“Prometheus” sequel due out in 2014 or 2015 - Page 22 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

Forum Jump: 
 86Likes
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-18-2015, 06:40 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 9,839
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 979 Post(s)
Liked: 722
An all-porcine crew? Mark my words, it'll never work! Hmm...actually, it'd probably make a ton of cash.
rezzy is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-18-2015, 07:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: florida
Posts: 1,109
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 503 Post(s)
Liked: 214
a side discussion from something that took place. I finally watched Lawerence of Arabia for the first time, cause netflix has it now in UHD. Is it me or did Fassbender look so much and act like Peter O Toole just to put it out there that he would he play him if they ever remade that movie?

tv: Samsung 55HU8550
avr: Pioneer VSX 824
subs: Polk PSW108, Definitive Technology Pro-sub 800
l/r: Klipsch R28Fs, c: Infinity Beta C360 rear: cheapo Sharps
mars5l is offline  
Old 09-18-2015, 07:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedeskE View Post
Obviously, you have a very vivid and active imagination. Bravo Sir.
I need this from time to time to save me from the horror of actually thinking.
Comment somewhat ambiguous -- am I reading correctly that you need a vivid and active imagination to avoid the horror of thinking? If so, I might easily enough agree -- at least in the way folks might typically regard "thinking." "Vivid" could connote a descriptor of the visual, likewise "imagination" might blossom in a visual, auditory, or sensate manner versus "concentrated pondering" toward some calculated goal -- thinking, as an active diversion. PROMETHEUS, in all its awe and glory, washes over you as experiential -- to the extent that one's mind might divert to the banal, inert, stillborn and stultifying matters of plot and characterization, a movie has already failed me -- horror indeed. I assume you would agree.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-18-2015, 08:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Valencia, Ca
Posts: 6,923
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2398 Post(s)
Liked: 3177
Quote:
Originally Posted by mars5l View Post
a side discussion from something that took place. I finally watched Lawerence of Arabia for the first time, cause netflix has it now in UHD. Is it me or did Fassbender look so much and act like Peter O Toole just to put it out there that he would he play him if they ever remade that movie?

Wow, great observation. I never noticed it, but it really clicks after thinking about it.
Tack is offline  
Old 09-18-2015, 09:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by mars5l View Post
a side discussion from something that took place. I finally watched Lawerence of Arabia for the first time, cause netflix has it now in UHD. Is it me or did Fassbender look so much and act like Peter O Toole just to put it out there that he would he play him if they ever remade that movie?
You might be right -- certainly the stew that ended up on the screen appeared to showcase the influence of at least a few cooks -- maybe Fassbinder one of them, and the whole interlude of him specifically mimicking O'Toole from clips of LoA, tailoring his appearance to duplicate the Lawrence of A visage, and even interjecting salient quotes from the movie at opportune times -- maybe all that was thought up by Fassbinder, you never know -- he certainly is a stellar talent and the production such an eclectic mix, RS might just have acceded to a suggestion on his part...
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-18-2015, 11:39 PM
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 36,583
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5299 Post(s)
Liked: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by mars5l View Post
Is it me or did Fassbender look so much and act like Peter O Toole just to put it out there that he would he play him if they ever remade that movie?
No remakes of LoA allowed (Hollywood Rule# 839).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
Comment somewhat ambiguous -- am I reading correctly that you need a vivid and active imagination to avoid the horror of thinking? If so, I might easily enough agree -- at least in the way folks might typically regard "thinking." "Vivid" could connote a descriptor of the visual, likewise "imagination" might blossom in a visual, auditory, or sensate manner versus "concentrated pondering" toward some calculated goal -- thinking, as an active diversion.
We are talking about PROMETHEUS here; no ambiguity or pussy-footing permitted.

Quote:
PROMETHEUS, in all its awe and glory, washes over you as experiential
Most would agree PROMETHEUS "washes over you," however, most would identify the agent as urine.

Quote:
one's mind might divert to the banal, inert, stillborn and stultifying matters of plot and characterization,
I don't think you will have many posters disagreeing with you....
oink is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 07:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,110
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1830 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Prometheus is a guilty pleasure, as preposterous as it is, it's entertaining and gorgeous to look at. Plus the best 3D I've ever experienced.

