New Replies (Page 4,949)

what if the squeal to Prometheus is a remake of alien ?!?!?!?!?!?! lol probably not going to happen but that could be interesting if that were right :)

Oops...here ya go [IMG]http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k151/MattFallsPortfolio/1324954231.jpg[/IMG][/img]

i'm just seeing 4 fingers and a thumb here.

Why do we think the space jockey has 4 digits?

I going on Mr. Clean being the SJ.

Oh hmm I can't see that he has only 4 in the pics I've seen but it's possible. It does look like the space jockey from Alien has 5 though unless he is thumbless.

It doesn't look like the Prometheus to me though. It looks more organic. Maybe it's one of the crew (David?) accessing the star charts?

Good point. Mr clean may not be the jockey then. I missed that.

Oh I am sure that is David accessing the star chart I just looked at it in high definition. He expands it by expanding his arms apart. I don't know what to think about the Space Jockey and Mr. Clean exactly. I think Mr. Clean might have five digits, one may be obscured by the other. Who knows though... EDIT: Woops about the star chart i was referring to the trailer. For this picture I don't know but it looks like the kinds of buttons on the platform in the star chart room in the trailer. Bet you're right and David accessed the hologram by using those controls.

Yeah...we're all just speculating. Another one I can't stop looking at. [IMG]http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k151/MattFallsPortfolio/90c7e7ee.jpg[/IMG]

I never could tell who that was for sure any ideas?

At first I thought it was Vickers with David's hand on her pod being conflicted about knowing this is a death mission for the crew. Now I think it might be Shaw with Vickers' hand.

I am wishing they would release the comic con trailer in HD. These comic con still are so distorted they can be misleading. I had a lot of strange plot ideas before I saw the same shots in the HD trailer and it was clearly not what I had imagined.

They ARE very fuzzy. Still kinda interesting to look back on them for another clue.

Did anyone ever figure out what this was all about? Ridley with this guy floating around in the background. [IMG]http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k151/MattFallsPortfolio/a14f473a.jpg[/IMG]

Here is the one from the official FB page with the missing part. http://m.youtube.com/#/profile?desktop_uri=%2Fuser%2FPrometheus6812%3Ffeature%3Dwatch&help=False&channel_id=0&livestreaming_tutorial=False&ytsession=%7B%7D&feature=watch&start=0&user=Prometheus6812&tab=&autoplay=True&gl=US

Also there was the leaked trailer that showed alot more in terms of "monsters" maybe we will have that trailer for the superbowl .

Frantz, I did see the leaked trailer too. I'm kinda sad that I didn't get to analyze it more to see the "monsters." I don't remember seeing anything too different from the trailer we have now. Were there spoilers I missed? I'm so pumped about this movie!

well there were two very explicit sequences ...but very bad quality .. one of a serpent like creature moving between some cables ( shaw's baby ? ) .... and another of a guy with a flamethrower burning something tha was advancing ( maybe ) against him ...and other things ..but the quality was unfortunately too poor .

Awww I missed the serpent. I think we are going to see several types of monsters/aliens/mutants in this movie. A whole new mythos. :)

[url=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078748/trivia]SnorkelTrivia[/url]

MAN UP WHO EVER DIDN'T YET !!! YOU WANNA PLAY YOU GOTTA PAY...COME ON NOW ~!!!

okay, citation for that has been added. if you do find any more problems with the information on my blog, I'd be very glad to attempt to fill in the details. Half the time I think I've typed everything out and then it seems as if half of it has vanished. But I would indeed like to provide citations for every little thing because it does indeed make a difference.

aside from the fact that both Blade Runner and ALIEN had the same director, i feel these 2 film's worlds could easily coexist with one another. i think the "Ash" model android could have easily been created by the Tyrell Corporation, rather than what was suggested in Cameron's " world " i could easily imagine the Nostromo's crew docking in someplace in that type of environment, on shore leave or whatever, i know the timeline for ALIEN is much farther in the future than Blade Runner's 2019 timeframe, but still, for me, i can definitely see these 2 film coexisting really well together i hope that, not only with Prometheus, but also with this tentative follow up to Blade Runner (or prequel) that Scott and his team simply and utterly blow away my simple mind with these possible films, and once again put a truly hardcore science fiction story / mythos BACK in the popular psyche of moviegoers post the late 1970's well, at least i can hope....

