Prometheus (Spoilers)

[Captain Kruger]

It's been a couple of days, so my memory may be faulty. But why did Weyland hide himself on board of the ship and then fake his death? Why didn't he just . . . go along with the ship?

I was thinking he just didn't want to attract that much attention. There would've been 50 billion questions thrown his way before they left.

[Captain Kruger]

Oh hell yeah. Jeeeeeezus!!!! Jesus will save us from the aliens.

"Doesn't that fly in the face of 300 years of Darwinism?" Rapace's Character: "I choose to believe."

Well to be fair, her faith is later justified. And it's not exactly an unreasonable thing to believe. Scientists have postulated panspermia before.

As an aside, yes, it would have been nice to actually have her point out the difference between exogenesis and intelligent design, and point out that believing one does not mean that one believes the other. But no, we instead got fully human extraterrestrials, which was disappointing, given the magnificence of the space jockey design.

I for one wanted aliens that had actual trunks, and spoke like this:



Alas it turns out that she's not proved exogenesis, she's proven intelligent design.

I was a little disappointed that they turned out to just be giant bald humans too, but I guess it makes sense for the storyline. If we seeded other worlds with life, it would probably end up being much like us.

Regarding the voices…I don't think we actually heard an Engineer speak in this movie, did we? Maybe in a sequel they could still sound like they do in this video. Provided Ridley Scott still remembers a deleted scene from 33 years ago, of course.

[TOSDOC]

It's been a couple of days, so my memory may be faulty. But why did Weyland hide himself on board of the ship and then fake his death? Why didn't he just . . . go along with the ship?

I was thinking he just didn't want to attract that much attention. There would've been 50 billion questions thrown his way before they left.

Not to mention the billion asked after he returned, if his plan had worked and he had found an alien fountain of youth.

Watching the movie, I compared the Prometheus to the Nostromo like a billionaire's yacht to a tugboat. Weyland had plenty of time to fit the ship to his specifications, enough so that there is only one class of passenger, to explain why Shaw's quarters resemble an apartment complete with ceramic dishes and chopsticks. Vicker's extravagant quarters could also explained as actually being Weyland's, with the sole medpod set for a male (Weyland himself), and its own canned life support. I can see the psychological advantages of such comforts on such an exploratory cruise compared to towing mineral ore.

That said, I wish he spent more money finding the right team of scientists to go on the trip than the ship itself, and availing themselves of all those comforts on the very first evening seemed strange after such a monumental discovery has already been made.

Fifield, Milburn, and Halloway were inexplicable. I expected a geologist, biologist, and archeologist to be more excited at what was found, taking samples and running tests with enthusiasm rather than running scared around the mountain or getting drunk at a pool table. David's scene with Halloway could have easily been filmed in a lab while Halloway was sleeplessly running tests. Milburn's reaction to the hammerpede was the closest one I wanted, just with more caution. Observe from a distance, idiot. This guy was hand-picked. The support staff should have been monitoring the lost crew members around the clock instead of off screwing around, suggesting that this grand expedition to answer the questions of where we came from was being undertaken by a luxury cruise ship with people more interested in gourmet dining, sex and alcohol than scientific discovery. Is that what they slept for 4 years for?

Looking at the space jockey in Alien, it still looks more like a skull to me than a helmet. I bet that was the original intention in 1979. I remember their holograms speaking to each other while David is examining the holos of all the planets, but it sounded nothing like any of the sound clips from Alien. It also would have been enough for me (and very human of him) to hear the woken Engineer speak in his own language instead of just grunting and yelling, even if it's just muttering to himself as he takes off.

[Guardsman Bass]

I think the original Jockey skeleton was fused into his(?) chair as well.

That said, the loose connection to Alien didn't bother me too much. It was probably necessary to get the film made in the first place (and originally it was much more overtly an Alien prequel).

[applejack]

What if the Aliens weren't weapons, but the Space Jockeys' gods? The script for the first movie had a sequence in which the humans explore a temple with depictions of the Jockeys willingly serving as hosts.

