Prometheus - Ridley Scott's 'Alien Prequel' (or not)...
Discussion
audidoody said:
Just rented and watched it on iTunes.
My question:
WTF was the reference to Stephen Stills and his (1970) hit "Love The One You're With" all about?
And as a long-time SS fan I'm not aware his claim to fame was playing the accordion.
I think its just to give the captain some character because apart from the appalling chat up line only slightly better than Star wars 2 " you are smoother than sand" " are you a robot?" and willfully dieing just by some bird assuming with no evidense what so ever they were going to kill the earth he did fMy question:
WTF was the reference to Stephen Stills and his (1970) hit "Love The One You're With" all about?
And as a long-time SS fan I'm not aware his claim to fame was playing the accordion.
k all.crazy about cars said:
Just watched this and I'm totally blown away! Not many movies can make me feel this way lately but this is definitely it. It's just something about the whole package that makes it a very enjoyable movie to watch.
Oh dear. You are clearly easily pleased. Either that or you tasted your first burger at McDonalds and a kindly friend said "You liked that? Let me show you a real burger!"
JonRB said:
crazy about cars said:
Just watched this and I'm totally blown away! Not many movies can make me feel this way lately but this is definitely it. It's just something about the whole package that makes it a very enjoyable movie to watch.
Oh dear. You are clearly easily pleased. JonRB said:
As an aside, I really enjoyed "Cowboys & Aliens".
im said:
JonRB said:
crazy about cars said:
Just watched this and I'm totally blown away! Not many movies can make me feel this way lately but this is definitely it. It's just something about the whole package that makes it a very enjoyable movie to watch.
Oh dear. You are clearly easily pleased. JonRB said:
As an aside, I really enjoyed "Cowboys & Aliens".
Neither billed themselves as "Ridley Scott's epic new film that is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/is/isn't/a prequel to Alien"
Bedazzled said:
How do you know what it's meant to be? It sounds like the movie was mis-sold and people had unrealistic expectations. Personally I liked Scott's original Alien film the best, but classic suspense doesn't sell anymore; the rest of the series (including Aliens) are popcorn sci-fi in my book, although I enjoyed them all.
The same way you can tell it's not a high faluting Kubrik classic.
People did not have unrealistic exceptions, people has very realistic expectations based on build up y Scott and co. What was unrealistic was just how the film-maker failed to live up to their own work.
Aliens might be described as popcorn whatever by some, if so, it is the best of it's genre. Thats why it is still loved and still quoted.
Unlike the mess that was served up in Prometheus.
Well I think it's definitely a new movie which I've enjoyed watching. I'd agree that it's not up there with some of the classics but it's not a bad movie (imo). Maybe I could be biased as I loved (most) of the Aliens saga too!
To bring another example to the discussion, let's take "Expendables 2". Another movie I've watched recently. I'll have to say the storyline is all but non existent but I still enjoyed watching that till the end just because of the old school heroes I enjoyed watching in it.
To bring another example to the discussion, let's take "Expendables 2". Another movie I've watched recently. I'll have to say the storyline is all but non existent but I still enjoyed watching that till the end just because of the old school heroes I enjoyed watching in it.
Halb said:
Aliens might be described as popcorn whatever by some, if so, it is the best of it's genre. Thats why it is still loved and still quoted..
OK, time for another Aliens plot hole the size of which is unmatched by anything in the very average Prometheus...In the first Alien film, a single drop of alien blood melts through several floors of the Nostromo. In Aliens when the sentry guns mow down zillions of aliens, there is no structural damage/melting of any of the corridors...
Again, because the film pleases overall you never get these type of criticisms.
Oh...and just how did Newt survive months amongst them when a bunch of commandos cant hide from them for 10 minutes?
Come on, you want plot holes, take another look at Aliens.
Edited by im on Monday 15th October 00:04
im said:
OK, time for another Aliens plot hole the size of which is unmatched by anything in the very average Prometheus...
In the first Alien film, a single drop of alien blood melts through several floors of the Nostromo. In Aliens when the sentry guns mow down zillions of aliens, there is no structural damage/melting of any of the corridors...
Again, because the film pleases overall you never get these type of criticisms.
It should be films since that is what you are describing, and if you hadn't already realised the laws are changed in each subsequent film and the 'canon' is updated.In the first Alien film, a single drop of alien blood melts through several floors of the Nostromo. In Aliens when the sentry guns mow down zillions of aliens, there is no structural damage/melting of any of the corridors...
Again, because the film pleases overall you never get these type of criticisms.
That is why what you post isn't the same. And even if it was, both films (as has been explained many times) hold up to logic and deliver on acting, suspense etc etc etc, that's why the films 'please', and that is why Prometheus gets slated, because it just doesn't deliver on so many levels.
im said:
Oh...and just how did Newt survive months amongst them when a bunch of commandos cant hide from them for 10 minutes?
