Latest News

‘Prometheus Unbound’ Theories Article

I think it’s fair to say there’s a hell of a lot of questions in Prometheus that goes unanswered. There’s a fairly in-depth look at Prometheus by someone called Cavalorn. It definitely puts a whole new spin on things. Who are the Engineers? What do they do? What does the opening scene represent? What does the dark liquid do? Why do the Engineers hate human beings?

 'Prometheus Unbound' Theories Article

Be sure to check it out. Thanks to JaaayDee for the news.



Post Comment
Comments: 47
  1. Mr. Clemens
    Brokentusk420, I hope you don't own any firearms.  :laugh:

    I liked the film. I'm not sure it's as good as you seem to think it is, but I like it, and I look forward to another one. So do many people! You might be happier talking to those folks instead.  ;)
  2. brokentusk420
    So Ridley and Lindeloff put all this thought and deep epic meanings and symbols/themes into the movie, but couldn't grasp how idiotic it looked that Shaw and Vickers first try to outrun the falling ship, then it takes Shaw only a few rolls to get out of the way, yet Vickers just lays there and lets it crush her?

    Maybe in the chaos of all that's happening it didn't enter her mind. Or maybe she accepted the inevitable as the life boat was trash and how was she to get home? Maybe she didn't know David was still alive/working.

    NGR01, there are definitely execution and script issues in the film. I have to echo your initial thoughts a week or so back. Felt the same way. But this journal post presents some interesting subtext to frame the storyline. It is quite a rich storyline with so much history, mythology, and religion underlying the actions of the Engineers and crew of the Prometheus. I admit, this gives me more faith in the filmmakers that they knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, they dropped the ball on basic execution of pacing, characterization, and plotting.

    And how would you have executed the pacing? The movie was already two hours long, if it drug on people would complain that it didn't have enough excitement and action. As I recall Alien gets to the point pretty quick itself. What's wrong with the characterization? I bet i can find a real life example of each one of them. Yes even the pretty boy scientist. The plotting? Really? Tell me this, its Scott's and his team's piece of art work. They weren't making it to please YOU ALL. They made it because he had a idea and wanted to create it. If you like it cool if not it doesn't mean its bad. Its just means its not for you. I don't think the Mona Lisa is anything special but there are people out there who think it is. It doesn't make it a bad painting.

    So rather than spewing out problems about the film just for the heck of it why don't you elaborate. Because anyone who just had high expectations for a film and were disappointed by it can say,"Oh the was no plot and the pacing was off " or "the characters were all wrong". Stop crying about the film. ::) It in my opinion it was a great stand alone piece with very important themes that if people would step back and look at outside of their narrow minded field of vision when it comes to movies, you would see that this movie is meant to be more than the beginning of and idea started in 1979. Not to mention Scott has already said that this ISN'T A DIRECT PREQUEL and he is planning on possibly two more sequel before it ties directly into Alien.

    The problem most of you have is that you thought going into this that all your questions about Alien would be answered in one two hour movie and they weren't. You left with more questions, much like Shaw was at the end of Prometheus. Her initial questions weren't answered and she was given all new ones. Why does every movie have to be all served up to you all neatly wrapped in a box? Can't a movie leave you wondering and you be satisfied with it? Thinking intellectually is one of the single greatest things humans can do and most squander it with their eternal struggle for instant gratification.

    Why is everyone so hung up on the fact that the original alien creature was not in here? Or complain about how its possible origins are from a black goo substance that reacts to the emotions or intentions of what ever it comes in contact with. I think that is brilliant. It shows the duality of life/death, creation/destruction. This is after all SCIENCE-FICTION and anything is possible. Maybe the combination of the worms and the humans intentions created the hammerpead. I know that everyone loves the original Alien creature and was expecting some huge payoff of how it came into existence, but you know what as David says,"big things have small beginnings". Maybe its beginning isn't as extraordinary as its final form. A grub is nothing special to look at but, a Rhino Beetle sure is!! At the end of the day if Scott and his team says the Alien creature came into being simply by a series of events that started with the ingestion of black goo that reacts to intentions and it makes it to the movie screen, THEN THAT'S CANON. I'm not saying that the black goo intention argument is correct but it sounds good and if Scott confirms it in the commentary it will make me like this film that much more. This film is meant to be a deep thought provoker. Not a answer all prequel to Alien like you all want and expected. That's why you are all limping away with sore butts. ;D

