Forum Topic
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 4:11 PMFellow fans,
Although we have every right in the world to get angry at the makers for failing to deliver on the character/story development front...
...after my second viewing, I realized PROMETHEUS delivers in original ways that we can only appreciate if we dispense with the conventions of classic narration.
First off, its dream-like structure, in which characters are killed off or abandoned randomly, plot hooks and points mixed up, motifs rehashed and repeated, 3D combined with 2D, testifies less to the incompetence of the makers, than to a certain STYLE that is more invested in visual storytelling, than the use of more conventional (theatrical) methods such as you'd find in ALIEN.
For example: when Elisabeth Shaw's boyfriend is suddenly killed - without any narrative justification - I think the scriptwriters are more interested in drawing a parallel with the death of Shaw's father from ebola - than the emotional dimensions of the event, as you'd have it in a conventional melodrama. Since the scene is followed by a shot of Shaw waking up on a hospital bed, it could even be construed that the whole thing is her nightmare.
This is something you can either like or dislike - but in itself, it is not wrong.
Then take the film's central (Gothic) theme: DOUBLING (MIRRORING, REPRODUCTION, REFLECTION). It is carried through quite consistently throughout the film, despite the shoddy narrative construction. The title is displayed on top of an image showing the duplication of cells. The plot of the film is a doubling of ALIEN's plot. The two female characters (Shaw and Vickers) are obviously two versions of the same female personality, both of them plagued by a traumatic relationship to the loss of the Father figure/God, both trapped by a patriarchal system in which the medical facility is ''optimized for use by men''. The character of David represents two genders, two types of androids, two kinds of agendas, et cetera. It even goes down to the level of action: when the Engineer first caresses David's head before ripping it off, you are instantly reminded of the way one of the grunts caressed the alien snake before it attacked him. And so on and so forth.
Given that the film's horror is focused on fears related to reproduction, it seems that the central spiritual question it is posing has to do something with our narcissism; not just on the level of corporate individualism and competition, but also, as a deeper philosophic/religious question - are we able to really perceive the perspective of the other, the ALIEN VIEWPOINT. Because if we're not, than human history is merely repetition, and childbirth inevitably ends in Hell.
When David reads Elizabeth Shaw's dreams, what he sees is her puzzlement in front of the fact that many people believe in many different Gods. It is this question, rather than belief itself, that she confronts on the mission.
51 Replies
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:20 PMAre they Engineers or other Aliens?
I think Shaw puts that question in the film, she asks who made the Engineers during her discussion of birth and creation with Holloway. Which is interesting, because it points to the idea that you can always imagine a puppeteer behind a puppeteer, a reason behind the reason, endlessly, until you come to the question, why do I need somebody else to guarantee my existence. In other words, you are always ALIEN to yourself.
Do the Aliens/Engineers on the ship know what the Engineer at the water fall is doing?
Does the Engineer at the waterfall know the effects of what he is drinking?
What was the intended result of the drink he drank?
Well I think visually that scene harkens back to the Close Encounters/Extraterrestrial school of science fiction, especially because of the oval shape of the spaceship, and the Engineer's big dark eyes, so we can legitimately assume that he was either left behind, or cast out as the black sheep of the group. Whether or not he decides to dissolve is I think less important than the idea of this fall (the fall of Prometheus) that is to say that human DNA is the result of corruption, of a cosmic mistake.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:32 PMIf the entire theme of the movie and underlying context of everything can be changed by how you interpreted the opening scene, then much of the symbolism can be thrown right out the window and instead leaves this movie not as an expression of set factors but instead as an open ended debate on the human condition - expression, experience, life, love, hope, honor, friendship, comradeship and a million other cliches.
If I remember my media theory classes well, both a mainstream Hollywood film and an indie arthouse film declare their main themes and motifs in the opening scene, and there are no exceptions to this, it's like your basic rule of film grammar. Clearly in this scene you see that this alien creature, who is later designated as our creator, dissolves (whether by sacrifice or fall), influences or creates human DNA and is somehow the driving force of cell replication *the title PROMETHEUS is displayed on top of the image of replicating cells.
