tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post8757659310112588416..comments2012-10-19T02:37:25.259-07:00Comments on The PopScience Review: Symbolism or Not, 'Prometheus' Still Fails as a Compelling StoryAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15547971369548882699noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-34332723777259968912012-08-13T00:27:32.216-07:002012-08-13T00:27:32.216-07:00amen to youamen to youserengetihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11351481212862151304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-83817632482370202272012-08-01T10:27:10.896-07:002012-08-01T10:27:10.896-07:00First of all, thanks for an excellent account of t...First of all, thanks for an excellent account of this drivel presented as an epic sci-fi drama. It was like tranformers on steroids + a thin layer of New Age mumbo jumbo. As pointed out the mythical and religous aspects could have been interesting and fulfilling, if the sense of mystery and meaning was upheld, which it wasn't. Quite different from the absolutely magnificent and beautiful 2001: A Space Odyssey,a film which goes to the core of human existence in an infinite universe. <br /><br />thedavethpower: You are wrong about Kubrick being an atheist in anyway, he can best be described as an agnostic, with a clear inclination towards "something more" and the mystery surrounding human origins and meaning. <br /><br />Atheists tiresome rejection of everything that cant't be quantified, has reduced human life to an antlike state, with the differnce that an ant's life has a purpose and function within a whole, man has in 2012 no meaning for anybody, hardly even himself. But back to Kubrick, her are som quotes on his view on religion and myth:<br /><br />"2001 would give a little insight into my metaphysical interests... I'd be very surprised if the universe wasn't full of an intelligence of an order that to us would seem God-like. I find it very exciting to have a semi-logical belief that there's a great deal to the universe we don't understand, and that there is an intelligence of an incredible magnitude outside the Earth. It's something I've become more and more interested in. I find it a very exciting and satisfying hope." <br /><br />and<br /><br />"I will say that the God concept is at the heart of 2001 but not any traditional, anthropomorphic image of God. I don't believe in any of Earth's monotheistic religions, but I do believe that one can construct an intriguing scientific definition of God, once you accept the fact that there are approximately 100 billion stars in our galaxy alone, that each star is a life-giving sun and that there are approximately 100 billion galaxies in just the visible universe. Given a planet in a stable orbit, not too hot and not too cold, and given a few billion years of chance chemical reactions created by the interaction of a sun's energy on the planet's chemicals, it's fairly certain that life in one form or another will eventually emerge. It's reasonable to assume that there must be, in fact, countless billions of such planets where biological life has arisen, and the odds of some proportion of such life developing intelligence are high. Now, the sun is by no means an old star, and its planets are mere children in cosmic age, so it seems likely that there are billions of planets in the universe not only where intelligent life is on a lower scale than man but other billions where it is approximately equal and others still where it is hundreds of thousands of millions of years in advance of us. When you think of the giant technological strides that man has made in a few millennia—less than a microsecond in the chronology of the universe—can you imagine the evolutionary development that much older life forms have taken? They may have progressed from biological species, which are fragile shells for the mind at best, into immortal machine entities—and then, over innumerable eons, they could emerge from the chrysalis of matter transformed into beings of pure energy and spirit. Their potentialities would be limitless and their intelligence ungraspable by humans."<br /><br />If Arthur C. Clarke had gotten it his way with the manuscript, the film would have been an overexplained bore to watch, and the tales tell that he left the first screening of Kubrick's 2001 in tears.AUTONOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04122820379301417506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-3314214701319103192012-07-08T07:23:47.303-07:002012-07-08T07:23:47.303-07:00What Zach doesn't realize is that Zach just ha...What Zach doesn't realize is that Zach just had a wicked idea...<br /><br />why shouldn't I have my own version of every movie that I own...why shouldn't everyone.. it is totally within the scope of our technology to make this happen.. <br /><br />this also leads to the tangental idea of a movie that is built from the ground up using crowd-sourcing technology...<br /><br />Zach.. you are a genius even if you said what you said because you find me annoying!!! Perhaps a little frustration can lead to creativity!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-31508153052984118262012-06-29T20:55:30.095-07:002012-06-29T20:55:30.095-07:00You know what dave? why don't you just rewrite...You know what dave? why don't you just rewrite the script and watch the movie by yourself.<br /><br />Rewrite: oh wait, you know what would be cooler than that?