Prometheus - the reviews are as split as John Hurt's chest

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06 June 2012   #31
Well, sucks to hear it's bad. I'm going to go see it Friday with much lower expectations.
__________________
Richard Cabrera
Twitter - Flickr
 
Old 06 June 2012   #32
aahhh, i am disappointed that the reviews are bad...it hurts coz i was so looking forward to this more than any other movie in 2012 :( I get a fair feeling of how i would feel after watching it now and have second feelings about watching it at all...and the fact that he might have to make another to bridge this and Alien, no good reason to watch a movie for VFX. I could be spellbound by just going thru the CG society portfolio!!!
__________________
"This is the moment. History could be made...or nothing at all."
 
Old 06 June 2012   #33
Originally Posted by Kai01W: I sometimes prefer a movie with great ambitions that fails somewhat to one which sets its goal comparitively low and does that well ( A.I. is one of the former category, there are hundreds examples of the latter)


Kai , i could argument for hours that AI is a true masterpiece and the best movie from Spielberg over the last decade ! Of course i'm kind of isolated supporting this position ! But as it is not the point of the topic here i will retain my enthousiasm about AI ...

Guys even if the movie is not perfect, it defenitly deserve to be seen on the BIG SCREEN ...
__________________
emfx.fr

Last edited by SebKaine : 06 June 2012 at 09:19 AM.
 
Old 06 June 2012   #34
Originally Posted by Apoclypse: The minute I heard Lindelof I knew the story was going to be mediocre and meh at best. This whole origin of the human species thing is so cliche. It made me roll my eyes when I saw the trailer.


You see, that didn't bother me - I was interested in the ideas behind the Engineers...

[ SPOILER - Click to reveal ]
Spoiler:
I liked the idea that they created us then decided (for reasons unknown) to destroy their creation. I could get behind the idea of the planet being a research facility for biological weapons - all that stuff worked for me.

The story thread with Weyland was just too cliché for this movie though - and clumsily hacked in so that David had some kind of purpose. Likewise, it was the only (flimsy) reason for Theron to be on the ship.

Despite Scott's claims that this was never intended to be an Alien movie, he's tried his best to set up the exact same framework as Alien and just tell a different story with it - Theron as Ripley (there's intentional parallels there), David as Ash, the two mechanics/pilots/whatever they were standing in for Parker and Brett etc.

(In fact, as an aside, does anyone know what anyone's job was on that ship? Nobody seemed to actually do anything except exchange 'witty' - i.e. clichéd - banter).

And the film is padded out with contrived set pieces that serve no purpose other than to pad the movie (dropping the head, lab scene with the head being reanimated - even the deaths of the two crew-members in the facility/tomb).


There's a core idea in there that could have been a great film - but sadly it's lost in a needlessly bloated story with characters that quite frankly I couldn't care less about.

Oh, and a flute?? Seriously?? A ****ing flute??

One last thing:

[ SPOILER - Click to reveal ]
Spoiler:
A message is received from another planet. A ship is sent to investigate it. The crew find evidence of an alien culture and lots of strange receptacles. Placing the crew of the ship in jeopardy, an android crew member deliberately exposes them to an alien threat. Crew fight to survive, succumbing one by one until only one female crew member is left. She manages to escape the monster in a ship, her destination and fate unknown.

Which film am I talking about?
__________________
Andrew G. Morgan
Writer/Director
Survivor Films Ltd.
www.survivorfilms.co.uk

Last edited by AegisPrime : 06 June 2012 at 10:16 AM.
 
Old 06 June 2012   #35
damn, I was so looking forward this movie, I'm still gonna go see it but like Rich, I'll be going with much lower expectations...
__________________
vertexangel.com/
twitter
 
Old 06 June 2012   #36
I remember Blade Runner being panned and now it is seen as a classic. I bet the critics of that film in 1982 who slammed the film are now saying how innovative it was. lol. Some film critics are snobs regarding sci-fi, especially when it tries to be intelligent and ask big questions. I am going to judge Prometheus for myself.

Here is one review excerpt written in 1982 for Blade Runner:

"And it's also a mess, at least as far as its narrative is concerned. Almost nothing is explained coherently, and the plot has great lapses, from the changeable nature of one key character to the frequent disappearances of another. The story lurches along awkwardly, helped not at all by some ponderous stabs at developing Deckard's character. As an old-fashioned detective cruising his way through the space age, Deckard is both tedious and outre."
By JANET MASLIN
Published: June 25, 1982
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/rev...755C0A964948260
 
Old 06 June 2012   #37
Originally Posted by digital verve: especially when it tries to be intelligent and ask big questions.


There's nothing even vaguely intelligent about cribbing a moron like Erich von Däniken and dressing it up to look deeper than it is.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 06 June 2012   #38
I read about Scott's Chariot of the Gods interest on wikipedia's Prometheus page a while back and was hoping it was an error.
That book ruined one potentially great Star Trek TMP concept by Harlan Ellison about lizard aliens altering time so dinosaurs never went extinct. A movie executive (who I think went on to co-produce the first Batman movie) wanted Mayans put into the story because he had read the book-and Ellison insulted him over it and that was that.
Wasnt it bad enough they used that idea in Alien Vs Predator?


Lots of older movies get re-assessed as time goes on especially when compared to today's offerings. I gather Bladerunner was advertised as a Raiders-kind of film.
 
Old 06 June 2012   #39
What a piece of snot!