That said, I have a hard time getting very excited about a sequel that spends much time on the Engineers. I found that the most disappointing
aspect of Prometheus. Aside from 'ruining" the mystery of the Space Jockey, replacing one of the most iconic and mysterious alien designs
with an utterly dull and prosaic bald muscly Greek sculpture, I found the Engineers just dull. Hopefully their world is much more interesting than they are.
R Harkness is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 08:36 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post
No remakes of LoA allowed (Hollywood Rule# 839).

We are talking about PROMETHEUS here; no ambiguity or pussy-footing permitted.

Most would agree PROMETHEUS "washes over you," however, most would identify the agent as urine.


I don't think you will have many posters disagreeing with you....
I for one can appreciate remakes -- but wish someone would just venture to redo the soundtracks of all older films (worth the effort) -- take the dialog component, meld it with re-recorded symphonic, foley and sound design elements and viola!, you take a substandard (relative to current state of art) production, and elevate to masterpiece. Hope I'm not pussy-footing on the points I make.

Again, cannot fathom how anyone does not love PROMETHEUS, but our beautiful world is composed of a full spectrum of moviegoing tastes -- leave it at that...

Now of course when I refer to banal, inert, stillborn, and stultifying plot matters, you know I'm not talking about PROMETHEUS specifically don't you? This would be the role or effect of plots and characterization in all film. If you are looking for that type of thing, film can definitely provide it (though a book might be more suitable), and it seems to comfort some (or most) to provide it, and when the entertainment value is absent or wanes, some imagine such things substitute for raison d'être for making or seeing a given film. But I find my mind meanders toward attending to "the story" when I'm insuffiently swept up in the entertainment. For the most part, we pay attention to the story and characters where the filmmaker has let us down.

Of course it is convention to incorporate dynamic contrast of intensity. I do appreciate this. Lulls are where we might gather expositional elements, and plot can provide a pleasant enough connective tissue to the imagery and sonic environment -- I'm not altogether immune to the seductive blandishments of the largely irrelevant, and it happens to be the case that I have seen PROMETHEUS so many times, I've gleaned pieces of "the story" along the way, but the genius of Scott is that when you follow this strategy -- to try and decipher what it is about -- you are stymied by absurdity -- pseudo-profound ambitions are rendered frivolous in inexplicable motivation, silly dialog, and wildly overdrawn characterization (in some cases). What better way to thwart fishing for meaning?! Tsk tsk tsk...

For me, this is one of the most brilliant films ever to reach the screen, hope I've not been ambiguous.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 09:42 AM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
hope I've not been ambiguous.
No. At least not to me but for some that may well be the case based on their reactions seen here over the years (time flies ). For them, PG-13 may be more to the level that they are comfortable with.
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:10 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Prometheus is a guilty pleasure, as preposterous as it is, it's entertaining and gorgeous to look at. Plus the best 3D I've ever experienced.

That said, I have a hard time getting very excited about a sequel that spends much time on the Engineers. I found that the most disappointing
aspect of Prometheus. Aside from 'ruining" the mystery of the Space Jockey, replacing one of the most iconic and mysterious alien designs
with an utterly dull and prosaic bald muscly Greek sculpture, I found the Engineers just dull. Hopefully their world is much more interesting than they are.
See, I don't get the guilty part -- entertaining and gorgeous to look at, that is film, or what it can be, if it is all it can be. Anything else film provides is like some archaic, obsolete linkage to biblioliterary or a fablemaking storyteller bygone era. Films can carry on that tradition, to be sure, but to the extent they don't exploit the techniques unique to cinema -- awesome sight and sound -- they have already lost me.

As to the Goliath subtheme -- they are STILL largely mysterious. I myself loved the look -- couldn't quite penetrate the quality of complexion -- the whole presentation was awesome! Plus that jar of stuff, the way it undulated like churning tar and sheeted off into golden elements -- I see and I'm hooked -- the sight gives me meaning. This movie stands on its own, nothing ruined for me -- in fact, there was no reference to the space jockey specifically, or they never encountered that tableau -- that situation was either on some other planet, or a different part of the one they were on, correct?

When I think of everything associated with the "Greek Goliaths" -- the whole swirling planetarium effect, the massing light points representing historical traces -- all of that perfectly visually realized -- the images are the genius and intrigue. Did you want RS to tell you the meaning of life? I am quite content that his vision is one of a baffling social contract where participants act irrationally, cherish fairy tale fantasies of significance and order, and ultimately perish in their profound arrogance and search for meaning -- just as happens to meaning-questers watching PROMETHEUS.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,110
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1830 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
See, I don't get the guilty part -- entertaining and gorgeous to look at, that is film, or what it can be, if it is all it can be.
The "guilty" part relates to the fact the movie represents much of what I loathe in Hollywood movie making: essentially, the brain-dead quality. I LOVE smart science-fiction, I want film making for adults not kids. I hate, hate, hate films made with lowered expectations, and when people lower their expectations because of it.

