What was wrong with Prometheus for me?

While I do agree that the film looked fantastic and loved that part of it I will say that the sequence in Alien where Rdiley used a video camera to show what the helmet cams were filming was brilliant. I would say that was the only case where "low-fi" would be better. It made you strain to see and added a level of mystery. Cameron obviously liked it too as he used it successfully in Aliens. However, I didn't miss this effect in Prometheus. True, Alien had the "used future" look in regards to the human side and the derelict was much more aged and battered. This was great. However, the Nostromo was an old, battered, almost obsolete tanker. The Prometheus is a top of the line, brand new, scientific exploration ship. It wouldn't make sense to me to have it be battered and old. I also believe that while most of the differences on the alien side were due to design differences and that every change didn't necessarily have "reasons" behind them. Like the size of the SJ compared to the Engineers in Prometheus. But I do believe that the reason the pyramid and the juggernaut did not look as old was because they were preserved due to the pyramid being built by the Engineers(or whatever) and the juggernauts being stored in it. In other words, the juggernauts were in a garage and the pyramid was the house. Plus, the enviroment on LV-223 isn't a bit as hostile as LV-246 and the derelict, according to Scott, had been in said hostile enviroment, exposed to the harsh elements, for quite a bit longer than 2000 years.

agreed.. I rewatched Prometheus yesterday as it finally was released here in germany on thursday . I really tried to forget all I new about it to concentrate on it.. I realised that the visuals are the KEY to overall of it. Once you are STUNNED by the visual quality and beautiful scenery you are able ( or willing) to interpret many of the plot holes .. Before, I watched a bad cam version on my HD 17 " laptop. well, the plotholes didnt stand up very much THAT WAY of watching 3D full HD , but how bad is that? my girlfriend ( a big Alien fan) saw it for the first time and was just pissed, she said it clearly is kinda HD´prole ´movie ..

yeah, I get that comparisson to "Avaturd", though not really IMHO. Avaturd was 99.9999% CGI, Prometheus 10%. Most of the scenes were natural scenes. Plus, sir Ridley is a pratical dude.

Blame Lindelof, Blame Lindelof, with all his black-goo hullabaloo, and that Lost shit he'd written too! I love it when I can South Park stuff like that :-D

@Simon: [i]"This could've and should've been a dark terrifying movie."[/i] It [i]could[/i] have been dark and terrifying, but it didn't [i]have[/i] to be. [i]Alien[/i] was dark and terrifying. Been there, done that, actually. [i]Prometheus[/i] is more of a cerebral endeavour.

zzplural › it should have been both dark and cerebral. There was a lot of potential there for both things to be intertwined. Alas... it has not become so... the horror... the horror...

@zzplural [quote]It could have been dark and terrifying, but it didn't have to be[/quote] Yes it didnt have to be but Ridley himself said it was going to scare the living shit out of us. It didn't. Regardless whether Avatar was 99.9999% CGI and Prometheus 10%, shouldnt change the fact that Ridley Scott went all out to create something "high definition" losing in my opinion a certain realism that Alien most certainly had. In that respect the film failed. The engineers looked like they were entirely CGI and I know that they weren't. So why bother getting someone to act the part, put all that make up on, if they're just going to end up looking like a cartoon character?

I loved the visuals. And Ridley never said he [i]was[/i] going to scare the shit out of you. He said that was his goal. I'm not sure why he said that. Maybe to put butts in the seats. I don't believe that was his goal at all. It seems his goal was to make people think. Which some obviously hate having to do when it comes to films. Just my opinion.

Prometheus indeed has very beautiful visuals, but in the orrey scene when the universe like 'pop out', I can't see the hologram engineers at all :/. I wish they would do the holograms a little different shade.

@Feebs...Did you see the film in IMAX, IMAX 3D or 2d? I saw the film in IMAX 3D three times and IMAX 2D once and was blown away. I had no problem seeing the Engineer's holograms. They were just walking around and messing with stuff but I see how it would suck to no be able to see them. I recently went to see the film at the local dollar theatre 2 times and I was quite dissapointed. One of my favorite "scenes" in IMAX was when the Prometheus, pea size, shoots accross the immense vastness of space. I love how shots from older films of the HUUUGE space ship taking up the entire screen was totally flipped on it's head. This was BARELY noticable at the dollar theatre. In fact, if I had never seen the film or liked the scene so much, I doubt I would have noticed the Prometheus buzzing across at all. I'm sure most of the audience just saw a shot of space.

@Engineering: As usual, the voice of reason speaks in this wilderness! @Simon: [i]"The engineers looked like they were entirely CGI and I know that they weren't."[/i] The Engineers looked terrific IMHO. I don't care what technology was used to render them on film. They looked awesome and... well... alien. If you equate physical perfection with CGI, bully for you.

Loved the Engineers as well. They blew me away. For days after seeing the film the first time I loned to see the final Engineer awoke from stasis to give those indelible looks to the puny humans who interrupted his slumber. For the record, the Engineers had fx appliances and were filmed. Then cg was used to make certain features coincide with their size. For example, they made the eyes larger. Scott said that they actually used apple boxes on set to make the Final Engineer tower over the humans which is so lo-tech, cheap and obviously the way to go that it's funny.

... I want the damn novelization right the heck now... staff: Weyland Corp. Restrictive Information and Disbursement Office Munich Germany

too clean, the Giger original (space jockey, seat, alien, eggs) had all sorts of surface artifacts, creases, aging, pitting, wear and tear. The Prometheus props looked like they were MADE YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, like they'd just come off the pseudo-plastique production line. Very odd...

I don't think, 'Alien', was believable and scary [i]because[/i] it was low-fi? I think it was simply a believable, scary and well-executed film...it being HD couldn't make it less so. Similarly, I greatly doubt that the fact that the visuals were good could really be declared as the reasons for 'Prometheus'' downfall? If it had been a believable, scary and well-executed film, it would have been - whether it was in HD, or not.

it would be soooo cool to see ALIEN , in IMAX 3D

@Simon. I'm like you to a point, i think modern films just don't have the same depth and class!!! The old Films are much much better! Alien taps into the deepest, darkest corners of our minds! Bladerunner taps into the same corners but in a different way and i think that the Technology they had back then played a BIG part in its spooky realism! Prometheus, while visually stunning, which you would expect from Ridley! Doesn't tap into that dark area of the mind like Alien and Bladerunner do! I expected more of Prometheus! It could have been ALOT darker and a complete nightmare! But to no avail... Bring back the old technology for films that are meant to be Scary and add realism! On another note but not quite. Maybe in the next one he will take more insperation from Gigers Work? Hopefully!!!

Agreed ncc :-D