I have some more food for thought: What if God created the ability to create? What if God doesn't exist in any form that we are aware of? If God designed you, would he prefer you to have free will or mindless? If God wanted to speak to us, how would he do it? If God wanted to speak to you, how would he do it? Out of everything in the universe, how much do you think you know? Which is better suited for searching out these questions: science or philosophy? Is God subject to your rules and logical reasoning? If God created you, what does that mean to you, if anything? Just a few questions for you.

goodkat › Did you ever consider that the Bible is nothing more than A Best seller written by people who were overtly frightened of scientifically and totally explainable events around them and things things around them which they could not explain away with their religion. So they wrote a best seller !!! Perhaps The Best Seller of ALL Time. To me it is nothing but an archaic best selling Novel written by people who could not overcome their own fear of the unexplained. furthermore, Ridley Scott's belief ....was/is...odds are...quite accurate. The scientific truth is... he is 100% correct to state that the mathematical odds of Mankind NOT having had help from other worlds is absolutely as ridiculous as the notion that mankind is alone in this universe. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of Scott and The TV series "Ancient Aliens" and every other scientific theory that puts forth the idea that Mankind has had help...and is not alone in all of space an time because from a mathematical point of view it is 100% impossible for them to be wrong in any way shape or form. It is IGNORANCE and COMPLETE LACK OF ANY SCIENTIFIC EDUCATION that is the basis of the "nay sayers" argument. Heaven and G-d are nice ideas, and almost certainly ficticious creations of MAN !!!

You can search the heavens for God but you will not find him, cause you can only find him in the hearts of the believers. Darwin brought us the word evolution but the Muslims already had the idea from one of the names of Allah Al Musawwir: The Fashioner. It makes sense that a things form and function can change over time through the influence of it's environment but it is hard to understand and except that things can also come into existence out of nothing. Well beyond magic!

That right there is 100% EXACTLY what I mean! I consider myself a spiritual person and as far as I can tell the ONLY accomplishment or positive contribution to the existence of mankind we can credit to the Art Of religion, is this... It has divided us and done so whilst celebrating our differences !!! Two extremely bad bad bad bad and even more bad things for mankind !!! & CLEARLY in today's day and age, mankind is in need of exactly the opposite things and for us all to start celebrating our similarities rather than our differences.

“If we could just take God out of the equation, there'd be no f---ing problem.” ~Ridley Scott All this seems to be the same old argument that has been debated since ancient times. Our world is populated by religious types, agnostics, and atheists. All of which, in one way or another, usually think or feel, that the others are wrong and or foolish. It’s such a heavy subject, that it usually turns hostile at some point. The religious type can be heard saying, “For those who believe, no explanation is necessary…for those who don’t believe…no explanation is possible," while the agnostic or atheist can turn it around and say “For those who don’t believe, no explanation is necessary…” and so on and so forth. And it just goes ‘round and ‘round. Unfortunately, both sides usually become heated, and the strong emotional responses just kill any sense of a sound logical debate. In the case of Ridley Scott, he is a self proclaimed agnostic. Therefore, religious entities and themes are not treated kindly or given much respect in his films, i.e. ‘1492’ and ‘Kingdom of Heaven.’ This agnosticism also seems to give rise to a strong thrust of “political correctness” in his pictures, i.e. ‘Thelma and Louise’ and ‘GI Jane’. Therefore, I conclude that any would-be traditional religious notions that might surface in PROMETHEUS, will be dealt with accordingly, and treated in the same way as in previous Scott films. What it boils down to, is that Ridley is generally down on organized religion, especially forms of Christianity. Starting from when he was a kid, when his parents sent him to church and spiritual formation classes…but did not adhere to the religion themselves. He doesn’t respect those who he considers to be hypocrites. I believe his formative years, at least on this subject had a great affect on him. ~N

Fantastic arguments, all of them Neurion and everyone else. It is nice to agree to disagree as well, we can all have our own opinions and they are all respectable. There are good arguments and bad ones for both sides of this coin. One thing though I think is certain, Religion, whether good or bad, has, and continues to have a massive influence on us all !!!

