Ridley Scott's Prometheus

Originally posted by roughrider
I just got back from my second viewing of it. Full theatre, and they felt like knowledgeable fans who didn't mind it was a bigger story than just a straight prequel.

Well damn. My second time seeing it I went to a 6:45 showing on a Saturday evening, and there were only a handful of people in there. Granted that is a little early, before the bigger crowds come out, but I'm still a little discouraged with how it's doing. Glad to hear, though, that you still had a full theater.

Originally posted by roughrider
I'm not saying there isn't room for discussion on this, because it answers questions while raising a lot more - for us to either figure out ourselves or to tease us with until the next film. But I don't feel cheated, and I do feel tantalized to see what they will do with the next film.

I don't feel cheated either. It's amazing. I'm effing psyched to see the next film. And I hope it gets green-lit ASAP. Cuz Ridley Scott's getting pretty old.. haha... did you know he's 74?? Damn.. Kubrick died at 70.

Originally posted by roughrider
Okay, I've been reading the pages of complaints here, and I feel compelled to respond.
SPOILERS be damned.

1. I've been reading here and in other articles about how stupid it was for the scientists to remove their helmets in the central chamber (never mind how all their instruments were telling them how breathable it was) - they are holding this up as an example of what Roger Ebert called the 'idiot plot'; ie. that the plot moves forward with consequence only because characters act like idiots, and if they didn't the bad things wouldn't have happened. But guess what, this complaint doesn't past muster because: there was NEVER anything in the air. Nothing of bad consequence ever happened in this film because characters took off their helmets in there. It's clarified late in the film explicitly by David: nothing was airborne. (Which is when Elizabeth Shaw begins to understand what David did.) So people can just put a sock in it, regarding that complaint.

Exactly. And my interpretation was that they traveled all this way to meet their creator whom they assume is benevolent. They see that the air is breathable when it shouldn't be, so why would there be contaminants in the place? Same reason they didn't put any weapons on their ship. What kind of impression would that send? "Weyland is a superstitious man. He wanted true believers on board." This is really a non-issue to me.

Haters gonna find a reason to hate. 🙄 The film is amazing.. it's just a bit different than Alien, but I feel like it fits in quite nicely. In fact, I dare say it enhances it by expanding the mythology.

Yep, that's it. Not liking stupidity in characters makes you a hater. lulz.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Yep, that's it. Not liking stupidity in characters makes you a hater. lulz.

Their stupidity was brought on by their misguided faith. That's profound.

Originally posted by Patient_Leech

I don't feel cheated either. It's amazing. I'm effing psyched to see the next film. And I hope it gets green-lit ASAP. Cuz Ridley Scott's getting pretty old.. haha... did you know he's 74?? Damn.. Kubrick died at 70.

Don't worry about Ridley's health; he credits his Mum for his youthful genes. She died ten years ago at the age of 95. He gets in there and slogs sandbags with the grips on set, it's been said (very unlike Stanley Kubrick, who often denied rumours he wore a football helmet while being driven in the back of his limo, he was so afraid of head injury. 😛 )

What's remarkable is his output since Gladiator in 2000. When that was released, he had just accepted the job to direct Hannibal, and he reflected how in his previous years - his debut in 1977 to 1997 - he had directed only ten films (some of them opening four years apart), and he concluded that was too few; he could make them faster. So with Prometheus this year, he's manged at an older age to make ten films in just a twelve year period; many of them massive epics! It's not like Woody Allen, making yet another romantic comedy. Whatever formula he finally found for working faster, it should help that follow up to Prometheus come that much faster. The worldwide box office is strong enough that it should happen.

Originally posted by jaden101
Which was my point. The star maps is some cases were 30,000 years old. So the plot is basically saying this.

"We, as the engineers, like these humans...Lets leave them star maps

It was not the Engineer's leaving the star maps: it was the humans. The Engineer's didn't make those cave paintings or the stone cuttings.

Originally posted by jaden101
to a planet that we only use for bio weapons production

The bioweapons use of that planet only seemed relevant since their shift in attitude towards the humans...we can just as well assume that the Engineer's made a massive shift in the use of that planet at around 2100-2000 years before the events in Prometheus. They were terraforming the planet so there were plans to make that planet habitable for at least themselves (the engineers). We can speculate and assume they originally planned for that planet to be cohabited with them in some sort of peaceful, spacefaring, sci-fi, utopia.

And, again, the engineers did not make the star maps, the humans did.

Originally posted by jaden101
and doesn't have any real significance to us other than that...

Other than being the place that multiple ancient human civilizations referenced in their art? Nah, that's pretty dang significant both scientifically (the whole reason the expedition in the movie takes place) and spiritually (the religious implications are great). Let's put it this way: the movie would not have taken place if it did not have any significance. 🙂

Originally posted by jaden101
It's certainly not our homeworld because the humans will go looking for that at the end of the film"

That was established in the very beginning of the film (that it wasn't their (engineer's) homeworld).

And, no where do we see any evidence from the Engineers that they ever wanted the humans to go to that moon. Only the humans created that notion. 🙂

Originally posted by jaden101
So it was a direct explanation yet you go on to give 4 different unsubstantiated explanations for it. Nice.

