Escape to the Movies: Prometheus

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

I just saw this movie yesterday, and I did find it to be a good movie. I didn't like that they used new xenomorph creatures, for the original ones are far more recognizable and creepy. Since Mr. Scott ended it for a sequel to be made, so I hope the xenomorph becomes more recognizable.

Oh, the next big twist in the (possible) sequel will be that the "Engineers" didn't make humans, but they to are searching for their creators. I'm calling that one now.

Hammeroj:

The barrage of stupid doesn't end there. After that, they check out the alien's DNA, and it turns out... It's exactly like ours! "But wait a minute", I hear you say - "Why is that stupid?" Well, it's simple. The aliens aren't quite like us, and if that were to be reflected anywhere, it's in their DNA. And it may or may not make zero sense on another level, depending on when the "seeding" of humans happened. If it were right at the edge of prehistory, fine, but the further you move back, the more change evolution would've effected on us. So if it happened something like 200,000 years ago, there would be quite some difference between the DNA of a human today and back then, which means the DNA of the alien and the human couldn't match on a whole 'nother level. And if it did happen right at the edge of prehistory, shouldn't it have happened many, many times to seed us to all the different places like Asia and Africa and Europe, given that we wouldn't be dealing with time periods as big as dozens of thousands of years?

I would like to call into question the whole idea of this human-only-panspermia without even taking into account all the evidence of evolution in the form of genetics and archaeological findings. And I'll do this in a single question, because this is already getting really ranty and TL;DR. How, exactly, is a creature being dissolved into genetic material (maybe not even that, because we see the actual DNA strands getting dissolved too, so who the fuck knows) going to create more creatures like it?

I'm not even going to address the complaints about scientists acting stupidly, because there's no excuse for it. This is yet another movie where the scientific method doesn't even fucking exist, and the characters all have "Doctor" plastered in front of their names to make them seem more interesting.

However, the DNA stuff in the movie isn't much of a stretch. Through modern DNA testing we know that evolution is an absolute, and can trace evolution down to the smallest biological elements. That element being DNA.

The mystery is why, in a universe where physical law dictates that everything falls apart and reaches a state of LESS complexity, would chemicals suddenly self-organize and do it in a way that codes for them to be able to do it again. This is the mystery of life we're still trying to figure out.

I guess Ridley Scotts' idea is that an alien race uses it's own DNA and some biotech to seed a new planet with DNA. At it's most basic level, DNA isn't going to just self-organize into something like a human. It's going to go through it's whole multibillion year evolution, and it's going to come up with things like bacteria, fish, insects, etc. It's going to adapt to it's surroundings. Finally, it produces a sentient creature, genetically identical to it's "parent" race. Remember, when we see the earth at the beginning of the movie, it isn't just before humans. It seems to be devoid of ANY life. Our best theories as to how DNA formed and life began on earth are basically "Extreme conditions forced molecules to combine in unlikely ways" or "DNA/Bacteria from another planet seeded life on earth". So Scotts' ideas on the subject aren't even that far fetched.

Also, as a slight defense of the ludicrously dumb biologist in the movie: look up Percy Fawcett.

He was an archaeologist who was an inspiration for the character Indiana Jones. The last time anyone saw him, he was going deep into the Amazon, asking local tribes to help him find the "Lost City of Z". He knew there were warring cannibal tribes in this unexplored portion of the Amazon, as well as the most dangerous animals imaginable, but he still did it. Immediately after he set off, he disappeared. Sometimes scientists do stupid, irrational things, and get killed by something they don't even understand.

I've got to agree with bob on this one, having just got back from seeing it.
I think it is almost as if the film serves to remind us how good the first alien movie is compared to the convoluted mess some of the sequels become.

I liked the movie,and that even though there were parts I expected to happen even scares I expected and they still startled me but between alien references and 3D glasses I found it hard to focus at points.

There are some good points raised here that I hadn't considered, and I've got to say it's not a bad movie. I enjoyed it, but I kind of want to see where a sequel could push some ideas further, however with grumpy creators that look like buff versions of the villains in Dark City it could be a bit predictable...

Really wish people would lay off of the sequels.

Yes, Ressurection was idiotic.

And yes, ALIEN 3 killing off Newt/Hicks/Bishop at the onset was stupid.

But ALIENS was one of the best sci-fi movies ever made. And the concept of a Xenomorph "queen" is LIGHTYEARS more interesting than any of the following:

A worm... thing that's effectively 1/3 of a facehugger.

A 4 limbed squid which grows into a *bigger* 4 limbed squid- that's actually a facehugger.

The Jockeys being bald albino humans on growth hormones.

And last but not least: the xenomorph itself- but more boring. In every way.

Argh, this is a Ridley Scott movie, you don't watch to point out plot holes. That is missing the Forest for the Trees.

You fill in the holes with your own ideas.

When you watch the movie, watch it like it is a standalone movie, not an Alien prequel. It becomes a lot better then, and has a lot of really good psychological and transcendental questions.

Same as Bob and most others. I walked out today and my friend asked what I thought of it. My immediately reaction was "9/10 if you've never seen the Alien movies. 8/10 if you have". I wanna say I was let down but I wasn't. On it's own it was a really good movie. I plan to see it in theaters at least once more.

It's hard to spell out what I didn't like exactly. A slight spoiler, at the end of the film there's a determination to learn more and one character asks "Why?" and that was my thought exactly. Everything you ever wanted to know about Alien is explained. Humanities origins, alien origins, who the space jockeys are. There's even a literal direct alien reference at the end. not a cut away or any subliminal stuff. HERE LOOK AN ALIEN!

I was left kinda nodding my head "OK Ridley I fucking get it this is an alien prequel."

Now there's a very specific reason this gets a point knocked off whether youve seen Alien or not. There's two scenes that rubbed me the wrong way.

There's a scene where a character does something really really stupid. Like B horror movie dumb. No good reason at all.

Secondly, there's a scene where a character has an epiphany about what the planets purpose really is and just straight monologs the whole plot twist at you. No subtlety either.

Both those scenes just felt phoned in on Ridleys part and frustrated the hell out of me.

This is a very good movie but I feel like Ridley could have left a bit more to the imagination in some areas and pandered slightly less. All that still adds up to a 8 or 9 out of 10 which is still great.

Very good movie... don't know why critics feel the need to rip it up so hard. Is it perfect? no... but it's better than the other movies in the alien franchise.

This movie is not about xenomorphs... they are there, but many people miss the point that they arent the main focus... whatever, to each his own i suppose.

if you are a sci fi fan, go and see this

Can someone please, PLEASE explain why an advanced, futuristic robotic surgical-thing-a-magig was only programmed for male patients?

When I saw this in the movie I laughed out loud at the riduculousness of it. It was a contrivance only to enhance the feeling of deperation for the scene- and it was ultimately useless since she got the space-octopus out of her anyway.

