New Prometheus trailer (here be rage) Pages 1 2 3 NEXT | |
I'm a little confused on what you're trying to convey here. Are you basically upset because the tech in one future fiction setting is different from the tech in a different future fiction setting? | |
huhh...really? I hate to be devils advocate but this is kind of skirting into "comic book guy" territory...as in...most people don't care | |
He's complaining that they have better technology than in Alien and this is a prequel to that. OT: I don't really care about the technology, since it's supposed to be the future it makes sense that they alter it to look like it actually the future and not the 80s version of the future, it kinda makes sense, but that trailer was AWESOME, I want to see that now. | |
Frankly, I don't care. Ridley Scott is doing another sci-fi film and it's set in the Alien universe. I'm not going to let technological paradoxes ruin the experience. And that Space Jockey with the PC, that's probably concept art judging from the signature in the corner. And if it is in the film, thank you for the spoilers. /sarcasm. | |
Maybe you could explain away the tech stuff by saying the ship in Prometheus is a fancy science vessel whilst the ship in Alien is a no frills mining ship? | |
He has a point. We've never seen Weyland Industries tech. I'm also surprised you're not up in arms over the power loader and 'storm rifle' on their viral site. | |
Well, the best technology reaches the richest people first, maybe the nostromo and hadleys hope weren't funded enough for such things? Seems to me that whereas the nostromo was just another ship and hadleys hope just another colony, prometheus is a pretty big deal and thus would be given all the funding and high tech gadgets that they want. There's an explantion if you need it. Me however, I don't care much, it's still looking freaking awesome. | |
Who knows, maybe the people in the future got fed up with the sleek and touch screen technology and some Steve Jobs just of guy made the old looks new again or maybe there is some great big war that result them to set their technologies a few decade back. | |
I actually found the tech of Prometheus to match up with Alien pretty well. Especially the spacesuits. They have this classic bubble dome design which comes across as very retro. Plus, the Prometheus is a state of the art laboratory vessel meant for discovery, and the Nostromo is basically just a rusty oil tanker. | |
This. Also, anyone else wish Ridley would just stop trolling us? It's quite clearly a direct prequel to the first Aliens film. Now we have another life form with a fucking Predator shoulder canon? | |
It's just concept art, who knows if it will actually be in the movie. From the trailer (which shows a quick glimps of the Space Jockey) I would think it won't be. I can promise you one thing though; Prometheus will end with the birth of the quinessential Alien. Mark my words, it's going to happen. | |
The trailer pretty much confirms that. It's just annoying that Ridley Scott keeps debunking the rumors of it being a direct prequel. | |
Saw the trailer when going to see the Avengers, looked alright, I probably won't see it because those type of movies tend to suck in some way. | |
Wait, now Prometheus is gonna be an Alien prequel?! | |
GET TO DA THEATAAHHH!!! That would be such an awesome twist. | |
Strictly speaking, it's always been that. That's how the brothers Scott pitched it to begin with to get the money. | |
I'm just a little pissed they spoiled the whole plot in the trailer. No point in watching it now. | |
Thanks for the warning. OT: Isn't it feasible that they were using an older ship in Alien? | |
Because 8-bit computers are the future.
