Alien prequel (Prometheus)

[Finbladerunner]

I quote from IMdb:

[Brownclaw]

Ok, here's what I thought of it I'll avoid spoilers but they're subjective so if you really don't want to know THE SLIGHTEST THING, STOP READING NOW....

3D - Stunning. Was a bit concerned when they showed trailers beforehand in 3D, as trailers are full of fast cuts that just move too quickly to follow very well, especially on a gigantic screen. You have to pan your head around just to take everything in, and when you have .03 of a second, it just doesn't work. Thankfully however this is a Ridley Scott movie and so he knew how to use the camera to best effect. Several scenes in the movie literally made me gasp, they were so immersive. None of that "spear coming towards you" shit either.....looking through a massive wind-shield and seeing a huge planet against a star-field,and other parts of the ship in the periphery is something really special.

Story - Obviously a tough one without spoilering - suffice it to say it's definitely not without its flaws. One scene in particular I feel could have been totally omitted, it was that pointless. Clearly put in there on behest of the studio, I fully expect it to be removed when Scott does his inevitable Director's Cut. Imagine the 'car driving happy scene' at the end of Blade Runner, this is a similar thing that I feel was a cynical decision by Fox to force continuity with the Alien franchise. Generally though, pacing was good, some of the characters lacked depth, made some odd decisions, and one character in particular served no fucking purpose whatsoever.

Effects - Flawless. Really. Use of CGI appeared to be minimal, so everything felt grounded (although the 3D obviously helps there).

Script - I'd been led to believe it was dire, so was pleasantly surprised. If this wins any Oscars it's not going to be for writing though - Fassbender might get a supporting actor role for David (he was great). On the whole, this was quite generic sci-fi fare for the most part. The captain of the ship is sufficiently comedic, but the script maybe takes itself a little too seriously when lingering on the whole 'Are we alone in the universe' concept. When your crew-mates are getting the fuck ripped out of them, debating whether or not there's a God would be the last thing on my mind. My main gripe though is it suffered in the same way (although nowhere near to the same scale) as Return of the King did - it didn't know when to end. The final 5 minutes felt like I was watching a trailer for the next movie, so much happened in such a short space of time. Kind of like playing D&D and looking forward to 3 sessions making your journey to the dungeon, and the DM says "Ok so you reach the dungeon after a week of hiking..." - anticlimactic to say the least, damaging to the movie at worst.

Alien Fan Stuff - Hugely enjoyable as an 'Alien inspired' movie. It's clearly a prequel (if you're talking 'canon' time-lines.... it could easily be 'reboot' if you're not). Costume design was fantastic, and there's a tonne of technology in there that you can see happening in the next 20 years. Do I like the way they've explained the Space Jockey? Well, it had to be explained one way or another, and this is as good a way as any. If you've read or seen ANY interviews with Scott in the last 30 years when he's been asked about the SJ, you already know their history anyway - at least he stuck to his word. The ship itself is brand new, so I've already got over my whole 'why is Alien so grungy and Prometheus so Apple-Designed?' thing.

TLDR - It's great, go see it if you like sci-fi and want to be slap bang in the action. But be warned there's some stuff in there that might make you face-palm a bit

[Ki-Djowac]

Just went to see it myself and i liked it alot. Don't wanna spoil, but i can agree with brownclaw for the most part. Fills in some questions, but raises a whole lot more. Definitely an ending where you left hanging a bit.

[andy]

I just got back from it less than an hour ago, and have to admit I am glad I kept my expectations low, because I really ended up liking it a lot. I saw it in Imax 3D and I am glad I did that too. Much of the films imagery may only work in 3D and Ridley used the medium near perfectly. The acting was mixed and there were some truly great performances, combined with some average ones. Some of the characters were a little bit cliche', and some of the notes Ridley hit show he may not know his audience anymore. I had some issue with the monochromatic quality of the film even though I think it was more a product of the setting than of style. There were however a couple things that were completely off key, and I hope get cut out of future cuts of the film, because they really did not work the way I think they were intended, and took what was a serious SF film and just worked like a can of exploding cheese wiz, totally cheapening the film. At least one thing could be cut out and not missed at all.