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16959192627027451759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-15056202983067226272012-06-29T20:51:15.837-07:002012-06-29T20:51:15.837-07:00I agree that there were a lot of cop-outs in favor...I agree that there were a lot of cop-outs in favor of religion in this movie, but that isn't what made it bad. Put plainly, it's just badly written with too much synthetic script to be any good.<br /><br />I agree with Michael that your criterion for good movies is very flawed. I would also like to point out that you are vainly reading into mysterious movies and pulling out atheism.<br /><br />Movies also don't prove anything conclusively.<br /><br />The first Alien movie was much better without all of these added in details that are sought after by atheists who claim to have monopolized logic. If anything this movie should be an atheistic paradise.<br /><br />Faith and determination against adversity, even when put in frightening situations is the backdrop of both Space Odyssey and Alien.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16959192627027451759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-36610839083907943412012-06-24T18:05:29.393-07:002012-06-24T18:05:29.393-07:00Well, I think I'm quite versed in Mythology an...Well, I think I'm quite versed in Mythology and Theology, and I didn't get any meaning from any of the symbols of the story. Sure, there are parallelisms, but the story wraps you up in an endless plot of human and alien stupidity. It's bad enough having to follow an empty movie full of empty characters and Alien Architects that are only characterized by their technological superiority and their violent demeanor without having to endure scene after scene of unjustified grotesqueness. Don't get me wrong, being a fan of the genre, I'm used to the occasional gory scene, visual effects aside, I just felt this was more like those bad TV zombie movies, and less like 28 Days Later(Danny Boyle). <br /><br />Besides all that has been discussed, we have the strange adolescent Alien character at the end. Do they mean to imply that the original Alien character was born out of mutated human DNA in the year 2099? That just down right sucks! I always thought of the Alien race as intergalactic parasites that suppose to be the perfect weapon. Much like fungi grows form spores that can blow lifeless in the wind for an unlimited amount of time, and suddenly find a suitable host and grow into a tiny mushroom, these Xenomorphs were timeless. They were lying there on the floor of that spaceship(and their home planet, where ever that is) long before humankind existed, and would probably outlive us just because of this capacity. Plus, the concept of the strange alien ship laying on a lifeless world in the middle of no where, with a warning message playing on a loop was a lot more interesting than these Mindless Architects.<br /><br />Having waited over two years for this film, I find it a huge disappointment. I just hope they hire James Cameron to save the day and restructure this franchise, much like with the original(Alien 3 and Resurrection aside). I love Ridley Scotts take, it's simple, horrifying and straight to the point. But, I find James Cameron's exploration of the species very interesting and highly entertaining.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05904944841578194377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-75046367817630748372012-06-20T15:23:53.041-07:002012-06-20T15:23:53.041-07:00I didn't like this movie and I'm not relig...I didn't like this movie and I'm not religious, but it's bizarre to read that unless a movie reflects your strident atheism, it can't be a good movie. By your reasoning, Renaissance art can't be any good either. It is a particularly narcissistic atheism that says "if you don't reflect my point of view back to me you have no value." Too many atheists simply take for granted that atheism is the end-point of human understanding. It isn't. It's the world-view that superseded mythic religion as the weaknesses of that dominant paradigm became evident. Similarly, as the limitations of scientific materialism to explain all of reality become more evident(e.g. consciousness; values; the mind-body problem; ), it too will be superseded. It's already happening. That's probably why we have a movie like Prometheus - clumsily struggling to re-integrate these themes into a post-religious culture.Michael Harrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15599717311049573501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-29117295472733151712012-06-16T21:53:03.168-07:002012-06-16T21:53:03.168-07:00A story is not a succession of symbols. If the au...A story is not a succession of symbols. If the audience's attention turns to symbolism, the story has failed and is pretentious. At bottom, a story's job is to trick its audience into believing that its characters are real and alive.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608999141909280646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-3643718014970005452012-06-14T12:56:36.885-07:002012-06-14T12:56:36.885-07:00The cross should have been melted down after an ar...The cross should have been melted down after an argument between her and David to fix a circuit on the tactical nuke which would later be used to blow the ship to kingdom come. This would emphasize the importance of empirical science over religion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-5864360545687282402012-06-14T10:43:03.884-07:002012-06-14T10:43:03.884-07:00hahahahaha!!! make a move and the bunny gets it!!!...hahahahaha!!! make a move and the bunny gets it!!!!