Prometheus represents one of the worst bait and switches I've ever seen: a movie that was promoted as smart sci-fi, dealing with "big ideas," but whose execution was idiotic and intellectually lazy at every opportunity.

So it's a love hate thing.
R Harkness is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:37 AM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Prometheus represents one of the worst bait and switches I've ever seen: a movie that was promoted as smart sci-fi, dealing with "big ideas," but whose execution was idiotic and intellectually lazy at every opportunity.
I beg to differ. It was promoted as a "prequel" to Sci-Fi/Horror film.
What you listed came after the release, mainly in the form of reviews.
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:39 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thedeskE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 4,081
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 254 Post(s)
Liked: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post

Most would agree PROMETHEUS "washes over you," however, most would identify the agent as urine.
Which is also a great wood cleaner (discovered from bad aim)
thedeskE is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:47 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcruiser View Post
I beg to differ. It was promoted as a "prequel" to Sci-Fi/Horror film.
What you listed came after the release, mainly in the form of reviews.
Yeah, much more on this later, in a hurry just now -- but I wondered where notions of what it was supposed to be came from too. I can't imagine anything extraneous to the movie has anything at all to do with appreciation for the movie -- the movie represents itself, but beyond that, it should be promising only as a vehicle for entertainment -- to the extent it fails that, it IS crap. Whatever else it may be would not matter, and if it IS entertaining, anything else is mostly irrelevent, so....gotta go just now....
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 10:57 AM
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 36,583
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5299 Post(s)
Liked: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Prometheus is a guilty pleasure, as preposterous as it is, it's entertaining and gorgeous to look at. Plus the best 3D I've ever experienced.
Although I can't recall seeing it in 3D, I completely agree it is visually arresting.

Quote:
That said, I have a hard time getting very excited about a sequel that spends much time on the Engineers. I found that the most disappointing
aspect of Prometheus. Aside from 'ruining" the mystery of the Space Jockey, replacing one of the most iconic and mysterious alien designs
with an utterly dull and prosaic bald muscly Greek sculpture, I found the Engineers just dull. Hopefully their world is much more interesting than they are.
FWIW, I thought the exact opposite about the Engineers...

10) Exactly why are they seeding the Universe with their DNA?
9) Considering the effort, to what benefit do they hope to achieve?
8) In what ways do we humans fall short of their goals?
7) Is there really no way for them to accommodate our existence?
6) Is extermination the only choice they are willing to consider?
5) Is it because we have created artificial life (David) and thereby broken some rule?
4) Will they try to wipe out ALL humans or just those who have violated some tenet of theirs?
3) If the word got back to their Homeworld about what has happened, how much TIME do we have before the sh*t REALLY hits the fan?
2) Do we become renegades/fugitives and are forced in to hiding to escape their wrath?
1) Do they like pork?

For me, the real problem with the movie are the human characters...
Nearly all are laughably unrealistic and cheaply Hollywood-drawn stereotypes.
This is the film's Achilles' heel (IMO).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
I for one can appreciate remakes -- but wish someone would just venture to redo the soundtracks of all older films (worth the effort) -- take the dialog component, meld it with re-recorded symphonic, foley and sound design elements and viola!, you take a substandard (relative to current state of art) production, and elevate to masterpiece.
I mentioned this possibility once long ago...however, I was branded a heretic and shouted down.

Quote:
Hope I'm not pussy-footing on the points I make.
I was making a joke (and not a good one).

Quote:
Now of course when I refer to banal, inert, stillborn, and stultifying plot matters, you know I'm not talking about PROMETHEUS specifically don't you?
I do.

Quote:
I find my mind meanders toward attending to "the story" when I'm insuffiently swept up in the entertainment. For the most part, we pay attention to the story and characters where the filmmaker has let us down.
This is where we differ.
Story and characters are paramount in my mind when watching a movie...no amount of "entertainment" values can overcome crappy writing.

