|
Yaws posted:I didn't feel any of the characters in Prometheus acted in a way that made the audience not care about them. They're human. Humans are fallible. Humans act irrationally. Especially when they're thrown in extreme circumstances like in Prometheus.  Your tolerance for dumb stuff must be higher than mine if you think the Prometheus characters acted realistically. If you think I've just been repeating the same thing over and over, you haven't been paying attention.
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
Xenomrph posted:The problem isn't that the characters did dumb poo poo, it's that the movie executed it so poorly that it undermined an otherwise interesting theme ("the hubris of man"). We agree that its an interesting theme, so lets discuss the execution of it. The kind of mistakes that the crew make in Alien are not about hubris. Breaking protocol by allowing an injured team member back onto the ship isn't hubris, its being a human. Kane staring at the egg too long and getting face-hugged isn't hubris, its a dude who doesn't really want to be there being overcome by a moment of natural human curiosity. If the scientists in Prometheus did everything by the book, and then maybe slipped up and made one mistake, that's not furthering the theme of hubris. Its exactly that "gently caress it, lets discover some poo poo!" attitude that hammers home the point about the hubris of man and its results.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Your tolerance for dumb stuff must be higher than mine 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Lasher posted:It's all down the the awful script. We could have had the relevant plot beats WITH the characters acting in a manner that wasn't frustratingly idiotic but the whole thing feels very mish-mashed and cobbled together. Prometheus could have examined that theme on a grander scale, and in my opinion it flubbed it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:00
|
|
|
Yaws posted:Well I've been reading your posts, so yeah Ah yes, resorting to insults. Now who's childish? Edit-- Basebff, I saw your post and I have some thoughts on it, but I'm posting from the Awful app so I'll post them when I get home. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:If the scientists in Prometheus did everything by the book, and then maybe slipped up and made one mistake, that's not furthering the theme of hubris. Its exactly that "gently caress it, lets discover some poo poo!" attitude that hammers home the point about the hubris of man and its results. If the characters in most movies acted in a %100 rational and believable way movies would be far shorter and more boring. Christ, the people in Alien and Aliens also acted like idiots. Who cares.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:I firmly believe that half of the deleted scenes in the movie would've fixed a lot of character inconsistencies. Or at least most of them. So, Q: Why did he touch the snake? A: Because he wanted to touch the snake. Q: Why doesn't anyone care about the uterus monster? A: Because they don't care. You don't need the expository dialogue to figure this out because the film shows you everything. It shows that the guy is attracted to the snake, and it shows everyone not-caring about the monster. The questions have nothing to do with 'character inconsistencies' and everything to do with backseat driving. They're not even real questions; they are actually hard declarations. "He should not want to touch the snake." "They should care about the monster." But, of course, they don't do what they should - for the same reason people do drugs and have sex out of wedlock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
I am still waiting for someone to describe the objectively perfect middle ground between the scientists acting like they did in the existing film, and a perfectly realistic depiction of scientists cataloging a brand new once-inhabited planet (running time: 30-75 years). People that dislike the film tend to say "well yeah it can't be perfectly realistic but it shouldn't've been like that!" So how do you tell that story (or something close, with no irrational scientists) perfectly? Surely it's not an unfilmable premise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Why cookie Rocket posted:I am still waiting for someone to describe the objectively perfect middle ground between the scientists acting like they did in the existing film, and a perfectly realistic depiction of scientists cataloging a brand new once-inhabited planet (running time: 30-75 years). People that dislike the film tend to say "well yeah it can't be perfectly realistic but it shouldn't've been like that!" I'll give you a hint: "irrational" is just code for "something I didn't like". It doesn't have any relation to actual realism.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
