In the interests of statistics

Hi SamboJim I'm from the UK and totally loved Prometheus. I went with 10 friends on 1st June and we all loved it. I also saw it again today in IMAX 3D and still love it - noticed more symbolism this time around (lots of horseshoe shapes in the architecture) I know that Prometheus is choppy but I loved that about it. I am happy to wait for sequels to explain some of the questions that are burning a hole in my brain since I saw Prometheus.

@Promknight, I actually think that isn't the case. The fundamental reasons we disliked the film were the terrible script, schizophrenic characters- saying one thing in one scene, then in another acting in a way completely unlike the "established" character. The fact the characters were made of 1 liners. The fact the deeper themes were not even given time to breathe(if there were deeper themes, I am not sure). The lack of character development or motivation, the lack of tension and so on. This was only compounded (the damage had been done) by these plot holes. I just wanted meaning to the nonsense. A central theme. I had this idea that the film would be seen through Davids eyes as we (the humans) come to terms with meeting our maker and wanting to know the answers, while David seeks his own answers through watching humans(his creator). Then about how we judge our creations harshly , and as such we as "children" judge our creators harshly, with David becoming disenfranchised with the idea of becoming human. Mirrored in the eyes of Vickers who was disenfranchised with her own father. And mirrored with the engineers and their creations (us). With Damon Lindelof at the helm I presumed parenthood and coming to terms with it, would be a theme, given what lost is all about. (I know that sounds like complete nonsense but it gives you somewhat of an idea of what kind of theme for the picture I might of been expecting) instead all we got was. Land on moon/planet. bunch of goo. People die. Lets find out why these tall guys don't like us. But it looked pretty and people died.

Even though i really like the movie, i agree threr are parts of the script that were a bit irritating. And with just a bit of re-editing, a lot more ppl would like it. I want to see an interview with sir scott now. And i oficially dont like damon lindelof. And still like the movie, maybe bcoz i waited 20 yrs and it wld b too embarrassing not to like it.

It's flawed, but not nearly as flawed as some would like to pretend. Supposed gaping plot holes galore, either aren't really there, or are relatively insignificant. There are a few loose ends, and a couple of WTF?! character actions/interractions, but the whole thing actually hangs together remarkably well, given the blistering pace of the third act and how many different agendas are at play in the story. If Scott made a fundamental error, it was in trying to combine so much in one film: Spectacle, body-horor, monsters, mutation, ancient astronauts, first contact, science, religion, existential depth, multiple agendas and character conflicts.......with such a tightly wound-up cut of the movie. I can understand why some people describe it as "rushed." There's a crap-ton of stuff happening [i]very[/i] quickly........thing is, if you think about how totally out of their depth, [b]everyone[/b] on that ship was, relative to the actual peril of their situation, it makes absolutely perfect sense. The main characters in [i]this[/i] movie are [i]not[/i] one dimensional cardboard cut-outs, like the crew of the Nostromo. We actually know some of their back-story and what motivates them[i]......besides shares[/i]. My biggest disappointment with this movie, was Weyland's death. Being killed by having David's artificial head smashed against his, [i]was[/i] very ironic......but I had thought they'd save something really special and symbolic for his demise.......however, that's really my problem, [i]because it was a personal expectation.[/i] On balance, I agree that if this film is nothing else, it [i]is[/i] a work of art.