|
boom boom boom posted:Just because a movie doesn't answer your questions doesn't automatically make it good. A movie can not answer questions in satisfying or unsatisfying ways I'm not really interested in whether or not other people think Prometheus is good. I think its good, that's enough for me. I was responding to the specific comment that was made about how the movie doesn't make sense and its impossible to reconcile it with Alien. That's simply not true if you have even an ounce of imagination, which is something Prometheus optimistically assumes you have.
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
The black goo could of been Jesus.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:The black goo could of been Jesus. Jesus is actually in the movie. He's depicted as a crucified Alien similar to the brown slimey turd monster birthed from the unholy union between a walking marble statue and a Lovecraftian tentacle rape monster.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. So it is true, Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat is the one true god!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. But the most common depictions of them and their popular conception are different from their actual historical reality. It's not that the Greeks saw the Engineers and made white statues; it's that the filmmakers wanted to make the Prometheus - Greek God - Marble statue connection in their audience's mind.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. The "clown like" part is a misunderstanding. They only found traces of the base paints, which, as every warhammer 40k player can tell you, are much brighter than the whole thing ends up once you'e applied washes and highlights.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:The "clown like" part is a misunderstanding. They only found traces of the base paints, which, as every warhammer 40k player can tell you, are much brighter than the whole thing ends up once you'e applied washes and highlights. How many points is Zeus worth? 
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:39
|
|
Hunterhr posted:How many points is Zeus worth? Cost you a hundred drachmas to find out when they release the new myths
|
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Clipperton posted:Cost you a hundred drachmas to find out when they release the new myths So thats why greece was always fighting!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. Actually their design was based on handsome Squidward.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:If the movie requires you to watch clips on a website to understand the plot and why they hired a young guy to be weyland with the "best" old people makeup, its a bad movie. That's not why they did the old make up at all. There was a few scenes where David was supposed to visit Weyland in his dreams which took place on an expensive space boat. He would be in his ideal younger self, of course. But it was too expensive. By the time they nixed the scene entirely, they already cast and made the make up for Guy Pierce.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:Red letter media covers a lot of the plot issues in their Prometheus spoiler thing, you should check it out. Also, this is basically a joke video. Jay himself confirmed it on their forum.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. This seemed like a reasonable move to me honestly because of how far beyond the domain of any one mythology or religion the movie places humanity and its creation. Prometheus' intro is literally a reenactment Norse creation mythology. Ymir the frost giant/first living thing ever bleeding poison into a river giving painful birth to life on our world. That the Engineers simultaneously work as parallels for both Norse and Greco-Roman mythology* is impressive to me. I don't mean this like "they look like statues" but from one of the old interpretations of the titans being that they were white faced from covering their faces in ash before going to do stuff. The word titan itself just having its origins of "a dude of huge stature/credibility" makes me think they were going more for that, the idea that they're meant to look like statues didn't even occur to me when I watched the movie for the reasons you say.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. I remember thinking this too. My dumb as bricks friend was astounded at how deep it was, so it had the desired effect on them. - Efb. GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 00:23 on May 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:My main issue with humans and engineers looking identical is... how did they do it? There's a pretty drat good fossil and genetic chain showing how humans and our various ancestor species evolved. If the engineers created humans they also must have created every other human ancestor, guiding them every step of the way. They were guiding humanity; that's why you have the stone tablets that depicting the gods' message to humanity. The Engineers are Zeus, Ganesh and whatever. The basic premise of the film is 'what if the pagan gods of antiquity actually existed, and a bunch of religious people from 2013 actually met them.' Scott is not making a documentary proving the existence of ancient aliens, but presenting the pseudoscientific 'ancient aliens' concept with a straight-faced seriousness in order to satirize it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:They were guiding humanity; that's why you have the stone tablets that depicting the gods' message to humanity. The Engineers are Zeus, Ganesh and whatever. That's not what the person you were replying to said. The implication from what he mentioned is that the Engineers have been loving around in the gene pool since before homo sapiens was a thing, and that they also created homo erectus, Neanderthals, australopithecus, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:That's not what the person you were replying to said. The implication from what he mentioned is that the Engineers have been loving around in the gene pool since before homo sapiens was a thing, and that they also created homo erectus, Neanderthals, australopithecus, etc. Right, and that's all implicit in the film. The opening scene is presented as a fantasy sequence (i.e., it cuts to a close-up of Shaw doing research) - and, if interpreted literally, does not take place on Earth. It, rather, shows the Engineers sacrificing someone to their god.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:They were guiding humanity; that's why you have the stone tablets that depicting the gods' message to humanity. The Engineers are Zeus, Ganesh and whatever. Why did they leave maps to their bases with weapons of mass destruction.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:They were guiding humanity; that's why you have the stone tablets that depicting the gods' message to humanity. The Engineers are Zeus, Ganesh and whatever. Classic trek did it better
