119 minutes is TO SHORT

Not happy, still two mins longer then Alien.... though i want to see the 136 min version...

Slightly sad, but in a way It couldn´t be otherwise, PG-13 was obvious since the moment Ridley said He was shooting both versions, so the rate it´s not my concern, but the lenght... come on, Avatar was so long and it was for newborns, so why this PG-13 piece can´t be longer?? only hope is that when they release the director´s cut they will give the missing 30 minutes :P hoping hoping... by the way is this official? I mean the 119 min length? anyone?

The running time of Ridley Scott's original "Alien" was 117 minutes. Ridley Scott's Director's cut was even shorter, at approx. 116 minutes. The running time of Cameron's "Aliens" was 137 minutes, only 17 minutes more than the alleged running time of "Prometheus." Looking at Cameron's track record, it's no surprise that "Aliens" was longer. I think we're in good hands.

119 minutes is to short what?

Ridley states he's a business man and needs to consider the largest audience for prometheus in terms of the rating, well ridley a good business man should know to listen to your customers requirements when selling an item, or idea, or anything else for that matter. The core audience for this wants an r rating and a as promised epic film in length, and scope. When a director tells his audience he wants to make something really nasty ! the fan base for this particular franchise are not thinking pg 13 i would wager.

Blade Runner is around that length and he packed a ton into it. Have some faith people. Jesus.

My faith has been shattered way to many times for blind faith shane i'm airing my concerns because of the Betrayal's already evident. Judas.

@Shane.. Yep.. yesterday it was "this" is all wrong.... the day before that it was "that" is all wrong, now, the "whine" du jour is the "runtime"! Geeebus H. Murphy !... Bladerunner was only 117 m. folks. If Ridley Scott says his theatrical cut with the BEST PACING runs 119 minutes... then the proper length for this movie is 119 minutes. END OF STORY. Tommorrow the moaning will probably be about "Why aren't Randy Newman & Elton John doing the title track"

Why is every one griping? It's not this or that, the film has yet to come out, wait til after the film to gripe or get over 200 million and make the film yourself. Give Scott a chance here, the man has been making movies for quiet sometime....I think he knows what he is doing....

Ridley Scott has made 2 scifi movies. Both are in the top 15 best scifi movies ever made. That is enough for me to have faith in it being a good movie. But I am one of the people happy it won't have a facehugger, xeno, chest burster, or hopefully LV426. I'm good with all these things. In fact, I prefer it.

Quality not Quantity (hopefully)

LOL what betrayal? 119mins is plenty long enough here's why - Jaws RT 124mins, Star Wars 121mins, Reserviour dogs 99mins, now I could go on but why? A films running time reflects the stories output and there's plenty in those 3 films without being the length of LOTR or The Godfather.

All - more serious issues here... EG: Why aren't Randy Newman & Elton John doing the title track?! PML at CanadaPhil (even if he is Canadian...)

Well i'm thinking kingdom of heaven where the opposite of that proved to be the case in terms of length. I'm optimistic about this film but cynical as it gets when putting my faith in studio decisions. Give me an Example of a really nasty film thats both epic and pg 13 ?

Yeah but KOH is crap lol, and so is Black Hawk Down. But RS and Sci-fi is a match made in heaven so should keep the faith.

KOH the directors cut was a lot better than the theatrical release and lotr is not a good example that's not my idea of a good film either. Star wars ? are you kidding me . i didn't like it in 77 when i was 12

Well well i think that like all the things one love you always hope that they never end ... so its normal that we will more happy if Ridley said " its a 3 hours movie ..." They will be able to pack more "situations of what we saw in the trailers ? I start a bit to doubt that ...

Most movie run too long anyway. I endured The 3 transformers movie 2 days ago because I'm stupid. that movie could have had an hour on the editing room floor with ease. Instead, it was way to fucking long. Quality not quantity. If the story is 119 minute long, don't fuck with it just to appeal to fans.