I really tried to like this movie. I tried to look past the bland characters that demanded to be ignored, or the multiple nitpicky things (like the one above) you could point out, but ultimately it was just too much.

I really do suspect there is more to this movie (which is par for the course for Scott and his director cuts), but I don't see how the bland, and stupid, characterizations can be saved.

SPOILER WARNING

So I saw this today...found a metric crap ton of crap that didn't make sense. However, most people seem to have posted most of the holes, but this is a pretty big one for me and I haven't seen it posted yet...sooo:

SPOILERS:

Can someone explain to me why it was the biologist (the on with the arm incident) that the new-old-mini-snake-mouth-inserter-face-hugger went into, whilst the geologist who got a face full of plastic melting and melding to his face (which usually kills in past, well future, aliens movies) was the one that came back to this ship as some sort of zombie while the biologist that got impregnated just had the wormy thing inside of him just decide to sit in his esophagus and run away and then was forgotten about?

And the wormy thing didn't evolve or anything?

Sorry if it doesn't make sense, I'm trying to be clever at this late hour and failing miserably.

Lupus80:
Can someone please, PLEASE explain why an advanced, futuristic robotic surgical-thing-a-magig was only programmed for male patients?

You know, I was bored last night and I actually thought about that. Obviously, a machine that performs all kinds of surgery but only for men would be an absolutely idiotic design. A machine designed for surgery that can only be performed on men, maybe (i.e. a....pff....anti-prostate cancer surgery?) but not this.

After some thoughts I came to the ultimate answer:

The machine is a dickhead.

Think about it: Since it can perform surgery on its own, it must have some sort of AI. Probably it is sentient to some degree and simply couldn't stand the little pseudo-religious dolt and when she came on, the machine was all like "Ugh, not that bimbo. Really don't wanna do this. How can I get out of this....oh yes *ahem* This machine serves only male patients"

And when she laid down anyway, it was probably like "Oh, I get it. I'm a machine, I can't tell a man from a woman, huh? 1010-bleep-bloop, right? Well, two can play this game, b***. You want surgery? I'll give you frigging surgery!"

Would also explain the completely fucked up surgery scene. ^^

The exacts science things are way over my head, and if people say there are major flaws, i believe them, but aside from such nitpickery, this was a solid scifi movie.

I'm just one of those "happy to see a Ridley Scott return" guys.
Liked this movie, and i am actually more confident about a Bladerunner 2 because of it.

Katatori-kun:

-The very first scene of the film shows us, straight up, one of the Engineers seeding its DNA on earth. The problem with this scene is mostly that it's completely disconnected from the rest of the movie, and later on in the film, people make statements that make zero sense unless viewed in the context of this prologue. Which nobody but the audience was aware of.

I disagree, but without knowing exactly what you're referring to, I can't say more.

Wait wait, you disagree without knowing what I'm talking about? Have you seen the movie? I'm pretty sure it's the very first thing we see. The waterfall, the guy drinking the black goo, the guy getting dissolved into some sort of biological material, and a fade-in of text saying "Prometheus".

And how about this, instead of telling me you disagree and expecting me to go with it, how about you tell me why you don't, especially since you seem to not even know what I'm referring to?

As a conclusion of the presentation, the female protagonist says that she believes these aliens created mankind. Which was followed by another scientist asking a perfectly valid question - "You got anything to back that up?" - which was followed by probably the stupidest line in the whole thing: "That's what I choose to believe."

That's right, a scientist jumps to a conclusion for zero fucking reason, then basically says "I believe because I believe", and, even more insultingly, that's where the bloody conversation ends. Everybody is fine with the explanation.

I wonder if this might be where a lot of people turned off of the movie. If a lot of people have such a visceral reaction to the fact that one of the characters is religious that it colors the whole movie. Certainly that seems to be the case with Emiscary, when he wrote the following:

First off, you're not addressing my point. This has to do with religion, too, but I pretty much went out of my way to avoid mentioning it, because that's a whole 'nother big can of worms.

I'm saying there's no reason for the character to have jumped to that conclusion. A conclusion, which, on top of being completely unfounded, is deeply unscientific. Need I remind you, this conclusion is being made by a scientist and the whole "Weyland also tagged along" thing is solely based on it. If you're going to go on about how I'm just having a visceral reaction to religion, we might as well stop the conversation right here.

Emiscary:

Casey Goddard:

It's all about Space Jesus...or something.

You have GOT to be fucking kidding me...

THAT is the big secret Mr. Scott came up with? The ALIEN franchise has to bend over and take it up the ass, AGAIN, because we needed another fucking morality play about a loudmouth from Jerusalem who's most noteworthy achievement was BEING EXECUTED?! GAH!

To which I have to say, "Get over it." Some people have beliefs. Some characters is movies have beliefs. Sometimes they don't do everything rationally. That's life.

Shaw and her partner Holloway are true believers. They've bought the ancient astronauts line hook, line, and sinker, and aren't prepared to be truly rigorous about it. If it weren't for the Weyland corporation having an ulterior motive for funding them, they would have been relegated to the fringe of their field. But you are wrong, everyone is clearly not fine with their explanation. The problem is the other scientists in the crew aren't in charge. Shaw and Holloway are. When you're thousands of miles from home under the authority of a true believer, you snicker to yourself and try to get the job done as fast as possible. No one thought they'd actually find life- in fact this is even explicitly commented on in the movie.

Incidentally Emiscary, the film is not a Jesus allegory. If anything, I see parallels with some Gnostic heresies.

No. People's beliefs inform their actions, and for as long as there are irrational beliefs, there will be problems. But that's another topic.

...And the reason for them buying that line is? Because "that's what they want to believe"? Where did they get the idea? The other scientists aren't in charge, but that doesn't mean they can't voice opinions. And they should, because that finishing line was nothing short of stupid.

Not in its entirety, but there is a clear reference to Jesus, as there is to quite a couple of other Christian motifs. The aliens all died around 2000 years ago.

-When they get to the alien structure thing, they find out that the air there doesn't have the volatile levels of CO2 that the rest of the planet has. The first instinct of these 'scientists'? Let's take off our helmets.

That's not the first instinct of "these scientists". That's the first instinct of Holloway, whom the film routinely characterizes as reckless. And again, a true believer. The other scientists only follow suit when he shows himself to be okay. Now it may be a bit of a stretch when for them to follow through so quickly, but A) I assume space suits, even in the future, are uncomfortable with a limited air supply so no one wants to wear them unnecessarily, and B) I did not pay $10 to watch people bicker for 30 minutes about wearing space suits. Even with the full glass domes I found it difficult to tell who was who while they were wearing their suits, so frankly I don't mind the helmets coming off. I paid to see a thriller. One cannot have a thriller if we have to wade through hours of scientific procedure just to get to the monsters going "a-bloogie-woogie-woo!"

I'm sorry. The first instinct of the other scientists is to follow the dumbass. Big difference. What the hell does being a true believer have to do with anything, unless you're saying that it informs his idiocy? Why are you trying to put that in a positive light?