Scott probably never gave a damn about this, but in the old comics (the one that continued from where Aliens left off), a human cult developed around the xenomorph that eventually raided a lab holding specimens of the aliens and voluntarily infected themselves, and helped start alien armageddon on Earth, so it's not unprecedented in the lore. The mural on the wall with the alien itself depicted there sort of supports this idea of a xenomorph-centered cult, though maybe not one that is so fanatically self-sacrificing since the Engineers in the hologram were running for their lives.

Maybe they created humans specifically to be hosts/food for their masters. It wasn't that they suddenly decided to destroy us, but rather they determined there were enough of us to support a population of Aliens. Perhaps Jesus was supposed to prepare humanity to worship and serve the Aliens, and when that mission failed and humans looked to be too aggressive to be herded, the Aliens punished the Jockeys for their failure, hence the massacre with the unseen foe.

Or maybe the Romans killed "Jesus" before he could drink the black goo and release the aliens. The scene at the beginning of the film shows one Engineer sacrificing himself to get the black goo going. Maybe that's what "Jesus" was really about and the Last Supper was the dry run.

[Zor]

Just a thought, but it has to do with the autosurgeon device, that thing cuts into her, extracted from her the facehugger squid thing the size of a football and then stapled her shut, and then she went about walking afterwards without much sign of disruption. Alright, plot needs to get moving and all that, but it is kind of silly

Zor

[Academia Nut]

I think we need a scene (possibly another example of the infamous 'Ridley Scott screwed by the executives' problem) that shows the recruitment of the team. It doesn't need to be very much, it just needs to show us who the hell Weyland is, and it also needs to show us that the team they picked aren't the cream of the crop.

Think about it. A company comes up to you and says, "Here's a bunch of money, we want a minimum of four years commitment, no questions asked and no independent disclosure." The best scientists are going to refuse on the basis of it sounding way too shady and because top scientists have big projects going on so the only way they would commit is if they were already invested or if they were in between jobs in their careers... and possibly in need to disappear for a few years. That means that the expedition is going to have the screw ups and idiots; the guys who have good qualifications on paper but have issues that means they're not at the top of their field.

I think it might have been good to have after the dig scene a scene where Wayland meets with Holloway and Shaw and discusses with them their latest media frenzy since they had their dig site taken away from them by the academic community. Talk about how their making a big fuss about aliens was not well received, but that he believes in them. This also establishes that the two archaeologists are crackpots explicitly, instead of implicitly, which makes their bad behaviour later on more understandable.

[Guardsman Bass]

Here's some interesting theorizing about some of the mythic aspects of the film, particularly with regards to the whole Space Jesus and black goo stuff. The idea is that "acceptance of death and self-sacrifice to make way for new life" is a recurring theme in the movie, and particularly the imagery of the god whose stomach is torn open.

[hongi]

I don't know if I agree with his idea of what the black goo is, but everything else is really interesting. I can't believe I missed the Christian parallels, even when the movie beats us over the head with the fact that it's taking place on Christmas.

[TOSDOC]

I don't know if I agree with his idea of what the black goo is, but everything else is really interesting. I can't believe I missed the Christian parallels, even when the movie beats us over the head with the fact that it's taking place on Christmas.

Ditto, although now I feel like the sequel is spoiled because I probably just read the most plausible explanation for everything. The parallels are very striking, though, but how would Jesus' events affect a world's black goo light years away?

Janek and his pilots' sacrifice was actually one of my favorite moments in the film, especially for its altruism. I thought if the Engineer had just met these guys first, everything would have been fine, as there had to be something we did right to produce these three.

[Pendleton]

I think we need a scene (possibly another example of the infamous 'Ridley Scott screwed by the executives' problem) that shows the recruitment of the team. It doesn't need to be very much, it just needs to show us who the hell Weyland is, and it also needs to show us that the team they picked aren't the cream of the crop.