What in ALIEN alluded to Lovecraftian horrors completely beyond our imagination here is watered down to a kitschy variation of the classic grey ETs.

The spacejockey was just a tall human with big muscles.

No sense of wonder, no mystique and no gravitas at all.

Even the Gigeresque sets look banal compared to the derelict interior..lighting and shadows, grandeur, mood...nothing here like in the ALIEN opening segment.

Huge disappointment.

PS: The operating pod was just for males?? And staples to close wounds? In an automated operating pod in 2090? Really?

EDIT: And btw, you don´t stand, walk, run and jump around after severing your abdominal muscles like that. Just the punch in the belly she received would have killed her in that state.
__________________


Last edited by CB_3D : 06 June 2012 at 07:03 AM.
 
Old 06 June 2012   #40
Originally Posted by CB_3D:
The spacejockey was just a tall human with big muscles.

PS: The operating pod was just for males?? And staples to close wounds? In an automated operating pod in 2090? Really?



Whilst I have already stated that I thought the film was just 'ok', I must say that I loved the Engineers. They were so beautiful and frightening at the same time. I'm glad they were able to hold back and not feel they have to come up with another 'monster'. It also played to the notion of humans being created in God's likeness.

Regarding the pod - I thought that seemed a bit odd too. It's as though they needed to purchase DLC to get more out of it.
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
Old 06 June 2012   #41
Originally Posted by grrinc: Regarding the pod - I thought that seemed a bit odd too. It's as though they needed to purchase DLC to get more out of it.


Welcome to the future of healthcare

Originally Posted by CB_3D: What in ALIEN alluded to Lovecraftian horrors completely beyond our imagination here is watered down to a kitschy variation of the classic grey ETs.

The spacejockey was just a tall human with big muscles.

No sense of wonder, no mystique and no gravitas at all.

Even the Gigeresque sets look banal compared to the derelict interior..lighting and shadows, grandeur, mood...nothing here like in the ALIEN opening segment.


I was a bit disappointed that the Engineers weren't handled as something truly alien but Alien was Scott's (and Shussett and O'Bannon's) creation and if that's his take then I can't be too mad at him for it - plus, as I mentioned above, I liked the core idea behind the story - what I can't forgive is how he seems to have dialled this one in - such a shame.

And yes, considering they actually built the navigation room as a set, it seems strange that all the attention to detail and atmosphere that was present in Alien is completely lacking here - either there were budgetary constraints (seems unlikely though) or he just didn't give a ****
__________________
Andrew G. Morgan
Writer/Director
Survivor Films Ltd.
www.survivorfilms.co.uk

Last edited by AegisPrime : 06 June 2012 at 12:55 PM.
 
Old 06 June 2012   #42
It was a disappointment. I can't believe how much time they spent on beautiful visuals and how little they must have spent on making the script make sense.
__________________
http://www.rebas.se/
(I suffer from repetitive strain injuries, so I can't type much).
 
Old 06 June 2012   #43
Originally Posted by leigh: There's nothing even vaguely intelligent about cribbing a moron like Erich von Däniken and dressing it up to look deeper than it is.


Seems to me like you had a critical view of Daniken's work (and who can blame you) before the movie came out, which didn't allow you to enjoy the ancient astronaut sci-fi when it was put on screen. I wonder if people who have never heard of such (ridiculous) theories will enjoy them movie a little more.

I'm hoping I can erase the crappy nonsense of Daniken's work and enjoy them movie for what it is: fiction.
If only that "ancient aliens" show hadn't gotten so popular...
oh how I've lost respect for the History channel...
__________________
LEIF3D.com
 
Old 06 June 2012   #44
Originally Posted by leif3d: I wonder if people who have never heard of such (ridiculous) theories will enjoy them movie a little more.


Anyone who saw the last Indiana Jones film, The Thing, the X-Files, Stargate, Alien VS Predator, Transformers and god knows how many other films where Von Däniken's ancient astronaut theories have been used will know them already :/

That's the biggest issue with the film's premise: it's been used so many times before that it's already a cliche.
__________________
leighvanderbyl.com
 
Old 06 June 2012   #45
Originally Posted by digital verve: I remember Blade Runner being panned and now it is seen as a classic. I bet the critics of that film in 1982 who slammed the film are now saying how innovative it was. lol. Some film critics are snobs regarding sci-fi, especially when it tries to be intelligent and ask big questions. I am going to judge Prometheus for myself.

Here is one review excerpt written in 1982 for Blade Runner:

"And it's also a mess, at least as far as its narrative is concerned. Almost nothing is explained coherently, and the plot has great lapses, from the changeable nature of one key character to the frequent disappearances of another. The story lurches along awkwardly, helped not at all by some ponderous stabs at developing Deckard's character. As an old-fashioned detective cruising his way through the space age, Deckard is both tedious and outre."
By JANET MASLIN
Published: June 25, 1982
http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/rev...755C0A964948260


don't be a silly goose.

Do you not remember that the original version of Blade runner was mind numbingly bad because the studio cut it to shit and added that idiotic voice over?

Almost no one likes remembering that little detail, because thankfully the Director's cut is the one we will always remember.

http://youtu.be/TbXUzRL9MzA
just watch this and tell me you don't feel like punching the screen.
__________________
[Invivo Animation Reel]

Last edited by DanHibiki : 06 June 2012 at 03:51 PM.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.