of admission. Every time the guy begins production, the movie is on a short list of Oscar contenders because the man is, supposedly, that good at his craft. And I definitely didn't expect this to sync up with Alien, and was surprised they made it seem so at the end.
Also, I admire when you tell people their music sucks. That's the point of message boards, to argue about dumb shit And if some one is going to flippantly attack my opinion on this movie, or tell me to STFU, I'm going to respond. That's the point, until real life tears you away and you forget about it.
RCMB Premium Poster
Count gHostula ●
- 4 stars Rating: 62
15104 votes total - (7373)
- 20 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Plate of Shrimp
- 4 stars Rating: 76
4468 votes total - Up with People
- (3543)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Count gHostula ●
- 4 stars Rating: 62
15104 votes total - (7373)
- 20 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Plate of Shrimp
- 4 stars Rating: 76
4468 votes total - Up with People
- (3543)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Count gHostula ●
- 4 stars Rating: 62
15104 votes total - (7373)
- 20 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
JonEintheD said...
It seems that a lot of the bickering on this topic is due to the story being incomplete. Theres a lot of speculation that there is going to be a second movie, if not a third. In that interview- Scott alludes to a more involved story line.
They made humans. Okay. Now they want to destroy us. There has to be some reason in that.
and thats what I think we have to wait to get the answer to.
Maybe they made us as a sacrifice to THEIR god. after all who made them- "keep searching" right. Maybe a part of that population didnt want to see us sacrificed- and wanted to protect us, while half didnt. Maybe, originally, they wanted to meet us, until, maybe some of the people saw us as a threat- because "what child doesnt want to kill their parents"- so they started coming to kill us, and some fought back. Maybe they want to kill us because they see us as food, and the only remaining possible way for the aliens to breed.
Point is- the storyline took us somewhere. Introduced us to a conflict - resolved the immediate conflict "Shaw wins!" yet also makes us aware of a larger conflict. To that end you dont want to give too much away. Its not as tight as "the matrix" was - but I think thats because the matrix didnt know if there was going to be a Matrix 2 or 3. And this movie seems to have that in mind.
Who's side is David on. It seems pretty interesting - that he understands them and can interact with the language- and never reveals any of the writing. Holloway says, I hope you can read that- and David says maybe. but never verbally speaks it out.
There's a lot of themes, that allow all of the "holes" to be filled. You just have to wonder and hope that whatever is next is more fulfilling.
Binford4State
- 4 stars Rating: 77
1112 votes total - (899)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Ted Brogan said...
I think the crux of the matter here is the difference between well-formed ambiguity and lazy ambiguity.
David Lynch films are an example of well-formed ambiguity. His movies are incredibly weird and difficult to discern, but they are self-contained. Whatever your interpretation may be, you can find elements in the film to support it. Another good example is Inception. The story is resolved, and the ambiguous aspect of whether the end is a dream or not doesn't affect the main point of the ending - Cobb doesn't care if the top is spinning or not. You can use certain elements of the movie to support claims that it's all a dream (e.g. the chase in Mombasa where Cobb runs through the alley with the walls narrowing is a manifestation of dream anxiety). You can use other elements to claim its real (e.g. Cobb only wears his wedding ring in the dream world). Either way everything you need is in the movie itself. No wikipedia research necessary.
On the other hand, lazy ambiguity stems from poor scripting and half-baked ideas. Lindelof tries to argue that ambiguity is a good thing and that he audience doesn't need to know everything, but he's just covering up his lazy writing and inability to resolve the big ideas with which he likes to entertain himself. People tortured themselves trying to figure out what Lost meant, when all along it didn't mean anything because it was lazy mishmash of uninformed scientific concepts and religious superstition.
I'm trying to avoid thinking about Prometheus because I'm not going to fall into the trap of wasting my time thinking about what the movie means. I enjoyed it as a Ridley Scott film, but as I contemplate the story and plot elements I find strong correlations to the same writing weaknesses that plagued Lost. I hope that if Sir Ridley does a sequel, he finds a better writer. The basic plot elements are there, but the details tasked to Lindelof and Spaihts are poorly executed.
Example of bad writing - that botanist guy says he's afraid of alien fossils, then wants to pet the snake creature. It's just little things like that which scream bad writing. But if Ridley didn't think these things were a problem, he shares some of the blame.
Again, solid, enjoyable movie (7/10), but surface flaws indicate much deeper problems with the script.
edit - damn, Forbes lays it down
"a thoroughly vacuous prequel to the series he kicked off, masquerading as a film about the cosmic origins of humanity."
Binford4State
- 4 stars Rating: 77
1112 votes total - (899)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
Here's something to piss the fanboys off even more.
Edit for what is a legitimate question, IMHO: Why was Guy Pearce used at all in this movie if he was never shown as his actual age? Why not just use an old ass actor?
This post was edited by Fletch on 6/11/2012 at 2:23 PM
'Prometheus' end credits: New viral video, allusions to Nietzsche | Inside Movies | EW.com
If you left Prometheus thinking, Well, that was certainly intense, but what it was missing was more baffling philosophical exploration into Freidrich ...
insidemovies.ew.com -
'Prometheus,' Ridley Scott, and the blockbuster 'Alien' franchise - Grantland
Prometheus and the weirdest blockbuster franchise in history.
www.grantland.com -
beal99
- 5 stars Rating: 91
9819 votes total - The Captain
- (9209)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Boards ▾
- Pages: 1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
Prometheus trailer out, looks awesome (Now with spoilers)