Well it's hardly surprising is it frantz with all this talk of epic scale and comparisons in the media to lawrence of arabia, and david lean movie's one expected a lot more than a basic 2 hour film the lost pilot was only half an hour shorter lol. Yes shane but the crux of what i'm saying is this the directors opinion or a studios ? more often than not its the studios which fincher, ridley, and cameron, have testified to this being the case and in all those cases they were wrong (their words not mine ) thats all i'm saying.

He said in scope, not length. Something doesn't have to be long to be epic. Or to fully tell a story. We just all think epic = long.

Seems like a decent length to me actually. Hopefully a blu-ray R rated version will become available with extra footage. You seem just a little TOO hyped, so you are only setting yourself up for disappointment.

Maybe but like i said disappointment and expectation go hand in hand in my experience. wish i was hyped i could use some hype right now.

Sorry Alteredstate you lost me when you were on about KOH.

EPIC "SCALE & SCOPE"... How are they not delivering that?? Have you people already forgotten the stills and moving images that you have already been treated to?.. There are 6 weeks of those still left. I have been a sci-fi fan all of my life and I can tell ALL you naysayers without ANY hesitation that I have NEVER seen any more breathtakingly beauftiful vistas than in this film... Im serious. Any "whiner" here, PLEASE name ANY sci-fi with more sweeping visuals than you have had just a very short taste of with the Prometheus stills & trailers? Im serious.. Im really curious.

you lost me when you reckoned star wars was great black hawk was shite

I saw one once but where and when I can't say.

Have you ever read a film poll? Can't ever remember BHD or KOH in any top 50 but no it must be me lol.

i've given my explanations, and reasons for my concerns, and maintain my optimism for this but i wont be surprised if and when the extended cut comes along the theatrical release will be claimed as.. its all down to the studios insistence, like so many other great films we love.

c'mon film polls rate the sound of music the best film ever lol its u at least that's in a channel 4 poll . If i thought that way the spice girls would be better than led zeppelin because they sell as many records. Fortunately i'm not a sheep and don't go with the masses view of what's great i don't watch talent programmes either.

I don't like anything Ridley Scott has done but Blade Runner and Alien. And I am still excited. Sorry, Black Rain was ok when i saw it on VHS as a kid. That was many years ago. Granted I haven't seen anything since I watched half of 1492 in 1993? Nothing after that interested me subject wise. So I am not even a fan and I am excited. Ridley Scott has made some shit movies. He's never made a bad scifi film.

For me, I'm not really pissed at the length, just perplexed. We're aware that major "how did we get here?"-type questions are going to be raised and answered, and I'm intrigued to see how that's going to pan out in 119 minutes. With Alien, the film could afford to be shorter because it was a different type of film, starting [i]in medias res[/i] with a quick-moving plot with alien vs. crew, unlike what we're expecting with Prometheus which addresses larger, "epic" issues (not that I want to necessarily be bogged down with extraneous filler, like other posters have said). Oh well, I'll be anxious to see the finished product, with another question added to my pile: How are they going to do all this in 119 minutes?

Agree with the last two posters comments and respect everyone else's to ive said my piece.

Black Hawk Down was fantastic. Ridley Scott directed the hell out of that film, and the cinematography was sublime.

Personally, a cough and a sneeze less than 2 hours seems a pretty healthy portion of movie to me... In the months and years to come, some of what's happening behind closed doors today will become public domain - maybe he planned to give us 150 minutes when he started, but it soon became obvious that he had another movie in this story and, when the studio saw what he was doing, they agreed and gave him one? Of course, I don't know...I am just inclined to give the man a little of my faith - at least until I see what he puts on my plate.

Funny, where is this 136 minute version coming from? PS: In the "Guess How long prometheus will be" I said exactly 136.

"Black Hawk Down is crap"...............really?!? But yeah, like I've been saying: for me, it's really all about the blu-ray. PG-13 and "pacing" be damned.....but then, I also think the extended edition LOTR films actually work better than the theatrical versions, so what do I know?

quality first, could be 90 mins of absolute awesomeness wouldnt give a shit

I like Ridley Scott films, he's done some of my fav movies of all time. His attention to detail is great Gladiator, American Gangster, Blakc Hawk Down, even kingdom of heaven was very underrated IMO to name a few. He has done some shit as well GI Jane..... robin Hood was garbage....