I almost want to cut this off right here. Why the hell is the other option, quote, "bicker for 30 minutes about wearing space suits"? How about:
1) The guy takes off his helmet alone and everyone else keeps it on?
2) Shaw actually acts concerned for his life, and doesn't let him do it, instead of dropping the argument because of one condescending line about skepticism?
Or something to that extent? How about someone acts like a rational human being, in other words? There's no need for anything resembling your hyperbolic false dichotomy options.

It's not like there are millions of potential toxins or species of fungi, bacteria or viruses that we could inhale. Oh no no no. All that matters are the CO2 levels. And again, the only reasonable reaction is presented very mildly - "You don't know what else might be in the air!" - and that argument is dropped right then and fucking there, with a "Don't be such a sceptic" remark.

They might not have had the technology to scan for those other things. Someone was going to have to take their helmet off eventually.

Another thing you have to keep in mind, these characters were gradually losing their heads. This is to be expected when a human encounters a far more advanced alien. Shaw and Halloway had been telling these people they were looking for God, and then contrary to their expectations they almost immediately encounter a "miracle". Let me tell you- if I was a researcher moments away from confirming my theory through an encounter with my creator, I'd be careless too. We all would. It's hard to keep your thoughts straight when you're about to become one of the discoverers of the most important thing in history.

In which case none of them shouldn't have taken their bloody helms off, because they risked compromising the entire operation. And no, nobody was going to ever have to take off their helmet. I don't think you can even come up with a reason for it.

Not buying it. And even if I did, the taking off of helmets happened right at the beginning of the expedition. If they're "gradually" losing their heads, they shouldn't have been borderline insane by then.

-Regarding the two schmucks. Almost nothing about them getting lost made sense. There is simply no way they could have gotten lost given that:
A) They started leaving way earlier than the rest of the crew;
B) They all have radio communication;
C) Said radio communication hadn't yet begun being interfered with by the storm (which doesn't matter, they should still have been able to communicate with other people still inside by the time they got lost);
D) There is a 3D map on the bloody ship and they could've asked for directions.
Unless, of course, they were fucking idiots. Then they make one of the few logical decisions in the movie by going away from a life force picked up by a scanner, and follow it up - again - by a really, really stupid decision, by camping out in a creepy room with some sort of containers and black Venom goo flowing all over it. But that's not where it ends, oh no.

Panic. That's the only explanation you need. Even scientists panic sometimes.

Yeah, panic is what prevents you from using the fucking radio to get the hell out of there as soon as possible, checking up with what the others are up to or basically taking the wrong turn right off the bat and failing to tell anyone about it. "Panic" basically makes them - and everyone else - forget all the technology they have. Did you even think for a second whether your proposition logically follows? You might as well have said "Strokes. Even scientists get strokes sometimes. Two at a time!"

Then a huge worm with some weird vagina head approaches them. Their reaction? "It's so beautiful, let's get closer!".

You're mischaracterizing it- Milburn, the biologist, wanted to get closer. Fifield, the geologist, wanted nothing to do with it and was becoming increasingly panicked. As for the biologist, yes, he made a stupid choice. Once again, scientist on the verge of discovering something that would have made him one of the most important people in his field. If you were a biologist meeting an alien speicies for the first time, you'd probably be tempted to interact with it too.

I am, but only slightly. Fifield's panic was completely and utterly immaterial to the scene. He was just floating around in the background.

Not when it happens in a room that has a big scary metal face, a ton of urns of undetermined origin or purpose, black goo flowing all around, prophetic frescos littering the ceiling and when you have no radio signal, are not in any sort of a power suit, or have any other sort of security measures. Will my curiosity still be there? Sure, but assuming that the first alien you meet is straight-up friendly for no reason is stupid. It's dumb, childish, completely reckless and shows no regard for the mission or one's own safety. In other words, being a true believer. Am I right?

Second, the whole time the alien is warning the guy - hissing, opening its vagina face, snapping at him - and it's like the dude is completely fucking oblivious to the most basic sort of animal language.

A basic response to animal psychology is confidence. When a dog growls, you don't make jerky movements to back away. When a snake hisses, you don't startle. This is how you calm jittery animals.

Yeah, you're right. Getting closer with your hand directed at it was the smart decision there.

This is the second part where characters in the film jump straight to a conclusion without being pointed to it in any way. "It looks like his skin was changing", which was what the audience saw in the first two minutes.. All the scientists saw were some dark veins and bumps. How the hell do you come from that to "his skin was changing" without so much as considering things like cancer, fashion, or that species simply looking like that naturally?

You're knit-picking. We saw the skin change while the characters were examining it. They said nothing that wasn't blatantly obvious.

No, we didn't. All the characters saw were some irregularities on the skin. The head was 2000 years old, there was not - and shouldn't have been by simply applying a current - any sort of movement whatsoever.

It's exactly like ours! "But wait a minute", I hear you say - "Why is that stupid?" Well, it's simple. The aliens aren't quite like us, and if that were to be reflected anywhere, it's in their DNA.

"Exactly" may be an exagerration. Chimapnzees share what, 97% of human DNA? DNA doesn't say, "Hey, I'm going to make you 6 feet tall versus 10 feet tall." It merely encodes the chemicals that trigger hormones that will eventually make you 10 feet tall. It's entirely conceivable that this alien shares 99.95% of human DNA. You're essentially quibbling over a rounding error.

I'm pretty sure the thing said "complete match". That's either dumb, or directed at simpletons. Either way, it's wrong. Replace "Complete match" with "99.5%" match, and I'm fine.

I would like to call into question the whole idea of this human-only-panspermia without even taking into account all the evidence of evolution in the form of genetics and archaeological findings. And I'll do this in a single question, because this is already getting really ranty and TL;DR. How, exactly, is a creature being dissolved into genetic material (maybe not even that, because we see the actual DNA strands getting dissolved too, so who the fuck knows) going to create more creatures like it?

That's not a plot-hole, that's just Ridley Scott not leading you by the hand through the back story. I've got my theory about it, but it requires giving away lots. If someone wants to make a thread discussing the big ideas in Prometheus maybe I'll join in, but this is more a thread about whether or not it's worth watching. I'd like to think that the mere fact I was interested enough to come up with a theory is a sign that yes, it is worth watching.

Address the point I'm making, or don't quote it.

Snipped the conclusion because my head was about to explode.

Lupus80:
Can someone please, PLEASE explain why an advanced, futuristic robotic surgical-thing-a-magig was only programmed for male patients?

When I saw this in the movie I laughed out loud at the riduculousness of it. It was a contrivance only to enhance the feeling of deperation for the scene- and it was ultimately useless since she got the space-octopus out of her anyway.

I really tried to like this movie. I tried to look past the bland characters that demanded to be ignored, or the multiple nitpicky things (like the one above) you could point out, but ultimately it was just too much.

