I hope Ridley is still a team player

@allinamberclad , not that I agree 100% ,but your a great debate! You need your own forum :-)

@Arkadine But, if I detected a negative note, it is because what you wrote is substantially built upon those notes? I understood your use of "loose ends" perfectly well? It was your use of them in the negative, that I took issue with? Your words are there, above? And I think you know I wasn't commenting on your conlusions for the Story? I was commenting on the conclusion you came to, [i]here[/i]. I can see that you weren't criticising Lindelof and yes: it is your prerogative to, "read between lines", but if that, for you, tends toward "misinterpretation", you should really expect to have your reading questioned - that is actually a good thing. I do agree on the last point - and would only add that dispassionate, fair criticism is one thing and is welcomed by all who are confident in their ability and art - but where unfair and ill-reasoned, criticism is just as damaging to creativity as, "fanboy-dom". If not more so.

@ allinamberclad It seems you wanted to see a negative note in everything I wrote, like in the expression"loose ends." I meant by that the Space Jockey of course, and I think it is a brilliant theme to build a movie around. I also don't have any conclusions for the story. Like most of you, I am expecting to be taken by surprise and to be amazed by Prometheus. And I was not criticizing Damon Lindeloff, I know exactly what he meant but it is my prerogative to read between the lines. I also believe that excessive adulation can't do any good to a creative mind, so I hope Ridley stays away from fanboys above all.

'"if the movie is a success it's all because of Ridley Scott and if the movie is not a success is because I was unable to execute his vision successfully" A nice way of flattering his idol and washing his hands at the same time.' Arkadine....that makes absolutely NO sense......Lindelof is giving any and all credit to Ridley there and taking any and all responsibility for possible failure should that happen....He gives all the credit to Ridley there...ALL OF IT and putting his neck on the chopping block..........He's saying, and rather clearly that if [i]Prometheus[/i] is everything people hope it is, THEN IT'S BECAUSE OF RIDLEY...and if the film fails, THEN IT IS ALL ON HIM, LINDELOF, FOR NOT TRANSLATING RIDLEY'S IDEAS TO THE PAGE AS WELL AS HE COULD HAVE....

I agree. It's Ridley's neck and the future of Blade Runner 2 (and Prometheus 2) all on the line at this event (it's more than a movie)......Lindelof, like an actor, is an employee. His career is bright and certain regardless of the outcome of this. Ridley has already made it! He has had an amazing career! All that is on the line here is whether or not Ridley will be entrusted to do two more sci-fi movies before he passes.

I fear that Ridley is going the same route as George Lucas did with the prequels. When you become too involved in every aspect of the film-making process, the end product may sometimes suffer. Many of the story elements that have been derided appear to be Ridley's ideas. I think Lindelof is being tactful when he says that if it doesn't work that means he failed and not Ridley. If you read between the lines, I believe he is trying to get it across that a lot of the final product was not his idea. I don't think that people should put all the blame on Damon Lindelof if the movie isn't good.

I would think that Ridley could be called an employee as well, he is being paid by Fox to make a movie for them. He then pays his team and so on.

[i]I would think that Ridley could be called an employee as well, he is being paid by Fox to make a movie for them. He then pays his team and so on.[/i] True. I look at Ridley, though, as the "ship's captain". He may be being financed by "The Company", but the fate of this movie rests entirely on HIS shoulders. He is used to this and, IMO, he accepts this.

Listen, this movie has NO CHANCE of being "bad". None. Zilch, Nada, Nichts....

I agree that Scott is responsible for the final product here...just saying that I felt Lindelof was being literal....

I'm sorry but I stopped at "Aurthur Max isn't brilliant." I am psyched as hell that he and Janty Yates are on this film. Kindom of Heaven was brilliant as far as visuals. Set design and costumes were just breathtaking. I also thought Body of Lies looked great. I mean shit lets look at the list Robin Hood Body of Lies American Gangster Kingdom Heaven Panic Room Black Hawk Down Gladiator GI Jane Se7en I mean seriously. I think you'd be hard pressed to find 5 other production designers with creds like those. I was thrilled to find out he was working with most of his as of late "usual" crew on this film. RS is at a place where he needs to have people around him that he has a short hand with. People who are great at what they do and also know him and what he wants. I would like to see him work with some different, up and comers but you don't fix what aint broke. If he were making smaller films perhaps yes it would be great to see him experiment. But not with Prometheus.

i cant say Lindelof's name brings any comfort/admiration to this movie.