Whatever direction the film later takes, its main theme has been stated - genetic reproduction or if you will the mystery of life.
The main dramatic conflict would be the question from HAMLET. Is existence a mistake, a fall, a failure, or is there a higher purpose to it. Reformulated by Shaw - why are the Gods angry with us.
I would say that this framework is quite consistently, and clearly, set up, and most of the film's other themes relate to it, and it doesn't really take a rocket scientist or a deep analyst to sense this.
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:34 PMDejan surely you aren’t saying Ridley is putting all this in from these sources of patriarachy ? I really don’t think theres a lot more to it, or at least not all this stuff on patriarchy. Well why ?
Ok there are other director influences on deep strong visual style, because that’s Ridleys thing he like to excel at. Like moving art. If you have seen kubriks, 2001, you will see clear scene references at start and the end in this movie (the old mans room is like the old mans room in 2001). Except they aren’t chasing blank monoliths and an acid trip, but up against a very real and dangerous system more powerful than themselves. I am guessing Ridley makes this stuff moving art for a practical reason. because he probably enjoys getting a scene really so real he ends up hyperstimulated immersed behind the lens puzzling, “well what would I do if I was in the situation”, which helps overall flow.
chaos creates ambiguity, which appeals to some of us. Ridley having done historical war in many movies creates and captures the chaos, like some of the old big time stuff like Sam Peckinpah where the budgets were massive and the stories really got across just how chaotic and mad life can be in western times or world wars etc, and what people have to do. Hes an old style director of the 60’s 70’s ilk. AND thank F for that, because that was the peak of cinema and the last of the post WW2 generation directors making their statements on screen. It appears todays generation don’t understand where hes coming from, but like you say, the effect occurs as a result and he is one of the few left who can stir things up from time to time.
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 8:05 PM[quote]The Engineers, I'm sure you also noticed, are hyper-masculine, I didn't see any women among the Gods. They could be gay, but they seem to me more like Ubermenschen. They are also apparently a militaristic species.[/quote]
OK maybe you hit on Ridleys dillema then throughout his films history. Notice in the duelists the main character keith plays who is sensitive has to wrestle the entire move with a sh**head (Keitel) who hounds him through his life, just because keith has an ounce of sensitivity (feminine trait). Keitel is also interesting to Ridley because he has complete integrity in his pigheadedness and Ridley makes a big deal about getting that ubermale aspect across. Of course Keitel could be a narcissistic repressed homosexual and the duelists is all about an NPD reaction.
However NPD is not all of man is it ? And the military races have integrity. At the start the engineer calmly disposes of himself (as does Keitel willing to do without a fuss, at the end of the duelists).
Ridleys film have a common theme of the interplay between sensitivity, integrity and corruption between or within various characters (or groups), mixing male or female traits. Perhaps thats all it is. It would be simpler to look at Ridley scotts personal background, film history and favorite projects if you want to understand his movies, or probably send him an email !
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:44 PM[quote]Well I think visually that scene harkens back to the Close Encounters/Extraterrestrial school of science fiction, especially because of the oval shape of the spaceship, and the Engineer's big dark eyes, so we can legitimately assume that he was either left behind, or cast out as the black sheep of the group. Whether or not he decides to dissolve is I think less important than the idea of this fall (the fall of Prometheus) that is to say that human DNA is the result of corruption, of a cosmic mistake.[/quote]
simple reason, he had to commit hari Kari because he F**ed up and got stuck on the Alien planet lab,
Why the disc ship ? Doesn't Ridley shoot in sequence, so later scenes could become more advanced from a post production POV, while earlier scenes, opening shots may be screen tests for the 3d cameras as notice its more expansive than any 3d real shoots ive seen so far. When i looked at those and saw the disc ship i thought, now being a director faced with that composition problem, and playing around with new cameras, a disc poking through clouds, would be far easier to put over such a natural scene and maintain depth of field.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:45 PMI really don’t think theres a lot more to it, or at least not all this stuff on patriarchy.
