Good/Evil/?

This make the movie more realistic and closer to life. In real life there are more often shades of gray, not black and white or good/evil. If you look at the eastern symbol of yin-yang, the dot of opposite color is meant to show that in the pairs of opposites there is a little bit of the opposing force in it. There are no pure positive negatives, black/white or good/bad. The yin yang symbol demonstrates that principle and the wisdom to recognize that fact. Regarding the characters in Prometheus, you are right that there are no pure good or evil characters in the story line and that adds to the strength of the script. I grow weary of unrealistic stories with 100% good vs 100% bad.

Totally agree nostromo001 There's always a transition period when change to another state is involved, even if it seems to occur quickly. When two variables are related, or opposing in a negative correlation in psychology, and the correlation does not equal the causality; then there can often by a third unseen variable affecting each. Even in computer programming subroutines need to be worked in for complicated programs that depend on a third option between open and closed to represent a 2, inside the mixture of ones and zeros. There are multiple in between states and mixtures. Even with water there`s an invisible third option that is different from ice or its liquid form, it changes into a gas. Things can go from good to bad, or be made up of shades of gray in between the opposing forces. Science and Religion is combined and expressed through Shaw's character. While Science and emotion are combined inside David, but somewhat separate from his logic, because he can't "truly" feel. Weyland was good because he invented all these technologies, but he was "bad" because, well you know how his actions were at the end of his life. We've seen two separate Weylands, yet they're still the same Weyland, it's his personality that has slightly morphed alongside his face, he "used to have so much grace: and people who haven't seen the viral don't see him in another light. His underlying personality as an egotist was always there and has the ability to take him to either extreme. He can justify his ego by being a fair King at the start of his reign who gave his subjects a lot, or he can become a selfish and greedy King who thinks his view is entirely correct. The yin-yang is the perfect example as it illustrates exactly what you said. It's not all one way or another, people are made up of experiences, knowledge, memory, instinct/intuition(programming...) and belief. One aspect of any of them could be flawed, while another is perceived as being good, e.g. Shaw's nice survival skills that David comments on. She makes it through the story so we can almost see her as more competent overall than the other characters, given what she was faced with,how that differs from the other threats faced by characters, and how others respond vs Shaw. Shaw responds logically and instinctively to situations. Two of this crew are not like the others. They're more "balanced" ;) Even in holloway we have a mixture of science and personal belief going on... Holloway was an egotist like Weyland and thought his thesis was correct so badly that he gets upset at the first sign that the engineers may not be alive... He wants to be right and then he wants his glory, and then he wants the rest of the answers handed to him by the alien culture. Vickers a mixture of chaos and order. She tries to control the chaos, but ultimately panic and succumbs to the chaos. Can't control the situation when she hasn't "minimized risk" first. Many things in this movie are a hybrid of things. Even the way the movie is a mixture of new ideas and old concepts used in new ways. The Deacon itself could be a hybrid alien of sorts. This definitely seems to be leading to the combination of biology and mechanics. Bio-mechanical beings, their nature, and their origins will most likely be explored more thoroughly in the sequels... David might have been a mixture of things, with only a little bit of the brain design from the other side. Vickers is the opposite brain-wise... I think she's not a robot or human, she's both and that's why she can't answer the question... she was more bio-mechanical than David and more like a replicant.. Although she had a little of the android brain design in her. A little of each in her body and head. This brings in the head and brain themes from Frankenstein, or the modern Prometheus. Because David would have a semi-real replicant mind and android leaning body; while Vickers 1 has a partially-replicant body and android-leaning mind. She was able to have sex because her body was more like a replicants... they never answered it yet because its not one way or another, it`s both. Replicants are technically human-like and organic, but Vickers has had her mind messed with... Shaw has had her mind messed with by David... Everyone in the movie is semi-unbalanced except for Shaw. Some may actually have borderline personality disorders that only the Quiet eye technology can pick up easily by analyzing speech patterns and movements. A pyschological profile was created for each one, even David with the Rorschach like test-- this is all about what`s contained within the head and the body... in a many ways. The corporate body of the company is lost temporarily without its head, its intelligence. I've said too much again. I really think we could see the combination of replicants and androids to try an experiment in creating bio-mechanical beings that can be somewhat controlled because they still contain mechanics. David was made as the "closest thing" to the replicant design Weyland didn't want to use. But desperately tried to when he gave David emotions and tried to make him more real. Weyland believes this failed. Both Vickers and David were made to be more real than any of the old Davids, a balance of replicant and android that's all in the head/body. In opposing ways that make David and Vickers similar opposites, that are two sides of the same coin... That's important too, we have to look at the whole. The coin. Good and evil. Dark and light. Knowledge and belief are not separate, but two sides of the same coin. There is quite a lot more of this going on in Prometheus which leads me to believe they are in fact revealing the combination of replicants with androids in Paradise. Bladerunner 2 would be it's own thing until we see the ending perhaps. Ridley really might be showing Fox how to make a balanced hybrid series, that's "a bridge and not an end" to either series. The connections and themes start to build slowly because big things should have small beginnings, or they fail like AVP... AVP could have stood a chance if the elements had been combined the right way. In the balanced way that I'm alluding to with your yin yang example. Balanced and containing only a bit of each side in each series... Creating an opposition between Tyrell and Weyland.. One that will slowly be combined

Mala'kak, What evidence do you use to support the idea that Vickers is a synthetic? You sound very sure of this notion and while I have considered it - in fact who couldn't after Janek asked her right out, unless I am missing something, I don't buy this idea that she is synthetic with enhanced capabilities allowing her to have sex. Ridley Scott only now decades later is finely stating directly in interviews that Deckard is a nexis-6. I think the most you can state at this point is that Vickers might be another one of Weyland's synthetics. Correct me if you think I am wrong as I would like to hear your argument. I think Vickers was definitely jealous of David thanks to Weyland's statements like "He is the closest thing I have to a son". You could see Vickers seething beneath that veneer of calm....A very human response.