Quote:
the genius of Scott is that when you follow this strategy -- to try and decipher what it is about -- you are stymied by absurdity -- pseudo-profound ambitions are rendered frivolous in inexplicable motivation, silly dialog, and wildly overdrawn characterization (in some cases). What better way to thwart fishing for meaning?! Tsk tsk tsk...
True, but most would not apply the word "genius" to RS's effort in PROMETHEUS.

Quote:
For me, this is one of the most brilliant films ever to reach the screen, hope I've not been ambiguous.
Not "ambiguous," I would describe your thoughts on the matter as unique.
oink is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 11:58 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,110
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1830 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcruiser View Post
I beg to differ. It was promoted as a "prequel" to Sci-Fi/Horror film.
What you listed came after the release, mainly in the form of reviews.
Ridley and company gave many interviews during the making of and the promotion of the movie where they depicted the movie as complex, multi-layered and tackling Big Interesting Ideas, where we come from, evolution, etc. They clearly were not simply portraying it as just another dumb shocker. (Ridley says this explicitly in some interviews, that while Prometheus has it's scary moments, much of it is concerned with exploring the deep ideas and questions we all think about).
R Harkness is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 12:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Tack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Valencia, Ca
Posts: 6,923
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2398 Post(s)
Liked: 3177
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Ridley and company gave many interviews during the making of and the promotion of the movie where they depicted the movie as complex, multi-layered and tackling Big Interesting Ideas, where we come from, evolution, etc. They clearly were not simply portraying it as just another dumb shocker. (Ridley says this explicitly in some interviews, that while Prometheus has it's scary moments, much of it is concerned with exploring the deep ideas and questions we all think about).
True.

I also remember him backing away from the "prequel" stance as the movie got closer to release.
Tack is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 12:48 PM
 
oink's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Shuloch
Posts: 36,583
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5299 Post(s)
Liked: 3035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tack View Post
True.

I also remember him backing away from the "prequel" stance as the movie got closer to release.
Same here.
oink is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 04:25 PM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Ridley and company gave many interviews during the making of and the promotion of the movie where they depicted the movie as complex, multi-layered and tackling Big Interesting Ideas, where we come from, evolution, etc. They clearly were not simply portraying it as just another dumb shocker. (Ridley says this explicitly in some interviews, that while Prometheus has it's scary moments, much of it is concerned with exploring the deep ideas and questions we all think about).
Far reaching promotions such as TV ads, trailers, poster images...etc have distinctive ties to Alien (Sci-Fi/Horror genre).
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 04:54 PM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post
10) Exactly why are they seeding the Universe with their DNA?
9) Considering the effort, to what benefit do they hope to achieve?
8) In what ways do we humans fall short of their goals?
7) Is there really no way for them to accommodate our existence?
6) Is extermination the only choice they are willing to consider?
5) Is it because we have created artificial life (David) and thereby broken some rule?
4) Will they try to wipe out ALL humans or just those who have violated some tenet of theirs?
3) If the word got back to their Homeworld about what has happened, how much TIME do we have before the sh*t REALLY hits the fan?
2) Do we become renegades/fugitives and are forced in to hiding to escape their wrath?
1) Do they like pork?
10) May be they are competing against another superior race to see who can claim more real estate.
9) See # 10.
8) To be answered in P-2?
7) May be "goldielock" real estate is premium in this galaxy.
6) See # 7.
5) See # 8.
4) Probably "nuke it from the orbit, it's the only way to be sure".
3) Things "got out and turned on them" 2K years ago, give or take. That would've been more than enough time for these advanced beings to find out. Unless it was a secret operation by rogue group may be...?
2) Us, hiding and escaping these far more advanced beings? It would be like the footage we see on TV where the police helicopter with infrared camera chasing running criminals and shows the body heat signature hiding behind the tree/fence. Our way of hiding would be futile.
1) Considering we share their DNA and how much we (except you of course) like bacon, I would say, yes.
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 07:44 PM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
YES! AWESOME!!! I'm very curious to see what she does with Fassbinder's head -- I know she took both elements, but maybe restoration only going to achieve so much functionality,
You and I both know she will not be able to resist applying generous portions of Crazy Glue and Duct Tape to the 2 halves (girls are girls, after all).
What I think can be written is, once they arrive to engineer's home planet, she ties David's head on top of hers, then gets into one of those engineer's suits in the hallway

so that David can communicate while she moves around...
Similar to this concept.
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 08:51 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Ridley and company gave many interviews during the making of and the promotion of the movie where they depicted the movie as complex, multi-layered and tackling Big Interesting Ideas, where we come from, evolution, etc. They clearly were not simply portraying it as just another dumb shocker. (Ridley says this explicitly in some interviews, that while Prometheus has it's scary moments, much of it is concerned with exploring the deep ideas and questions we all think about).
So of course I would assert unequivocally that whatever Scott and company think they were shooting for, thought they had achieved, and/or any other notions they might have of the production from any angle or perspective, is wholly irrelevant to the film itself. He gave us what he gave us, it is what it is -- I don't have any expectation whatsoever that he has any particular insight into what his film is or means, either before or post production, and even if I did, his words are not his movie, just like the sky is not a piece of paper.