I really do suspect there is more to this movie (which is par for the course for Scott and his director cuts), but I don't see how the bland, and stupid, characterizations can be saved.

I'm pretty sure the machine said "This procedure is only available for male patients" when Shaw asked it for a cesarean (c-section). I guess the joke was supposed to be that in the future, males carry babies Junior style, while for some reason the operation has grown completely obsolete for women. It's just a dumb idea that served as a small joke/obstacle to create tension.

There is more to this movie. Somebody already linked to an article talking about the metaphors/religious references in the movie, but, for one, those have almost nothing to do with the deeply stupid nature of the characters and the "science" of the film, and, for another, some of those ideas are of kindergarten level writing. That is to say, there is some depth to find there, but it doesn't do much as far as the quality of the writing is concerned.

doubleohpsycho:
SPOILER WARNING

So I saw this today...found a metric crap ton of crap that didn't make sense. However, most people seem to have posted most of the holes, but this is a pretty big one for me and I haven't seen it posted yet...sooo:

SPOILERS:

Can someone explain to me why it was the biologist (the on with the arm incident) that the new-old-mini-snake-mouth-inserter-face-hugger went into, whilst the geologist who got a face full of plastic melting and melding to his face (which usually kills in past, well future, aliens movies) was the one that came back to this ship as some sort of zombie while the biologist that got impregnated just had the wormy thing inside of him just decide to sit in his esophagus and run away and then was forgotten about?

And the wormy thing didn't evolve or anything?

Sorry if it doesn't make sense, I'm trying to be clever at this late hour and failing miserably.

Well, the geologist fell face-first into the goo, which is probably the thing that mutated the simple worms you see laying around on the ground as the crew first steps into the chamber, so that could've been the thing that turned him into a rage monster.

I'm pretty sure it was the biologist they found dead in the chamber, while the geologist was off to prepare for his later killy shenanigans. No clue why the mouth-rape just killed the biologist instead of creating some sort of xenomorph or at least turning him, though.

Luca72:
I'm not even going to address the complaints about scientists acting stupidly, because there's no excuse for it. This is yet another movie where the scientific method doesn't even fucking exist, and the characters all have "Doctor" plastered in front of their names to make them seem more interesting.

However, the DNA stuff in the movie isn't much of a stretch. Through modern DNA testing we know that evolution is an absolute, and can trace evolution down to the smallest biological elements. That element being DNA.

The mystery is why, in a universe where physical law dictates that everything falls apart and reaches a state of LESS complexity, would chemicals suddenly self-organize and do it in a way that codes for them to be able to do it again. This is the mystery of life we're still trying to figure out.

I guess Ridley Scotts' idea is that an alien race uses it's own DNA and some biotech to seed a new planet with DNA. At it's most basic level, DNA isn't going to just self-organize into something like a human. It's going to go through it's whole multibillion year evolution, and it's going to come up with things like bacteria, fish, insects, etc. It's going to adapt to it's surroundings. Finally, it produces a sentient creature, genetically identical to it's "parent" race. Remember, when we see the earth at the beginning of the movie, it isn't just before humans. It seems to be devoid of ANY life. Our best theories as to how DNA formed and life began on earth are basically "Extreme conditions forced molecules to combine in unlikely ways" or "DNA/Bacteria from another planet seeded life on earth". So Scotts' ideas on the subject aren't even that far fetched.

Also, as a slight defense of the ludicrously dumb biologist in the movie: look up Percy Fawcett.

He was an archaeologist who was an inspiration for the character Indiana Jones. The last time anyone saw him, he was going deep into the Amazon, asking local tribes to help him find the "Lost City of Z". He knew there were warring cannibal tribes in this unexplored portion of the Amazon, as well as the most dangerous animals imaginable, but he still did it. Immediately after he set off, he disappeared. Sometimes scientists do stupid, irrational things, and get killed by something they don't even understand.

When I first started reading your post, I thought I was gonna get schooled. I pretty much know everything you just told me.

I have zero problems with the panspermia theory (or a variation of it, in this case), because it, from what I understand, is considered actually possible. All you need for that is a really resilient organism and some means for it to get from one habitable planet to the next, like an asteroid simply bashing it out, along with a lot of debris, from said planet. In sci-fi, we can eliminate the need for these incredibly far-fetched probabilities, like the debris from a specific planet hitting another planet while it has an incredibly rare super-resilient life form on board; and replace these with an alien with a spaceship and almost any sort of organism that can survive, in this case, Earth's environment.

There's a reason I talked about the aliens seeding humans specifically, and then took a relatively small timescale. For one, we're supposed to believe the aliens have the exact same DNA as humans (let's just say the DNA is very similar because the idea of identical DNA is fairly dumb), which is why these aliens simply seeding all life on earth (and other planets) is not even an option. The chance of something extremely like them (down to the vast majority of the DNA at least) evolving all over again from a single celled organism over hundreds of millions of years is ludicrously small. And they'd have to wait out those hundreds of millions of years, somehow without themselves being affected by evolution, and keep spending incredible amounts of resources checking up on this planet once in a while.

You say the end result would somehow be a genetically identical sentient race, but how the hell is that even remotely the main possibility? How do you control a mechanism of such massive proportions, which, ironically, is happening at such minuscule steps at a time? And which does not have any sort of goal? Evolution is not a bloody ladder. Unless, of course, magic. But magic is not what makes sci-fi good.

This whole thing tries way too hard to cram Christian theology into aliens. The "god" creating man in his own image, the birth by a woman who shouldn't give birth (replace "virgin" with "barren") which happens on Christmas, the "the aliens got wiped out 2000 years ago" thing (Guess what happened then), and so on.

On the scientist thing. The guy you describe certainly seems self-destructive in his obsession, but not necessarily as dumb as these two guys. Plus, he didn't actually get killed by something he didn't understand in the sense that you're talking about. It's one thing to go "I know the risk, but fuck it, let's do this", and a whole 'nother thing to go "I don't even know what the hell this is, but I'm going to pet it". One is brave/adventurous to an almost stupid level, and the other simply stupid. By the way, these guys live almost 200 years later than Percy. One would hope that in the next 80 years the education won't have gone back a hundred years. Never mind that these idiots also have a hundred times better tools than that guy had. I know you said slight defense, but still.

Hammeroj:

It's exactly like ours! "But wait a minute", I hear you say - "Why is that stupid?" Well, it's simple. The aliens aren't quite like us, and if that were to be reflected anywhere, it's in their DNA.

"Exactly" may be an exagerration. Chimapnzees share what, 97% of human DNA? DNA doesn't say, "Hey, I'm going to make you 6 feet tall versus 10 feet tall." It merely encodes the chemicals that trigger hormones that will eventually make you 10 feet tall. It's entirely conceivable that this alien shares 99.95% of human DNA. You're essentially quibbling over a rounding error.