If anything, xenomrph not getting Prometheus just proves it's the superior alien movie. "Bbbbbbut my alien fanfic (that I paid some livejournal vorefic writer to write for me)!" -every xenomrph post
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I'll give you a hint: "irrational" is just code for "something I didn't like". It doesn't have any relation to actual realism. I dunno man I love Prometheus (saw it three times in the theater; bought a blu-ray player for it) but the characters definitely act in a....heightened manner. I can roll with it because I understand we're just watching a big metaphor and the characters are tropes, but it's definitely not naturalistic. That's what I want, for a critic to specifically explain how Prometheus could be fixed by making the characters more grounded and without throwing out the basic story outline and core message.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
It should've ended with Charlize Theron smugly taking a huge step to the side yet still getting crushed by the MASSIVE loving NO WAY TO EVEN POSSIBLY RUN AWAY FROM OUTER SPACE SHIP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
Why cookie Rocket posted:I dunno man I love Prometheus (saw it three times in the theater; bought a blu-ray player for it) but the characters definitely act in a....heightened manner. I can roll with it because I understand we're just watching a big metaphor and the characters are tropes, but it's definitely not naturalistic. Prometheus is fairly grounded. It's just that everything is shown from David's point of view. He's scanned all the characters' dreams and knows everything about them, so of course they seem like automatons to him. So this guy claims that he's a biologist and that he wants to find new species for the good of mankind or whatever - but, really, he's motivated by this fantasy of being ravaged by a wild-man. That's why he touches the snake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:If the characters in most movies acted in a %100 rational and believable way movies would be far shorter and more boring. Christ, the people in Alien and Aliens also acted like idiots. Who cares. ruddiger posted:If anything, xenomrph not getting Prometheus just proves it's the superior alien movie. And I "got" Prometheus just fine. Why cookie Rocket posted:I dunno man I love Prometheus (saw it three times in the theater; bought a blu-ray player for it) but the characters definitely act in a....heightened manner. I can roll with it because I understand we're just watching a big metaphor and the characters are tropes, but it's definitely not naturalistic. - Edit down the amount of time Milburn spends prodding the snake before it strikes, or edit down its hostile body-language to something somewhat more neutral. For a good example, there's always Kane and the Alien egg. Alternately, have Milburn not see the snake become hostile, perhaps he looks away to talk to Fifeld and that's when it gets aggressive and strikes. - Have someone at least speak up when someone pops their helmet on an alien planet, even if the helmet has already been popped and it's too late to do anything about it now. For an example, check the scene from Galaxy Quest. - Not have the guy who literally mapped the cave with his cool flying toys be the guy who gets lost and forgets that he mapped the cave. Have the characters get lost, but have it be literally any other character who did the mapping, or make it so the map is inaccessible to them, or doesn't work, or is incomplete. Any of those things still maintain the narrative beats, still maintain the characters' failures, even preserve the characters acting irrationally, without doing it in what I feel is a ham-fisted way. Basebf555 posted:We agree that its an interesting theme, so lets discuss the execution of it. I disagree that the characters in 'Alien' aren't exhibiting hubris, they're just doing it in a different way. The people in Prometheus are on the cutting edge of discovery, while the people in Alien are just doing blue-collar jobs. With Prometheus, the idea is "we can tame the unknown", and that's an arrogant stance to take. With Alien, the idea is "we have tamed the unknown", and as far as the characters are concerned, they have - everything is documented, there's procedures for everything, they just go out and punch a clock and it's all commonplace even though they're literally working in space and visiting other worlds, something that would be mind-blowing to us. The arrogance is in the notion that they've tamed the unknown and that they've seen it all, and that there are no dangers lurking in the dark, and that The Book has a procedure for everything. I agree that the characters wanting to bring Kane back onboard isn't hubris, but what makes the scene "work" is that Ripley at least acknowledges that there are risks involved, even if it makes her look like an insensitive