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:Why did they leave maps to their bases with weapons of mass destruction. Spite.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
Hubris
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:Why did they leave maps to their bases with weapons of mass destruction. See, here you've already lost the point. Prometheus' story centres around the interpretation of an artwork (or a series of artworks), and the interpretation that the artwork is an invitation ('a map to something') is declared false by the protagonist. Now, we can all tell you what the artwork is a hubristic display of naked power, but that's unsatisfying. Only you can take on the burden of interpretation. No-one can believe for you. Are you familiar with the myth of the Tower of Babel? How do you interpret this myth? Does God want you to unite all the languages and come visit him? SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 14:36 on May 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
The iconography of the Xenomorph in the storage room is very religious in nature, while also being a biohazard sign. It's quite possible that the Engineers were playing with something they understood poorly. Possibly something they did not create. Ridley Scott made an off handed remark about Jesus once. It is nowhere in the film Prometheus. Tenzarin posted:The definition of insanity is trying to pretend the alien universe makes sense. Tenzarin posted:The definition of insanity is trying to pretend the universe makes sense. Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 21:35 on May 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Please don't tell me the engineers were supposed to look like classical statues of gods because on classical times they were painted and extremely colourful bordering on clown like. The original painted versions aren't what influenced thousands of years of Western culture. Like, do you think that Michelangelo's David is "wrong" once you know that the style he was reinventing was originally colorful and painted? Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 21:42 on May 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
SirDrone posted:What happens if a facehugger face hugs a fellow alien? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOk5bYrL6Tg
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
I've seen Alien/s plenty of times and Alien is in my top five films ever but I never watched beyond those two films. I'm rewatching them at the moment so should I make this cut my first Alien 3 experience?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
EmmyOk posted:I've seen Alien/s plenty of times and Alien is in my top five films ever but I never watched beyond those two films. I'm rewatching them at the moment so should I make this cut my first Alien 3 experience? Yes, but the theatrical cut is worth watching just to see what got removed/changed, because it's pretty substantial. Whole subplots get changed, the beginning and ending, even the creature the Alien pops out of gets changed.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
EmmyOk posted:I've seen Alien/s plenty of times and Alien is in my top five films ever but I never watched beyond those two films. I'm rewatching them at the moment so should I make this cut my first Alien 3 experience? It's not worth watching the theatrical cut honestly, but DEFINITELY after you see the work print check out a comparison online. There are some interesting alternate shots that were used and the way they worked around completely removing a major plot point of the movie is "interesting" (basically in the theatrical version several characters mysteriously don't show up anymore out of nowhere and no one notices or cares). There is one shot not in the work print, it's a cool miniature shot of a ship being moved by crane with some characters standing on it as it's being lifted up. Amazing shot in concept but I can understand why it was left out, it's pretty unconvincing and they were wise to spend their resources restoring the parts of the film that they did.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:Yeah the tech level complaint never bothered me that much. Like, I understood where people were coming from, but it wasn't something that derailed the movie for me. I can actually get behind that comparison. If you look at modern military hardware (up to and including next-gen fighters and aircraft carriers) the hardware appears at a glance be be much more low-tech that you'd expect. The main reason behind this is that the more fancy the gizmo the more chances it has to break, which is why the military tends towards rugged and simple in its equipment and trains folks to do their job without fancy equipment first and foremost. Plus Hudson's opinion is a little skewed since his entire speech is wagging his dick at Ripley. I could brag to an unaware civilian about an MRAP being a state-of-the-art armored vehicle but when you look under it you realize it's just a glorified truck cab with some armor bolted to it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
So... a bigger facehugger comes out? That just raises further questions. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 09:23
|
|
|
I really like Alien 3 but I still feel it only works if you make allowances for its troubled production. I would have loved to see the moody character piece that Fincher was aiming for and which the Assembly Cut only gets partway towards realising.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
The Aliens franchise has always been a product of luck and circumstance, I think. The first movie was written by some pretty sketchy dudes and could easily have been atrocious if Ridley Scott had not come across Giger in a good mood and also turned out to be such a great director. Although, we now know that without everything coming together with the script and the casting as it did he's not talented enough to have brought it home on his own shoulders (Prometheus). Aliens seems like it's the most well-crafted of the movies. They got competent and reliable people in to make something that worked by the numbers, without relying on any temperamental artists who may or may not have delivered such as in the rest of the franchise. I realize the first movie is better, but I think they got lucky. Cameron is as close as they've come to having a guy with direction and a head on his shoulders in control of the franchise and they should have had him make Alien 3 or not at all. The production of Alien 3 was such a mishmash of horrible "out there" ideas. I get that the first movie shocked audiences, and the second one was hard to top as a straight up action-adventure movie, but clearly they lacked someone to take the reins on the thing. Maybe they tried to correct for that with the fourth movie and ended up going too far, or maybe they never learned their lesson