Don't mean to nitpick, but...

Drugs. High tech medical equipment. Precision lasers. Drugs. Adrenaline. Fear. Awesome awesome drugs. It's the future, and science fiction. Anything goes.

I disagree completely with OP...Did Not find it rushed at all, found it just perfect thank you very much and in 15 years it will be interesting to know what people think then...after the rest of it has played out.

mmmm....awesome drugs. okay. i'm good with that. still, i'm calling it a missed opportunity for some real tension in the third act.

They actually mentioned the 'gory medical procedure' in the listings here (Ireland) . If they'd made it a longer scene it might have had a different rating. If I can accept the premise of an android telling a woman that's she became 3 months pregnant overnight, (and despite the amount of energy that must have taken from her body, and the death of her boyfriend, she doesn't look like she's exhausted from crying or hosting a rapidly growing parasite.) and I can accept robotic surgery machines, then I can accept that they might have done more than simply stitch her skin closed. (i.e. repair the torn membranes, the torn abdominal muscles, and then staple her closed.

Yes, the combo of drugs and adrenaline explains it for me. I've heard true situations where people did pretty insane stuff with the help of a little adrenaline rush.

lol.....good one, Maiafay. Spot-on. I think people need to keep in mind that if the crew of the Nostromo disturbed a hornet. the Prometheus landed on its' nest. The temple complex became an insidious, deadly trap, the moment David broke the seal of that door. Everyone on board was utterly and completely out of their depth, [i] including[/i] David. Surely, no one can believe he had any inkling that what he said would elicit such a violent reaction. With all the different character agendas and physical perils in the movie, it actually makes perfect sense that everything fell apart so chaotically and so quickly, because the people on that ship were well and truly screwed, from the get-go.

@funkopotamus I agree with you. When I had my apendix out many many years ago I wasn't up for cross country running straight after that's for sure. But in the movies defence, how many times have you watch a fight scene where characters are beating the crap out of each other, or a scene where someone gets shot and they carry on like nothing happened. Welcome to the world of make believe.

@Maiafay Yes, but while this may be a reasonable explanation - it's [i]post[/i]-rationalism? This isn't about you, you just happened to have provided this example - but this, in way, is exactly symbolic of the many issues that affect this film and how seeking to address them in retrospect doesn't actually change anything about those issues. @funkopotamus points out that everything surrounding this scene is sufficiently badly drawn to destroy the viewers credulity - and they are correct: because some basic techniques of telling a story in a film were as mishandled as they were elsewhere. You are having to do far too much explanation after the event - which means that there was insufficient consideration of these issues, at the event: as @funkopotamus is obviously not a particular imbecile, and neither are they alone in finding there is something very unsatisfactory in how what they've been asked to believe in, has been staged. Shaw an, archeologist, managed to know a lot about this machine, given she knew only 6 or something were ever made. As part of that ridiculous speech, for example, she could easily have mentioned "super-drug, super rapid healing abilities" and it would have cost absolutely nothing?.. There is telling a story: and then there is telling a story, [u]well[/u] - and the success of that is very little to do with interpretation, or the taste, or intelligence, or opinion of the consumer: that is everything to do with the approach and decisions of the story-teller.

That occurred to me too, but the scene succeeds so well dramatically that I was willing to forgive almost anything. Also, Maiafay has a point. This is the most advanced medical technology available 79 years in the future, designed to be able to safely perform any procedure on a feeble elderly man, never mind a young healthy person like Shaw. Some of our medical technology today would seem almost magical to a person of 1933, and progress in this area is accelerating exponentially. (I actually expect us to have solved the problem of stopping aging long before 2091, nullifying Weyland's quest, but that's another topic.)

allinamberclad: well said. so many of the inconsistencies could have been explained by laying groundwork prior to certain scenes. Also what kind of automated operating machine removes a tumor or foreign body from a patient and leaves it dangling above the patient so they have to slide out from underneath it? the machine did not malfunction. you would think such a high tech machine would not suddenly become manual at this point. if the foreign object/tumor was not retracted into a medical waste chute immediately, that it would be moved into a glass chamber for analysis- therefore isolating it. Having it hanging over Shaw while she had to slide out was just nonsense. Also you would think a high tech machine would have been calibrated to weigh the patient and make all the necessary calculations to administer the correct amount of anaesthetic to stop them feeling any pain if awake or at least make them unconcious for a minimal time period. I think this was cruel, torturing the protagonist for no reason other than to gross people out. all that needed to happen was for the machine to try and put the foetus into a med waste chute and it grab onto the sides thereby jamming the machinery and putting the operating machine into error mode.