The kid whose main aim was to hide, and the marines firing off guns whose main aim was not to hide? Riiiiihgt.im said:
OK, time for another Aliens plot hole the size of which is unmatched by anything in the very average Prometheus...
In the first Alien film, a single drop of alien blood melts through several floors of the Nostromo. In Aliens when the sentry guns mow down zillions of aliens, there is no structural damage/melting of any of the corridors...
Again, because the film pleases overall you never get these type of criticisms.
Oh...and just how did Newt survive months amongst them when a bunch of commandos cant hide from them for 10 minutes?
Come on, you want plot holes, take another look at Aliens.
Newt saying "It won't make an difference" when told that the people were soldiers speaks volumes that stealth / hiding will win over overt force. In the first Alien film, a single drop of alien blood melts through several floors of the Nostromo. In Aliens when the sentry guns mow down zillions of aliens, there is no structural damage/melting of any of the corridors...
Again, because the film pleases overall you never get these type of criticisms.
Oh...and just how did Newt survive months amongst them when a bunch of commandos cant hide from them for 10 minutes?
Come on, you want plot holes, take another look at Aliens.
As for the blood thing, we are not explicitly shown the result of the Sentry Gun carnage. Perhaps the Med Lab is on the ground floor and everything under it is earth? I don't really see a plot hole in either.
JonRB said:
As for the blood thing, we are not explicitly shown the result of the Sentry Gun carnage. Perhaps the Med Lab is on the ground floor and everything under it is earth? I don't really see a plot hole in either.
Quite. It's not a 'plothole' since it has nothing to do with plot, incorrect to describe it as such. 'Poor continuity' would be what it is at worst, and that's only if it was one film. It is also the blood of a xeno against the blood of a facehugger? Possibly the same, possibly different? I don't know. Who knows if that was even thought about by the different directors. Probably only thought about by geeks like us eh Jon?
Halb said:
im said:
It should be films since that is what you are describing, and if you hadn't already realised the laws are changed in each subsequent film and the 'canon' is updated.
That is why what you post isn't the same.
Sorry fella, canon wasn't changed regarding their blood being highly acidic in any of the films.That is why what you post isn't the same.
im said:
Oh...and just how did Newt survive months amongst them when a bunch of commandos cant hide from them for 10 minutes?
The kid whose main aim was to hide, and the marines firing off guns whose main aim was not to hide? Riiiiihgt.Riiiiihgt.
And, it would appear that 200 years from now, with FTL travel etc the US maines still pack shotguns
Kinda like todays troops in Afghanistan riding into bandit country with musket and shot.
Look, IMHO it aint great, it aint even 'quite good', but slagging off people who actually enjoyed it is a bit ripe when using the 'plot holes' argument.
It didn't live up to what we Alien fans all wanted which was film in the same mold as Alien. I was disappointed. But hey, if thats not your frame of reference then the film is actually very passable.
im said:
Yeah, cos sticking a cowering, wimping young 8 year old kid in a sealed compound with thousands of the universes most bad-ass creatures and her surviving isn't stretching credibility way past breaking point.Riiiiihgt.
You are misremembering extremely badly if you recall Newt as either 'cowering' or 'wimping'. The character shows great strength and courage, more so than the macho soldiers.Riiiigggghhhhhtttttttt indeed.
im said:
And, it would appear that 200 years from now, with FTL travel etc the US maines still pack shotguns
And? Shotguns have been around for a long time, (pump for 100 years or more) there is no reason to think they will disappear because cartidgeless superguns are the norm.im said:
Kinda like todays troops in Afghanistan riding into bandit country with musket and shot.
No it's nothing like that. That is a ridiculous and weak comparison.im said:
Look, IMHO it aint great, it aint even 'quite good', but slagging off people who actually enjoyed it is a bit ripe when using the 'plot holes' argument.
I have not 'slagged off' anyone. And the plot hole arguments stand, as the many examples given above. It seems bizarre to me to try and say the plot hole argument doesn't stand by ignoring it and discussing either films, especially when you can't come up with any plot holes anyway. Like the film cannot be defended but only misdirection used instead.im said:
It didn't live up to what we Alien fans all wanted which was film in the same mold as Alien. I was disappointed. But hey, if thats not your frame of reference then the film is actually very passable.
It's my frame of reference thanks to the director, and his multi-million dollar campaign. But even without that it's a weak film, that doesn't hold water, and seems to have been used as some sort of pilot for a sequel which will hold all the answers!'edit to say with some dialogue change, some tighter direction on the acting, some plot change, some sharper editing, it could have been a decent film, as it is, it is so-so.
Edited by Halb on Monday 15th October 00:36
Edited by Halb on Monday 15th October 00:40
waaaaaay above what you'd give it, no?Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff