or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Now Showing - What We Watched - Page 232

post #6931 of 7853
OT, but the Lady Contact was based on just stepped down from that project... no time for movies lately,work and now the Women's College World Series...
post #6932 of 7853
watched Frontline re runs last night; "Digital Nation" and "Inside the Meltdown"
post #6933 of 7853
Originally Posted by RTROSE View Post

Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol - BR - Late to the party on this one, but finally did get around to watching it (as well as the other MI's). I was cautious going in as it was hyped pretty heavily. I was not disappointed. Pretty good story line, cool gadgets, pretty girls. Excellent use of LFE and surround speakers. LFE was very good without being bloated for no apparent reason.

I've been passing up opportunities to watch this one - waiting on my chance to slow down long enough to watch it on BR. Glad you liked it - others seems to agree that it is done well - and thanks for not giving any of it away.
post #6934 of 7853
Watched The Odd Angry Shot (1979)
1.8/5 (imdb 6.5/10)
Never really got interested in the film.
A group of Australian soldiers are deployed to Vietnam around 1967/8 and encounter the realities of war, from the numbing boredom of camp life and long range patrols, raids and ambushes where nothing happens, to the occasional firefight. Until "Platoon" came along, it was one of the few films that portrayed the combat experience in Viet Nam.
post #6935 of 7853
Just finished Alien and Aliens.

Seen them both before, but this was the first time on Blu-ray. What's interesting to me is that Ridley Scott (Alien) and James Cameron (Aliens) take very different approaches to the films visually, but the story-telling comes out remarkably similar. Scott uses anamorphic lenses to shoot while Cameron, then as now it seems, prefers the full frame. The visual effects are hit-and-miss throughout, but Scotts in-camera effects are still quite good, while Cameron's film looks a little ragged in many spots. Both stories progress naturally and keep the tension and drama building at a good pace - though Cameron's sequel does run a bit long (that may be because I watched the 1990 extended edition instead of the 1986 theatrical cut).

Sigourney Weaver does her thing equally in both movies, but I prefer Tom Skerritt and Ian Holm in the original to Paul Riser and Bill Paxton in the sequel, though I think Paul Riser works very well in his roll as corporate bad-guy.

Since I bought the whole four film set on Gold Box special this week, hopefully I'll find time for the other two before heading out to see Prometheus. I don't expect as much from the third and fourth installments (which I have never seen) as I do from Scott's re-entry into the set, but then again, I don't expect as much from virtually any new movie this year as I do from Prometheus. (Except from maybe the new The Bourne Legacy - go watch the new trailer if you haven't - Jeremy Renner looks like the real deal.)
post #6936 of 7853
Watched Underworld: Awakening and while the movie was so-so, the bass was incredible. Great movie for just action and bass but not much else.

Originally Posted by HopefulFred View Post

Just finished Alien and Aliens.

Seen them both before, but this was the first time on Blu-ray. What's interesting to me is that Ridley Scott (Alien) and James Cameron (Aliens) take very different approaches to the films visually, but the story-telling comes out remarkably similar. Scott uses anamorphic lenses to shoot while Cameron, then as now it seems, prefers the full frame. The visual effects are hit-and-miss throughout, but Scotts in-camera effects are still quite good, while Cameron's film looks a little ragged in many spots. Both stories progress naturally and keep the tension and drama building at a good pace - though Cameron's sequel does run a bit long (that may be because I watched the 1990 extended edition instead of the 1986 theatrical cut).

Sigourney Weaver does her thing equally in both movies, but I prefer Tom Skerritt and Ian Holm in the original to Paul Riser and Bill Paxton in the sequel, though I think Paul Riser works very well in his roll as corporate bad-guy.