The rest of the film was a real proof of concept for 3D films to me, and it had me grinning through much of the movie. There were also some good tense moments and genuine scares as well, but nothing you can not get from low budget fright flick. It really reminded me of Bilal's Heavy Metal magazine artwork as well, and that was cool with me. Also a lot in common with 2001:ASO as much as with Alien. No real mind blowing moments though, and Ridley may not realize that some tricks only work once with an audience. The story was okay, and I could tell had those moments where actors characters were created in a certain way so they would have a moment where they would explain their philosophy in order the give the film it's purpose. A tad bit phony and lazy script writing. Almost Lucas worthy.

Still I can not say enough about how much I enjoyed the 3D cinematography. One of the main reason's I go to a film is for those moments I feel I am actually there witnessing something I can not experience in real life, and this film gave that in abundance. Plus I got a free poster for the film for going to the Imax 1st showing

Andy

[Noeland]

I saw it tonight too. I loved it. LOVED the 3D.

I'll post more tomorrow after I get some shut eye.
_________________
I don't have enough blasters!

[joberg]

It's opening here in Ottawa today, so by Saturday I should give you my review

[panaflex]

I saw a new trailer on television last night which had a major spoiler in it. I can't believe they let that out. If you haven't seen the movie yet and you see a trailer come on, turn it off. Ouch.
_________________
Hollywood is the only industry, even taking in soup companies, which does not have laboratories for the purpose of experimentation.
Orson Welles

[Finbladerunner]

Had my second time on today. 2D this time. Only 10 people were attending that screening. Prometheus is not doing well on Finland, -I think. Reason to see it 2D after 3D premier was I thought more details can be seen. Actually I didn't. Bodum glasses were easy to spot. Was trying to identify exact wristwatch models. No luck.
This movie really works better as 3D. It's so dark already, -didn't find anything special from backgrounds with 2D version. Was also hoping to see "murals" much better...




-

[Brownclaw]

[Finbladerunner]

[Replicant 13]

PROMETHEUS opened here (I'm told) at midnight Thursday, although I held off seeing it, taking the afternoon yesterday to view it twice as well - first in 2D, then in 3D.

In short, I liked the film. I felt it was worth the wait. As to 3D, I am still not sold on the technology, entirely. Prior to this I'd seen three films in 3D, starting with AVATAR and later the dismal THE PHANTOM MENACE (a movie only made even more intolerable in 3D). I find 3D can be somewhat distracting -

3D in PROMETHEUS
The discomfort of wearing clunky eyewear over glasses doesn't help, but I often found myself paying more attention trying to discern the effect than following the story or dialog. When the effects are most noticeable it works almost too well, as when things are in the close foreground or "screen readouts" are present. I did find that in most scenes, although present, it was not overbearing. In wider shots is was less noticeable (when foreground elements were absent). All said, Ridley used it to good effect here, but I AM glad I saw the story in 2D first.

- - -

THE FILM
In discussing it afterward, my fellow viewers and I had a couple of issues, but that's typical. I thought the plot was pretty solid, although I won't discuss it here, in my hope not to influence any potential viewers. As I said. I enjoyed it, and while often quite "intense", I think (by today's standards) it will be enjoyed by most, especially those reading this thread.

The vistas as breathtaking and the entire film is beautifully shot and crafted, as one would expect of Sir Scott. As some reviews have stated, "It is not ALIEN". Of course not. And ALIEN had the advantage of breaking new ground. Like Blade Runner, its particular impact and influences can never be equalled. For those who did not see those films on their initial release, it is more difficult to distinguish their contributions, since so many films have borrowed from Ridley's concepts and executions.

I've never be disappointed by Ridley's efforts, even when the subject matter was not initially appealing to me. And I've missed far too many good films after reading some slanted review, only to discover my error later on a much smaller screen.

I recommend it to all here on PS, but then I doubt many of you will pass it by.

(The audience was sparse for the afternoon showing, but the later viewing was much more populated and it was showing on several screens.)

Once the film has some mileage, it will be interesting to see the thoughts posted.

HAB1! - R13
_________________
Gosh, you've really got some nice toys here . . .

[joberg]

Thanks Rep13 for the review...as for you seeing the Phantom Menace in 3D you have, Sir, my utmost admiration; as a matter of fact, I'm standing ram rod straight in front of my computer, my right hand over my heart. Now that's what I call Courage

[Space Jockey]

I saw the 3D version of the movie last night.