I confess I can find artist testimonials a curious aside to the art itself, just as anecdotal accounts may be of more or less interest, but do not in any way alter the art itself. I've read artists saying the most ridiculous things about their art -- but as to its changing what they gave us, that would be toward valuing commentary in the same realm as the art. Nevertheless Ridley Scott gave us a smart, complex, multilayered, exploration of the big ideas. The smartest teachers don't churn profusions of coma-inducing words, and choke our brains with textual transpositions -- they show. The smart of PROMETHEUS IS the visual, IS the production design, IS the art, IS the music, ARE the compositions of color, the special effects, the whole awe and spectacle of this world unto itself.

Plus if you would want the crap he evidently talked about, he did very much provide everything he said he did. I know people don't like his answers -- that doesn't mean he did not deal with the questions. Look at all the thought and conversation his production has inspired, years after the release of his movie. If THE MARTIAN presents a coherent world of intelligent characters with brilliant dialog, it will be a lesser effort than PROMETHEUS because of that -- but only slightly, since, if the audio/visual is in the same class -- the story structure would remain the most infinitessimal, most simplistic, negligible aspect of film -- I could (and do) whip out stories all day long -- magazines, jokes, books, news, conversation, letters, TV commercials and shows, and the stories they contain, are all commonplace as dirt.

But could I deliver a film that looks like and sounds like PROMETHEUS? -- there are only a handful of human beings on this planet who are posed to do anything close to that. I am in constant awe of what they give us.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 11:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,110
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1830 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Emaych,

Fine. We have different standards. For you Prometheus reached your standards for excellence. For me it feel far short.
Your defending of Prometheus to me is the lowest-common-denominator defense used by most people who are fully happy with
bad movies: "Hey, they didn't really try when making it, so I'll just turn off my brain and lower my expectations for all the bad elements."
I'm just generally not into doing that and wish more people would expect more.

Everyone anticipated Ridley's return to sci-fi because he'd made two of the most well regarded, and intelligent, sci-fi movies of all time, Alien and BladeRunner. I remember reading a review by Roger Ebert about Alien where he just nailed the elements that elevated that movie, and one of them was the higher minded writing and acting for the characters, that we were spending time with thinking adults who are placed in an insane situation.

Tons of people have been able to make average sci fi films, but getting one or more elements done well, but faltering in other important areas. Ridley's were classics because they did almost everything well (Alien for me doing it best).

People where hoping for a similar level of quality through and through with Prometheus. But what we got was gorgeous to look at - expected in a Ridley Scottt movie, but groan-worthy, hair-pullingly stupid characters and a plot that read like something you'd write while smoking a bong, and then reading it the morning after and continually thinking WTF did I write?

It's not for nothing that Alien and Bladerunner are revered, yet Prometheus bashing, like The Phantom Menace, became an internet spectator sport. And this is among the very people who were most eager to accept Scott's new movie. That should tell you something right there.
R Harkness is offline  
Old 09-19-2015, 11:54 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by oink View Post
I completely agree it is visually arresting.

For me, the real problem with the movie are the human characters...Nearly all are laughably unrealistic and cheaply Hollywood-drawn stereotypes.This is the film's Achilles' heel (IMO).

This is where we differ. Story and characters are paramount in my mind when watching a movie...no amount of "entertainment" values can overcome crappy writing.

Not "ambiguous," I would describe your thoughts on the matter as unique.
I used to own a compendium of Giger's work called NECRONOMICON (if I recall) -- visually arresting, possibly many other things beyond that. What I guess I can make of some of the commentary herein, is that those images, sans an intelligent story, and/or complex, realistic characters, and/or scintillating, intelligent dialog, have little value. Likewise music will also inevitably fail to move without smart people talking over it toward the end of redeeming it by attaching some sort of respectable story to it.