Since I bought the whole four film set on Gold Box special this week, hopefully I'll find time for the other two before heading out to see Prometheus. I don't expect as much from the third and fourth installments (which I have never seen) as I do from Scott's re-entry into the set, but then again, I don't expect as much from virtually any new movie this year as I do from Prometheus. (Except from maybe the new The Bourne Legacy - go watch the new trailer if you haven't - Jeremy Renner looks like the real deal.)

great movies. always thought that if you switch out the instruments in the space ships to something modern that it could pass off as a new movie almost. Aliens 3 and 4 were a waste and I like to write them off. The story was done with after Aliens imo but I have the box since it was cheaper than buying just Alien and Aliens. Hopefully Prometheus won't be a let down as it's one movie I really want to see this year. Been trying to avoid the commercials so as to not catch too many spoilers.
post #6937 of 7853
Was at freinds house yesterday and caught part of Aliens & Alien Resurrection, (was on the Ghost channel (Syfy)) I need to break down and get the boxset also... watched the new A&E series Longmire last night, I enjoyed... John Carter is out tomorrow so will watch again in 3D tomorrow night...
post #6938 of 7853
Watched Tin Tin last night - other folks seem to have liked it, it didn't do much for me. I'd put it at about a 2.5 or 3/5 personally.
post #6939 of 7853
Watched MI:Ghost Protocol & Moneyball.

The gadgets in MI rivaled those in any James Bond movie, and Simon Pegg added a bit of humor to a pretty decent action flick. 3.5/5

I am a baseball nut and rank Moneyball in the top 2 or 3 baseball movies of all time. Had this come out while I was still in high school, I probably would have pursued a career in the front office of some baseball team. Brad Pitt was excellent as Billy Beane, but Jonah Hill had the performance of the movie. 4.5/5
post #6940 of 7853
Welcome to the new AVS.
Originally Posted by dfergie View Post

Saw John Carter Friday in Real3D, loved it... I ignore the critics and I think this is the first time I've been to a theater since Avatar at the Orleans in Vegas... 4.6 out of 5 from me, I'll pre-order when available and can't wait to watch again.
Originally Posted by dfergie View Post

... John Carter is out tomorrow so will watch again in 3D tomorrow night...

Watched John Carter
3.4/5 (amazon 4.6/5, imdb 6.8/10, rotten tomatoes 52%, Decent Films B+)
A fairly pleasant little adventure story. I regret I haven't read the original A Princess Of Mars, nonetheless from what I've heard of the books the movie captures the Barsoom series’ special mix of adventure, grandeur, and rampant silliness. The first half I paused a couple times, but the last half was good popcorn stuff. The CGI is reminiscent of the last Star Wars films, but the colours are pleasant to look at.

Budget: $250,000,000
Gross:$179,300,000 (Worldwide) (19 March 2012)
post #6941 of 7853
World College Series Softball rain delay has kept me from John Carter 3D tonight... still in 4th inning...
post #6942 of 7853
Alien 1979 tagline: In space no one can hear you scream.
Prometheus 2012 tagline: The humans win. For now !
post #6943 of 7853
rewatched The Island yesterday. Haven't done so on the current system and while it was only a DVD, still a lot of bass during the action scenes.
post #6944 of 7853
Got hands and eyes on "Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)"...interesting movie.
post #6945 of 7853
Watched Act of Valor (2012)
2.9/5 (amazon 4.5/5, imdb 6.4/10, rotten tomatoes 25%)
No script polish, no acting. Unlikely chechnyians as terrorists.
Does star 8 navy seals, so there's a lot of realism in the moves and equipment.
At 40 minutes in, the gunboats are firing real bullets (not CGI or blanks), at the correct rates, doing the correct things to objects in front of them -- apparently the camera crew was nervous and wearing flack jackets. I thought the movie was over then, but there was another hour and a couple more battles to go.
At 53 minutes in, the submarine travling just under the surface is a sight to see.
My understanding is that the original intent was to make a documentary, and then they decided they could make more money by adding a little character development and releasing it in theaters.

The only two technical errors I saw were having the Chief and the Lieutenant chat away on the open ramp of the C130 before putting their oxygen masks on before the HALO jump, and, since one vest blew when struck by ball bearings from the first one, it seems that the “new gel exp0losive” was too sensitive to be used in that role.