bitch. The narrative is at least acknowledging the danger. I do disagree on Kane, I feel that Kane poking his head into the egg is a fair degree of hubris. Like yeah he's overwhelmed with curiosity, but even he is hesitant and careful when he's exploring the egg chamber, and even reacts with apprehension when the egg merely opens. But he thinks it's safe, even when he really doesn't have any reason to believe it's safe. But the reason Kane's scene works while Milburn's scene doesn't is that Kane's scene happens so quickly. The egg opens, which is fairly ambiguous from a threat standpoint, and Kane puts his face in and gets zapped seconds later. Milburn's scene is drawn out, with Milburn seemingly oblivious to obvious visual cues from the space snake. Like I mentioned earlier, if the thing had acted more neutrally, and/or the attack had been quicker, it wouldn't have stood out as much. I really feel it comes down to the scene's editing less so than the content. The scientists in Prometheus didn't need to do everything by the book (because as you mentioned earlier, there is no book yet). But I feel it's possible to express the awe and wonder of discovery and exploration without having the characters be reckless. poo poo, 'Alien' did it. Kane is the embodiment of it, from the moment they detect the Derelict's signal until the moment he gets facehugged. Even when they're marching towards the Derelict, he's saying "We have to go on, we must go on!" Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Sep 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:The scientists in Prometheus didn't need to do everything by the book (because as you mentioned earlier, there is no book yet). No billion dollar project would ever not create plans and procedures in place for when stuff happens. People do not just wing it in those situations well except really lovely movies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:No billion dollar project would ever not create plans and procedures in place for when stuff happens. People do not just wing it in those situations well except really lovely movies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
All these characters secretly fantasize about their deaths, and their 'professional' behaviors (with the sophisticated equipment they use) are a way of domesticating those fantasies - of keeping them at a distance. That's to say that the map guy gets lost because he desires it. And, in fact, he only created the mapping technology in the first place because he was trying to avoid realizing his desires. Xenomrph is obliviously ruining characterization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:I disagree that the characters in 'Alien' aren't exhibiting hubris, they're just doing it in a different way. The people in Prometheus are on the cutting edge of discovery, while the people in Alien are just doing blue-collar jobs. With Prometheus, the idea is "we can tame the unknown", and that's an arrogant stance to take. With Alien, the idea is "we have tamed the unknown", and as far as the characters are concerned, they have - everything is documented, there's procedures for everything, they just go out and punch a clock and it's all commonplace even though they're literally working in space and visiting other worlds, something that would be mind-blowing to us. The arrogance is in the notion that they've tamed the unknown and that they've seen it all, and that there are no dangers lurking in the dark, and that The Book has a procedure for everything. The characters in Alien aren't arrogant when it comes to acknowledging the dangers of space exploration. That's why the policies are in place, why they're so hesitant to investigate the signal, and why Ripley is so adamant about the quarantine rules. The company knows they can't just say "oh hey, on your way back shoot on down to this random planet and check out a mysterious signal." It has to be made clear to the crew that they will forfeit their shares if they refuse to go. I think what you're saying here is more relevant to Aliens. Xenomrph posted:The scientists in Prometheus didn't need to do everything by the book (because as you mentioned earlier, there is no book yet). But I feel it's possible to express the awe and wonder of discovery and exploration without having the characters be reckless. The recklessness of the characters is exactly the point of those scenes, not the awe and wonder of discovery. You want the scenes to be about something different than what Ridley Scott wanted. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Sep 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:32
|
|
Tenzarin posted:No billion dollar project would ever not create plans and procedures in place for when stuff happens. People do not just wing it in those situations well except really lovely movies. Can I introduce you to the occupation of Iraq?