Now that's something to get pissed about. | |
Prometheus is a prequel to Aliens its the same setting | |
They are if the future in question is an Alien prequel. OT: This doesn't look good. Maybe it will defy expectations, but right now it looks like the sort of Alien movie J. J. Abrams would direct. How does improved technology = worse visuals? | |
Not to sound condescending, but I find having problems with not sticking to a 40+ year old vision of the future (seeing how far that vision has progressed) to be a little goofy. This is coming from a guy who loved Alien, too. | |
I don't know - every future will be dated eventually, and the "we will all still be using 8-bit computers" future is more gritty and visually interesting than the "everything is an iPhone" future. Alien is dated, Blade Runner is dated, and 2001: A Space Odyssey is dated, but they're all much more visually interesting, solid-feeling, and credible as settings that people live in, than, say, the Star Trek reboot. | |
Because quite simply, science marches onwards. And don't you dare look surprised, some idiot always links to an appropriate TV Tropes page and today that idiot is me! :P | |
There's no way that's concept art for the movie. I mean, personally, I don't think that Ridley Scott is any longer the director that he once was, but I really doubt that he's senile enough to put a Predator twist in Prometheus. Regarding your other point, it does look like this movie has some continuity issues with the original Alien movie. As far as I'm concerned, I don't really care about the fact that the technology is more advanced in this one, and I didn't expect any different either. | |
This is what happens with any kind of revisited future-fiction tech. You can look past old-looking tech from an old film, but you can't have a film made in 2012 with tech that looks like it's from the fucking 70s. | |
Well, not every future. Surely there are limits to how far technology can progress. I have nothing against grit or interesting design for a future, but when something is being passed on as futuristic, when it quite clearly is either dated as fuuuuuuuuuuck already, or is a dated version of a futuristic vision, it just seems wrong. | |
I'm not sure about that - the internet seems to cream it's collective shorts at the mere mention of steampunk. Nothing wrong with retro SF - the point of the visual design is to work within the context of the movie and the universe the movie is set in, not to evoke a feeling of the future in viewers from a specific time period. In other words, Blade Runner (for instance) was a good SF film, is a good SF film, and will continue to be a good SF film. Even if it was released for the first time today, it would be a good SF film, despite the dated technology. | |
I think the OP's being a bit too pedantic about this. Yes, it's a plot hole but thirty odd years ago (edit) Ridly Scott didn't have the technology to do flashy computer screens like he can now. Back in the 80's the computer screens themselves were high tech and probably impressive to the audiences back then. | |
Not that I disagree with the gist of your post, but James Cameron didn't direct Alien, and he didn't direct Prometheus either. | |
When Silent Hill 2 came out they didn't have the technology to fully display environments, so they added the fog that was so vital to that game's atmospheric horror. At least one re-release completely missed the point, got rid of the fog, and wound up with a much less scary game. It becomes more abundantly clear with each re-release that the only thing preventing George Lucas from cramming the original Star Wars movies with extraneous CGI crap was technological limitations. Can anyone honestly say that the latest iterations of these works that have been made possible by advancements in technology are better than the originals? In other words, just because Ridley Scott now can set an Alien prequel in an iPhone future and CGI every outdoor environment into breathtaking beauty, it doesn't mean he should. EDIT: Oh, and speaking of James Cameron, Aliens and Terminator 2 vs. Avatar. Just sayin.' | |
I fuckin' hate steampunk. That said, this is a different case. Working within the context of the movie I completely agree with. But here's the thing. The only relevant context as far as the technology goes in Alien is that it's the future. It's not "70's future", the filmmakers simply used the best technology available to them, and at this point, it simply doesn't convey a future. I seriously did not pay attention enough to debate you on Blade Runner, on almost any level. Here's my way of thinking about this, in a nutshell. There are two ways this "prequels with better technology" can work, and this can go for games as well. Either the original creators didn't have the concept, or the means of conveying advanced technology to the extent that they would later on, or they simply chose not to do it. In the first case, I'm much more likely to forgive a later installment for using more advanced technology. In the second, it quite clearly goes against the authors' original intent and I'm more likely to have a problem with it. I'll grant that the archaic computers in Alien added to the creepy atmosphere of the film, but really, as a form of technology that's like, what, 150 years in the future, it's just not viable at this point. | |
Yeah i've edited the mistake now, easy one to make given Cameron directed Aliens. Last time i made an error like this and didn't bother to correct it i had like twelve people in my inbox informing me of my mistake.
Do you ever get the feeling that digital artists from the older generation take a view to CGI were they think that by inserting the latest CGI into their films or games it makes them automatically better? Because to me that reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of technology and art, which is kind of ironic if you're a sci-fi film director. | |
That's exactly the feeling I get for a lot of these movies, and is definitely the feeling I'm getting from this trailer. | |
| Pages 1 2 3 NEXT | |
Firstly, the trailer itself.
Now all the rage...
I knew - i f*cking knew - that Scott will fall for better technology in the past trap. Touchscreens, virtual monitors, high tech, lasers, neons, stinking-green fumes in hibernator chambers. For f*cks sake... Nostromo used such equipment :
Fast Forward 40 years - APC from "Aliens" is equipped with these babies :
...and it wasn't bad. Actually it's possible that for such long distances the earlier, crude but less demanding and solid technology will be chosen over new hi-tech miracles.
Why Scott, WHY ?! >:|
Edit :
Dafaq i recognize on his shoulder ?