I also saw a lot of stuff left out, that would be a) boring, or b) violate OPSEC. Both of those make me wonder about Tom Clancy appearing in the credits…
post #6946 of 7853
Watched Safe House (2012)
2.9/5 (amazon 3.7/5, imdb 6.9/10, rotten tomatoes 54%)
Quite watchable CIA spy thriller. Sort of a weak Borne Identity.
Denzel Washington plays a CIA agent who went rogue years ago, and has now shown up at the US Embassy in South Africa asking for asylum. He started in the CIA in 1985 and was one of their more skilled agents--"rewrote the manual on interogation techniques". Was last seen in South America a year ago, and the heads of the CIA can't figure out what he wants.
Ryan Reynolds plays a young CIA agent, currently the caretaker at a safe house in South Africa. He has been on post for several months, and has asked to be relocated. Weston has not had any 'guests' in the several months he has been there, until Tobin Frost, rogue agent, is dropped in his lap. They are soon on the run together, waiting on the CIA to save them. He is confused about who to trust since Frost keeps trying to get in his head, as West is trying to deliver Frost, and get the respect of the heads of the agency.
The audio on this disk is only available in DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1.
post #6947 of 7853
post #6948 of 7853
post #6949 of 7853
Watched Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
3.0/5 (amazon 3/5, imdb 7.5, rotten tomatoes 61%)
Mycroft Holmes (Stephen Fry) is a fictional character in the stories written by Arthur Conan Doyle. He is the elder brother (by seven years) of Shirley. Possessing deductive powers exceeding even those of his younger brother, Mycroft is nonetheless regretfully incapable of performing detective work similar to that of Sherlock since he is unwilling to put in the physical effort necessary to bring cases to their conclusions. Nonetheless, if given all the facts and by the use of his superior deductive powers, he is able deduce the solution to any problem or case from the comfort of an armchair. This has led the British and other European governments as well as royalty to frequently consult Mycroft's analytical mind on a number of key political decisions and strategies. Mycroft possesses superior camouflaging skills to that of his younger brother, able to appear in black tie and tails and top hat in an open wood shed, and yet remain completely concealed. Mycroft rescues Watson's wife from her watery peril, and entertains her at his castle -- a great impediment to his day as it precludes a visit to the Diogenes Club, which he co-founded, which is quite nice as it is a rule that one must not acknowledge the presence of anyone there. There are many men in London, you know, who, some from shyness, some from misanthropy, have no wish for the company of their fellows. Yet they are not averse to comfortable chairs and the latest periodicals. It is for the convenience of these that the Diogenes Club was started, and it now contains the most unsociable and unclubable men in town. No member is permitted to take the least notice of any other one. Save in the Stranger's Room, no talking is, under any circumstances, allowed, and three offences, if brought to the notice of the committee, render the talker liable to expulsion. My brother was one of the founders, and I have myself found it a very soothing atmosphere. As I said, Mary Morstan-Watson inconveniently keeps Mycroft from the Diogenes Club, but Mycroft makes the best of it handing her a telegram. Later in the film Mycroft successfully thwarts international disaster in Switzerland, and saves the life of his brother with one of his toys. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Oh, and Sherlock and Dr. Watson have cameos.
post #6950 of 7853
Watched Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2012)
1.9/5 (amazon 2.4/5, imdb 4.5/10, rotten tomatoes 17%)
Idris Elba (actor) was pretty good.
Nicolas Cage wasn't; and Violante Placido, Fergus Riordan, and Johnny Whitworth couldn't carry the film; and Ciarán Hinds was just odd.
Moments kept appearing which could have redeamed the film had they carried on but those moments were fleeting, and followed by muck.
post #6951 of 7853
Prometheus contains such a huge amount of mythic resonance that it effectively obscures a more conventional plot. I'd like to draw your attention to the use of motifs and callbacks in the film that not only enrich it, but offer possible hints as to what was going on in otherwise confusing scenes.

Let's begin with the eponymous titan himself, Prometheus. He was a wise and benevolent entity who created mankind in the first place, forming the first humans from clay. The Gods were more or less okay with that, until Prometheus gave them fire. This was a big no-no, as fire was supposed to be the exclusive property of the Gods. As punishment, Prometheus was chained to a rock and condemned to have his liver ripped out and eaten every day by an eagle. (His liver magically grew back, in case you were wondering.)

Fix that image in your mind, please: the giver of life, with his abdomen torn open. We'll be coming back to it many times in the course of this article.

The ethos of the titan Prometheus is one of willing and necessary sacrifice for life's sake. That's a pattern we see replicated throughout the ancient world. J G Frazer wrote his lengthy anthropological study, The Golden Bough, around the idea of the Dying God - a lifegiver who voluntarily dies for the sake of the people. It was incumbent upon the King to die at the right and proper time, because that was what heaven demanded, and fertility would not ensue if he did not do his royal duty of dying.