His actions are directly explained, yes, but his motivations to execute those actions are NOT explained/well understood. He is supposed to be emotionless or someshit but we know damn well he isn't. So it is guessing what his motivations are to execute his literal programmed instructions.

Originally posted by jaden101
Motivations is a good discussion point with characters. If something is not directly explained on screen for a characters motivations then it can usually be inferred from their emotions. David's motivations are not explained and he has no emotions meaning his motivations are entirely unexplained.

Actually, David does have emotions. He is noticeably irritated with Holloway's dick answer about why humans were created by the Engineers: "Because they can." This is only another clue in a series of clues the viewer has been given about David NOT being an emotional android.

Originally posted by jaden101
For me, this would be the only logical explanation but the only thing to back it up is David's 1 sided conversation while standing over the stasis chamber before Weyland is revealed as being in the chamber (although it's very obvious that it is...meaning the supposed plot "twist" of him being alive was completely pointless.)

I do not see David's actions being explained any other way, really. But the second film may change how we understand the film. As I told another, we should not have to have a second film to better enjoy the first.

Originally posted by jaden101
Yet the film clearly shows he'd already made the decision to infect him (or at the very least, someone) long before Holloway took the piss at the pool table.

We do not know that. It may have been a test the entire time which Holloway failed. David could have put the poison into the cup at any point in time but he didn't until the very end. That shows me that David had reservations about going through with the actions.

Originally posted by jaden101
For all we know...exactly...we don't know. Which is the point.

You're quoting a section of my post that I have directly stated is speculation on character motivation: of course we do not know if my speculation is correct.

Originally posted by jaden101
Not ENTIRELY known?...Not known whatsoever.

Oh, we definitely know that David was there to research ways to get Weyland back to health. We know this for a fact. We do not know if his actions with Holloway are directly (they definitely are, indirectly) related to that instruction set. That's what I meant by "not entirely known".

Originally posted by jaden101
The only explanation is the David was testing the black goo to see if it gave the eternal life giving properties that Weyland was looking for...Which brings up another glaring plot hole. You would've thought that David would've mentioned to Weyland at some point that the black goo didn't give Holloway eternal life...But rather infected him with wiggly eye worms and ultimately led to his fiery death.

Are you forgetting the line David uttered to Shaw about, "Doesn't every child want their parents dead"? That, for me, was the biggest clue that David had no intentions of serving Weyland. So, your question: no, David has no motivations to tell Weyland about the blackgoo being a horribly regenerative choice. lol Note that David never used it on Weyland so you could still be right. In fact, I find your insight to be refreshing on this film as your thoughts are better put together than some of the internet rage-nerds.

Originally posted by jaden101
You're missing my point. I'm not talking about how the engineer knew where he was going...I'm talking about how David knew where the engineer was going...What with him being at this point just a torn off head with no ability to actually see what was going on beyond whatever was in front of his torn off head.

That's easy to explain. David was right there, on the control floor, next to the engineer.

And I think it would be pretty obvious where he was going if he stormed-off, in a rage fit, once his horseshoe craft was crashed into. I also believe David had access to some of the systems on the lifeboat, too.

Then there's this: David may have told the engineer. David may have orchestrated everything. He may have told the Engineer to rip off his head and destroy the humans as the humans are about to go to the home planet and release all of the germ-warfare. We just don't know.

Originally posted by jaden101
Yet this is entirely speculative and would've taken all of 5 seconds to show on screen. But is wasn't.

You're telling ME? This is my biggest complaint about the film, lol. This film barely made a 9 out of 10, for me. It was almost an 8 if Shaw had no survived and was going to the home planet.

Originally posted by jaden101
It would've also been extremely stupid because it's not like the engineer could've threatened him with "tell me where she is or I'll tear your head off" which would mean that he would've had to volunteer the information...which would mean that in one sentence he'd be trying to get Shaw killed...And seconds later be trying to stop her from getting killed.

Which is monumentally stupid.

But, David could still have his own motivations. He very well may have lead the Engineer to Shaw hoping that Shaw would die. OR...David may be some sort of master planner and we have yet to unravel the entirety of his plot. We do know, however, that Shaw was the most respectful to David out of anyone. She apologized for putting his head in a bag and zipping it up: she treated him very humanly. Why apologize when David should experience no discomfort? Is it possible that David cares for Shaw and he truly intended to save her?

I think the movie lends more of a reason to believe David was honestly trying to help her.

Originally posted by jaden101
You said the characters were decent...They weren't.

Decent is not the same thing as "falling in love with the character". Decent is only a bit better than "they got the job done but nothing remarkable about them". I liked the captain's character and I loved David's character. And, honestly, I liked the awakened Engineer's character, too. The rest? Decent to "got the job done".

Jaden, here is another plot problem:

How the **** is Shaw supposed to survive the long-ass journey to the Engineer's home-planet when her gut was cut and she has no known means of getting food from the Horseshoe craft? Maybe David will figure out how to dispense food. Maybe she will go into hypersleep. Who knows. Maybe she will, at the instructions of David, figure out how to repair David.

But that, to me, is another plothole.

wow thats alot of replys...hehe , so was the movie any good?