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-67513171567874927032012-06-14T09:32:37.923-07:002012-06-14T09:32:37.923-07:00I have realised that Noomi's cross is pretty m...I have realised that Noomi's cross is pretty much treated like the bunny in Con Air -blufoghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14181891666494496192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-53391060156406115582012-06-14T09:09:48.234-07:002012-06-14T09:09:48.234-07:00The thing about Sci-Fi is that even crappy Sci-Fi ...The thing about Sci-Fi is that even crappy Sci-Fi is an integral part of the genre. I'm always reminded of various star trek episodes which were really bad but still make for good jokes during poker games. <br /><br />And when Sci-Fi is crappy it is almost always good fuel for humour. This is part of the magic of Sci-Fi that does not seem to be as present in other genres.<br /><br />Remember when Luke Skywalker says "But I was going into Tosche Station to pick up some power converters!". This was probably the worst executed line in all of Sci-Fi but it is so funny.<br /><br />I did like the spherical-mapping drones in Prometheus. They were cool, the sounds were good on them, although I don't think they were used to their full advantage by the directors to build suspense. I mean, I think the Sentry Guns in Aliens (special edition) were waaaay waaay waaay cooler but I still think the mapping drones were kinda cool. It would have been cool if they would have used the mapping drones and the 3-D film to their advantage more and had the drones zoom into the audience in surround sound--That would have sent shivers up my spine.<br /><br />I really feel sorry for people who have not seen the Aliens special edition with the sentry guns because the guns added so much to the movie.<br /><br />I would like to see rail gun technology used in the Alien-type next movie. I think there is a lot of potential with rail guns which has never been explored in Sci-Fi. <br /><br />I also think a spider explosive grenade would be cool -- fire the grenade from a launcher(or even throw it) and these mechanical spider legs spring out to latch on and dig into the the target to burry the explosive before it detonates for maximum damage. Of course it would have to have eerie spider sounds as well for maximum strangeness.<br /><br />I would have liked to see Elizabeth become addicted to drugs as well because of all the pain and shock she experienced. David could object at first but then become convinced that Elizabeth was a better person and more open minded on drugs. This movie needed more perspective stretching elements and a drug addict could have gone a long way in balancing out all the creationist BS that this movie was laced with.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-16843391041704743342012-06-13T13:45:05.676-07:002012-06-13T13:45:05.676-07:00The movie was crap.
Pseudo-intellect passing off ...The movie was crap.<br /><br />Pseudo-intellect passing off lazy writing as "depth," and then blaming the viewer as uninformed if they just "don't get it."<br /><br />It reminds me of abstractionists pumping each other up so that they can call each other "artists" and hide how talentless and slovenly they know, in secret, they truly are.<br /><br />No amount of post-processing, or hidden explanations, can help make the movie less of a waste of time and money than it truly is. It will be relegated to the crap-pile of B and C movies, made even worse by the amount of money spent on it.<br /><br />When discussing his insane workload in editing the LOTR trilogy, Peter Jackson said (paraphrasing), "Pain is temporary, bad film is forever."<br /><br />The absurd awfulness of this movie is forever. <br /><br />I hate to say this, because I am such a Ridley Scott fan, but Mr. Scott, I want my money back. If you could figure out how to reverse time and let me un-see this movie, I'd like that, too.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06638718146877919738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2278094401613188018.post-13431941407442681752012-06-13T08:25:55.879-07:002012-06-13T08:25:55.879-07:00I definitely had the gross feeling of being covere...I definitely had the gross feeling of being covered with a sticky black gue of disgusting religious residue when I left the theatre. Noomi Rapace is capable of so much more. Her raw performance in The Girl With a Dragon Tatoo was phenomenal. In prometheus they turned her into a woman of the flock who got back her cross and ended up being some sort of creationist driven explorer.<br /><br />Just off the top of my head it would have been cool to see Elizabeth have a nervous breakdown, lose her religion, and become platonically infatuated with David and crushed by the sheer logical weight of his atheistic philosophy. I wanted Elizabeth to end up having a Neurotic breakdown because as an actress this is Noomi Rapace's strong suit. Also, Elizabeth should have been the one to kill Weyland. The idea of an Atheist Android who is carrying out a sort of machine-driven-logical revenge on humanity would have been very fascinating (HAL 9000, 2001(c)). <br /><br />Clarke and Kubrick were strong atheists and I beleive that this is a necessary requirement to making a good alien movie. Tech/Science/Skepticism is what drives a good Alien movie. The evolution/creationist debate is over. The creationists have lost. Arthur C Clarke and Stanley Kubrick PROVED conclusively in 2001 that there ARE deeper mysteries in the Universe when no mythology is invoked for explanation. The I don't know factor is reduced when religion comes along and says 'we have the answer'. <br /><br />Religion killed this movie in the same way that it is killing this planet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com