Now, consider the opening sequence of Prometheus. We fly over a spectacular vista, which may or may not be primordial Earth. According to Ridley Scott, it doesn't matter. A lone Engineer at the top of a waterfall goes through a strange ritual, drinking from a cup of black goo that causes his body to disintegrate into the building blocks of life. We see the fragments of his body falling into the river, twirling and spiralling into DNA helices.

Ridley Scott has this to say about the scene: 'That could be a planet anywhere. All he’s doing is acting as a gardener in space. And the plant life, in fact, is the disintegration of himself. If you parallel that idea with other sacrificial elements in history – which are clearly illustrated with the Mayans and the Incas – he would live for one year as a prince, and at the end of that year, he would be taken and donated to the gods in hopes of improving what might happen next year, be it with crops or weather, etcetera.'

Can we find a God in human history who creates plant life through his own death, and who is associated with a river? It's not difficult to find several, but the most obvious candidate is Osiris, the epitome of all the Frazerian 'Dying Gods'.

And we wouldn't be amiss in seeing the first of the movie's many Christian allegories in this scene, either. The Engineer removes his cloak before the ceremony, and hesitates before drinking the cupful of genetic solvent; he may well have been thinking 'If it be Thy will, let this cup pass from me.'

So, we know something about the Engineers, a founding principle laid down in the very first scene: acceptance of death, up to and including self-sacrifice, is right and proper in the creation of life. Prometheus, Osiris, John Barleycorn, and of course the Jesus of Christianity are all supposed to embody this same principle. It is held up as one of the most enduring human concepts of what it means to be 'good'.

Seen in this light, the perplexing obscurity of the rest of the film yields to an examination of the interwoven themes of sacrifice, creation, and preservation of life. We also discover, through hints, exactly what the nature of the clash between the Engineers and humanity entailed.

The crew of the Prometheus discover an ancient chamber, presided over by a brooding solemn face, in which urns of the same black substance are kept. A mural on the wall presents an image which, if you did as I asked earlier on, you will recognise instantly: the lifegiver with his abdomen torn open. Note the serenity on the Engineer's face here.

And there's another mural there, one which shows a familiar xenomorph-like figure. This is the Destroyer who mirrors the Creator, I think - the avatar of supremely selfish life, devouring and destroying others purely to preserve itself. As Ash puts it: 'a survivor, unclouded by conscience, remorse or delusions of morality.'

Through Shaw and Holloway's investigations, we learn that the Engineers not only created human life, they supervised our development. (How else are we to explain the numerous images of Engineers in primitive art, complete with star diagram showing us the way to find them?) We have to assume, then, that for a good few hundred thousand years, they were pretty happy with us. They could have destroyed us at any time, but instead, they effectively invited us over; the big pointy finger seems to be saying 'Hey, guys, when you're grown up enough to develop space travel, come see us.' Until something changed, something which not only messed up our relationship with them but caused their installation on LV-223 to be almost entirely wiped out.

From the Engineers' perspective, so long as humans retained that notion of self-sacrifice as central, we weren't entirely beyond redemption. But we went and screwed it all up, and the film hints at when, if not why: the Engineers at the base died two thousand years ago. That suggests that the event that turned them against us and led to the huge piles of dead Engineers lying about was one and the same event. We did something very, very bad, and somehow the consequences of that dreadful act accompanied the Engineers back to LV-223 and massacred them.

If you have uneasy suspicions about what 'a bad thing approximately 2,000 years ago' might be, then let me reassure you that you are right. An astonishing excerpt from the Movies.com interview with Ridley Scott:

Movies.com: We had heard it was scripted that the Engineers were targeting our planet for destruction because we had crucified one of their representatives, and that Jesus Christ might have been an alien. Was that ever considered?

Ridley Scott: We definitely did, and then we thought it was a little too on the nose. But if you look at it as an “our children are misbehaving down there” scenario, there are moments where it looks like we’ve gone out of control, running around with armor and skirts, which of course would be the Roman Empire. And they were given a long run. A thousand years before their disintegration actually started to happen. And you can say, "Let's send down one more of our emissaries to see if he can stop it." Guess what? They crucified him.