Why anyone thinks either requires a story to make it worthy of consideration is quite beyond me. In fact, music in my mind gains great power precisely because it is so abstracted -- tones in time, altogether removed from story or "content" structure, has the ability to make you cry or laugh, What is it touching? I submit something deeper, more profound, and less susceptible to analysis or explanation -- getting to those areas of the human psyche by means inexplicable, is to me way more mysterious and magical than concocting some story where (for example) a dog dies, thereby triggering very familiar associations by the most simplistic of means.

Why, when it comes to film, do we want to say it is crap, if the the least of its elements is possibly lacking? I just don't get that. You know OBLIVION has an isolated music track on it -- I'm going to venture someone besides me listened to it. Doesn't have the story or words per se -- provides a fantastic experience. I dare say you could listen with your eyes closed, or is that complete heresy? -- would your mind have to impose awareness of the story to decide if the sound was crap or inspirational -- depending upon how you felt about the story? So now reverse that, isolate the story -- listen to only the verbal description of what is transpiring for the visually impaired -- don't watch the images, remove any other sonic content -- how interesting is that? -- sorry, wouldn't last two minutes on it because it has so very little to do with what is interesting in a film.

I would point out that most of the "writing" in a film, crappy or otherwise, does not present to us as story or characters, it IS the look of things, the continuity, the editing, description of the musical cues, in that sense it is not standing in opposition to or isolated from entertainment values, just that the story and characters are the smallest part of the writing that goes on, further diminishing its significance. So, I don't know, maybe I am unique when I say the story and characters are not what matters to me -- don't really believe it because people do look at art, even abstract art, listen to music without a story, but it will never do if a film has those things, even brilliantly realized, if the characters are stupid.

You know, it occurs to me that the film 12 ANGRY MEN is considered a classic -- the characters it presents are shortsighted, prejudiced, self-involved, and one might say in various ways stupid -- does depicting stupid people make it a crap film? Just another something to ponder where "entertainment values" are taken out of the equation.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 02:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Emaych, Fine. We have different standards. For you Prometheus reached your standards for excellence. For me it feel far short. Your defending of Prometheus to me is the lowest-common-denominator defense used by most people who are fully happy with bad movies: "Hey, they didn't really try when making it, so I'll just turn off my brain and lower my expectations for all the bad elements." I'm just generally not into doing that and wish more people would expect more.
It is evident to me you have no idea what my arguments have been. Exactly zero of my points have anything to do with "lowest common denominator," or not trying to make a quality production -- where did you possibly get that?

I've said throughout PROMETHEUS stands at the highest pinnacle. I could go into detail again about why I find virtually every facet of this film pure genius, including story and characters, but I'm sure it seems that would be lost on you. Also, if I were to venture a vigorous campaign for the story and characters, that would have the deceptive effect of seeming to elevate the role of those elements, so I'm just as content to refer to them tangentially.


But be clear there is genius in story and characters, even if entirely accidental -- it's just that that doesn't count for much.

If one intent of art is to provoke thought and discussion, I've discovered that almost THE most potent means of promoting such is to disrupt audience expectations -- in this case, the characters seeking meaning are portrayed as inept, irrational, and absurd -- and the audience revolted creating a firestorm of thought and discussion on the big questions. Mission accomplished in a big way.

Now contrast to OBLIVION, for example -- character trying to get to the mystery of his beingness. The answer very clearly and coherently laid out through the logical efforts of an intelligent character, yet as a vehicle for sparking grand ponderings on the nature of reality on the part of moviegoers, much less effective precisely because it is so neat, by the numbers, coherent and all laid out just so.

But that is enough on story matters, because both films succeed well enough in entertainment -- no higher calling than that for film -- don't got that, forget everything else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Everyone anticipated Ridley's return to sci-fi because he'd made two of the most well regarded, and intelligent, sci-fi movies of all time, Alien and BladeRunner. I remember reading a review by Roger Ebert about Alien where he just nailed the elements that elevated that movie, and one of them was the higher minded writing and acting for the characters, that we were spending time with thinking adults who are placed in an insane situation.
The tradition continues -- PROMETHEUS, though standing quite on its own, a very worthy entrant to the pantheon of great great cinematic works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
Tons of people have been able to make average sci fi films, but getting one or more elements done well, but faltering in other important areas. Ridley's were classics because they did almost everything well (Alien for me doing it best).