Overall, I liked it.

It is flawed; the soundtrack music was irritating and overused. Sometimes the silence within a scene sets the mood; certainly more than what this movie does by looping the same piece of music over....and over....parts of it felt very out of place and just downright annoying.

The pacing of the movie was way too quick snapping quickly from scene to scene to scene....no lingering corridor shots with the quiet hum of the engines here.

Way less suspense / horror than what I was expecting.
Considering this was an 'R' it could have been alot more full-on.
Part of the horror for me in Alien is not knowing what exactly the creature is capable of doing - transforming Brett into an egg; imagining what happened to Lambert.
You get the same kind of terror in this movie, but it's cut way too short and therefore did not work for me.
For instance, there is a scene where the rear cargo door opens and we see an infected character laying on his stomach outside, his legs and back bent backward so his feet are either side of his head. But we don't see him rise and de-contort back into a proper human shape; it's just hinted at and then we see him go beserk and begin killing the crew, and we never know what he was transforming into.
Also, when a crewmember is attacked by the worm-thing, we start to gross out, then it suddenly cuts to another scene elsewhere.

The design of the Space Jockey's are interesting, as is the human connection. But I'm not sure if I like it or not. I think I do....it just could've been more.....horrifying? Not human? I don't know.
Again, when the Space Jockey is let loose and goes nuts on the crew, this could've been more 'BERSERK-MODE ON!!!'. Just seemed tame and held back by something.

I enjoyed the characters, although at times they do some pretty stupid things, such as Holloway getting drunk (why I'm not sure; he's just found an alien settlement / temple and alien life and still he frigging whines and acts like a sulking kid).
David, Shaw, Vickers and Janek are great. Holloway is pretty good too, in fact they are all good; just seems clunkily written, or could be the pacing again....I'm not sure.
I think the film could have shown us more of Shaw's personal torment as her faith is challenged by what she is seeing and experiencing. There is one clip in a trailer where panic-stricken she seems like she is going to pray, but this is not in the movie.

Overall I did like it, I'm looking forward to seeing it again.
Set design, vehicles, costumes and cinematography are excellent.
But I really needed more horror, suspense and for it to be re-edited....this is a film that could have been 2.5 to 3 hrs....but it is 2hrs and they FLY by because of the pacing.
In fact, the pacing of it at times certainly made me feel as though a different director entirely made the movie.

It just felt as though they were holding back from giving me a whole pint of Guinness and instead giving me two-thirds when there was really no need.

I do hope we'll see more on the blu-ray.

[Replicant 13]

I often hear of the near impossibilities of making any motion picture in today's environment. The cost, the demands, the complications, the deadlines and, all too often, the absurd interference of the studios take their effect on the outcome.

I would think that by now, Sir Ridley has the clout to cut through this. We've known him to be a perfectionist and it's apparent again here in the stunning visuals and the amazing craftsmanship, with the attention to the smallest background detail. But there are other elements and I must agree with much of what others, as well as what Space Jockey has stated in his review . . .

There are several missed opportunities, the editing can be puzzling at times and there's some rather ridiculous behavior throughout. After all, as a friend remarked to me afterward - "They are scientists and yet they seem to ignore all precautions, whether procedural or just common sense". Again, I will not go into detail here, but I DO wonder how much of the story changed or might have been sacrificed for as yet unknown reasons - and what scenes were left on the virtual cutting room floor. (In watching the trailers and the support videos that lead to its release, the film seemed to have all of the integrity of great science fiction and the best of intentions.)

Perhaps one factor is the team with which Ridley worked on PROMETHEUS. No doubt their is incredible talent here, and while Giler and Hill were back to produce (good or bad), some names were no longer involved. Absent was the guiding hand of Terry Rawlings, the sound and film editor who worked on both ALIEN and BLADE RUNNER, and of course the late genius and composer Jerry Goldsmith whose score for ALIEN among countless others, has become a classic. While it was never a smooth ride, there did seem to be a certain chemistry or magic to their contributions.