Yeah. The reason the Engineers don't like us any more is that they made us a Space Jesus, and we broke him. Reader, that's not me pulling wild ideas out of my arse. That's RIDLEY SCOTT.

So, imagine poor crucified Jesus, a fresh spear wound in his side. Oh, hey, there's the 'lifegiver with his abdomen torn open' motif again. That's three times now: Prometheus, Engineer mural, Jesus Christ. And I don't think I have to mention the 'sacrifice in the interest of giving life' bit again, do I? Everyone on the same page? Good.

So how did our (in the context of the film) terrible murderous act of crucifixion end up wiping out all but one of the Engineers back on LV-223? Presumably through the black slime, which evidently models its behaviour on the user's mental state. Create unselfishly, accepting self-destruction as the cost, and the black stuff engenders fertile life. But expose the potent black slimy stuff to the thoughts and emotions of flawed humanity, and 'the sleep of reason produces monsters'. We never see the threat that the Engineers were fleeing from, we never see them killed other than accidentally (decapitation by door), and we see no remaining trace of whatever killed them. Either it left a long time ago, or it reverted to inert black slime, waiting for a human mind to reactivate it.

The black slime reacts to the nature and intent of the being that wields it, and the humans in the film didn't even know that they WERE wielding it. That's why it remained completely inert in David's presence, and why he needed a human proxy in order to use the stuff to create anything. The black goo could read no emotion or intent from him, because he was an android.

Shaw's comment when the urn chamber is entered - 'we've changed the atmosphere in the room' - is deceptively informative. The psychic atmosphere has changed, because humans - tainted, Space Jesus-killing humans - are present. The slime begins to engender new life, drawing not from a self-sacrificing Engineer but from human hunger for knowledge, for more life, for more everything. Little wonder, then, that it takes serpent-like form. The symbolism of a corrupting serpent, turning men into beasts, is pretty unmistakeable.

Refusal to accept death is anathema to the Engineers. Right from the first scene, we learned their code of willing self-sacrifice in accord with a greater purpose. When the severed Engineer head is temporarily brought back to life, its expression registers horror and disgust. Cinemagoers are confused when the head explodes, because it's not clear why it should have done so. Perhaps the Engineer wanted to die again, to undo the tainted human agenda of new life without sacrifice.

But some humans do act in ways the Engineers might have grudgingly admired. Take Holloway, Shaw's lover, who impregnates her barren womb with his black slime riddled semen before realising he is being transformed into something Other. Unlike the hapless geologist and botanist left behind in the chamber, who only want to stay alive, Holloway willingly embraces death. He all but invites Meredith Vickers to kill him, and it's surely significant that she does so using fire, the other gift Prometheus gave to man besides his life.

The 'Caesarean' scene is central to the film's themes of creation, sacrifice, and giving life. Shaw has discovered she's pregnant with something non-human and sets the autodoc to slice it out of her. She lies there screaming, a gaping wound in her stomach, while her tentacled alien child thrashes and squeals in the clamp above her and OH HEY IT'S THE LIFEGIVER WITH HER ABDOMEN TORN OPEN. How many times has that image come up now? Four, I make it. (We're not done yet.)

And she doesn't kill it. And she calls the procedure a 'caesarean' instead of an 'abortion'.

(I'm not even going to begin to explore the pro-choice versus forced birth implications of that scene. I don't think they're clear, and I'm not entirely comfortable doing so. Let's just say that her unwanted offspring turning out to be her salvation is possibly problematic from a feminist standpoint and leave it there for now.)

Here's where the Christian allegories really come through. The day of this strange birth just happens to be Christmas Day. And this is a 'virgin birth' of sorts, although a dark and twisted one, because Shaw couldn't possibly be pregnant. And Shaw's the crucifix-wearing Christian of the crew. We may well ask, echoing Yeats: what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards LV-223 to be born?

Consider the scene where David tells Shaw that she's pregnant, and tell me that's not a riff on the Annunciation. The calm, graciously angelic android delivering the news, the pious mother who insists she can't possibly be pregnant, the wry declaration that it's no ordinary child... yeah, we've seen this before.

'And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.'

A barren woman called Elizabeth, made pregnant by 'God'? Subtle, Ridley.

