New Replies (Page 4,835)

I saw the :39 sec. scene but to me, it looks like someones chest is being scanned like in Alien with Kane. I could not see the :37 sec. scene. maybe its just wasnt clear for me. But I think you might be right. Its possible that Ridley has us all thinking or watching one hand and we are not watching his other hand. who knows.

Is this the hand you are seeing at the :37 second scene? I couldn't really see it in the leaked trailer but found this pic and thought it may be the same scene. If so I think that hand looks very human to me. http://www.movieweb.com/movie/prometheus/PGDoDrPryxr0GM/C4wDWDgLUBCoYLJ

Looks like a human hand to me but i aint no biologist lol but i dont think it is an alien, but..... there is nothing ruling out the fact it could be the big smurf blue guy ha ha ha maybe he is a nice guy and shaw gets injured or something and that is Alien technology we see there and he is healing her or something... who knows.

@Game Over Man!....thanks for that, but it's not the shot I refer to. I was able to get a screen shot of the second however and here it is.... [img]http://s3-ak.bebo.com/image/8386610908a12953575874l.jpg[/img] As to the first shot...I understand, it is very difficult to see....

No problem Craigamore. I wasnt for certain if that was the same scene or not. I would have just pasted the pic but I cant figure out how to. Can you assist me on how you pasted your pic? Or anyone help me at that? I would appreciate it greatly!

As to the pic, theres an icon in the in the reply window that's square, white and green in color, and fourth from the left. click that....and a box will pop up asking for a url. Open another tab with your pic on whatever website, right click, go to properties and copy the url info. Then go back to your original tab and paste the url in the box they provided and hit ok. It will appear in the window as text. I make sure there's an extra space between each group of text and the image text, to make sure it's not messy and then I post. When you check, it should pop up.

Also...I'm trying to get a pic of the first shot...but I'm not having much luck...technical difficulties...so, we'll see. Trust me...go back and look again. The 1st shot is right ahead of the SpaceJockey chair shot. It's one hell of a creepy second and it's looks very inhuman.

Thanks craigamore....i must be dumb i cant even get a picture to show up. :( I have used that box and still it just shows up as text on my post and not a picture. Maybe it is the spacing you were talking about...where do you know what should be spaced apart?

So there is a formal name for this trailer.. lol

Hmmm.. It could have been due to budget cuts.. but from what I heard, the are going to use that idea in "Over the Top" part 2.. next year..

still speculation ncc1701, this is not a proven theory at all as of yet.

God knows what the urns are about, it is all part of the mystery....... it is frustrating i know but just 5 months to go............................................................................................:(

Don't think "urns" think biological torpedoes.

Here's a point, anyone else notice what looks like big scratch marks around the "eyebrow" part of the big head thing?? Inflicted by xenomorphs maybe. . .

Possibly but the image where Fassbender is pulling the green goo out of the urn, you can clearly see 4 points at the tip of it, it does look like an unformed egg. RickK.... you may not be far off with that idea.

it looks nothing lke an egg...in aliens we see a queen laying the eggs....they come out looking like they do just what the hell is it though

Apollo,,,I do agree .I keep looking at green slime pic , and keep seeing the top of a new egg at a certain stage with something inside ....looks boney ??

I also read that their will be 2 versions.....but I seriously doubt that they will go as far as actually changing the story....IMO the only difference will be that their will be more violence, sex and perhaps a few disturbing happenings in the R rated version....in other words...it will simply be the uncut version .....assuming they do even end up even making 2 versions?

I have to agree with Juxtapose on that one. Just two cuts of the same movie to suit different audiences. I am against the whole thing being 13 rated to appeal more to the younger audience......... they have twilight and all that crap... GIVE US WHAT WE ARE EXPECTING AND HAVE WAITED SO MANY YEARS FOR!!!

The impression I got from the footage at last years comic-con is that Ridley himself is also not too keen on a pg13 rating. My suspicion is that he will cut the film as an R/18 film and then remove the more gory/adult themed elements for a pg13/12a version of the film. But I think Ridley will cut them so that the R/18 version will be so superior to the pg13/12a version that Fox, hopefully, will retract the pg13/12a version. The only two things that go against my suspicion are the fact its been shot in 3D and AVP. AVP was pushed to be PG13 to pull in greater audience numbers, as is the current trend with 3D films.

I agree Snorkelbottom. Question........ can anyone remember the last time a movie had two cuts/ versions lets say and was released at the cinemas??? i dont remember but maybe i am just being ignorant. I know movies may be released as a 15 rating (i am english|) and then an uncut release to an 18 version on DVD , if that is the case... i do not want to see a childs version then have to wait for the real adult version to come to DVD. I still cannot get my head behind this thinking. Trust me, kids and teens will not even want to see the cut version. As a kid what appealed to me most about Alien when i was 7 and i wanted to see it was that it was so adult, it was almost forbidden. Tell a kid that he is not allowed to do something or in this case not be able to see the adult version then they will just start sneaking in to the cinemas and downloading the real version. It just doesnt make sense to me. All those moneybags in holywood trying to capitalise and fill their wallets as they just see statistics not what people want.

This idea of making two versions to achieve different ratings is ludicrous! Either it's a sci-fi/horror or it isn't. Make your mind up, Ridley.