Originally posted by rudester
wow thats alot of replys...hehe , so was the movie any good?

Some liked it and some didn't.

It was not the Engineer's leaving the star maps: it was the humans. The Engineer's didn't make those cave paintings or the stone cuttings.

So humans made a star map to a constellation that couldn't even be seen without a telescope some 29,600 years before the 1st telescopes were invented?...Not to mention Shaw even says "Not a map...An invitation"...You receive an invitation from someone...You don't give yourself an invitation...Especially not to some place you don't even know exists.

The bioweapons use of that planet only seemed relevant since their shift in attitude towards the humans...we can just as well assume that the Engineer's made a massive shift in the use of that planet at around 2100-2000 years before the events in Prometheus. They were terraforming the planet so there were plans to make that planet habitable for at least themselves (the engineers). We can speculate and assume they originally planned for that planet to be cohabited with them in some sort of peaceful, spacefaring, sci-fi, utopia. And, again, the engineers did not make the star maps, the humans did.

Nothing quite like writing the script for them eh?...How long would it have taken to explain in the script that the planet had been abandoned?...Not long...and yet it wasn't. Hence the reason you've been using "speculate" and "assume" an awful lot in this discussion...

Other than being the place that multiple ancient human civilizations referenced in their art? Nah, that's pretty dang significant both scientifically (the whole reason the expedition in the movie takes place) and spiritually (the religious implications are great). Let's put it this way: the movie would not have taken place if it did not have any significance.

And yet it doesn't unless you resort to what you're doing...making stuff up that isn't in the film in order to justify the idiotic writing and massive plot holes.

That was established in the very beginning of the film (that it wasn't their (engineer's) homeworld). And, no where do we see any evidence from the Engineers that they ever wanted the humans to go to that moon. Only the humans created that notion.

Once again...Not a map...and invitation.

His actions are directly explained, yes, but his motivations to execute those actions are NOT explained/well understood. He is supposed to be emotionless or someshit but we know damn well he isn't. So it is guessing what his motivations are to execute his literal programmed instructions.

So I say it's a plot hole that it's never explained WHY David infected Holloway. You disagree...then you say his motivations for those actions are not explained...So...his motivations for those actions...That'd be the WHY. That'd be the plothole.

As for the emotions part.

http://www.weylandindustries.com/david

"I understand human emotions...although I do not feel them myself"

Actually, David does have emotions. He is noticeably irritated with Holloway's dick answer about why humans were created by the Engineers: "Because they can." This is only another clue in a series of clues the viewer has been given about David NOT being an emotional android.

See link above.

I do not see David's actions being explained any other way, really. But the second film may change how we understand the film. As I told another, we should not have to have a second film to better enjoy the first.

Which is what my original criticism of this movie was....That it was merely a set up for another 2 hours movie. You shouldn't have to pay full price to see half a story. Granted there are exceptions such as the Lord of the Rings where everyone understands the story is set over 3 films but even other franchises started with a great stand alone film...Not least the original Alien film.

Then there's this: David may have told the engineer. David may have orchestrated everything. He may have told the Engineer to rip off his head and destroy the humans as the humans are about to go to the home planet and release all of the germ-warfare. We just don't know.

Slightly annoying isn't it?...It's not even well executed...It's not like the contents of the briefcase in Pulp Fiction...Or what was in the Fed Ex box in Castaway. What does Bill Murray whisper at the end of Lost in Translation?

These were all good examples of plot important mysteries. Not knowing what David said just...isn't.

What's remarkable is his output since Gladiator in 2000. When that was released, he had just accepted the job to direct Hannibal, and he reflected how in his previous years - his debut in 1977 to 1997 - he had directed only ten films (some of them opening four years apart), and he concluded that was too few; he could make them faster. So with Prometheus this year, he's manged at an older age to make ten films in just a twelve year period; many of them massive epics! It's not like Woody Allen, making yet another romantic comedy. Whatever formula he finally found for working faster, it should help that follow up to Prometheus come that much faster. The worldwide box office is strong enough that it should happen.

Shame most of his stuff in the last 12 years has been total shit though. With Body of Lies being the only really good film and Gladiator and Black Hawk Down getting passing grades. The rest being ****ing awful.

It's clarified late in the film explicitly by David: nothing was airborne.

That's a misrepresentation of what happened. They were discussing HOW Holloway got infected. David stated that it wasn't by an airborne pathogen. Not that there weren't any airborne pathogens.

Originally posted by jaden101
So humans made a star map to a constellation that couldn't even be seen without a telescope some 29,600 years before the 1st telescopes were invented?...Not to mention Shaw even says "Not a map...An invitation"...You receive an invitation from someone...You don't give yourself an invitation...Especially not to some place you don't even know exists.

Did you see the part where an alien was in their midst and the humans were worshipping the alien (in the 30,000 year old cave painting)?

The alien was an "Engineer". Humans made the map. But, most likely, it was influenced by information given to them by the Engineers. So, to put it all together:

The maps ALL predate 100 CE by hundreds to thousands of years. It was around 100 CE when the Engineers turned on the humans. Here is what I am saying: of course the humans and the Engineers were on friendly terms when the murals, paintings, and engravings were made: the Engineers didn't turn on the humans until around 100 CE which is many hundreds of years AFTER the newest engraving. So this is not a plot inconsistency, like you're portraying it as.