Re-read the post again. Out of all the threads on this board I disagree with this one the most.

Deckard_B26354...I am in total agreement....

Well, I didn't want to spell it out but it seems some might have missed the point of my post. One guy got it. This time all the burden is on Ridley's Shoulders. But he is not a science fiction author. He didn't write the original Alien: Dan O'Bannon did; and he hadn't even read Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? before shooting Blade Runner. Of course he is a great director. If his idea for Prometheus is really amazing and groundbreaking it will be a turn for him as as a screenwriter. But up to this moment, his best movies have seen him directing other people's stories.

I have to be honest, this reads, to me, quite a bit like a you've decided that the story has to fit your conclusion and not the other way around. There was no pre-existent Screenplay? I don't understand why that is necessarily significant. Scripts and the Story they are based on have to be created, like everything else - and having "a lot of loose ends", actually seems a pretty healthy start to me....it all depends on what is done with them. Like others, I would also say that you seem to have grossly misinterpreted Lindelof in a way that seems, to me, quite impossible to do - if you base an interpretation only the actual words that are said: "if the movie is a success it's all because of Ridley Scott and if the movie is not a success is because I was unable to execute his vision successfully" Leaving aside [i]guesses[/i] as to his motives - his actual words: In the best outcome: he is relinquishing all credit to Ridley Scott. In the worst outcome: he is accepting full responsibility upon himself. Neither case is actually anything like what you have concluded from the same words - it's the kind of thing that throws everything else you say into question. There's no way to read a, "washing of his hands", into that statement. If anything, I tend toward it being encouraging - it smacks of someone with supreme confidence, trying to compensate that supreme confidence, publicly. I interpret it as him knowing perfectly well that it's good. I'd imagine he's not prepared for the World and Mr. Scott to get the impression that he thinks it wouldn't be so damn good if it hadn't been for him - and there's the Spaihts component in all this that he has spent some time dancing around and between....(in fact, it's just the kind of thing that makes me wonder if, secretly, that isn't [i]exactly[/i] what he thinks, but that's immaterial). "Proud of his lack of authorship", I interpret as coming from the same place - not false modesty, just a slight and bizarre over-protestation - y'know? It's a particular kind of nonsense....I see it as a give-away. That suggests to me that, when he finished that script, he probably actually sniffed it. Several times. I'd guess what he's proud of, is himself - this may actually be a good sign. No offence intended to you - and I'm not necessarily Lindelof's biggest fan - but I passionately disagree with your analysis, conclusion and the terms you have used to frame them and I really do agree with @Deckard_B26354.

Robin Hood Body of Lies American Gangster GI Jane et.al Now why did you have to go and ruin my excitement by making me remember the crap this guy has been directing lately?

Nicely put allinamberclad

Maybe the issue I take on this sentence is because I am thinking in logical terms. The second part of the sentence seems to deny the first part. Because if the movie is a success it is also because Lindeloff was able to execute Ridley Scott's vision successfully. And if the movie is not a success... well, I leave that for you to finish... By chance I was reading this Philip K. Dick story called "The Mold Of Yancy", where a team of bureaucrats create a virtual entity in order to manipulate an entire population. This entity would address his audience with speeches that included sentences not unlike that of Lindeloff: "It was the same all down the line. With one sentence Yancy gave; with the next he took away. The total effect was a neat cancellation, a skillful negation. But the viewer was left with the illusion of having consumed a rich and varied intellectual feast. It was amazing. And it was professional: the ends were tied up too slickly to be mere accident".

@craigamore...You and I seem to be like minded on many subjects. You're the shit lol. @dallas!dallas!...I will admit that I'm a Ridley Scott fanboy to the unth-degree. I will also admit that he does shit films from time to time. What I was talking about with that list was not Scott's directing. I was talking about the production design and look of the films and the work of Aurthur Max and Janty Yates. Rgardless of how bad any of those films were, they looked fantastic. Amd fpr the record 2 of the films you listed-Body of Lies and American Gangster-are classics imo.