When I say patriarchy I am merely referring to the male-dominated economic system of today that is capitalism. Despite improvements in women's rights, the system, you'll agree, is male-dominated. The desire of the patriarch is always to reproduce himself, whether by having children, or by making himself immortal, like Weyland. For this goal he is prepared to commit all crimes. This has always been a theme in the whole ALIEN universe, starting with the first ALIEN, which introduced a female SF heroine.
The Engineers, I'm sure you also noticed, are hyper-masculine, I didn't see any women among the Gods. They could be gay, but they seem to me more like Ubermenschen. They are also apparently a militaristic species.
In PROMETHEUS, Shaw symbolically rejects her traditional function as the bearer of children, of the Father's progeny, deciding instead to search for answers - a role that in the traditional (patriarchal) narrative would be given to the son, eg. Hamlet.
This is what I see as ''subversive'' to the way things are done in mainstream SF movies.
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:51 PM[quote]Whatever direction the film later takes, its main theme has been stated - genetic reproduction or if you will the mystery of life.
The main dramatic conflict would be the question from HAMLET. Is existence a mistake, a fall, a failure, or is there a higher purpose to it. Reformulated by Shaw - why are the Gods angry with us.[/quote]
Ridleys films are consistently about survival first, then if we make it through with our integrity and humanity intact, then we deserve a little break to ask some questions like, why did i have to go through all that S**t !! I dont see a lot more to it than that.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 7:58 PMa disc poking through clouds, would be far easier to put over such a natural scene and maintain depth of field.
Well I don;t know if you have direct experience of film-making (I do, professionally), and those kinds of decisions are seldom made without planning. A technical solution may accidentally present itself as handier than some other solution, but that is never the reason why you put something on screen.
So I think it matters a lot for example that Prometheus is hawk-like, resembling a bird of prey, that the ''mother ship'' in the beginning is oval, or that the warrior ship looks like a boomerang.
These kinds of considerations you always make, whether as a graphic designer, or as a film-maker. The meaning of the form is more important than the aesthetic, although aesthetic is also important.
However I do not respect Ridley's talents as a director primarily because I think his choices are utterly conventional - in ALIEN, for example, it all works on close-ups of eyes, that's how you do it in TV commercials when you want to quickly capture an emotional condition. Where I think he is remarkable is that the design is so coherent, it creates a whole world, where everything fits inside a big pattern.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 8:05 PMRidleys films are consistently about survival first, then if we make it through with our integrity and humanity intact,
Absolutely, but what does this mean? ''Survival first'' is the Darwinian credo: a species primary purpose is to reproduce. The alien is a very Darwinian creature, it exists to eat and fuck. Christianity claims the opposite - the meaning of life is in death, to live life is to overcome it. Now in Prometheus, he wants to go further and explore why we (the humans) deviate from the Darwinian norm by asking questions about our origins and our purpose.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 8:10 PMIt would be simpler to look at Ridley scotts personal background, film history and favorite projects if you want to understand his movies, or probably send him an email !
Actually the idea that formed in my head as we were talking is that Ridley reads this, realizes just how brilliant we are, and then puts us on the scriptwriting team for PROMETHEUS 2 for like 20 million dollars. This is why I';m being kind to Lindeloff while everybody else is shitting on him. I don't wanna burn my bridges.
The other option is to continue this thread for another six months, in which case we are feeding Fox's merciless marketing machine with gratis fodder, while THEY are making the 20 mil.
Pessimistic as it may sound, I think we'll end up with NO DOE. But we might at some point write a best-selling book.