Also, I wish to add something I think is quite cool here... Is this true of YOU like it is of me? When it comes to believing in "g-d", as I have said, my official position is that I feel he/she was a fabrication. But whenever I have found myself in some serious ass trouble in life, suddenly I start thinking of or praying to "g-d". IN school, if I was screwed and did not study for some major exam I'd be up all nite crying and praying to "g-d" to Please help me pass somehow, or get through it somehow...it is as if I ONLY believe in any g-d when I am desperate of feel I need to bring some g-d into it simply because am in trouble and have no idea how to get out of it. Sometimes I lie to myself and tell myself I am praying to some g-d so that I can find the strength inside myself to get out of whatever it is I am in, but that's not really truth full is it? What is true is I am a hypocrite and selectively choose when I want to believe in a higher power or not. I also, am a Jew, not by choice or preference, but by birth, and although If I could choose from all of them this would be the one I would stick with...But in Judaism it is considered disrespectful to write out the word "GOD" like I just did. You are supposed to show Respect and type it this way...the way I always do here..."G-D" Making me a complete and total fucking hypocrite. It's like I am covering my own ass or something and playing both sides of that coin and not even stopping myself even though I know deep down it is wrong somehow!!! And even just typing that word that way, seems to me to be an idea created out of Fear!!! The whole thing is a Mess !!! I love that Line attributed to Ridley you quoted about "Just taking it out of the equation". Maybe what he always meant was that if we could we would take more responsibility for ourselves and each other.

An argument for the existence of God The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this many understand to be God. It's a fairly simple concept...if all movement and change is cause and effect...like a domino effect...who or what pushed the first domino? ~N

Did you happen to write that here [url=http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm]SUMMA THEOLOGICA[/url] also or did you lift it from there?

I lifted it from the Summa Theologica. ~N

I any case, I think that the argument is sound. I'm curious to hear/read an argument to challange or attempt to contradict it. ~N

I think it would probably be a good idea to give proper credit to the author when using quotes next time to prevent confusion, thanks.

I agree, sorry for the clumsy oversight. ~N

@ Spartacus Where the hell did I mention the bible? I spoke only on the subject of God, not the bible. Aside from the reasons above why I don't believe in God... The reason I don't believe we were created by any other sentient race is quite simple. 1. There is no evidence. 2. The universe is so large that it's more than likely guaranteed for intelligent life (if there is even such a thing) to spring up on it's own out of pure chance. 4. If we were designed then it was probably accidental considering how insignificant we are in comparison to the universe. Incredibly unlikely that we were given a purpose, whether it be for their sake or something else. If we were actually given a purpose then it would probably be to take their place and beyond as their successors, just as machines someday will be our successors.

@Spartacus I never mentioned the bible once in my post. The bible is a documentation of fantasy stories and information while god on the other hand is a fictional figure, two completely different things. As for the topic on other sentient races creating us for a purpose, I don't believe that for several reasons. 1. There is no evidence. 2. We're too insignificant for anything more advanced than us to have use for us. 3. If we were created and we were given some type of purpose then it would more then likely be to take their place and beyond as their successors, just as machines someday will be ours. This suggest that we would be superior to them if this were the case. 4. The universe is so large filled with more stars than grains of sand on all of the beaches of the earth that the chances are stupidly high for life to spring up out of pure luck, even intelligent life like ourselves (if there is even such a thing). I don't doubt for one race to have the capability of creating another, what I doubt is the reason behind it, there is nothing to gain from it other then to replace you.

The "religion has been bad, bad, bad" sentiment ignores a couple of fundamental, realities. 1: The development of religious belief was intimately bound together with the development of agriculture, and therefore, [i]all[/i] civilizations. 2: An overwhelming majority of the greatest, most significant art and architecture produced by every cutlture throughout the globe has been directly or indirectly inspired by religious beliefs.