Think about it. A company comes up to you and says, "Here's a bunch of money, we want a minimum of four years commitment, no questions asked and no independent disclosure." The best scientists are going to refuse on the basis of it sounding way too shady and because top scientists have big projects going on so the only way they would commit is if they were already invested or if they were in between jobs in their careers... and possibly in need to disappear for a few years. That means that the expedition is going to have the screw ups and idiots; the guys who have good qualifications on paper but have issues that means they're not at the top of their field.

I think it might have been good to have after the dig scene a scene where Wayland meets with Holloway and Shaw and discusses with them their latest media frenzy since they had their dig site taken away from them by the academic community. Talk about how their making a big fuss about aliens was not well received, but that he believes in them. This also establishes that the two archaeologists are crackpots explicitly, instead of implicitly, which makes their bad behaviour later on more understandable.

Did you see the TED talk Weyland gave? That probably gives a good idea of what his persona is like, i.e. quite arrogant and power thirsty.

[SylasGaunt]

One thing I keep seeing come up is the whole thing about the biologist not freaking out with the weird alien cobra thing but freaking out at the dead Engineer. Isn't it possible he's one of those people who's just intensely uncomfortable around corpses? I mean it's hardly a rare thing.

[LadyTevar]

Or maybe the Romans killed "Jesus" before he could drink the black goo and release the aliens. The scene at the beginning of the film shows one Engineer sacrificing himself to get the black goo going. Maybe that's what "Jesus" was really about and the Last Supper was the dry run.

Or maybe it wasn't Jesus after all.

Pre-Christianity, there were dozens of religions where the god/hero sacrifices themselves or another being to insure/preserve Life. At the time of the Roman Empire, the Celts and the Germanic tribes were still practicing a God-King who rules for a time and then dies for the good of the Tribe. I believe this is even mentioned in the movie, about a King has his time and then dies.

So, we have humans practicing Self-Sacrifice to ensure Life, just as the Jockeys taught us... except in Rome. Because Rome has turned one of their former Grand Sacrifices into Games that the common people bet upon; those dying within are not Willing Sacrifices, but slaves forced to fight to the death. In short, Rome tainted the Sacrifice. Perhaps the Jockeys did sent Jesus to die to show the way, but no one listened. Rome started killing those that did follow the message, then went and twisted the meaning from self-sacrifice to "do what the Priest says and you'll get to Heaven".

Yeah, I'd be a bit pissy if my centuries of teaching got trashed within decades.

[mr friendly guy]

I reflection, I enjoyed Prometheus, but thats mainly because of the twists (I am biased towards plot base stories as oppose to character based ones, but a good story needs both).

The characters were somewhat unlikable - from Shaw's "I believe" (in chariots of the Gods ideas) and her BF whining that they MUST get out now even though they would only have 6 hours etc and wouldn't wait till morning. Nevermind the scientist who went, lets touch that cobra like life form. Some of their motivations aren't clear, ie why the Engineers tried to kill us (we can speculate, but its not clear), why David the android was a dick (again we can speculate he was on orders from Weyland, the human pissed him off, the human would want to do anything to meet the makers, so he poisoned him with the alien thing not realising it was not the makers etc) but again its not clear. In fact he seems to fluctuate between being evil and good (in effect he is a used as a plot device to move the story forward rather than a character).

Here is a review from haters of the film

[hongi]

Well this movie has got me all confused. I didn't exactly hate the movie. I wasn't in love with the move either. I enjoyed it as an experience and spectacle, but I didn't realise there was any 'deeper themes' behind it until it was pointed out to me. Now that I am aware that the movie is more complex than I originally thought, I want to see it again so I can make up my mind: is it a good or crap movie? if it is crap, why is it crap? Do the underlying metaphors and parallels help to cancel out the criticisms that have been heaped on it?

[applejack]

Or maybe the Romans killed "Jesus" before he could drink the black goo and release the aliens. The scene at the beginning of the film shows one Engineer sacrificing himself to get the black goo going. Maybe that's what "Jesus" was really about and the Last Supper was the dry run.

Or maybe it wasn't Jesus after all.

Pre-Christianity, there were dozens of religions where the god/hero sacrifices themselves or another being to insure/preserve Life. At the time of the Roman Empire, the Celts and the Germanic tribes were still practicing a God-King who rules for a time and then dies for the good of the Tribe. I believe this is even mentioned in the movie, about a King has his time and then dies.

So, we have humans practicing Self-Sacrifice to ensure Life, just as the Jockeys taught us... except in Rome. Because Rome has turned one of their former Grand Sacrifices into Games that the common people bet upon; those dying within are not Willing Sacrifices, but slaves forced to fight to the death. In short, Rome tainted the Sacrifice. Perhaps the Jockeys did sent Jesus to die to show the way, but no one listened. Rome started killing those that did follow the message, then went and twisted the meaning from self-sacrifice to "do what the Priest says and you'll get to Heaven".

Yeah, that seemed to be the gist of the article that Guardsman Bass linked to. The article, and a couple of posters before that, were sort of intimating the Space Jesus idea.

I agree with Necronlord that a giant bald albino Jesus is rather weird.

Yeah, I'd be a bit pissy if my centuries of teaching got trashed within decades.

Yeah, but it seems pretty dickish to condemn the entire human race for the behavior of the Romans.

[jollyreaper]

Here's some interesting theorizing about some of the mythic aspects of the film, particularly with regards to the whole Space Jesus and black goo stuff. The idea is that "acceptance of death and self-sacrifice to make way for new life" is a recurring theme in the movie, and particularly the imagery of the god whose stomach is torn open.

If you have to explain a joke, it doesn't work. Likewise if you have to step outside the movie to explain it, it doesn't work.

I get the sense that Scott is sniffing around some themes with the potential of making for some really great scifi but is falling short of the mark. Your link really drives that idea home.

God created us. God is disappointed in us. God wants to kill us. The Flood story from the Bible was Lucased from earlier Sumerian myths. It's done frequently becuse it works! Updating it for the modern age could be powerful. The idea of nice, benevolent aliens looking into our collective soul and finding something so twisted, so repugnant that they must wipe us out because we are anathema... Primal, powerful stuff. Especially when the true horror is in understanding that the alien gods are correct! They're doing a good thing. Fighting for our survival is bad for the universe.

Could someone make that movie pretty please?

[applejack]

Here's some interesting theorizing about some of the mythic aspects of the film, particularly with regards to the whole Space Jesus and black goo stuff. The idea is that "acceptance of death and self-sacrifice to make way for new life" is a recurring theme in the movie, and particularly the imagery of the god whose stomach is torn open.

If you have to explain a joke, it doesn't work. Likewise if you have to step outside the movie to explain it, it doesn't work.

Well, I don't know about that. Sometimes it can add more layers of understanding and meaning to the story. It's especially true in this case because it appears that Scott started out with the intent of using those mythological themes to begin with. The article is simply elaborating on what's already there.

BTW LadyTevar, in giving second thought to your response to my post, it now looks like you thought I was proposing the genocidal Space Jesus thing seriously. That was not my intent. It was just meant to be an offhand joke. And if it's the joke you find distasteful, then I'm sorry I made it.

[jollyreaper]

Well, look at it like this. If you have star-crossed lovers j. A story, you need to explain in the story why it doesn't work. You can't just set it in a real historic era, put the two in rival families and then expect the audience to get the context without any kind of explanation. You can give a brief explanation in the film and then let the fans read more from the history books if they are interested.

Book adaptations suffer from this a lot where the readers understand why a character is doing something but a movie watcher will be left scratching his head. "You had to read the book to understand" is a terrible answer.

2001 was pretty bad that way. The whole starchild bit really could not be inferred from the movie itself, only from the novel.

[Grumman]

The idea of nice, benevolent aliens looking into our collective soul and finding something so twisted, so repugnant that they must wipe us out because we are anathema... Primal, powerful stuff. Especially when the true horror is in understanding that the alien gods are correct! They're doing a good thing. Fighting for our survival is bad for the universe.

Could someone make that movie pretty please?

Sorry, but that sounds awful.

A villain that thinks that exterminating humanity is the right thing to do? That's fine.
A villain protagonist scenario like DC's Secret Six where the viewpoint characters actually are bad guys that deserve to lose, but you can root for them anyway? That's also fine.
A story that claims Hitler's problem was that he thought too small? No.

[jollyreaper]

Well, it could be awful if done poorly but that can be said about anything.

Humans are the monsters! stories have been done before but I don't think they have yet been paired with chariots of the gods. Maybe they have and I don't know.

Consider a basic fantasy setting. You have your elves and dwarves and trolls and giants that manage to live in balance with nature. Humans aren't as smart or strong or gifted with magic as the the other races but we are gifted with wit and cunning.

Humans clear the forests, mine the mountains, poison the streams and endlessly multiply. Our cities cover the land, smoke from our factories cover the sky, and endorser we seek new territory. We refuse to accept boundaries.

So here you have humans who are close with the elves. They see the folly of their kind and agree with the elves that, if nothing is done to change things, the land will be ruined.

So, is the flaw of humanity is poor culture or is it a rot in our very seed? The elves feel that nothing can be done. Perhaps a few human populations can be spared as a preserve but the bulk must be culled, not out of hate or malice but love of nature.

So the conflict of the human characters friendly with the elves. They know the problem as the elves see it is real, beyond dispute. They question the solution. At least some do. I could see those who have been done wrong by their fellow humans having no further sympathies.

So, going by the ideas in the above blog post, what if humanity is deeply flawed, flawed in ways that are genetic and intrinsic? If the black goo is a mirror to the soul then we see our true nature in it, ugly and rapacious and evil. Is this a warning that can be heeded or a sentence already passed?

For the characters in this new story, they may reject the conclusion of the engineers but can they refute the facts, the argument? We are at the point where idealism and self-interest hang in the balance. Can we prove that the engineers are wrong, that humanity can transcend? Can we prove that the very arguments of the engineers are misguided?

[hongi]

So, going by the ideas in the above blog post, what if humanity is deeply flawed, flawed in ways that are genetic and intrinsic? If the black goo is a mirror to the soul then we see our true nature in it, ugly and rapacious and evil. Is this a warning that can be heeded or a sentence already passed?

Has anyone considered that the black goo is actually sin? The physical manifestation of what is wrong with the human species?

Maybe it wasn't a biological weapon at all. Or at least, not in its intention. More like a test. If you are untainted, it's harmless. If you're not, it's deadly.

Also, I was thinking about the casings for the black goo. I thought it looked like artillery shells actually, but what if we're going about this the wrong way? I'm now thinking of Pandora's jar. In the original myth, it wasn't a box but a sort of jar or amphora where all the evils of the world were contained.

[Pendleton]

One thing I keep seeing come up is the whole thing about the biologist not freaking out with the weird alien cobra thing but freaking out at the dead Engineer. Isn't it possible he's one of those people who's just intensely uncomfortable around corpses? I mean it's hardly a rare thing.

I think the issue is more with him approaching something not unlike a cobra in the same manner one would a lost puppy. Given there's a chamber full of fallen gods just down the corridor, is it really wise to give in to curiosity when so much ominous black goo is reacting to you in unknown ways?

[hongi]

Is it possible for a movie to deliberately make a character dumb and naive and then kill him off for the purpose of showing that his behaviour is a really stupid thing to do? Or is that just bad scriptwriting? I mean that scene changed the whole feeling of the movie. It told you that the aliens weren't there to be studied, to be talked down to, to be petted. And then the rest of the movie showed that you couldn't suck up to them either.

[Pendleton]

I think it showed not to visit LV-223 or 426.