I'm pretty sure the thing said "complete match". That's either dumb, or directed at simpletons. Either way, it's wrong. Replace "Complete match" with "99.5%" match, and I'm fine.

The funny thing is, they wouldn't have needed to involve genetics at all if they wanted to direct this at an audience that has a brain.

For a viewer without knowledge about general science, it doesn't really matter what you say, its technobabble either way. They could have as well said the "photonic quantum signature" is an exact match, that viewer doesn't give a shit.

However, if you are involving "hard science" that people actually know about, you have to get it right, or else you are treating your audience as idiots.

All they needed to do really was to instead of bringing up genetic testing and DNA, to bring up chirality.

Life on earth is based on left-handed amino-acids, nobody knows why, or what the chances are for this to happen in other environments.

Additionally, chirality is amazingly easy to demonstrate visually, because its a three dimensional configuration, so they could have some cool special effects that they can throw at the viewer.

Both sides would be satisfied, because the simpletons don't care what you say either way, but the people that care wouldn't get pissed off.

I would even wager that it would have a beneficial outcome, as its good science and science that not everyone knows about, mentioning it would have an educational effect.

The whole movie is just a collection of movie-clichés.
If Prometheus wanted to be something more than a creature-feature it would needed to try harder.

Right now its up there wit The Core as "dumb fun".

adamtm:

The whole movie is just a collection of movie-clichés.
If Prometheus wanted to be something more than a creature-feature it would needed to try harder.

Right now its up there wit The Core as "dumb fun".

If you're judging it as a creature-feature, it falls massively short in that department. Like I said before, here's the list of "monsters":

Bald oversized humans who don't get enough sun.
A facehugger without the facehugging.
A squid.
& a step down from the original flick's monster.

All the really impressive visuals typically involved huge barren environments or microscopic close ups, not monsters.

Hammeroj:
I'm pretty sure the machine said "This procedure is only available for male patients" when Shaw asked it for a cesarean (c-section). I guess the joke was supposed to be that in the future, males carry babies Junior style, while for some reason the operation has grown completely obsolete for women. It's just a dumb idea that served as a small joke/obstacle to create tension.

WoW, it's like you didn't even watch the scene at all. The machine can't perform a c-section, because it's only programmed for male patients. Not because males are the ones who carry children, which is completely retarded.

Think about why it would only be programmed for males if it was in vickers lifeboat. The answer is pretty obvious, it's not for her, it's for Weyland. Even she wasn't important enough for one, it's a pretty subtle way to further show the relationship between them.

animehermit:

Hammeroj:
I'm pretty sure the machine said "This procedure is only available for male patients" when Shaw asked it for a cesarean (c-section). I guess the joke was supposed to be that in the future, males carry babies Junior style, while for some reason the operation has grown completely obsolete for women. It's just a dumb idea that served as a small joke/obstacle to create tension.

WoW, it's like you didn't even watch the scene at all. The machine can't perform a c-section, because it's only programmed for male patients. Not because males are the ones who carry children, which is completely retarded.

Think about why it would only be programmed for males if it was in vickers lifeboat. The answer is pretty obvious, it's not for her, it's for Weyland. Even she wasn't important enough for one, it's a pretty subtle way to further show the relationship between them.

No, it's not like I didn't watch the scene at all. It's like I don't have the exact wording of the sentence written down in front of me and that's how I took it when I first heard it.

Furthermore, I didn't say males are "the ones" that carry children, I said that if that's the case, C-sections for women are obsolete in the film's future. They still have their vaginas.

Speaking of retarded, how right you are. It's anything but retarded to introduce a universal healing machine which the main protagonist actually knows of, of which there are 12, meaning, this isn't a unique piece of equipment, and not so much as foreshadow that they're all either programmed for men or women? Or how about this idea on its face? Why should it possibly be for "men only"? Okay, let's assume Weyland specifically rigged the thing not to serve women. What then? Why the fuck does it still perfectly execute an operation, without checking for a dingdong or nothing?

See, one of these options is a stupid throwaway line, basically a bad joke, and the other is simply dumb writing, like a whoooole lot of other things in this movie. Take your pick.

Hammeroj:
No, it's not like I didn't watch the scene at all. It's like I don't have the exact wording of the sentence written down in front of me and that's how I took it when I first heard it.

Furthermore, I didn't say males are "the ones" that carry children, I said that if that's the case, C-sections for women are obsolete in the film's future. They still have their vaginas.

And you think the film is dumb?
http://i.imgur.com/ZLGxF.jpg

Hammeroj:

Speaking of retarded, how right you are. It's anything but retarded to introduce a universal healing machine which the main protagonist actually knows of, of which there are 12, meaning, this isn't a unique piece of equipment, and not so much as foreshadow that they're all either programmed for men or women? Or how about this idea on its face? Why should it possibly be for "men only"? Okay, let's assume Weyland specifically rigged the thing not to serve women. What then? Why the fuck does it still perfectly execute an operation, without checking for a dingdong or nothing?

See, one of these options is a stupid throwaway line, basically a bad joke, and the other is simply dumb writing, like a whoooole lot of other things in this movie. Take your pick.

It's actually not as stupid as you think, a c-section is only performed on females, if weyland programmed the thing for his sole use, then he wouldn't need to configure it for females. Nothing prevented a woman from using it, it's just that it didn't have female specific surgeries. It was able to perfectly perform the operation because she manually set up the thing.

animehermit:

Hammeroj:
No, it's not like I didn't watch the scene at all. It's like I don't have the exact wording of the sentence written down in front of me and that's how I took it when I first heard it.

Furthermore, I didn't say males are "the ones" that carry children, I said that if that's the case, C-sections for women are obsolete in the film's future. They still have their vaginas.

And you think the film is dumb?
http://i.imgur.com/ZLGxF.jpg

How hard was it to miss two walls of text?

Hammeroj:

Speaking of retarded, how right you are. It's anything but retarded to introduce a universal healing machine which the main protagonist actually knows of, of which there are 12, meaning, this isn't a unique piece of equipment, and not so much as foreshadow that they're all either programmed for men or women? Or how about this idea on its face? Why should it possibly be for "men only"? Okay, let's assume Weyland specifically rigged the thing not to serve women. What then? Why the fuck does it still perfectly execute an operation, without checking for a dingdong or nothing?

See, one of these options is a stupid throwaway line, basically a bad joke, and the other is simply dumb writing, like a whoooole lot of other things in this movie. Take your pick.

Don't know why you separated this part of my post. You sure you weren't going to address what I was saying?

Hammeroj:
How hard was it to miss two walls of text?

Don't know why you separated this part of my post. You sure you weren't going to address what I was saying?