Anyway. If it weren't already clear enough that the central theme of the film is 'I suffer and die so that others may live' versus 'you suffer and die so that I may live' writ extremely large, Meredith Vickers helpfully spells it out:

'A king has his reign, and then he dies. It's inevitable.'

Vickers is not just speaking out of personal frustration here, though that's obviously one level of it. She wants her father out of the way, so she can finally come in to her inheritance. It's insult enough that Weyland describes the android David as 'the closest thing I have to a son', as if only a male heir was of any worth; his obstinate refusal to accept death is a slap in her face.

Weyland, preserved by his wealth and the technology it can buy, has lived far, far longer than his rightful time. A ghoulish, wizened creature who looks neither old nor young, he reminds me of Slough Feg, the decaying tyrant from the Slaine series in British comic 2000AD. In Slaine, an ancient (and by now familiar to you, dear reader, or so I would hope) Celtic law decrees that the King has to be ritually and willingly sacrificed at the end of his appointed time, for the good of the land and the people. Slough Feg refused to die, and became a rotting horror, the embodiment of evil.

The image of the sorcerer who refuses to accept rightful death is fundamental: it even forms a part of some occult philosophy. In Crowley's system, the magician who refuses to accept the bitter cup of Babalon and undergo dissolution of his individual ego in the Great Sea (remember that opening scene?) becomes an ossified, corrupted entity called a 'Black Brother' who can create no new life, and lives on as a sterile, emasculated husk.

With all this in mind, we can better understand the climactic scene in which the withered Weyland confronts the last surviving Engineer. See it from the Engineer's perspective. Two thousand years ago, humanity not only murdered the Engineers' emissary, it infected the Engineers' life-creating fluid with its own tainted selfish nature, creating monsters. And now, after so long, here humanity is, presumptuously accepting a long-overdue invitation, and even reawakening (and corrupting all over again) the life fluid.

And who has humanity chosen to represent them? A self-centred, self-satisfied narcissist who revels in his own artificially extended life, who speaks through the medium of a merely mechanical offspring. Humanity couldn't have chosen a worse ambassador.

It's hardly surprising that the Engineer reacts with contempt and disgust, ripping David's head off and battering Weyland to death with it. The subtext is bitter and ironic: you caused us to die at the hands of our own creation, so I am going to kill you with YOUR own creation, albeit in a crude and bludgeoning way.

The only way to save humanity is through self-sacrifice, and this is exactly what the captain (and his two oddly complacent co-pilots) opt to do. They crash the Prometheus into the Engineer's ship, giving up their lives in order to save others. Their willing self-sacrifice stands alongside Holloway's and the Engineer's from the opening sequence; by now, the film has racked up no less than five self-sacrificing gestures (six if we consider the exploding Engineer head).

Meredith Vickers, of course, has no interest in self-sacrifice. Like her father, she wants to keep herself alive, and so she ejects and lands on the planet's surface. With the surviving cast now down to Vickers and Shaw, we witness Vickers's rather silly death as the Engineer ship rolls over and crushes her, due to a sudden inability on her part to run sideways. Perhaps that's the point; perhaps the film is saying her view is blinkered, and ultimately that kills her. But I doubt it. Sometimes a daft death is just a daft death.

Finally, in the squidgy ending scenes of the film, the wrathful Engineer conveniently meets its death at the tentacles of Shaw's alien child, now somehow grown huge. But it's not just a death; there's obscene life being created here, too. The (in the Engineers' eyes) horrific human impulse to sacrifice others in order to survive has taken on flesh. The Engineer's body bursts open - blah blah lifegiver blah blah abdomen ripped apart hey we're up to five now - and the proto-Alien that emerges is the very image of the creature from the mural.

On the face of it, it seems absurd to suggest that the genesis of the Alien xenomorph ultimately lies in the grotesque human act of crucifying the Space Jockeys' emissary to Israel in four B.C., but that's what Ridley Scott proposes. It seems equally insane to propose that Prometheus is fundamentally about the clash between acceptance of death as a condition of creating/sustaining life versus clinging on to life at the expense of others, but the repeated, insistent use of motifs and themes bears this out.