So where's the plothole or inconsistency you were wanting? I see none in this particular area.

Originally posted by jaden101
Nothing quite like writing the script for them eh?...How long would it have taken to explain in the script that the planet had been abandoned?...Not long...and yet it wasn't. Hence the reason you've been using "speculate" and "assume" an awful lot in this discussion...

It does not matter that I speculated on what the planet was for: they were terraforming the planet. Obviously, it was intended for humanlike life. Add in the reality that the early humans had quite clear star-maps to the planet and it is quite obvious that the planet was intended to be visited by the humans at some point. And, again...we know shit hit the fan around 100 CE and the Engineers turned on the humans. That's not speculation, at all: that's just using the information from the film to see an very obvious plot point that was directly fleshed out (and verbalized) by the characters in the film. The only thing they characters were missing before they arrived was that relations had soured around 100 CE. That's it. Again, not plot inconsistency to see here: move along.*

Originally posted by jaden101
And yet it doesn't unless you resort to what you're doing...making stuff up that isn't in the film in order to justify the idiotic writing and massive plot holes.

I have made nothing up concerning the cave paintings, murals, and engravings. You should watch the movie again if you think I did.

And, I don't think you actually responded to my point at all with those words: read them again. It's directly in the film for you to see.

I mean, I could torrent the film and repost the scene where Weyland shows the series of art that show the stars that clearly mapped to stars in space. I could also post the scene where Shaw and Holloway are speculating about the implications (spiritually) of what it means if humans were created by the Engineers.

But I don't think I need to do that.

Originally posted by jaden101
Once again...Not a map...and invitation.

1. They are partial star maps that the characters within the movie interpreted as an invitation.

2. Your point above doesn't even remotely address the section you quoted.

Originally posted by jaden101
So I say it's a plot hole that it's never explained WHY David infected Holloway. You disagree...then you say his motivations for those actions are not explained...So...his motivations for those actions...That'd be the WHY. That'd be the plothole.

"His actions are directly explained, yes, but his motivations to execute those actions are NOT explained/well understood."

For example: a solider executes his CO's orders. We know why he followed those orders (because he CO commanded him to) but we do not know what the solider's motivations are for obeying those orders.

Originally posted by jaden101
As for the emotions part.

http://www.weylandindustries.com/david

"I understand human emotions...although I do not feel them myself"

See link above.

Which is clearly contradicted in the film. Go watch it again. Except, this time, realize that David is not an unfeeling automaton. Pay special attention to his facial features and expressions when interacting with Holloway before he poisons him.

I feel you're missing out on some of the best writing and acting in the film by assuming that David it supposed to be an unfeeling automaton. Even the viral youtube video shows David shedding a single tear towards the end of the advert: something he should not be doing and something that foreshadows his role in the film (nicely done, imo).

Originally posted by jaden101
Which is what my original criticism of this movie was....That it was merely a set up for another 2 hours movie.

And it was an argument that I agreed with. Take note that very few people will take the time to understand the plot, after only one viewing of the film, like I have. That's mostly a movie-nerd thing that people like you and I do.

Originally posted by jaden101
You shouldn't have to pay full price to see half a story.

I take it you hate the utter-living-shit out of Hemingway?

Originally posted by jaden101
Granted there are exceptions such as the Lord of the Rings where everyone understands the story is set over 3 films but even other franchises started with a great stand alone film...Not least the original Alien film.

Well, to me, this just seems like a hypocritical opinion rather than a legit complaint. Who cares that you wanted the whole story, of a three part series, told in the first film. 🙂

*waits for the announcement of the second installment*

Originally posted by jaden101
Slightly annoying isn't it?...

YES!!!!!

Originally posted by jaden101
It's not even well executed...It's not like the contents of the briefcase in Pulp Fiction...Or what was in the Fed Ex box in Castaway. What does Bill Murray whisper at the end of Lost in Translation?

Oh man, good point with the pulp-fiction briefcase. (I later found out it was diamonds. lol)

And, lip-readers and audio specialists havefigured out, partially, what Bill Murray uttered.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19138_7-hotly-debated-movie-questions-that-totally-have-answers.html

But I found that thing that Bill Murray did at the end to be far worse than anything seen in Prometheus because it is actually fun and entertaining to speculate what is going to be explained in the second or third film. Lost in Translation? NOPE! None of that. Just annoying writing trying to be "hipster artsy", imo.

Originally posted by jaden101
These were all good examples of plot important mysteries. Not knowing what David said just...isn't.

Others have pointed out that it is irrelevant to know what David said. I still hold out that it will play a part in the second film. David has some secrets to reveal, for sure. Based on your frustration with this film, you'll probably see the second. Does that make you a "sheep", just like me? Meh. Maybe. But I actually enjoyed this film.

*Seriously. There's waaaaaaaay more things in the film that are actual plot problems.

