The juxtaposition of these two things is the major problem with this movie, IMHO. If you want to make a movie that deliberately leaves things open to interpretation and strongly implies that the characters are misinterpreting the facts, I think you really need to make everything else absolutely watertight. If there are as many clear flubs as Prometheus has, it makes the audience just think you were sloppy, rather than deliberately ambiguous.
Fair and intellectually honest. Carry on.
I think Prometheus in Fifteen Minutes sums up everything that one could need to know.
A bold statement about something that can’t be checked for accuracy. I disagree with it, and you’ll just have to prove me wrong. Go for it. I’ll wait right here.
I also encourage people to watch the show I linked to, because they’ll see that my transcript is accurate and your wiki quote distorts his statements.
Come back when you have some facts; thus far you’ve shown few if any to back up any of your assertions or rationalizations.
“Prometheus” is not only a reference to mythology. It is also a reference to the novel Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus.
The aliens seem to have created a monster they can’t control. And not just the goo. We humans may be a “monster” which will ultimately destroy our creators.
I look forward to sequels to see where they take this.
This was brilliant! My favorite part:
Well, as to Blade Runner,
As to The Thing, here’s what John Carpenter had to say,
Gee, that sounds oddly familiar.
JANEK: Yo, I am up to like three millidavids here. Pick one: excellent sex or accordion concerto.
JANEK’S ACCORDION: BRRRREHHHHHNNNNNNGGGGG
VICKERS: My room. Ten minutes.
Look dude, it’s okay if you like drivel. No one is here saying that you don’t have the right to love shitty, horribly written nonsense.
It is your right. But the people here who are leveling critiques on the film aren’t just neckbeards. They’re people who expect some effort to be put into the writing of a film.
Shit, you can’t even defend the film, you just raise hands and say it’ll be retconned at some point in the future by fans.
To sum up, you are okay with shitty writing. That’s cool. There is a lot of it for you to enjoy. But to those of us who value writing and intelligent plotting, you’re not making a good case.
Yep. And using not-so-subtle insults towards those who had problems with the film isn’t helping his case either.
But I liked The Thing when I first saw it.
Nope. What she did was the opposite of hyperbole. Nobody says hyperbolically that they’ve traveled “a whole ten miles” when they’ve actually gone ten thousand.
Likewise, nobody would say that they’re half a billion miles from home when they’re really several trillion (or several hundred trillion, there seems to be some confusion about whether the distance in question was 10^12 or 10^14) miles from home.
Making that kind of elementary mistake just reinforces the impression that the scriptwriters aren’t really interested in this fictional universe and don’t care about maintaining any kind of realism or logical consistency in their characters’ engagement with it. “Billion, trillion, what’s the difference, as long as it sounds like a big number.” But the thing is, to a character who was ACTUALLY traveling trillions of miles, a billion WOULDN’T sound like a big number in that context.
That’s not me looking for things to nitpick after the fact because I like to imagine that I look smart on the internets. That’s (just one of many examples of) something that pulled me right out of the film while I was watching it because it was so sloppily, gratuitously incongruous.
There are a whole lot of legitimate complaints about this movie, but this one is pretty trivial. The character in question isn’t a scientist or a navigator. She’s a corporate suit. She doesn’t care how many actual miles she is from Earth, she just knows it’s a really big number. “Billion” is also a really big number. To most laymen, once you get above a million, the numbers are pretty much interchangable. They all mean “way more of something than you can possible count.” There’s a lot of bad writing in the film, but there’s nothing at all wrong with that line. It’s an absolutely believable thing for a person in her position to say in that situation.
Heh. In Star Trek IV, Scotty [in the polymer factory talking to the plant manager] goes on a fake rant about traveling “millions” of miles from Edinburgh [to San Francisco].
Bones had to correct him.
Bah, all the thinly veiled insults are kinda pointless. I liked the movie and look forward to seeing it again. If that reflects a horrible flaw in my nature to some, so be it. There are a lot of dumb things that go on in the movie, but I had no problem overlooking them. Then again, I like my fanwank on the movie a lot better the Ridley Scott’s interpretation.
I think fanwank is what was in those black canisters. And they’re going to need a few more shipfuls for this movie make any sense.
But I would totally pay to see a “maybe prequel” to Prometheus that was just Scorsese’s “Last Temptation of Christ” with a Big Bald Alien in the Jim Caviezel role.
No, nothing wrong with you. Just as I don’t think there is anything wrong with people who hated it, people who are tepid on it, and people who have had their views change as they considered it more (like I did).
Differences of opinion on subjective things is not a moral failing. That said, I’m right and you’re wrong.
Or vice versa.
[QUOTE=Kimstu]
(or several hundred trillion, there seems to be some confusion about whether the distance in question was 10^12 or 10^14) miles from home.
[/QUOTE]
I hope not, 10^12 is less than a light year away from our sun (1 light year being 9.4x10^12). Not many “galactic systems” at that distance.
I remember distinctly that it was something x10^14. I think it was 3.somethingx10^14, but that’s a little shakier.
I believe it was kilometers, not miles.