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Why cookie Rocket posted:I dunno man I love Prometheus (saw it three times in the theater; bought a blu-ray player for it) but the characters definitely act in a....heightened manner. I can roll with it because I understand we're just watching a big metaphor and the characters are tropes, but it's definitely not naturalistic. My point is that it's not disliked because of the lack of "realism". People love movies that aren't realistic in any way and find very realistic movies extremely discomforting. People also find actual real scenarios impossible to believe (hence the phrase "Truth is Stranger than Fiction"). The question then becomes "Why use the term 'realistic'?" but that's a bit of a separate tangent.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
computer parts posted:My point is that it's not disliked because of the lack of "realism". People love movies that aren't realistic in any way and find very realistic movies extremely discomforting. People also find actual real scenarios impossible to believe (hence the phrase "Truth is Stranger than Fiction"). Well I'd be glad to open up my question a little wider and ask "how would you fix Prometheus without fundamentally changing it", because I find suggestions along those lines really interesting. Xeno's suggestions, for instance, we're so minor that I'm surprised those flaws ruined the movie for him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The recklessness of the characters is exactly the point of those scenes, not the awe and wonder of discovery. You want the scenes to be about something different than what Ridley Scott wanted. Now you're saying it's about their recklessness, and I'd still say there's better ways to show that (and I listed a bunch). But beyond that, there's a pretty wide gap between being arrogant, and being reckless. You can show arrogance without being reckless. Why cookie Rocket posted:Xeno's suggestions, for instance, we're so minor that I'm surprised those flaws ruined the movie for him. If anything, the part that drags the movie down even more are the ties with Alien. I don't feel Prometheus benefits from it, and I'd have loved to have seen what they could have come up with if the filmmakers were really let off the leash. I was excited that Prometheus 2 was going to distance itself even further from Alien, but apparently now they've done a complete 180 and are going to make it even closer to Alien.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 04:19
|
|
|
I don't think they're flaws. I don't think a character being all bark and no bite or being blinded by arrogance doesn't mean the film's creators screwed up and mistakenly made the characters dumbasses. Both characters are grating but I don't think changing either of those things would change what I think of them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
Ending Prometheus with Noomi Rapace and David flying away on the mission to find the homeworld, only to then cut back to show an almost-but-not-quite Alien get born in the most hamfistedly over-dramatic way ever, is one of the biggest wet fart endings ever. I don't understand why a director like Scott would cut the legs out of his own ending like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
If he was going to use a not-Alien, I wish he'd used one of the other ideas that had concept art done up: the Deacon is this graceful albino creature with no mouth, and after birthing from the Engineer, it goes outside the shuttle and stares at the sunrise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Chairman Capone posted:Ending Prometheus with Noomi Rapace and David flying away on the mission to find the homeworld, only to then cut back to show an almost-but-not-quite Alien get born in the most hamfistedly over-dramatic way ever, is one of the biggest wet fart endings ever. I don't understand why a director like Scott would cut the legs out of his own ending like that. Everything about that scene was tits. gently caress off.  And the Deacon looked great. It was a nice surprise to see it look different from the xenomorph, you know, the thing we've seen in 4 Alien films and 2 AVP films already?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
I agree pretty much with Xeno. I did enjoy Prometheus, it was a pure scifi flick and those are pretty rare these days. It's gorgeous and the environments and sets are great. Just some weird script choices, some of which just came down to direction or cutting something that shouldn't have been. I almost agree that I would've preferred it not be related to Alien at all. For two reasons: 1. Alien was awesome because it was a pure "what the gently caress is that?" movie. We (and the characters) didn't know what was in that ship, and we didn't know what got taken out of it. We went along for the ride with the characters. This was a big reason why Alien worked. James Cameron wisely knew that the mystery can only come out of the bottle once, so he decided to make an action and character-based movie instead. Good. When Scott announced he was revisiting that universe, I thought there was really only one way he could do it again- give us the unknown. He had to show us horrors that we could not comprehend. The "Alien" is played out and we know it too much to be scared by it- if it does indeed come from a mutating lifeform that adapts, why not show us how that came about? And you know what, to his credit, that's the path he took. With his waffling on how whether or not to tie it into Alien at all I thought he felt the same way. The black goo is a nice mystery and it can do things that we just can't predict. It doesn't NEED to tie back into Alien at all, because that brings us to... 2. The Space Jockey. The great unsung mystery of Alien- what the gently caress IS that thing? Your imagination ran wild. But now it's nothing but a suit for a humanoid. How droll. In my opinion he never should have touched or referenced that ship or it's pilot again. Even if he kept the story the exact same the Engineers should have not been the thing in the derelict ship. It ruins mystery. It ruins imagination. In a story where the main horror can adapt and mutate, there was no need to visit that well again. I would have infinitely preferred it if the space jockey was a mutated engineer.. just not a humanoid in a suit. A big