People where hoping for a similar level of quality through and through with Prometheus. But what we got was gorgeous to look at - expected in a Ridley Scott movie, but groan-worthy, hair-pullingly stupid characters and a plot that read like something you'd write while smoking a bong, and then reading it the morning after and continually thinking WTF did I write?

It's not for nothing that Alien and Bladerunner are revered, yet Prometheus bashing, like The Phantom Menace, became an internet spectator sport. And this is among the very people who were most eager to accept Scott's new movie. That should tell you something right there.
Hair-pulling -- oh yes, I can easily agree. The best art provokes, vexes, confounds, taunts a response. The merely good, or acceptable, or pleasant enough, is embraced warmly and pretty much forgotten about. Impressionism in art caused outrage and mass hysterical derision, rock and roll prompted shock and anger. PROMETHEUS and LOST, the TV series, launched sustained campaigns of bitter vitriol and have both become modern classic filmic art.
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 10:34 AM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Harkness View Post
"Hey, they didn't really try when making it, so I'll just turn off my brain and lower my expectations for all the bad elements."

but groan-worthy, hair-pullingly stupid characters and a plot that read like something you'd write while smoking a bong, and then reading it the morning after and continually thinking WTF did I write?
Are you referring to biologist and geologist in Prometheus? If so, they are supposed to be that way, see post # 586.
Quote:
People where hoping for a similar level of quality through and through with Prometheus.
From what I've observed, those that are disapointed, were expecting same kind of storyline / action as Alien, Xenomorph, face hugger, alien eggs, horror suspense...etc. Some even thought that it's a direct prequel to Alien. It's all psychological.

Edit:
BTW, the first screenplay (by Jon Spaihts) is a direct prequel to Alien but that didn't sit well with R. S. so the revised version (by Damon Lindelof) was chosen. I've read both and I'm glad that the story was revised because it would have been boring if the first one went ahead.

Last edited by bcruiser; 09-20-2015 at 10:48 AM.
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 10:38 AM
 
bcruiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,240
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
Why anyone thinks either requires a story to make it worthy of consideration is quite beyond me. In fact, music in my mind gains great power precisely because it is so abstracted -- tones in time, altogether removed from story or "content" structure, has the ability to make you cry or laugh, What is it touching? I submit something deeper, more profound, and less susceptible to analysis or explanation -- getting to those areas of the human psyche by means inexplicable, is to me way more mysterious and magical than concocting some story where (for example) a dog dies, thereby triggering very familiar associations by the most simplistic of means.
Too deep, Emaych, too deep...
bcruiser is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 12:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcruiser View Post
Too deep, Emaych, too deep...
Well, music can strike a deep chord -- deep enough that I'm sure I'm never quite fully aware of the influence it is exerting on me as I watch a movie, but if you meant my observation was too deep -- sorry about that, not trying to be at all inaccessibly profound -- just tossing around a few ideas with my AVS friends for laffs and giggles on a lazy Sunday....
Emaych is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 05:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
R Harkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 14,110
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1830 Post(s)
Liked: 1539
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
So of course I would assert unequivocally that whatever Scott and company think they were shooting for, thought they had achieved, and/or any other notions they might have of the production from any angle or perspective, is wholly irrelevant to the film itself. He gave us what he gave us, it is what it is --
How the film is sold to the audience is entirely relevant. If a film-maker promotes a film as a scary horror film, the audience decides "that is the type of film I want to spend my money on" and what is delivered is a three stooges comedy caper, then this is entirely relevant to the reaction of any audience to the film. Phrases like "it is what it is" are empty tautologies - of course that's the case, but it just doesn't address the type of points being brought up here. Expectations are just as relevant when a movie, when a film maker describes his goal, and again that being the type of film you'd like to see, this gets you to the theater. It's entirely justified to evaluate the film on whether it met the goal of the film-maker, and hence how well it fulfilled expectations/desires of you the viewer.

Further, even without advanced expectations for what type of film you've been sold, anyone can evaluate a film in of itself, as to why the elements did not work to involve or satisfy that particular viewer.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
I don't have any expectation whatsoever that he has any particular insight into what his film is or means, either before or post production, and even if I did, his words are not his movie, just like the sky is not a piece of paper.
Some of my film-theory instructors spoke that way. They were the ones who generally didn't have film careers.