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 9:33 PMHa ha, that’s good imagination, I don’t even know where this thread is located on this board, so I doubt anybody else can find it to read it by tomorrow. My field being computational neuroscience, which can cross with Ai and social psychology my experience with writers is reality does not make great movies or at most OK whats the minimum facts, right thanks got to get back to my story, and im saying but wait there is more, without it you will just make a fool of yourself with the smart readers !
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 9:38 PMWhen in the cinema Ridley had managed to suspend my belief into his usual dark tones. I was thinking yeh, I feel so immersed, that’s how it would be in the future etc etc. Ridley Visionary, Keep it rolling…bring it on, hooked in
Then back outside, its “nah, this is reality, Ridley just took me on a trip to a dark place for a while”. Why do we even go there ? He got me again, clever B%%D ! tricking my senses with smokes and mirrors, posing resonating deep puzzles mixed with chaos to stir things up ! Well done confusion grabs you at a subliminal level, but banal confusion does not.
Considering a second trip to Prometheus at imax this time. How often does a movie do that ? been so long I cant remember,
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 10:14 PMI'm sorry I was just laughing as I imagined a FOX executive sticking a ''synaptic reanimator'' into your exhausted computational neuroscientists's brain in order to extract the last bit of explanation they can before you expire, and then your remains are found by Thachicken's crew, and then they stick another reanimator into your brain, and so on
However if you really want to rediscover movie magic, I would rather recommend Lars Von Trier's MELANCHOLIA, than a second viewing of PROMETHEUS - it's a good movie, but not the kind of a deranged masterpiece that MELANCHOLIA is.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 10:25 PMhas to wrestle the entire move with a sh**head (Keitel) who hounds him through his life, just because keith has an ounce of sensitivity (feminine trait).
I never saw THE DUELISTS, but I would say that Satan is clearly related to the penis throughout Scott's ouevre, witness the shape of the new monster and of course the head of the xenomorph. Scott mentions in interviews that he's attracted to strong women because his mother was the captain of the house, or maybe he suffers from castrational anxiety. When one thinks about the original Prometheus, one tends to wonder not what the eagle did to the poor guy's liver, but what happened to his scrotum.
You sense there's a lot of pop psychoanalysis in there, but I do think Satan is primordially linked to the penis by the image of the snake in the Garden of Eden, while one could also theorize that the act of penetration is a form of violence, which means that creation itself is hopelessly scarred by violence.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-03-2012 10:37 PMHowever NPD is not all of man is it ? And the military races have integrity. At the start the engineer calmly disposes of himself (as does Keitel willing to do without a fuss, at the end of the duelists).
I was just thinking about that - how every movie financed in America has to have at least some elements glorifying the moral integrity of the American soldier. Like, MEN IN BLACK 3 has a sub-plot about the honorable black soldier who died before his son could become a man. Or THE AVENGERS is all about these retro patriotic images from the Second World War where square-jawed Captain America saves the world. In PROMETHEUS we have the black captain who will sacrifice for the sake of humanity.
This is where that (British) ambiguity saves the day in PROMETHEUS, for you can also observe the behavior of the Company as the white man's colonizing mission and the black captain's sacrifice as a terrorist crime.
Drakeequation
MemberOvomorphJun-04-2012 1:10 AM[img]http://memecrunch.com/meme/12MV/prometheus/image.png[/img]
Thachicken
MemberOvomorphJun-04-2012 4:26 AMWow Dejan.
Just wow.
Its all I can really say. You see, I thought you were just trolling the community by the complete and utter nonsense you are saying but I genuinely think you believe the stuff your saying.
This isn't an art-house movie. Most people don't watch art-house movies. Art-house movies are not main stream cause most people aren't arrogant, self-centered, self-important hippies that like to make connections between everything for no reason.
Then again, somebody recently broke in to my house and while talking to the neighbors I heard stories of men talking about this and that, all taken out of context because of what had happened. The sad thing is, where these people had some event to color their point of view, I don't think you need an event to alter the content to suit your needs.