because resurrection has not one, but two "artistes" clashing and fighting for control leaving the movie a jumbled mess. The AVP franchise that follows is boring as gently caress, but at least they recognized some kind of formula (make old-school monster movies with alien warriors constantly killing things) that somewhat meets the low bar they've set for themselves. The Aliens franchise since Aliens is still missing a red thread, and that's why the Blomkamp movie is most likely going to be horrible. thotsky fucked around with this message at 14:01 on Jun 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Biomute posted:The Aliens franchise has always been a product of luck and circumstance, I think. The first movie was written by some pretty sketchy dudes and could easily have been atrocious if Ridley Scott had not come across Giger in a good mood and also turned out to be such a great director. Although, we now know that without everything coming together with the script and the casting as it did he's not talented enough to have brought it home on his own shoulders (Prometheus). I think you've bought WAY too hard into auteur theory here. Every movie is a product of the team's collaborative effort and a large helping of luck and circumstance. There is not a director alive that can save a movie if the script, cast and crew aren't coming together - and while keeping the team together is part of the director's responsibility, it's as much or more on the shoulders of the producers and studio. Aliens may arguably come across as coming from a more deliberate, singular vision, but it's as much a product of luck and circumstance as its predecessor: Cameron's lucky the producers let him both write and direct rather than one or the other; he's lucky the studio was developing an Alien sequel just as he was coming off The Terminator so he could get this opportunity; Cameron also happened to get his wife onboard as a producer who would have an obvious personal commmitment to his vision; it was fortunate that Cameron already had a rough outline for a sci-fi action/horror creature feature that he could easily fit with the Alien IP; and the entire production was lucky to be able to inherit Sigourney Weaver, the alien creature design and Scott and Giger's visual aesthetic from the first Alien film. I realize I'm probably overreacting a bit and you do bring up some solid points in general. Honestly I think something about the wording of "he's not talented enough to have brought it home on his own shoulders" just rubbed me the wrong way; like a director 'should' be expected to be able to carry a studio feature on his own.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
The avp movies were good!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
They were entertaining, which isn't the same as good. It's actually better.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
lizardman posted:I realize I'm probably overreacting a bit and you do bring up some solid points in general. Honestly I think something about the wording of "he's not talented enough to have brought it home on his own shoulders" just rubbed me the wrong way; like a director 'should' be expected to be able to carry a studio feature on his own. I can see where you're coming from and I don't think it's only about talent either, but it does seem like the first movie was very much a case of lucky happenstance, with a bunch of different visions coming together and somehow managing to congeal into a near perfect piece of art. I know, you can say that about every movie, but it stands out in interviews and such they seem surprised it even worked. Aliens seems different. Cameron takes a personal hand in everything, including distancing himself from the more volatile people from the first movie (Giger for instance) and he also takes the internal logic from the first movie to its next logical step, coming up with the design for the Queen pretty much on his own. So what if he only had the opportunity for so much control because of previous achievements and personal connections? The point is that he got it done. I think its fair to blame Ridley for Prometheus not being a good Alien prequel. Whatever he's saying now, that was what he originally sold it as and he has both clout and talent. His vision was lacking. It's a stupid hypothetical to argue for sure, but Cameron seems like he had all three, and I think it's going to be vital for the success of further Aliens movies to find someone who also has that. Or get lucky, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Biomute posted:I can see where you're coming from and I don't think it's only about talent either, but it does seem like the first movie was very much a case of lucky happenstance, with a bunch of different visions coming together and somehow managing to congeal into a near perfect piece of art. I know, you can say that about every movie, but it stands out in interviews and such they seem surprised it even worked. So Ridley Scott, the guy who hired Giger, benefited from lucky happenstance, but then Cameron was taking a personal hand in everything by not hiring Giger and just aping the art design of the first movie? You know there was also a creature designer not named James Cameron working on Aliens right? And not just any effects artist, one of the most iconic and influential of all-time. So I'm really not sure why we should be giving Cameron the credit for Aliens, yet take it away from Scott who also worked with talented fx people. As far as Prometheus goes, Ridley Scott has always worked within the studio system and I don't know how much control he would have been able to exert over marketing. I agree with you that the marketing campaign set people up for disappointment, but I'm not convinced the blame for that should go to Scott. Judged on its own merits, separate from any marketing, my personal opinion is that Prometheus is better than Aliens, but I know that may be controversial.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:
Cameron really did design the Queen though: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 21:16 |
|
|
Tenzarin posted:The avp movies were good! The first one is probably the low point of the franchise, but the second one (which I just watched for the first time a couple nights ago) is surprisingly good and pretty, once I cranked up the brightness on my TV. I like that it presents the xenomorphs as being really nasty fuckers, which I think was a smart way to make them still intimidating given how overexposed they are. And the predator as an anti-hero protagonist was great. Even the humans were surprisingly enjoyable for this sort of thing. Seeing the guy who played Mark Fuhrman in American Crime Story again was fun. Alhazred posted:Cameron really did design the Queen though: Nice job, Cameron. You design a female alien, so naturally she's got to be sticking her butt out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2016 20:22
|
|
