QUOTE(Brian O'Connor @ Jun 14 2012, 03:20 PM)
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
My opinion is Charlie shouldnt be allow to die. From the 1st 1 hour I admire that he's a cool character including that scene where the medical team examining the engineer's head, he just sit there and drink wine and after it exploded, he just walked away like nothing happen. Probably the director think that somebody from the expidition group need to trigger something and he's very unlucky that he's the 1st person that David met when David is searching for his potential 'lab rat'. Same goes to Vickers, dunno why the director killed her character because I do assume that she can replace Ripley in terms of her charisma and ego. Now I do hope that if there is a sequel, she suddenly survives the 'donut' attack like Shaw did and went back to earth for reinforcement.(sigh~)
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
If follow the same pattern in earlier Alien movies, the characters that we think shouldn't die (becoz he/she's a tough intelligent leader) will most probably die. That's the misdirection the directors love to employ to keep us on our toes (but might frust some coz we've rooted for the characters); remember Ripley was on equal footing in the beginning, then only we realized she's the main heroine and not Captain Dallas. In Aliens, Michael Biehn's Hicks character did survive but he didn't do much at the end. Alien3, the medical officer with whom Ripley had intercourse died so early...(horror movies pattern? heheh). Alien 4, Michael Wincott's character the 1st to die among the crew ... in the end, the cripple and Ron Perlman's 'bad' unlikely-to-survive characters are the one that survived.
Similarly, that's why Vickers character was included and was squashed so easily? ... I thought she could've survived (she got her own personal cabin with separate life-support, I thought that's a foreshadowing) and could've provide a Ripley-like character in contrast to Shaw's in the sequels ... but alas, no.
QUOTE(JustcallmeLarry @ Jun 14 2012, 06:45 PM)
Enjoyed the movie. But my question are
1. Why at the start of the movie one engineer drink something and died? What the meaning of that?
2. After getting 50 mil on opening week, what the chances now on a sequel?
3. If there a sequel hope it won't be this same lost writer bcs he good at writing scripts with many questions but then give really stupid answers like what he did with lost. That ruind the years I spent watching lost.
QUOTE(shinjite @ Jun 14 2012, 08:36 PM)
1) Every big things has small beginnings
2) Wait for the international gross and also the 2nd week to gauge
3) That is how they can do more sequels
QUOTE(JustcallmeLarry @ Jun 14 2012, 10:50 PM)
They say he sacrifice himself so his DNA created human race?? Water mix his DNA to make human???
1. I still haven't read enough to conclude, was the act intentional? There are mentions of rebel Engineers..and unfilmed scene that an elder Engineer offered the younger Engineer the black goo. Is the one in the opening act a rebel? Then the other Engineers tried to destroy the resulting earthlings coz that wasn't in their plan? Anyway, was it mentioned how long since the mixing of the DNAs with H2O that human beings appeared? For all we know, it's just the beginning of evolution, with the external DNA a trigger ingredient in the primodial soup, and took billions of years (but then, how come the Engineers race didn't improve along much? heheh, more questions ... )
2. The box-office of 50million for a R-rated film in US is above expectation. Prometheus held the box office throne in the United Kingdom (Ridley Scott's country) coz no Madagascar 3 to compete. Overall, it did 90millions internationally (RM2juta in Malaysia). Not bad. Blu-rays and DVDs still to come after theatrical runs. (
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=intl&id=prometheus.htm)
3. I guess that's why the producers or the director brought Lindelof in, to provide the 'religious' viewpoint. As we know, LOST ending is very religiously biased. In a way, I was satisfied with the series ending ... from the emotional aspect. From the logical aspect which demands clear cut answers, one is bound to be disappointed. As with most religions, one have to rely on faith, personal emotional experience ... not empirical explanations. (see Contact)
QUOTE(koolspyda @ Jun 15 2012, 12:59 AM)
ok, it's a (just) story.
i dont think ridley sets out for us on a bona fide science education. i don't think we want to there on why this, why that, Is this even possible, I think the makers; well, ridleys want the fans to make their own assumption on "who are we", here's his story, and btw it can be scary

.
As in how elizabeth, a scientist believes in religion because she choose to "believe".
there were comments/questions on other Prometheus forums that..
among it...
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
"why does the director need to have a sex scene", "why does janek needs to score with vickers, doesn't go with the story", "wtf, a white female needs to get laid from a black guy" "How the hell did they find the engineers base so soon", "Why does the engineer need to drink the black goo?"
there are times i wish i can bat their heads

Ya, Ridley Scott isn't the preachy type of director. Even with Kingdom of Heaven, he tried to balance both the Islamic and Christian Crusaders points ...
I guess with old age, one tends to more religious (to be on the safe side) and he's using his current movies to include some religion/creation themes, but not too 'atheist' ... more to agnostic ... open minded. I'd liken Naomi's Shaw character to Jodie Foster's Arroway character in Contact ... both a scientist who like to believe (altho one only realized it in the end) and both gets 'invitation' to meet the 'higher beings' ... I only hope Prometheus sequel doesn't go the "oh, we're not the prime movers, there were others before us".
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
- sex scene (not directly shown) between Shaw & Charlie; shows the close intimate relationship, which set-ups the impact for the infection scenes afterwards.
- the long distance / long-haul type of 'truckers' culture; was implied in 1979 Alien movie, but wasn't filmed. I guess Ridley wanted to do now what he didn't get to the 1st time...
- the Engineers 'base'? ... those people weren't paying attention. I thought that's obvious, the formation of stars. One can complain about some plot holes or the 'stupid' scientists, but some answers could be found internally. I was pleased afterwards when read that LV-233 and LV-426 are in the same solar system i.e. Zeta 2 Reticuli. Or is it how the Prometheus crew after arriving at LV-223, could find the 'pyramid' so fast? Was it stated how fast the Prometheus spaceship was travelling while doing surface imaging? Anyway, not so important in a 2-hrs movie.
- why does the Engineer need to drink the black goo ... hmm, that I haven't read about also, as mentioned previously.
Btw, a cool post ....
http://www.m.prometheus-movie.com/communit...rums/topic/7487QUOTE
You want to know if LV -233 is anywhere near LV 426... yes indeedy.
Here's what we know about the Location of LV 426 from Alien - as told by Lambert - the source of the signal is the system of Zeta 2 Reticuli ( part of a binary system 39 light years from Earth.)
From Prometheus we are told that the ship is 3.27 * 10^ 14 km from Earth and this works out to approx 34.5 light years away. And we get a diagram of six stars.
I pulled up a star map of the Zeta Reticuli system... guess what pattern I found?
Yeah. that's right. I think LV -223 is a moon around a planet orbiting the star Gliese 86... which is the bottom left star (lowest in the three that seem to make a diagonal going up and right) while Zeta 2 Reticuli is the one in the bottom right star.
Gliese 86 is a K type star, approx 35 light years away... with a white dwarf star and massive gas giant planet orbiting it (discovered in 2000) .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zeta_reticuli.png
Zeta Reticuli has been part of UFO folklore for sometime by the way being part of the Hill Abduction Folklore.
What do I win? I guess that part was properly scientifically consulted ...
This post has been edited by r2t2: Jun 15 2012, 11:38 AM