I hit the post button by mistake before I had addressed the rest of your comment.

animehermit:

Hammeroj:

Speaking of retarded, how right you are. It's anything but retarded to introduce a universal healing machine which the main protagonist actually knows of, of which there are 12, meaning, this isn't a unique piece of equipment, and not so much as foreshadow that they're all either programmed for men or women? Or how about this idea on its face? Why should it possibly be for "men only"? Okay, let's assume Weyland specifically rigged the thing not to serve women. What then? Why the fuck does it still perfectly execute an operation, without checking for a dingdong or nothing?

See, one of these options is a stupid throwaway line, basically a bad joke, and the other is simply dumb writing, like a whoooole lot of other things in this movie. Take your pick.

It's actually not as stupid as you think, a c-section is only performed on females, if weyland programmed the thing for his sole use, then he wouldn't need to configure it for females. Nothing prevented a woman from using it, it's just that it didn't have female specific surgeries. It was able to perfectly perform the operation because she manually set up the thing.

Except we're talking about a machine that isn't unique, and by no standards of manufacturing would it ever have been programmed by hand by anyone, except after the fact if they basically wanted to rig the thing. Unless, of course, they're manufactured to be gender-specific, which doesn't make a lick of sense, seeing that the universe its set in already has perfectly functional androids, which are superior to humans in every regard. We could not possibly be talking about an issue with hard drive space at this point.

In regards to the bolded line, you do realise that the whole idea of a universal bypass surgery machine renders this notion of "configuring" it completely absurd, right? If it's an automatic "tumors fuck off" machine, it's going to configure itself, you've no need to worry about that.

Hammeroj:

animehermit:

Hammeroj:
I'm pretty sure the machine said "This procedure is only available for male patients" when Shaw asked it for a cesarean (c-section). I guess the joke was supposed to be that in the future, males carry babies Junior style, while for some reason the operation has grown completely obsolete for women. It's just a dumb idea that served as a small joke/obstacle to create tension.

WoW, it's like you didn't even watch the scene at all. The machine can't perform a c-section, because it's only programmed for male patients. Not because males are the ones who carry children, which is completely retarded.

Think about why it would only be programmed for males if it was in vickers lifeboat. The answer is pretty obvious, it's not for her, it's for Weyland. Even she wasn't important enough for one, it's a pretty subtle way to further show the relationship between them.

No, it's not like I didn't watch the scene at all. It's like I don't have the exact wording of the sentence written down in front of me and that's how I took it when I first heard it.

Furthermore, I didn't say males are "the ones" that carry children, I said that if that's the case, C-sections for women are obsolete in the film's future. They still have their vaginas.

Speaking of retarded, how right you are. It's anything but retarded to introduce a universal healing machine which the main protagonist actually knows of, of which there are 12, meaning, this isn't a unique piece of equipment, and not so much as foreshadow that they're all either programmed for men or women? Or how about this idea on its face? Why should it possibly be for "men only"? Okay, let's assume Weyland specifically rigged the thing not to serve women. What then? Why the fuck does it still perfectly execute an operation, without checking for a dingdong or nothing?

See, one of these options is a stupid throwaway line, basically a bad joke, and the other is simply dumb writing, like a whoooole lot of other things in this movie. Take your pick.

You gotta admire though how he defends total BS with even more total BS and keeps a straight face while doing so. It's why fans are so amusing.

So let's buy the BS that there's ANY situation, where a medical engineering company says "Hey, we should invest in and build a machine that can perform surgery,in its essence a high-precision profession, but refuses to perform it on one gender."

We also accept then, that mentioned company doesn't immediately go bankrupt and indeed not only builds such a machine but designes it in such a way, that despite its restriction it can't tell man or woman apart and intentionally performs its duty like a hillbilly lumberjack, should the "wrong" gender - which he cannot identify - use its service.

Let us further accept the BS, that they take only ONE such machine on this huge ship to this expedition into deep space with a number of people. Which, may I remind you, cost billions of dollars and was started solely because a woman "chose to believe" that mankind was constructed by aliens. That means they spent BILLIONS of Dollars for a wild goose chase but refused to invest in another surgery-machine.

We then accept that they pick a male-only model, and only a male-only model, when the commanding whatsoever is a woman, who made a very clear point that she doesn't want to leave anything to chance as far as her safety is concerned. By extension we thereby accept that they imagined a scenario where Weyland is in need of major surgery but they cannot conceive a possibility where a woman could require the same or similar surgery.

And on top of that giant pile of BS we are now asked to accept, that they put this thing in VICKER's appartment, because she has a "certain kind of relationship" with Weyland.

Okay, I'll play. Construct me now a scenario, if you will, that will bring up the need to perform major surgery ONLY on Weyland and is MOST LIKELY to happen in Vickers', the "woman in charge", room AND IN NO OTHER ROOM on the ship, including Weyland's room, given how he clearly tried to keep his presence on the ship concealed AND the frigging sickbay.

I'm looking forward to that explanation with glee and anticipation.

I saw this yesterday, and I essentially agree with Bob's review. It's a watchable film, competently put together and well-acted, but it also has some significant problems, and might well have been stronger if they had omitted the "Alien Prequel" aspect altogether.

My biggest problems follow in spoiler.

There's some other stuff I'm a little more willing to hand-wave. Basically, when it's being science fiction, it's stronger- some elements like David keeping occupied through two years of the crew's suspended animation are particularly well handled. When it's being a thriller, people act in stupid thriller ways and stupid thriller cliches make their ugly faces apparent.

Hammeroj:

Except we're talking about a machine that isn't unique, and by no standards of manufacturing would it ever have been programmed by hand by anyone, except after the fact if they basically wanted to rig the thing. Unless, of course, they're manufactured to be gender-specific, which doesn't make a lick of sense, seeing that the universe its set in already has perfectly functional androids, which are superior to humans in every regard. We could not possibly be talking about an issue with hard drive space at this point.

In regards to the bolded line, you do realise that the whole idea of a universal bypass surgery machine renders this notion of "configuring" it completely absurd, right? If it's an automatic "tumors fuck off" machine, it's going to configure itself, you've no need to worry about that.

You make a lot of assumptions based on relative technological advancement, but the simple reason for it not being able to perform a c-section is that programming to perform one wasn't necessary for the intended occupant. You dismiss the need it to be programmed by saying "it wouldn't need to programmed". Why wouldn't it?

Again, let me ask, if Weyland only intended for himself to use the machine, why would he need female only surgeries?

Headbiter:

You gotta admire though how he defends total BS with even more total BS and keeps a straight face while doing so. It's why fans are so amusing.

It's not that hard a concept to grasp. You and Hammer seem to have a hard time understanding such a relatively small part of the film that it's a wonder you can even understand any of it.

Headbiter:

So let's buy the BS that there's ANY situation, where a medical engineering company says "Hey, we should invest in and build a machine that can perform surgery,in its essence a high-precision profession, but refuses to perform it on one gender."

But it did perform surgery on her. It wasn't programmed to only accept males.