As a closing point, let me draw your attention to a very different strand of symbolism that runs through Prometheus: the British science fiction show Doctor Who. In the 1970s episode 'The Daemons', an ancient mound is opened up, leading to an encounter with a gigantic being who proves to be an alien responsible for having guided mankind's development, and who now views mankind as a failed experiment that must be destroyed. The Engineers are seen tootling on flutes, in exactly the same way that the second Doctor does. The Third Doctor had an companion whose name was Liz Shaw, the same name as the protagonist of Prometheus. As with anything else in the film, it could all be coincidental; but knowing Ridley Scott, it doesn't seem very likely.

Sorry, no offence intended, but I could write a ton of allusions about The Care Bears movie that would sound just as legit.

post #6952 of 7853
Thanks for posting an interesting read, Bob. Whether all that symbolism is important or not - I don't care. The movie was thrilling - every bit as fun as Alien, for me anyway.
post #6953 of 7853
Played By Dawn's Early Light (1990)
2.9/5 (amazon 4.2/5, imdb 7.0/10)
This is the one where Powers Boothe plays a United States Air Force Pilot who crashes his airplane near the end.

Played Red Dawn (1984)
3.5/5 (amazon 3.8/5, imdb 6.0/10)
This is the one where Powers Boothe plays a United States Air Force Pilot who crashes his airplane near the middle.
I rather enjoyed this. Haven't seen it in years.
post #6954 of 7853
Played Hobo with a Shotgun (2011)
0/5 (amazon 3.6/5, imdb 6.2/10)
Rutger Hauer
This was on television. I'm so glad I didn't buy it. It has no redeaming features.
post #6955 of 7853
Thanks for the post bob, brought a lot of things I missed and didn't think about when watching Prometheus. Very interesting points, although I wonder if the head was truly of disgust for being brought back to life, a reaction of what was going through the engineer's mind when he was dying, or just something as simple as too much power pushed through it (As Shaw said not to go over 30A at first iirc).

I agree Fred, but maybe a little slow at the beginning. My dad thought the same and loves Alien. I went into the movie thinking it'd be something like Alien so was expected horror and came out kind of disappointed as I was expecting something else to happen at different times. It wasn't until after I stopped thinking that way and started looking at it as a stand alone movie that I realized how good it was. Definitely adding it to my collection once it comes out on BD
post #6956 of 7853
Need to re-watch Red Dawn & By Dawn's Early Light, have them both on a EHDD archived from Dish, seen both many times but it has been awhile. Summer & family stuff has kept me from watching more movies since Softball ended a couple weeks ago, started Mission Impossible last night (archive) I have III in red & IV in Blu and it has been awhile since I've seen I & II.
post #6957 of 7853
EHDD - External Hard Disk Drive?
post #6958 of 7853
Originally Posted by BasementBob View Post

EHDD - External Hard Disk Drive?
Yes, Dish dvrs allow you to archive single programs to Externals, I have Western, War, Scifi and other favorite genre drives full of movies off of the premiums.
post #6959 of 7853
Have not done a lot of watching lately but have watched the following two movies.

The Descendants - Netflix DVD - Not sure why it received all the accolades that it did. I bought into the hype (which I try not to do) and was disappointed in the film. I could appreciate the situation of the messed up dysfunctional family at a serious time like the one in the movie, but I just could not buy into it. For me the film just plodded along and just never did come together. I did think Clooney did a good job in the film, but not as good as I was expecting for all the hype. The worst thing is I really pitched it to Mrs. RTROSE and it fell flat for her as well. 2/5

The Darkest Hour - Netflix DVD - Saw a trailer on this and thought it would be interesting. Actually pretty good, not stellar or fantastic, but I certainly did not come away with the feeling I wanted my time back. Some of the CGI work is cheesy (especially the aliens) and the ending did not sit well with either me or Mrs RTROSE but overall an entertaining popcorn flick. 3/5


post #6960 of 7853
RT -

I thought you were done with your build!?!?! You should be watching a LOT.

I've been catching up on my watching now that the theater is usable. Over the past couple of weeks (in no particular order).....

Cowboys and Aliens
The Departed
Money Ball
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Ghost Protocol
Captain America
Sherlock Holmes
The Curious Case of Benjamin Britten
The Golden Compass
No Strings Attached

Yeah, I'm really behind. I'm just glad to be able to post in this thread finally.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home