I dont think it is Ripley thinking of doing this, more so the studios trying to appeal to different ages, basically...... more moneu more honey. But i think they are biting their noses of to spite their faces and that this idea will backfire, lets see.

[b]"I dont think it is Ripley thinking of doing this, more so the studios trying to appeal to different ages, basically...... more moneu more honey"[/b] I really can't see Ridley going for that. It would be his way or the high way surely? I can't see him making compromises for the studio. But who knows?!

Exactly who knows, thats the problem, if ridley doesnt know yet then who does lol. Trust me the days of studios making movies for the right reasons are gone. For years they cared about making good movies to compete with other studios but now they just care about making more money, hence why for years they have just spewed out pure crap in some cases just to make a quick buck, for example all this comic book movie craze is them all just jumping on the bandwagon e.g Spiderman , Batman (actually pretty good to be fair), the incredible hulk etc.... all came out made a profit, wait a few years lets re release it and put a different spin on it, again making money. Its the world we live in , i know everyone knows this but trust me what they say goes, they pull the strings and ridley must go along, you know he has a contract to follow and really i doubt he would be able to just walk and start again with another studio so no, ridley cannot do a thing. Its the same in football/soccer for example the manager makes sure to try and organise the team and get results, but it is all the directors above and the chairman who pulls the strings, money. signings, sponsorship etc... that is the situation Ridley is in.

[b]@Snorklebottom[/b] I really hope so. If Ridley has created the film around an [b]R-Rated [/b] frame work, then a [b]PG-13[/b] cut should maintain some of the gritty elements, only omitting bits of violence and gore. Conversely if Ridley has sculpted Prometheus over a [b]PG-13[/b] skeleton...we're fucked; It'll be a watered down blockbuster. [b]@Apollo[/b], its not a horror but I recall [b]Bruno[/b] being released to the cinema in two cuts. [b]*EDIT*[/b] I think it will be a PG-13 rated film. I've just re-watched the comic-con footage and listened a little carefully to what Lindelof says. He says ask Ridley [i]"Will the PG-13 rating on this movie inhibit you from telling the story that you want to tell?[/i] Lindelof basically wrote the second script right? Or made amendments to the first, creating the second draft. They must have known which rating / which audience they were aiming the film at during the writing process. And I know in the interview afterwards Ridley claims he'll watch the final cut with Fox to decide upon the rating. But I think we'll see at [b]PG-13[/b] version at the cinema.

Bruno in 2 cuts, i stand corrected Mentos. God i hope it is not PG13. That would be a nightmare of epic proportions lol, well..... a watered down nightmare.

Now my question is, can anyone here think of a dark and disturbing movie with a PG 13 rating?.....was all the Alien movies PG 13?....(I should know this...but I don't) I hope not all the nasty stuff is inferred ....Imagination can be a powerful thing...but seriously....I wanne actually see some stuff as well..!

I know this is a tad off on a tangent, but how many years before Alien is Prometheus meant to be set?? I forgot!

Lyle, 30ish years. Or millions if we get hijacked with some of Damon Lindelof's "Lost-esque" time travel BS.

Please...no time travel

If it ends up PG-13, then why stop there? I will personally be insisting there is a musical version so I can sing-along to the horror and gore. And I want Ridley to get his ass on top of that Derelict and sing out the frickin' chorus.

Starbeast... with Nathan Lane as the 'alien'! :-)

Lol, exactly - I better recheck the cast list on IMDB... lol

Sulaco the skeletal monstrosities are from a fake plot .... i point that not to become tedious but because someone can take them as true and we will have another 200 posts with skeletal monstrosities inside . returning to the plot of course a PG13 and an R can have only some scenes of difference ... a sex scene can be a bit longer ( well , not in a ridley movie ) ...a death scene can be a bit more longer ...there can be an extra of a woman dressing with tits out ...or there can be something creepy showed for more time ....just that i think .

Well if they have Nathan Lane as the 'alien', which in my opinion is a bullseye.. It wouldn't really surprise me if that have Robin Williams as one of the Space Jockeys.. just a thought.

@ Frantz Point taken on the fake plot, but am I correct in thinking the SJs are in suits? The whole notion of suits doesn't make any sense unless of course what's inside is even more of an abomination. We know Ripley's using animatronics for the SJs when suited so what's in store when they're unsuited and what do they look like? I don't think it's the big blue guy we've seen - for my money he's from the ship over the waterfall. Also I don't think Ridley would give such an important role to Matthew Rook. There would be no point in having an unsuited SJ unless it's for communication and then you're going to need an actor for that. Ok so Guy Pearce is unaccounted for but I doubt he's an unsuited SJ.

@ starbeast LOL get the cast of Glee. This movie needs to be rated R. If kids want to see this movie, they will get to see it somehow. I think there are much worse things kids see nowadays. I am not saying it is right for them to see it if it were rated R. The way TV is now and complete acess to the internet, a movie will not be that bad. Its a bad example but Titanic was rated PG-13 and it had nudity? go figure. Let me know what you all think.

Haha [b]@Starbeast[/b] I'm up for a musical version! [b]@Apollo[/b] I think it depends how they execute it to be honest, I think time travel [i]could[/i] work in some instances.