Shaw her Cross and Jesus

I think this is correct as well. I do believe the Christian church or Christianity as a religion organized itself (correct me if I am wrong) somewhere around 75 years A.D. This can be reason for the Engineers to decide to wipe us out.

[code]The review also stated that this symbolised Christianity as THE SUPREME mono-theistic religion. Any ideas anyone?[/code] One word: LOL Try to put the defenseless guy like jesus in place of any engineer, you're an atheist, you can get the idea from here about supremacy. ;) Problem with supremacy is that [b]when any tribe or a person is weak, he/they need to defend it with such claims. Either by eliminating others, just like ants do or by making such assumptions. It shows weakness of that religion rather than supremacy.[/b] That said, this movie is from conservative group of film studio aka FOX, I can't expect any of their movies not being Pro-christianity or Pro america. That;s all i can say.

Half of that review is right. I think Ridley Scott tried to sneak "believer's victory" into the film. That we are being watched over and it's not just us alone out there. I noticed that all the non-believers died a terrible death. But Captain Janek, who remembered Christmas, died a noble death. He became a martyr by sacrificing himself for the human race. Only survivors were Shaw- a Christian and David- he carried a cross during the Engineer's rampage. Now don't go getting annoyed, it's just a movie.

Well, apart from the lack of historical evidence of Jesus, consider that it was the 4th century before the Emperor Constantine helped make Christianity part of the Roman Empire. Before that it was small. So that wasn't 2000 years prior to the "incident" that killed the headless Space Jockey. Also, The book of Genesis, that contains the story of Adam was written about 500 B.C. but were one of many competing faiths at the time.... are the Space Jockeys supposedly monitoring every belief system on the planet? Also, in terms of fitting with christianity... there's a few flaws. The 'miraculous' pregnancy of Shaw (who was infertile) resulting in a monster - quite willing to kills its mother, and which ends up killing the 'makers', thereby saving Shaw the believer fromt he maker's wrath. Shaw is a believer, but dares to question the motives of her makers. Unlike Weyland she is not willing to risk everyone elses life to do it, and is only taking the opportunity to ask because she knows they are going to wake up the Space Jockey anyway. Weyland believes they created him, but what he wants from them is selfish. David is a creation of the maker's creation and has no belief in anything, and has a kind of immortality in that he wont age or die of natural causes - but he's not indestructible, and having his head pulled off and used as a weapon to beat Weyland to death is a very dramatic and quick way of showing displeasure at human's daring to even consider themselves as 'makers / engineers'. Janek, never mentions any beliefs other than to ask Vickers if she wanted Shaw to be wrong. He's happy with his cigar, his christmas tree serves only as a way of marking the passage of time, and he likes alcohol, music and sexy women like Vickers. He espouses no faith in a god or afterlife, yet it is he who commits suicide to save Earth. So, the atheist, who cares for other people made the supreme sacrifice, for no reward only that everyone he knows on Earth will not be wiped out. The believer who wants to question the maker is the only surving human, and for company she has the android, which unthinkingly accepts orders from its creator, has no philosophy of its own, and can't even be disappointed if it gets killed, or left sitting headless for eternity. And the Christians think that THIS ending shows that theirs is the supreme monotheistic religion? Why? Simply because she's so attached to the cross her father gave her? She lost both parents while young... although the cross does have a 'miraculous moment' when it goes from being in a plastic container on a table in the medical bay, to being in the pouch of David's utility belt for NO apparent reason. He chose to bring it, we can only guess why. Perhaps his character development is that he's interested in the beliefs of humans, as he feels like an immortal without a purpose... as Weyland described him.. having no soul.

I think any review of any film on a professed Christian website will probably make connections in the films they are reviewing to either laud the film for supporting Christianity or chastise it for rejecting the religion. It was obviously much easier (if you're looking for religious significance) to assert that Prometheus was showcasing a "Christian victory" because the opposite wouldn't have made as much sense. I think the significance of Shaw's religious beliefs are simply character development. She needed (as the main character) to be relatable and it seems to me like the idea of a character who had Scientific know-how but retained an open mind toward the possibility of supernatural answers was a safe middle ground to take.