I must repeat, I enjoyed PROMETHEUS through both viewings. Overall, it has a solid storyline. As a designer and art director, I remain awed by the outcome. Call it "eye candy" if you wish, but it's much more. The designs, the effects and the thought that goes into a venture like this staggers the mind. And so I still have the highest regard for Sir Scott & company. His genius is intact, and I respect and appreciate the various contributions of all of those who created this spectacle.

Yes, the film is flawed and while we have come to expect perfection, it is easy to criticize from the comfort of a theater seat. Few seemed to like Blade Runner back in 1982, and its flaws are well documented. Whether that's a fair comparison remains to be seen and debated. . . . Oh where is Paul M. Sammons when we need him?

I am glad Ridley came back to the genre he's helped define, and we were able to go on another adventure in his universe.



And perhaps, as SJ suggests, more will be revealed in its future release on Blu-Ray and DVD. These days it seems a director's work is never "done".

HAB1! - R13

And as to The Phantom Menace, meesa thinks "it" remains Jar-Jar Binks!
_________________
Gosh, you've really got some nice toys here . . .

[joberg]

Love the "poster" Rep13 and the caption:"I've imagined things you people have come to believe"
Making a good movie is never easy (I'll spare the details that a lot of our members, here at Propsummit, know and/or have experienced themselves).
I think the pacing of movies nowadays have changed and not for the better; fast pacing/ cutting is made for an entire generation used to the same on video games (just looking at TV programs made for young people, you'll notice that it's always a hand held camera being used, as to make the image move constantly during interviews or other stuff on the show). These spectators have to be constantly stimulated, if not it becomes boring very fast and they'll lose interest

[SKIN JOB 66]

http://clothesonfilm.com/prometheus-exclusive-interview-with-costume-designer-janty-yates/25959/
_________________
THE FUTURE IS A THING OF THE PAST

[joberg]

TFS Fred...interesting interview for sure

[Replicant 13]

I always enjoy the "Making Of" vids and articles. Relatedly . . .

Turning back to the previous questions and concerns regarding PROMETHEUS, I ran across this interview . . .

http://collider.com/ridley-scott-prometheus-deleted-scenes-interview/172202/

(scroll down on the page), which might answer some of the concerns voiced here. It proves some of my earlier assumptions wrong.

The interview with Ridley also touches on the BLADE RUNNER sequel as well. Sounds like Ridley is going back to his original concept for the opening of 1982's BLADE RUNNER which many of you may recall takes place in a rural setting -

http://andrewbanta.com/2010/08/10/blade-runner-animatic/

- R13
_________________
Gosh, you've really got some nice toys here . . .

[Noeland]

The first viewing for me was in a brand new 3D theater and the experience was flat out amazing. Every shot was dynamic, bright, and the 3D sucked me right into the movie. I just loved it.

I wish everyone could have seen it the way I did. I really enjoyed the story, thought the production design was flat out brilliant, I liked the creatures. I would have liked more of them though. The worms needed more screen time, and we needed to see those teeth that are shown in the art of book.

The second viewing was in 3D but not in a new theater, and the 3D effect was dim and nearly lost. I really hate to think of someone seeing it this way for the first time. So much of what was amazing in my first viewing looked flat and dull in the second viewing.

For Scott's first foray into sci-fi in 30 years, I think he hit a home run. It's just cool to see him stretching his sci-fi legs again. Not a perfect film, and not a film for everyone, but for me it was entertaining and thought provoking and artistic.

The themes touched upon by characters and the larger story worked for me. I liked the ambiguous style of the film. I loved the end, and I really enjoyed what the space jockey has become.

I think a lot of the disappointment has come from the film not being terribly violent or visually all that dark. It's not a film about tight spaces or airlocks.

I still maintain that David is the lead character too.
_________________
I don't have enough blasters!

[Space Jockey]

Yeah, I must admit now its a few days later I really want to go back and see it again.

David was superb. I loved the scene where he watches Peter O'Toole on screen and shows the android learning and being influenced by him. Like a robot child, but in an adult form and incredibly intelligent.

I liked the scene too where David is effectively asking, in a roundabout way, Holloway's permission for David to spike his drink. If it was a human and an evil one at that, probably wouldn't have asked. Just gone ahead and done it.

Really looking forawrd to seeing an extended cut. That was my only real gripe I guess other than the overuse of the same music....just the quick pacing of scenes in general as I said above.