Headbiter:

We also accept then, that mentioned company doesn't immediately go bankrupt and indeed not only builds such a machine but designes it in such a way, that despite its restriction it can't tell man or woman apart and intentionally performs its duty like a hillbilly lumberjack, should the "wrong" gender - which he cannot identify - use it's service.

There is no "wrong" gender, it simply wasn't programmed with the surgery she requested, simply because it was configured for Weyland's personal use.

Headbiter:

Let us further accept the BS, that they take only ONE such machine on this huge ship to this expedition into deep space with a number of people. Which, may I remind you, cost billions of dollars and was started solely because a woman "chose to believe" that mankind was constructed by aliens. That means they spent BILLIONS of Dollars for a wild goose chase but refused to invest in another surgery-machine.

It was implied in the beginning of the movie that this surgery machine cost a lot more than the entire expedition to the planet. That and there were only 12 or so made.

Headbiter:

We then accept that they pick a male-only model, and only a male-only model, when the commanding whatsoever is a woman, who made a very clear point that she doesn't want to leave anything to chance as far as her safety is concerned. By extension we thereby accept that they imagined a scenario where Weyland is in need of major surgery but they cannot conceive a possibility where a woman could require the same or similar surgery.

First, it's not a "male only" model, as it was able to perform surgery on a female

Second, it simply stated that it was configured for use by a male occupant, in this case Weyland. Who wouldn't need female only surgeries.

Third, Weyland didn't want anyone else using the machine.

Headbiter:

And on top of that giant pile of BS we are now asked to accept, that they put this thing in VICKER's appartment, because she has a "certain kind of relationship" with Weyland.

I get the feeling that the "lifeboat" wasn't intended for Vickers, but was for Weyland. Actually I'm pretty sure his sleep pod thing was on the lifeboat as well.

Headbiter:

Okay, I'll play. Construct me now a scenario, if you will, that will bring up the need to perform major surgery ONLY on Weyland and is MOST LIKELY to happen in Vickers', the "woman in charge", room AND IN NO OTHER ROOM on the ship, including Weyland's room, given how he clearly tried to keep his presence on the ship concealed AND the frigging sickbay.

I'm looking forward to that explanation with glee and anticipation.

And done, it's not that hard when you actually think about it.

animehermit:
You make a lot of assumptions based on relative technological advancement, but the simple reason for it not being able to perform a c-section is that programming to perform one wasn't necessary for the intended occupant. You dismiss the need it to be programmed by saying "it wouldn't need to programmed". Why wouldn't it?

Again, let me ask, if Weyland only intended for himself to use the machine, why would he need female only surgeries?

I make some assumptions, sure. Can you tell me how those assumptions are in any way unreasonable?

I didn't say it wouldn't need to be programmed. I said it wouldn't need to be programmed manually, except after the whole manufacturing process if you wanted to rig it one way or the other.

Oh, for the third fucking time. The machine isn't unique. It isn't built for Weyland specifically.

animehermit:
It's not that hard a concept to grasp. You and Hammer seem to have a hard time understanding such a relatively small part of the film that it's a wonder you can even understand any of it.

You are completely free to pick apart any of my criticisms of the film and point out things that flew over my head. Until then, you have no frickin' grounds to so much as imply any sort of intellectual superiority on your side. Especially since I just had to repeat two things, one of them for the third time.

Hammeroj:
I make some assumptions, sure. Can you tell me how those assumptions are in any way unreasonable?

Because they aren't accurate. They rely on technology advancing in a direction it isn't heading.

Hammeroj:

I didn't say it wouldn't need to be programmed. I said it wouldn't need to be programmed manually, except after the whole manufacturing process if you wanted to rig it one way or the other.

I don't see why it shouldn't need to be configured towards one particular gender, or occupant.

Hammeroj:

Oh, for the third fucking time. The machine isn't unique. It isn't built for Weyland specifically.

You actually don't know that it wasn't. And I didn't say that it was either, I said it was configured for his personal use, not that it was built for him.

animehermit:

Hammeroj:
I make some assumptions, sure. Can you tell me how those assumptions are in any way unreasonable?

Because they aren't accurate. They rely on technology advancing in a direction it isn't heading.

...What? Be more specific, please. Because all I said was:

and by no standards of manufacturing would it ever have been programmed by hand

In other words, I said that it doesn't come out of the factory as a paperweight, and then the buyer has to frickin' code the thing. That, or anything like that, defeats the entire purpose of a super advanced automatic surgery-machine. Because it's not the hardware that is advanced, it's the software. We pretty much already have the hardware of the precision that this surgery device is shown to be.

I don't see why it shouldn't need to be configured towards one particular gender, or occupant.

...And back to square one. Because it can have the data on how to perform a procedure on males, and females *drumroll* at the same time!

And by the way, you're missing the entire point of adaptive/predictive operation in synthetics. This sort of question is exactly the same as asking one of the guys who programs, for instance, robots that maneuver around rooms/obstacles: "Hey, do you need to map out the entire room for the thing and then configure it every time it's in a different room?" No, with a question like this, it's almost like you fail to realise or straight up don't know how any sort of interpretative being/machine works.

Do I have to repeat another thing, the fact that we're talking about a universe where there are already androids superior in every way to humans? The fucking robot could do shit like this without being a specialized, uber-rare piece of equipment, just by spending a while absorbing information on surgery.

Let me ask you this another way. Does a surgeon have to be "configured" before every operation?

But whatever. I want to hear exactly what you mean when you say that word. How exactly do you think the machine should be configured.

Hammeroj:

Oh, for the third fucking time. The machine isn't unique. It isn't built for Weyland specifically.

You actually don't know that it wasn't. And I didn't say that it was either, I said it was configured for his personal use, not that it was built for him.

Unless all 12 of these were built for Weyland, this wasn't specifically built for Weyland. So yes, I do know that. And you do too.

Emiscary:

adamtm:

The whole movie is just a collection of movie-clichés.
If Prometheus wanted to be something more than a creature-feature it would needed to try harder.

Right now its up there wit The Core as "dumb fun".

If you're judging it as a creature-feature, it falls massively short in that department. Like I said before, here's the list of "monsters":

Bald oversized humans who don't get enough sun.
A facehugger without the facehugging.
A squid.
& a step down from the original flick's monster.

All the really impressive visuals typically involved huge barren environments or microscopic close ups, not monsters.

I'm trying to give the movie the benefit of the doubt, the "best" aspect was the creature-feature aspect of them movie, but that doesn't mean it was good in that aspect.

What it definitely wasn't is a hard sci-fi movie, or a philosophical piece about man meeting his maker.
In essence theres only two ways of looking at Prometheus.

Its either a horrible attempt at sci-fi, or a mediocre creature-feature.

The best case scenario is still a failure.

---

I encourage everyone to go see an in-depth analysis of the first Alien movie by SFDebris:

http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/alien-review-part-1-6191679

Notice how in Alien, the characters are professionals, flawed, yes, but professionals at what they do.
They are professionals that are thrust into a horrible situation outside of their expertise and knowledge.
They are miners, they weren't trained for first contact, alien infections or other crap that happens.