Originally posted by roughrider
4. And how they acted with they came in contact with the small-form in the chamber; let's remember their actions earlier - wanting to leave quickly because they got freaked out by the alien corpse (which means Shaw's Engineers theses was probably right - Fifield was repulsed by the notion of it) got them into their current mess. So the biologist decided they needed to switch tactics, seeing as they couldn't leave there anyway - see a life-form, let's act friendly, not fearful or repulsed (though the consequence was the same.) It doesn't make it stupid or illogical, how they acted. They wanted to survive, and were following what they thought was the best thing to do at the time.

I felt the need to reply to this point in your post cuz I didn't see anyone else complain about this but I did and another member did agree with me. Like you mentioned there were engineer corpses lying around all over the place, they earlier saw a hologram of engineers running away...so how did the biologist know that what got the engineers scared wasn't that creature that they found? The fact of the matter is he was stupid, didn't show any precaution and it cost him dearly, even I knew the guy shoulda kept his distance from it. It suddenly opens up it's mouth and the guys like 'ohhhh well how about I just stick my hand down there and we'll see what happens...it's an alien life form I've never seen or anyone I know has come into contact with and we have no data on it so whats the worst thing that could happen!' Acting fearful woulda been the best option because then at least you'd be keeping your distance rather than provoking a creature you have no idea about.

Did you see the part where an alien was in their midst and the humans were worshipping the alien (in the 30,000 year old cave painting)? The alien was an "Engineer". Humans made the map. But, most likely, it was influenced by information given to them by the Engineers. So, to put it all together: The maps ALL predate 100 CE by hundreds to thousands of years. It was around 100 CE when the Engineers turned on the humans. Here is what I am saying: of course the humans and the Engineers were on friendly terms when the murals, paintings, and engravings were made: the Engineers didn't turn on the humans until around 100 CE which is many hundreds of years AFTER the newest engraving. So this is not a plot inconsistency, like you're portraying it as. So where's the plothole or inconsistency you were wanting? I see none in this particular area.

But it is though. If the engineers were planning on wiping out humanity 2000 years before the events of Prometheus then they would've know that humans were nowhere near achieving interstellar travel and so would've had no reason to change what the planet was being used for...So it still raises the question why would you want to lure human beings that you're supposedly on friendly terms with to a planet with no significant purpose other than what we see on screen which is making deadly weapons.

And, I don't think you actually responded to my point at all with those words: read them again. It's directly in the film for you to see.

Oh yes...It's directly in the film that the engineers were terraforming the planet in order to live side by side with humans as a space-faring co-operative...oh wait...no it wasn't...hence you're making stuff up.

1. They are partial star maps that the characters within the movie interpreted as an invitation. 2. Your point above doesn't even remotely address the section you quoted.

I'd already addressed it.

I feel you're missing out on some of the best writing and acting in the film by assuming that David it supposed to be an unfeeling automaton.

I'm not the one doing the assuming here. You are.

Well, to me, this just seems like a hypocritical opinion rather than a legit complaint.

It's hypocritical to want a story to be finished before the film starts getting made?...No...The Lord of the Rings had a finished story and was split into 3 parts. Prometheus' ending, like other Damon Lindelof works, hasn't even been written yet. Like he always does, he starts making what he thinks is a good idea without having any idea where it's going to end. He even stated about Prometheus.."Good stories, you don't know where they're going to end"...Clearly he doesn't. He most likely has a basic idea but he clearly has no idea how to flesh it out so it makes sense and works well. The only saving grace is that Lindelof has stated that it's likely he wont be involved...Most likely cos he has no idea how to finish a story cos he's ****ing shit at writing.

Anyway...We can go round and round arguing the same points. My only hope is that at least some of the problems with the film can be attributed to bad editing and so will be fixed with the dvd release (along with the 30 minutes extra footage) Things like Janek saying he was having problems with Fifield and which ever other one it was that got lost's video feed despite the fact that it was showing on the screen clear as day. That's obviously down to bad editing.

Others have pointed out that it is irrelevant to know what David said. I still hold out that it will play a part in the second film. David has some secrets to reveal, for sure. Based on your frustration with this film, you'll probably see the second. Does that make you a "sheep", just like me? Meh. Maybe. But I actually enjoyed this film.

So far there's no guarantee of a sequel. Scott wanted Prometheus to stand alone...it doesn't...and said "If we're lucky, there'll be a second part"

I wont pay to see it though. I'll wait for a tv release.

Originally posted by steverules_2
I felt the need to reply to this point in your post cuz I didn't see anyone else complain about this but I did and another member did agree with me. Like you mentioned there were engineer corpses lying around all over the place, they earlier saw a hologram of engineers running away...so how did the biologist know that what got the engineers scared wasn't that creature that they found? The fact of the matter is he was stupid, didn't show any precaution and it cost him dearly, even I knew the guy shoulda kept his distance from it. It suddenly opens up it's mouth and the guys like 'ohhhh well how about I just stick my hand down there and we'll see what happens...it's an alien life form I've never seen or anyone I know has come into contact with and we have no data on it so whats the worst thing that could happen!' Acting fearful woulda been the best option because then at least you'd be keeping your distance rather than provoking a creature you have no idea about.

