My review - IF THEY WOULD HAVE - (SPOILER)

my Prometheus review--- IF THEY WOULD HAVE --- I decided to watch a cheap Camversion, because I didn't want to wait another 2 month for the release in germany ( First flaw, release dates, big mistake and we know why they did ) and after popping in more and more bad reviews ..wtf . maybe bigscreen might give some credits back, who knows. Overall rating I give 5 points of 10. I wouldn´t give a PURELY negative review because of the love for Scott´s film he created. They gave it away! Really that´s a good description, maybe the overall quality WOULD HAVE BEEN better if they didn´t SPOIL it by themselves by releasing the BEST SCENES as trailers. What a ´funny´ way of pre-release policy to forbid all actors and staff to go public with the plot and THEN releasing the detailed trailers? [b]I mean IF THEY WOULD HAVE done a better care on the plot and actor development and also let Ridley´s talent of creating deep tension scenes more space it MIGHT..[/b] I only give flaws here, you have seen the movie. The first 3 minutes are just georgous, the landscape..wow there you can feel Scott´s feeling for big pictures ( he´s a painter, too. I had to think a bit of the opening scene of Alien) Or the scenes of David playing basketball/ watching lawrence of arabia etc..very nice, 2001ish.. First flaw: then the cheesy pale but Schwarzenegger looking ´sacrifice engineer´appears.. "WHY THE HECK SO MUCH MUSCLES, WHAT FOR?" ( I stopped and smoked a cigarette). The plot flaws: Basically the story unfolds and the first hour ( I looked up my watch) and I realized that the style is this: [b]The movie just follows (better:) illustrates in thin lines the plot RATHER than developing strong, dark and lifeful pictures that impregnate your brain[/b].( I´m not only comparing it to Alien but to other Scott films). I thought, I hope this gets better, this style of mainstream movies I don't need HERE. ( AND MAYBE THIS IS DUE TO THE BASIC ORIENTATION TOWARDS THE CRAPPY ANCIENT ASTRONAUT THEORY,TOO) Second flaw: the plot just burbles on..THE ONLY ACTING THAT STOODS OUT IS THAT OF DAVID! LITERALLY! I mean ITS ALL THERE, fantastic actors, georgous spaceship, ALIEN I DNA ..W T F?? main flaw: the mission is stated as an scientific exploring, but they do everything to hurt that. Like little kids they stumble into the temple, grasping for breath, touch everything, take the head into the ship ..Because of that David is able to take unrecognized an ampule on board. No science, [b]Tomb Raider in Space[/b]. The hangar Weyland briefing scene/ Weyland scenes overall.. WOULD have been nice when they developed a stronger, basic picture of Peter Weyland´s ideas and agenda in the background, PARALLEL to the main plot. Kind of threatening or sinister one.. IMO. That WOULD HAVE GIVEN a whole new REASON and TENSION to the plot. Maybe the only [i]valid[/i] one in this movie. Too, his relationship to his daughter. ( Actually we only see hints of, in the hangar briefing scene, when he calls David, a robot, as his kinda son and Vickers looks aside..). The plot just cant develop and breath. The fire blows out constantly. Acting: sorry, it just goes under, again, because of the mainstream style of plot/ story developing. Best scene of Vickers: " In my room. In 10 minutes" . seriously. Fifield and Milburn stand out, too, simply because of their status, they are merchendaries, a small hint to the blue/white collar thing in Alien I. The old capitalism problem, we´re only in it for the money. The Peter Weyland appearance when he wants to meet his maker. A joke. THE WHOLE MISSION is based on Weyland and then he just gets into his electronic walker and gets knocked down by the engineer. ( I watched the movie without the ending credits, so somebody please could give me a link..thanx)