I use pretty much what you`re saying, that the answer is never quite so clear, and she did not know how to respond or behave after that question. She is a bit of both and neither completely, unlike replicants we would meet in Bladerunner. This makes David and Vickers unique as Weylands first experiment in creating bio-mechanical beings. Weyland wanted an obedient offspring that would follow his orders but vickers thought him a fool. The answer cannot be ascertained when Janek asks, so she shows Janek and lets him decide for himself, as the film does. In Janeks perspective she was most likely real, because if she is a replicant shes one who ravel and chance jokingly mistake as a sex model when they say something about putting credits towards a lapdance with Ms. Vickers. In the weyland files when a mentor is implied weyland says that he would never create full organic people. He wants creations he can control so it doesn`t blow up in his face. Paradoxically he wants something as close as he can get to a son. He rejects the Vickers design that is based on Tyrell designs. And makes the David 8 the first of the Davids to be emotional. The viral claims a number of times that David is emotional in some way. The trick is he hides his emotions... much is being hidden about this film because people are being led to believe one thing or another. And not seeing that the answers are very complicated and a mixture of things. Not that i`m right about this because with all the ambiguity there`s no way to know for sure. But i have other pieces of the puzzle in place that showed me the answers are always either a mixture of things, or the opposite of what we`re expecting, e.g. David would actually be becoming a `real boy`, and that Pinocchio reference is too ironic, and makes Holloway look like even more of a jackass and a fool. David allows him to believe he`s not as real as he is. There has to be something to all the not a real boy stuff that pissed David off. David shows some signs of almost true but subdued emotional response throughout the film. Vickers is kind of a similar opposite of David, and all the pairing in the movie starts to match up with this theme. There`are even two Hammerpedes which are slightly different in physical appearance. I`ll admit I don`t know for sure about the Vickers and Bladerunner stuff, but it`s what I choose to believe based on how it connects to almost all of my other theories and perspectives on the movie. Because of that I can`t reject this combination idea, each with a little bit of each on the top and bottom, as a possibility yet. The yin-yang really is the perfect symbol to describe how I think many characters and pairings are similar opposites, that are two sides of the same coin. Like holloway and his difference with Shaw over their beliefs. They both had strong beliefs, were archaeologist and scientists, but had a differing opinion on the nature of the Engineers.

"..There has to be something to all the not a real boy stuff that pissed David off.." Could it be that Holloway feels that David is threat to the Holloway/Shaw relationship..and his boy reference is Charkie;s way of telling David to back off. Also it was curious that Holloway(at the pool table) wants to converse with Davis at all...like David's opinion of the mission's failure was important at all? Maybe David's manipulation of words actions has already started to confuse Holloway's mind as to David's robotic/humanoid background. David's 'How far would you you go' question may have been viewed by Holloway was a way to demonstrate to David what a real man would do. Quickly David serves a special drink..

Mala'kak, Im glad that you qualified your statement with an admission that you may be wrong. By trade I am a PhD Chemist and so well versed in the scientific method and the requirement for evidence or data. Having said that, I can provide a clue in your favor: remember when Vickers throws David against the wall demanding that he tell her what Weyland said? Those synthetics are a lot stronger than humans and while he may have been letting her throw him out of programming or software protocol. She may possess inhuman strength if she were a synthetic. Remember though to never get to attached to your own idea constructs such that you lose flexibility or you will become invested in a mental trap that can limit ones ability to accept new data in an unbiased way. Its what you learn as a scientist. For example Shaw stating that she believes that the Engineers invited us because it is what she chooses to believe is antithetical to the real unbiased scientific thinking. I never let what I would like to or choose to believe influence my ability to take in new data in an unbiased way and that is precisely Dr Shaw's fatal flaw. Food for thought. PS as a scientist, I found virtually all of the so called scientists on this voyage made scientific mistakes that actual scientists would never make. Look at those two bufoons, Melbourne and Fifield. Their behaviors were inexcusable. "Ohhhh baby baby baby shes so cute, come here honey......" I was happy to see Melbourne eat the results of his unprofessional behavior! Fifield and Melbourne both chicken out as scientists confronted with the most important find in human scientific history?!!!! Totally unprofessional for a PhD geologist and biologist, and believe me Weyland wouldn't have hired them if they weren't PhDs.

"..the real unbiased scientific thinking,," Taking into account the crew members who in this expedition should have been the leader and provide the 'the real unbiased scientific thinking' that you suggest? *Vickers asks the most direct questions and then acts to protect the Weyland property. *David being of a robotic nature should have been the Chief Science Officer..but as been suggested he had other motives for his exploring of the moon. *Holloway/Shaw would the most likely personnel responsible but they are so intertwined in a personal relationship and non scientific motivation that objectivity went out the window. To me it seemed liked this Scientific Expedition was doomed from the start. We are lucky to even have David/Shaw survive . In reading over this post I guess it is more of an expression of confusion. Yet is the ending of the movie seemes to be.by chance. I wonder the next step in this adventure will have any 'scientific thinking' applied to the Engineers' world..or just collection of adventures by our surviving duo.