I don't think those snake like alien forms were the things that killed those engineers, those things came from those worms when David walked into that chamber.

I don't think they did either, but they didn't know thats not what they were running from

Who knows might have been other species on that planet and one got inside that room and came into contact with that black goo.

Coulda been, the movie opened quite a few doors

Originally posted by rudester
wow thats alot of replys...hehe , so was the movie any good?

Sup, dawg?? Long time no "see"!! Basically the movie is an excellent beefed-up-on-steroids version of Scott's original Alien with a thicker, more thought-provoking premise. The cinematography and direction is f#cking superb and scott uses some foggy mist to create an atmosphere of mystery, ambiguity, and wonder. So the tone from the original Alien returns in many ways (a tone that I felt was missing in all of the Alien sequels). It is and isn't an Alien prequel at the same time. It does take place before Alien, but don't expect the end to meet up directly with Alien (cuz that would be boring anyway). And the movie pays off pretty damn well, especially if you avoided the trailers like I did. And the performance from Noomi Rapace is excellent (she is the main and most likeable character). I think it's an under appreciated performance, perhaps because Fassbender is so spot on as a persnickety robot.

That being said, some have been digging trying to find what they think are "plotholes," but it all makes pretty good sense when viewed under a particular light. Basically go see the damn thing, cuz it rocks and we need to see the sequel that they've already planned. After you see it, read this, cuz it's a pretty solid interpretation of the film...

http://cavalorn.livejournal.com/584135.html#cutid1

Originally posted by jaden101
But it is though. If the engineers were planning on wiping out humanity 2000 years before the events of Prometheus then they would've know that humans were nowhere near achieving interstellar travel and so would've had no reason to change what the planet was being used for...

This is all speculation on your part...and it is baseless. It is also contradictory to what was seen in the movie. All we know is relations soured around 100 CE and they planned to wipe out their own creations. The purpose of the planet MAY have changed, as well. But we do know that it was once being terraformed...and all operations stopped around 100 CE.

But all of those points of yours are irrelevant to the points I made in the section you quoted.

Namely, there is no plothole in relations souring after all of those maps were made which is what your original point was:

Originally posted by jaden101
You don't think that star maps/invitations to a planet that were drawn 30,000 ago when the engineers were supposedly friendly only led to a plant that was for the production of bio-weapons?

You see a plothole but none exists. You are inventing plotholes so you can hate the movie more. Sorry, not plothole there, at all.

Originally posted by jaden101
So it still raises the question why would you want to lure human beings that you're supposedly on friendly terms with to a planet with no significant purpose other than what we see on screen which is making deadly weapons.

Answered this, already. Here it is, again:

"...all of those star maps predated the souring of relations, which occurred around 100 CE..."

"And, again, the engineers did not make the star maps, the humans did."

"The maps ALL predate 100 CE by hundreds to thousands of years. It was around 100 CE when the Engineers turned on the humans."

"...of course the humans and the Engineers were on friendly terms when the murals, paintings, and engravings were made: the Engineers didn't turn on the humans until around 100 CE which is many hundreds of years AFTER the newest engraving. So this is not a plot inconsistency, like you're portraying it as."

Originally posted by jaden101
Oh yes...It's directly in the film that the engineers were terraforming the planet in order to live side by side with humans as a space-faring co-operative...oh wait...no it wasn't...hence you're making stuff up.

Please point to where I said that the film directly stated that the planet was being terraformed for both the humans and the Engineers to live together.

And your point is still wildly irrelevant to the section you quoted.

Let's start at the beginning so you can see why you're not making sense:

I said:

Originally posted by dadudemon
I found the movie to be devoid of most of the plotholes being mentioned.

To which you replied:

Originally posted by jaden101
Really?...You don't think that star maps/invitations to a planet that were drawn 30,000 ago when the engineers were supposedly friendly only led to a plant that was for the production of bio-weapons?

To which I replied:

Originally posted by dadudemon
Really? You didn't stop to think for a moment that all of those star maps predated the souring of relations, which occurred around 100 CE, by hundreds to thousands of years?

I see no plothole, here: I see a forced plot error on your part.

To which you replied (emphasis added because I replied to a specific section in your comment):

Originally posted by jaden101
Which was my point. The star maps is some cases were 30,000 years old. So the plot is basically saying this.

"We, as the engineers, like these humans...Lets leave them star maps to a planet that we only use for bio weapons production and doesn't have any real significance to us other than that...It's certainly not our homeworld because the humans will go looking for that at the end of the film".

To which I replied:

Originally posted by dadudemon
Other than being the place that multiple ancient human civilizations referenced in their art? Nah, that's pretty dang significant both scientifically (the whole reason the expedition in the movie takes place) and spiritually (the religious implications are great). Let's put it this way: the movie would not have taken place if it did not have any significance. 🙂

To which you replied:

Originally posted by jaden101
And yet it doesn't unless you resort to what you're doing...making stuff up that isn't in the film in order to justify the idiotic writing and massive plot holes.

And you saying the above makes no sense at all since, if you followed that particular thread (no forum pun, intended) of our conversation, because the points I covered were directly in the film, not speculation, not made up. This is why I said what you said was irrelevant to my point you quoted.