Funny thing is the only fact is that life comes from goo. No gods, no aliens, no magic. I have always liked the theory that we are the biological weapons by design and they will come back to put of the match if other weapons work out better. humans - destroy, consume, resilient

To me Shaw's reclaiming of the cross only signifies man's irrational drive towards belief in something in the face of contradictory evidence. R.S. or Lindlelof or whoever came up with this scene may be a bit arrogant or nearsighted in the sense that the protagonists of that scene don't necessarily have to be just a robot and a human, there should have been a third human who continued to fight for survival and knowledge based on rational thought. This idea that only religious drives can be incentives to overcome adversity is a bunch of Bull Sh.... Survival is a game of numbers, many will die, some, probably a few, will survive and carry on, irrespective of how they feel a about it...that is nature. If you don't believe me look at war planning strategies, or epidemic statistics. The key is maximizing numbers, fighting and not being selfish.

Just like to add also that maximizing numbers works up to a point where you overcome resources and it starts to become detrimental, there is a point of diminishing returns sort of speak...

Pro-Christianity buys you lots of things in the media. Like, coverage. [quote][i]Funny thing is the only fact is that life comes from goo. No gods, no aliens, no magic. I have always liked the theory that we are the biological weapons by design and they will come back to put of the match if other weapons work out better. humans - destroy, consume, resilient[/i][/quote] I agree. And it's a good thing that people aren't raging about their damaged religious pride on these boards. It's almost as if the main Prometheus audience is atheist or agnostic. And that's a good thing. Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to stir conflict with people who do have faith in a unique god, just stating the fact that the debates have been civil (as far as I've noticed).

@vitaldon -"In this film was used a subtle hint or mass manipulation technique which often used by jewish anti-christian producers of Hollywood: so-called "white artful dodger" - all the white is bad, black is good. (Remember, so-hero-black-captain, white evil android, white bad engineers monsters which wanted to destroy the mankind and so on)." First of all, if you noticed David8 is a robot, not a human, so the comparison you are trying to make makes no sense (there is no hiding this fact in the movie, David8 is a robot). Second, if you notice, the only human hero/survivor is a white christian (Do you consider females as human beings?). Also, if you notice, those Bluish hue engineers were not presented in terms of race, they were Aliens by definition, who we happen to come from (supposedly). And last of all: by far, by far, Hollywood has a tradition of depicting minorities as the antagonists, or bad guys and white europeans as the heroes or good guys; it is only recently that we have seen some change in this area...

The references to Jesus in the film (the cross, the christmas trees, the washing of the feet) point to the answer to Shaw's question. Which is why were the engineers planning to destroy life on earth 2000 years ago? The birth of Christ is the obvous answer. The next question is why do the engineers hate Jesus? These are plot questions not political statements. This is a movie that is trying to address the origins of life and religous referenes are unavoidable. Back to the questions of what the engineers have against the humans they created and Jesus? This raises the question of who created the engineers? I believe a character in the movie asked this. Here is my theory; the engineers are not the creator. There is something else that created the engineers and maybe this entity sent its "son" to the earth 2000 years ago. The engineers seems to have set up a system to where they seed a planet with DNA and leave a map or an invitation to visit them. However, the visitors are directed to the engineers bio weapons ship garage where a ship is then dispatched back the visitors home work to wipe them out. Maybe it is to eliminate a species that may be advanced enought to comptete with it. Why did the engineers decide to do a preemptive strike on earth before we got the ability to visit them? Why does this attempted preemptive stike happen coincidently at the same time as the birth of Christ and why are there so many Jesus references in the movie? Is it also possible tha the creator had something to do with what went wrong for the engineers and thwarted their strike in earth?