waste. I'm not even dissing the Engineers, the concept is fine, the execution is fine, I like the ceremony, I like the sacrifice-to-seed scene. Just don't make them the space jockeys. (I do also like the few mysteries we still have- what was that weird temple room for? What was the green crystal? Do they worship the Alien, or was it a lab?) I won't touch the "characters being stupid" argument. Just situations like the whole medpod scene are played out so strangely. First, every time I watch that scene I can't help but think how she would not be able to get up and walk around after. I'm not talking about pain, I'm talking about physical impossibility. You get a foot long incision deep enough to pull a baby out, you ain't walking nowhere two minutes after. And if I was her, how could you not burst into that door and scream OH MY GOD I JUST HAD A loving MUTANT SQUID PULLED OUT OF MY ABDOMEN! GO LOOK AT IT, WHAT THE gently caress JUST HAPPENED? The scene just carries on like nothing happened, like oh hey! Here's the old guy with bad makeup. Or the captain suddenly knowing everything about what's going on, even though he has yet to act interested about anything and hasn't set foot outside the ship (this is redeemed a bit by a deleted scene but still, the theatrical cut is baffling). I can forgive mad scientist guy taking his helmet off, and then even his girl, but the whole team? Not one of them thought it would be a bad idea? Maps, stilted dialogue, blah blah. (And really, a rubik's cube as a prop?) Part of the issue is that these things were not an issue in Alien. Characters acted and sounded like real people. The breaking of quarantine was a major issue there. People reacted accordingly. We know Ridley can do better!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
If it makes you feel any better about the Space Jockey/Engineer thing, I'm a big fan of the interpretation that they're not the same thing. It adds another layer to the "creators/creations" theme (and Shaw even hints at it in-dialogue), and preserves the mystery of the Space Jockey to boot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
I've gotten lost or turned around in buildings I helped design and in building I'm installing directional maps in. It can happen to navigational pros like me it can happen to idiot flunkies on space weed in a weird alien temple
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
If you can find the Prometheus Weyland Investors fan edit, it helps somewhat. Everyone's still a bunch of idiots, but their behavior is a little more understandable. Also, the zombie dude attack scene is better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 08:34
|
|
|
Sir Nose posted:Also, the zombie dude attack scene is better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJOv6a_uzNo
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
SirDrone posted:I still don't know why they even bothered with two versions of the same scene, still this design seems better then bigfoot zambie man.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Still flabbergasted by that decision. It was 'eh' in the theater but learning they filmed and made the scene with the alternate design is 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Wait what? You were the one saying the characters were acting out of the excitement of exploration, I was just saying there are better ways to show that. Both things are true. They are being reckless because of their excitement. I'm not really interested in anyone's alternative ideas for what they would have done with those scenes. I don't feel like that line of discussion is ever really productive, this is the movie we have and its not changing. I think its basically perfect, you think it has flaws, I'm fine with just debating that without getting into "the snake should have acted less aggressively" and "this character should have said this to that character".
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Fair enough, I like looking at scenes and considering how they could have been done differently in order to be more effective, and deconstruct it to see what "works" and what doesn't, and why. I find that sort of stuff interesting, but to each their own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:It should've ended with Charlize Theron smugly taking a huge step to the side yet still getting crushed by the MASSIVE loving NO WAY TO EVEN POSSIBLY RUN AWAY FROM OUTER SPACE SHIP. People complaining about this was the dumbest thing ever because you literally see Noomi Rapace run to the side and get crushed anyway because the ship is massive, surviving only through dumb luck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 15:39
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Fair enough, I like looking at scenes and considering how they could have been done differently in order to be more effective, and deconstruct it to see what "works" and what doesn't, and why. I find that sort of stuff interesting, but to each their own. Then you have failed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Actually, it isn't. You are not engaged in deconstruction. Yeah, well that's just, like, your opinion, man. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Sep 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Yeah, well that's just, like, your opinion, man. Actually, it isn't. You are not engaged in deconstruction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 18:19 |
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Actually, it isn't. You are not engaged in deconstruction. If you don't think honest to god real life filmmakers don't look at movies that way (their own or otherwise), then you're awfully naive. Recognizing what makes a scene effective is important, and so is recognizing what a scene lacks. It's kind of a cornerstone of critical thinking about movies, and recognizing what makes a movie "good" or "effective". Here's a super cool youtube channel about it, for those interested in that sort of stuff. A google search like "what makes a good movie scene" brings up a couple thousand results, too. And yes it is deconstruction, even if it's not the kind you like. In short: Xenomrph posted:Yeah, well that's just, like, your opinion, man. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 16:34 on Sep 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 16:30
|
|