Originally posted by jaden101
I'd already addressed it.

No you didn't. You still haven't addressed that particular portion of my post (you can claim that other sections of your replies address that particular portion of my post, but you have yet to directly reply to that particular section of my post).

Here it is again:

You said:

Originally posted by jaden101
"...It's certainly not [the Engineer's] homeworld because the humans will go looking for that at the end of the film"

To which I replied:

"That was established in the very beginning of the film (that it wasn't their (engineer's) homeworld). And, no where do we see any evidence from the Engineers that they ever wanted the humans to go to that moon. Only the humans created that notion."

Originally posted by jaden101
I'm not the one doing the assuming here. You are.

You certainly did some assuming about David, already.

You assume that he has no emotions.

Yet he is directly and visibly affected by Holloway saying that David's point of existence is "just because he can".

Yet the viral trailer shows him shedding a tear.

Yet he seems quite happy with his "father's" adoration of him being his "son".

Yet he is visibly upset (though subtle) over Weyland saying David has no soul in his mission briefing.

You assume he has no emotions.

Yet he wants his "parents" dead.

Yet he smiled when the Engineer pat him on the head.

# my assumptions about David having emotions: 0
# of supporting pieces of evidence I have mentioned that show a clear set of emotions for David: 5. And there are even more instances.

Originally posted by jaden101
It's hypocritical to want a story to be finished before the film starts getting made?

That's...not even close to representing what I said.

You said you would allow a pass for LotRs for leaving tons of answered questions in the first film...but will not do so for Prometheus.

Originally posted by jaden101
The Lord of the Rings had a finished story and was split into 3 parts.

It had a book version, sure, but the films were not finished and we had no way of knowing how it was going to be done/turn out. TONS of stuff was cut from the first book before it hit the big screen.

Originally posted by jaden101
Prometheus' ending, like other Damon Lindelof works, hasn't even been written yet. Like he always does, he starts making what he thinks is a good idea without having any idea where it's going to end. He even stated about Prometheus.."Good stories, you don't know where they're going to end"...Clearly he doesn't. He most likely has a basic idea but he clearly has no idea how to flesh it out so it makes sense and works well. The only saving grace is that Lindelof has stated that it's likely he wont be involved...Most likely cos he has no idea how to finish a story cos he's ****ing shit at writing.

Seems like he likes the way Hemmingway writes. I do not care for that story telling method, myself; but, unlike you, I was not devastated by the ending in Prometheus because we were pretty much promised another film. Since Scott has pretty much stated at least another film is coming (he said it would IF Prometheus did well...and it did well. It has almost made it's budget back, just domestically, much less with the worldwide earnings being included), I am quite happy with Prometheus because I get to sink my teeth into another movie that will answer some questions and possibly provide more.

Originally posted by jaden101
Anyway...We can go round and round arguing the same points. My only hope is that at least some of the problems with the film can be attributed to bad editing and so will be fixed with the dvd release (along with the 30 minutes extra footage) Things like Janek saying he was having problems with Fifield and which ever other one it was that got lost's video feed despite the fact that it was showing on the screen clear as day. That's obviously down to bad editing.

About that particular point: man, I hope you're right. That is one of the plotholes that irritated me.

Originally posted by jaden101
So far there's no guarantee of a sequel. Scott wanted Prometheus to stand alone...it doesn't...and said "If we're lucky, there'll be a second part"

I wont pay to see it though. I'll wait for a tv release.

TV release?

Anyway, this:

"I said to him, we should be prepared for people to feel frustrated if we’re going to be withholding, so we have to be very careful about what we’re saving for later," he continues. "Because it’s not a foregone conclusion that there are going to be sequels, and so if there isn’t a sequel, just be comfortable with what we gave them in this movie."

And Lindelof stated the the gist of the second Prometheus film has been discussed out. He also said he thinks it would benefit being in "new hands" which is all good news for you:

“I had [Prometheus] for the period of time that I was running the race, and if that story continues, it could actually benefit going into someone else’s able hand," Lindelof adds. "Although, I feel like some of the iceberg below the water for any potential future movies in that storyline has already been constructed based on conversations that Ridley and I had about it.”

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/prometheus-damon-lindelof-sequel-ridley-scott-paradise-332875

And Lindelof pretty much confirms that he was writing under the impression that it was sequel-ready material:

“From the very beginning, I was working from a premise that lent itself to a sequel. I really don’t want to meet God in the first one. I want to leave it open to [Noomi Rapace’s character, Dr. Elizabeth Shaw] saying, ‘I don’t want to go back to where I came from. I want to go where they came from.’ “

Also, the idea of what to do about how Shaw and David will survive was directly thought about and addressed by Scott in an interview:

"I know where it’s going. I know that to keep [David] alive is essential and to keep [Elizabeth] alive is essential and to go where they came from, not where I came from, is essential.”

So that is not a plothole, per se. It is an intentional plothole that Scott was keenly aware of...because of what you (Jaden) said: he wants another movie or two.

Originally posted by roughrider
Okay, I've been reading the pages of complaints here, and I feel compelled to respond.
SPOILERS be damned.