Whereas in Prometheus the team is selected -specifically- for a job (alien contact and research) but act like teenagers on a roadtrip.
Thats where the dissonance comes from.

The -only- way this makes sense in Prometheus is if Wayland specifically selected the dumbest bunch of people for the job in the hope they would all get killed. OR if Wayland just got a "FUCK NO!" from every sensible human being on the planet that he asked to go on the mission and was forced to take those retards instead because he REALLY REALLY wanted to go.

In which case Prometheus is an unfunny dark comedy.

animehermit:

It's not that hard a concept to grasp.

It is, very much so. In your desperate attempt to make this lazy screenwriting make sense however, you ignore the most basic of questions.

But it did perform surgery on her. It wasn't programmed to only accept males.

First: That was anything, but no surgery. And on that matter, I haven't even touched yet how a woman who just got a shitload of painkillers in her system and had herself cut open like a turkey simply walks that experience off.

Second: Whatever it did there, it shouldn't have done it according to its OWN statement. Why would it even bring up the whole "only for men"-thing, if it performs the intervention anyway? Why, if it was "configured" for Weyland wouldn't it say so or at least show it on a display, instead of spouting that "only for men"-BS?

There is no "wrong" gender, it simply wasn't programmed with the surgery she requested, simply because it was configured for Weyland's personal use.

Like I said, basic, logical questions: WHY - THE - HELL would anyone create a fully automated machine for surgical interventions that ISN'T capable of doing them all? Especially when it comes to things like a cesarian: They're in deep space, a few men and women alone. What if, for whatever reason, they were out there for a longer time, one of the women got pregnant and there were complications with the birth? Suck it, you only downloaded the "old dying man"-application? It's mindbogglingly stupid.
And what does that even mean "configured for Weyland"? It's frigging surgery, so as long as the old guy doesn't hide his heart in his skull, there's not much to "configure".
Apart from that and just for protocol, you're still pulling that "It's for Weyland"-stuff right out of the darker places of your body.

It was implied in the beginning of the movie that this surgery machine cost a lot more than the entire expedition to the planet.

Which is just another one of those things you only accept if you don't think about it at all. How in the blazes does a surgical unit cost "a lot more" than a space ship, fuel for this space ship, a paid team of scientists and what the f*** else is on that ship to ensure the survival of the crew?

First, it's not a "male only" model, as it was able to perform surgery on a female

Second, it simply stated that it was configured for use by a male occupant, in this case Weyland. Who wouldn't need female only surgeries.

Third, Weyland didn't want anyone else using the machine.

See all the above + you're making stuff up again.

I get the feeling that the "lifeboat" wasn't intended for Vickers, but was for Weyland. Actually I'm pretty sure his sleep pod thing was on the lifeboat as well.

Then why would she lead them there? You want to tell me, he wanted to stay undetected on the ship and the first thing his...whatever Theron was does, is to lead the entire Southpark-cast right into his secret life boat and explicitly explain about that wondrous surgical unit he "doesn't want anyone else to use"?
Wow. Congratulations. In your version of the movie, the characters are even dumber than they originally were.

And done, it's not that hard when you actually think about it.

Sorry, all you've done is throw up even more confused ideas that make no sense and turn the characters in even bigger dunces. You just guess and ignore what was presented right there in the movie and still you can't make it sound reasonable.

Oh and what I absolutely love...

You and Hammer seem to have a hard time understanding such a relatively small part of the film that it's a wonder you can even understand any of it.

That phrase. "*whine* You just don't undershtand it." Of course we understand it. Who the hell wouldn't understand it? Sorry, but that movie isn't half as deep and philosophical as it likes to pretend to be. It's just that the more you think, actually THINK about what happens there the less sense it makes and the more contrived reasons and ideas you have to come up with to create any sense. Example: Your entire "Vickers' stuff actually belongs to Weyland"-theory. Giant made-up theory to stuff a idiotic plothole.
To paraphrase Spoony: The only reason there is a movie is that all the characters behave like frigging mouthbreathers.

And yeah, you're right that it's a small part of the film and yet it's so half-assed it makes the entire scene completely ridiculous. And it's by far not the only one at that. If we were to discuss every idiocy in every post, we'd have half an encyclopedia in no time.

Want to know the real reason for this whole surgery-mess? They wanted a shock-moment. One of those "Be disturbed"-moments for the audience. That's all. A surgery-machine that has to perform a cesarian on a concious woman, although it's supposedly only for men, so the surgery gets sloppy and "disturbing". Whole story.

Headbiter:
Want to know the real reason for this whole surgery-mess? They wanted a shock-moment. One of those "Be disturbed"-moments for the audience. That's all. A surgery-machine that has to perform a cesarian on a concious woman, although it's supposedly only for men, so the surgery gets sloppy and "disturbing". Whole story.

Not much of a disturbing surgery, if you count it as that. Hell, the whole surgery consisted of swabbing her stomach with iodine, lasering a hole, pulling out mess, and then stitching her up. Why wasn't there any blood when the opened a whole in her stomach? Why didn't machine do something with the "foreign object" after it removed it, but instead left it dangling above her? Also, it kind of looked like horizontal Caesarean anyways.

As for the helmets thing, that seemed to only be used as an example of the guy's reckless behavior. But if that was the case, why did we need to show him to be reckless? He didn't do anything else in the movie that I can remember. Also, the movie is set in the future. They could have just had a throwaway line from someone else saying that the atmosphere scanner detected no biological particles in the air? That way everyone else wouldn't look like an idiot.

Headbiter:

Want to know the real reason for this whole surgery-mess? They wanted a shock-moment. One of those "Be disturbed"-moments for the audience. That's all. A surgery-machine that has to perform a cesarian on a concious woman, although it's supposedly only for men, so the surgery gets sloppy and "disturbing". Whole story.

Actually the first thing I thought about when I saw it was a hamfisted abortion statement.
But that might just be me.

Saw the movie, it was horrendous, the characters were the dumbest pieces of shit I have ever seen in a movie, from the guys who were terrified of the aliens suddenly wanting to touch the obvious death worm, to the surgery machine that for some reason only worked on men despite being owned by a woman for her own personal use, just awful

I have a tangential question, who is Team Hollywood? Does this mean that we'll be getting reviews from people besides Moviebob in the future?

I enjoyed the movie for the most part. Great visuals, pretty good soundtrack, great cast. I think where the film drops the ball is in the dialog and some of the scenes.

Toilet:
[snip]... and that one line that one throwaway line that was so overly dramatic and had no impact on the story or characters.

I am hoping the movie had to go through massive cuts for the theatrical release, hopefully we will get a directors cut that will have and explain more.[...]

Also this^ part felt horribly out of place. Maybe she enjoyed all that over-the-top acting from snow white?

Another part that bothered me was after

maybe I missed something?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here