Xbar : [i]The engineers seems to have set up a system to where they seed a planet with DNA and leave a map or an invitation to visit them. However, the visitors are directed to the engineers bio weapons ship garage where a ship is then dispatched back the visitors home work to wipe them out. Maybe it is to eliminate a species that may be advanced enought to comptete with it. [/i] I was thinking this as well, but Prometheus, while at times clumsily awfully badly written, also has some clever layers and false assumptions. Consider this. LV 223 is a moon around a planet around a star. The map only showed 6 stars... it didn't point out which star to aim for... and certianly didn't pinpoint a planet or moon. Has it occured to you that Holloway simply got his guesswork wrong when deciding where to aim for on a trip that takes more than 28 months? He says it in the briefing, after they matched the star pattern they chose the sun they thought most like ours, and looked for a planet or moon that would support life. Perhaps we shouldn't assume that they actually looked at all known planets around each of the stars? There may be little outposts in each of those six solar systems. There is DEFINITELY a Space Jockey on a moon in one of the OTHER solar systems of that map. Because the star at bottom right of that pattern is Zeta 2 Reticuli. This is, according to Lambert (navigator of the Nostromo) the solar system where they are getting the strange message from. I'm not sure how wise it is to expect a movie to follow the reality of an existing star system but, THESE SIX STARS DO EXIST... and have been used in UFO stories. It's why the name of a real star Zeta 2 Reticuli was used in Alien. So far they've used the correct locations and distances for them in Alien and Prometheus. So, I had a look at the other stars... one of them, 82 Eridani, is quite similar to our sun and is suspected of having more than 3 Earth like planets. Zeta 1 and 2 are also very similar stars to our own sun, as is Alpha Mesae and Gliese 86m (which is the system the Prometheus went to.) So if Holloway got it wrong, then there's no reason to assume that the invitation was a trap. Prometheus just took a wrong turn, and ended up in the WMD neighborhood. I think there's a war going on, and some Space Jockeys are out to wipe out anything created by the other Space Jockeys - the engineers who visited Earth.

After all that science and discoveries Shaw simply find that the definitive answers are something much bigger than simple DNA playng ...than just creating something with what already exist ... So while she continue her search her little cross is more deep and profund ( and not because it have to rapresent the truth ) than the pathetic engineers mess .

Hadley That is good stuff about the star system and its relation to the one that the Nostromo lands on. Right before Halloway said "God does not build in straight lines" and they found the installation, did the straight lines around the installation flash in color? Was this the ships planetary survey tools highlighting the roads on the display screen? Or was it my imagination and an artifact of the 3d glasses? I had a problem with how they found the installation almost immedialty after entering the atmosphere. I know a movie audience cannot be bored with the details of a planetary survery but that was a little bit too much for me. I think it is too much of a conincidence that we followed the engineers map and happened to land next to their dirty little secret. The engineers were all about WMD and death. The planets in this system must be filthy with derilict ships and egg rooms. I agree that a war is likely. The questions is between whom. It may be competing groups of engineers or the creator of the engineers may be involved. There was a line from David about a childs wish is to see the death of the parents. The line from Vickers about the King must have his reign and then die. Both of these point to the idea that the engineers belive they must destroy their creations before they an destroy them. Maybe the war is this scenario playing out between the engineers and their creator.

@xbar16 "The birth of Christ is the obvous answer. The next question is why do the engineers hate Jesus?" The birth of Christ is not the obvious answer. For all we know David8 could have either not understood the language and told the engineer something different than what Shaw and Weyland were asking, or he deliberately could have told the blue man something to piss him off, who knows (never trust those darn androids, ha,ha). Verbal language is notoriously problematic in communication and anyway, nobody talks about any particular religion in that conversation. I would imagine a species as advanced as the "engineers" would already know we would turn up being superstitious...

Macs I think you misunderstand what I am saying. The engineers planned to target earth 2000 years ago. This was shown in that halogram movie that David triggered. It showed the destination to be earth. The head was dated as 2000 years old. Somehow. the engineers plan was derailed. I do nto think it mattered what David said. the engineers are set to destroy us and it does not matter how charming our robot is. If science fiction has taught us anything it is to never trust the robot. The engineers are an older and wiser species and know that when confronted with a robot it is best to rip its head off and ask quesitons later.