1. I've been reading here and in other articles about how stupid it was for the scientists to remove their helmets in the central chamber (never mind how all their instruments were telling them how breathable it was) - they are holding this up as an example of what Roger Ebert called the 'idiot plot'; ie. that the plot moves forward with consequence only because characters act like idiots, and if they didn't the bad things wouldn't have happened. But guess what, this complaint doesn't past muster because: there was NEVER anything in the air. Nothing of bad consequence ever happened in this film because characters took off their helmets in there. It's clarified late in the film explicitly by David: nothing was airborne. (Which is when Elizabeth Shaw begins to understand what David did.) So people can just put a sock in it, regarding that complaint.

And Roger Ebert never found any examples of the 'idiot plot' in this, BTW - he gave it a four-star rave.

2. David is acting on orders from Weyland to do some experimenting with the vase he secretly brought back (hence his cryptic answer to Meredith Vickers: "He says, try harder."😉 But no matter what he felt towards Holloway dismissal of him as just a tool for them to use, he doesn't drop the black goo in his drink until he gets 'permission' from Holloway to do so (which Holloway gave without understanding.) They hadn't discovered the sleeping Engineer yet, so the fact it backfired so badly on Holloway was rendered moot in the view of David and Weyland, as they felt the best option was obviously to wake and talk to the Engineer and ask him for the secrets to immortality (if he would give them.)

3. It's up to debate how much of a private agenda David was following; did he speak to the Engineer to actually provoke him to violence (and perhaps escape his programming with the death of his 'father'😉, or did he speak correctly and the Engineer did it anyway, as they already established Earth was targeted for destruction of life and he was offended these selfish creatures came grovelling to him for answers they didn't deserve? I don't feel disappointed that, for the moment, it could be read either way, and they could be leaving it for a future film. Just as I never held the actions of HAL 9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey against him as frustratingly opaque (or that it was a plothole he got the last astronaut to rush out out of the ship without his helmet, in a desperate rescue mission.)

4. People are complaining about the actions of their geologist and biologist, who get trapped overnight in the alien dome. You can debate about how they got lost, but it turns out the rest of the party had to leave pretty quickly because of the approaching storm, so the opportunity to go get them immediately was gone. And how they acted with they came in contact with the small-form in the chamber; let's remember their actions earlier - wanting to leave quickly because they got freaked out by the alien corpse (which means Shaw's Engineers theses was probably right - Fifield was repulsed by the notion of it) got them into their current mess. So the biologist decided they needed to switch tactics, seeing as they couldn't leave there anyway - see a life-form, let's act friendly, not fearful or repulsed (though the consequence was the same.) It doesn't make it stupid or illogical, how they acted. They wanted to survive, and were following what they thought was the best thing to do at the time.

And just because no one was up monitoring what happened to them that night, following their webcam feeds - there was group consensus at that time that nothing was alive in there. The captain dismissed the temporary 'ping' of one sensor (the same one David would investigate the next day, outside the flight deck of the ship) as a glitch.

I could go into some others points, but I want to leave it at that for now.

I'm not saying there isn't room for discussion on this, because it answers questions while raising a lot more - for us to either figure out ourselves or to tease us with until the next film. But I don't feel cheated, and I do feel tantalized to see what they will do with the next film.

1) I don't think people should just as you say put a sock in it. Regardless of whether the air was breathable they had no idea what kind of airborne bacteria/viruses could be in the air. I'll use Earth as an example. Even though we all breath the same air if we go to another part of the world where our immune system isn't adjusted for the bacteria in the world we'll likely get sick and possibly die and that's on Earth. There's no telling what separate bacteria or micro-organisms could have developed on an Alien world and our immune systems wouldn't be ready for it. There is a difference between interacting with the environment in a pressurized safe suit and actively having your body interact with foreign elements.

4) It was stupid for the biologist to just go gaga over the creature. He had no idea what the creature was capable and he died because of his stupidity.

And it was stupid for them to just dismiss a ping of life as nothing. For one it means you don't trust the equipment to do what's supposed to do. Secondly not only should they have had people monitoring them at all times they should have also been recording their video feed. That way they would have no why they died.

David and Weyland still acted stupid in how they handled everything imo. Purposely infecting someone without knowing how it will turn out is stupid. Weyland was in stasis so as far as we know he wasn't in any danger of dying quickly therefore there was no need to be so brash.

I know humans can be illogical at times and do stupid things, but generally when you're supposed to have some of the smartest people interacting with a foreign and unfamiliar environment I would think their natural tendency would tend to be more cautious than what they displayed in the movie. And it ended up killing them.

Obviously the type of movie this was meant people were gonna have to die but you can have this stuff happen without them acting stupid to produce the results.

Now I don't think this kind of thing would normally bother me as bad as this, but from what I gathered this movie was supposed to make you think about some hard questions about life. Yet for such big ambitions they kind of barely hit the surface of that and the characters they used to try and bring those points home didn't work because they acted like idiots.

How am I supposed to take the very real and big questions this film tries to take into account when the film doesn't do the same with the plot or the characters.

This film had so much potential but it fell way short, and this was me going in with no expectations for the film so I wasn't walking in with a bias. At least I don't feel I did.