If your looking to make some grandiose big point on how intellectual you are, which seems obvious that you are trying to do which I have to admit, my friends and I have been laughing very very hard about. I even have a friend that is a snooty art-house movie critic and even he is laughing at how fail you are being. Aside from the pure entertainment we are getting, I would like to challenge you to something. Take any character in the movie, create a profile on them, then apply said profile to them during the movie. . .or wait, you can't create a profile because the dialogue was so fail, their interactions were so fail. The characters were so 1 dimensional that even the military in Avatar had more emotional depth and character development.
The only part we all agree on with you is that this movie, the writers started it off as an intellectual challenge but then whilst trying to prove they were smarter than the rest of the world, twisted up the entire movie and failed miserably.
Anyways, this is my last post on your threat cause of 1 simple thing. Its not going anywhere and as a picture my friends sent me recently, I totally agree with it.
The picture had the text of:
Arguing with retards is like playing chess with a pigeon, no matter how good you are at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock over all the pieces, crap on the board and strut around like its victorious.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-04-2012 8:53 AMThachicken, I guess I'd be insulted by all this if it weren't coming from a CHICKEN.
Art-house movies are not main stream cause most people aren't arrogant, self-centered, self-important hippies that like to make connections between everything for no reason.
Smart people are always in the minority, while the masses eat the fast food you serve them. But I didn't say that I'm a snob who glorifies high-brow culture at the expense of popcorn entertainment. That's what you construed out of your chicken's malice. If nothing, PROMETHEUS proves that you can nowadays mix the two and that's a very good development in comparison to the 1980s.
Take any character in the movie, create a profile on them,
I started this whole conversation claiming that ''character development'' isn't the most important thing in this script, because the script is more of an allegory, a satire, and a fantasy, than a classic drama. Your demand for classic development is understandable, but doesn't obligate the authors to agree with you.
Arguing with retards is like playing chess with a pigeon,
I have NOT invited you into any ''argument'', you came of your own and judging by the number of your reactions, enjoyed it thoroughly. Obviously you also have an inquisitive mind demanding answers. That you have to play the highschool bully for your fraternity pals, is YOUR problem, chicken.
kellyiom
MemberOvomorphJun-04-2012 7:44 PMHear, hear, Dejan. More thought, less scorn. Myself, I was initially quite empty after watching it, but simultaneously wanted to see it again. It is I think creating a quest for answers and let history be the judge. I think it will be more important than we believe, whether by accident or design..a bit like life?
rogerharris
MemberOvomorphJun-05-2012 1:40 PM[quote]Hear, hear, Dejan. More thought, less scorn. Myself, I was initially quite empty after watching it, but simultaneously wanted to see it again. It is I think creating a quest for answers and let history be the judge. I think it will be more important than we believe, whether by accident or design..a bit like life?[/quote]
Exactly most people appear to miss whats been achieved here. Director and writer take a tired and recently abused movie theme from the dogpile of hollywood. Then stay within the constraints of the old script, and characters of that world, while they start to then turn it around into a visually mindblowing epic that makes us think about life the universe and everything. So much so that it is simulating us to ask of them if they can develop the theme such that it may turn out to be the longest developed theme in movie history, and may end up bearing very little resemblance to its origins.
Bit of an achievement pulling all that off, especially considering Ridley is pushing 80. Most of us here will be lucky if we can pull of anything significantly creative past age 40.
dejan
MemberOvomorphJun-05-2012 7:55 PMRoger, browsing the internet the other day I bumped into an archaeology student who specializes in Greek & Roman mythology as it is used in the media, and she drew my attention to the other part of the Prometheus myth, with Zeus eating his children...
http://popclassicsjg.blogspot.nl/2012/06/prometheus-dir-ridley-scott-2012.html
(I, in turn, reminded her of the HAMLET references)
Indeed there's a lot of parent-child hatred in this story, and there is a tragic undertone as well.
Add A Reply