I certainly agree that no one's enjoyment of a movie should be constrained by the intentions of the film-maker, whether the film-maker had anything to say, or whether the film achieved what the film-maker desired. Certainly many of us have loved movies that the film-maker himself thought were failures, so whatever the intent, there is always our subjective relationship with a movie that gives it value.

BUT...I hate when it is ONLY this aspect of film (or art) that is held to be of importance or interest.

You seem to espouse what I've always thought of as "the self-absorbed approach" to understanding movies. That is, no particular interest in what a film-maker might have wanted to have achieved, or what he/she wanted to say, no attempt to try, because it doesn't matter; the only meaning you are interested in is YOUR MEANING that you bring to the experience.

I don't NEED a film to have been the product of deliberate specific goals, lofty or low. But...IF the film-maker had intent, goals, messages I'm interested in what she/he has to tell me - I don't hold some across the board "I don't really give a **** about your intent/message" attitude. And If I made a movie with the intent of it being scary for the audience, and audiences instead find it boring, or funny, then I personally feel I would have failed to meet my goal - the whole motivation for making the film in the first place. That includes if some members of the audience decided to "love it" on what they held as so-bad-it's-good camp value. It still failed my goals and since whatever value someone else is getting out of it would be accidental, I could not take credit for it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post

Plus if you would want the crap he evidently talked about, he did very much provide everything he said he did. I know people don't like his answers -- that doesn't mean he did not deal with the questions.
Sure he sorta, kinda dealt with some of the questions. Which justifies any viewer pointing out how poorly they were presented or answered.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emaych View Post
I've said throughout PROMETHEUS stands at the highest pinnacle. I could go into detail again about why I find virtually every facet of this film pure genius, including story and characters, but I'm sure it seems that would be lost on you.
Then I'm glad you aren't making movies.

In no way do I wish to object to your love of the movie. There are all sorts of movies any of us feel have enriched our lives, that other people have disliked. Me, I think the Exorcist is the pinnacle of horror films on virtually every level, a master class. Other people have seen it and laughed at it. (Though, the impact of the film has been largely that it was actually successful in it's attempt to scare, and if that hadn't been the case I'm sure it wouldn't have been a film that had such an impact on me).

I just find the approach you espouse, one I've seen ever since my days in film school, pretty one-sided (the only way to evaluate a movie is how it made you feel) and relativistic to a fault.



Quote:
Originally Posted by bcruiser View Post
Are you referring to biologist and geologist in Prometheus? If so, they are supposed to be that way, see post # 586.
Every character in Prometheus was an idiot in their own way. In the same way that makes movies like Plan 9 From Outer Space become laughable camp - where the film-maker just seems to have lost track of emotional and intellectual logic of actual human beings, so that their reactions to any situation they are put in becomes surreally out of place. This is a standard way audience attachment to a movie breaks apart, how you "lose" immersion in the movie.

Again, reactions will vary and are subjective. But there IS a logic behind reactions, and thus any particular viewer can explain why he/she couldn't get into the movie, or could.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bcruiser View Post
From what I've observed, those that are disapointed, were expecting same kind of storyline / action as Alien, Xenomorph, face hugger, alien eggs, horror suspense...etc. Some even thought that it's a direct prequel to Alien. It's all psychological.
I was fascinated by the reactions to Prometheus and for a while followed reaction all over the net. The major theme of disappointment was that it was just a dumb, dumb movie to the degree people couldn't truly enjoy it and couldn't connect with it. When you see all the break-downs and mockery of Prometheus be it in video reviews or print it's almost universally based on this, not on some disappointment that it wasn't Alien or whatever. For most Ridley fans - the people who were most excited about the movie - all we wanted was another excellent sci-fi movie from him...WHATEVER he decided to do, if it was good we were there. But the reaction was that the movie was just off-puttingly inane.
R Harkness is offline  
Old 09-20-2015, 06:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Emaych's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,326
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 407 Post(s)
Liked: 161
^^^NICE, Rich H -- very nice. That was a pleasure to read through. I'm going to let it marinate a bit more, but will just say for the time being, I see every movie of specific types that I might have an interest in. There was no way I would not have seen this film, nor any followup, so what Scott ever said never factored in. Though I don't understand it, I suppose there might be people in this wide world of ours that might only see it if what someone said matched what they were interested in...? It could be true, but after you see it, it would seem the appraisal is gonna have to be based on what you saw, not how you interpreted what was said by Scott or anyone else. But I've got some football to settle down to just now -- the movie watching over for another weekend...waaaa, waaaa...
Emaych is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off