    Furthermore, I think the disappointment that everyone has with this film is a reflection of how the human race is gonna feel when we meet our creators and we find out that there is no real meaningful reason for our existence. Or how the most of you are gonna feel because you can never understand out of mental capacity what GOD truly is and what life is about. I can sleep at night just fine not possibly ever knowing all the answers and that one day I will die. I am comfortable with my own death as its not the end its the beginning of something else. These are some of the things that are brought up in the film. Society and Hollywood has conditioned you all to have such warped expectations in not just movies but life as well. Humans are the scourge of this planet right now and we don't have to be. That's why the Engineers wanted to destroy us and rightfully so. We don't deserve the gift of life as all the most of you do is consume, waste, and continue to over populate while all along bickering and fighting with one another. I welcome the destruction of the human race to cleanse this planet and let pure life reclaim it and return to balance. I would gladly sacrifice myself for that.
  3. DoomRulz
    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
    Considering how she reacted with Weyland, I figured that bit of information was obvious.

    I never would've guessed, quite honestly. But why introduce it if it goes nowhere? Silly.

    It was just there to show us her/Vickers reason for being there. She did not give a sh*t about anyone, or the mission. Look at what she say's to Janek' after Enginneer kills everybody "just take us home" . She was just looking after her inheritance. So knowing her connection to Weyland is kind of big, but not really story wise. IMO :)

    Then why bring her along at all? She could've just as easily stayed at home and monitored the mission remotely.
  4. Alien³
    A great read!

    The only thing in Prommy that still isn't answered is: what does David pick up from the floor of the ship when he's wandering it alone?

    I have a theory it's one of the worms seen coming from the boot of the crew later in the dome. Only the Blu-ray can answer this.
  5. ChrisPachi
    The film was filled with pointless characters who died for nonsensical reasons. I've watched my nephew playing G.I Joes and felt more engagement, and his characters had names like 'Bad Man' and 'Moss Face'.

    How is that even f**king possible?
  6. Highland
    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
    Considering how she reacted with Weyland, I figured that bit of information was obvious.

    I never would've guessed, quite honestly. But why introduce it if it goes nowhere? Silly.


    She was quite a pointless character. Theron is great eye candy though so I'll let her off.

    It was a little obvious when she grabbed David in the hall way. I thought maybe wife at first (in a f**ked up way), just because daughter seemed too obvious.
  7. bleau
    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
    Considering how she reacted with Weyland, I figured that bit of information was obvious.

    I never would've guessed, quite honestly. But why introduce it if it goes nowhere? Silly.

    It was just there to show us her/Vickers reason for being there. She did not give a sh*t about anyone, or the mission. Look at what she say's to Janek' after Enginneer kills everybody "just take us home" . She was just looking after her inheritance. So knowing her connection to Weyland is kind of big, but not really story wise. IMO :)
  8. DoomRulz
    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
    Considering how she reacted with Weyland, I figured that bit of information was obvious.

    I never would've guessed, quite honestly. But why introduce it if it goes nowhere? Silly.
  9. CONKERSBADFURDAY
    I like this analysis, but like others, I think it has some problems. It seems like the black goo is predisposed to make Xenomorph type monsters, so I'm not really sure how that would relate to emotions. I believe the snake monster that killed that pretty much unnamed scientist was an infected millipede/worm thing on the ground, and as someone else pointed out, millipede/worm things don't have emotions.

    The Space Jockey's were running away from something in the holograms, and Xeno's don't traditionally get picked up by normal means (or at least, infrared), so I'm guessing they were running away from some Xenos. I believe someone even mentions that they saw a corpse with a blown out chest.

    Honestly, it seems like the black goo was just liquid Xeno, which seems safer to carry than a bunch of facehugger eggs.

    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
    Considering how she reacted with Weyland, I figured that bit of information was obvious.
  10. Gilfryd
    Isn't it obvious though? The Engineers were preparing to leave for Earth in order to wipe us out, which means that they were working with or at the very least handling the biological material in preparation, loading their ship/s etc. You could even assume that they weaponized it specifically for the Earth mission, and that's when things went awry.

    The article makes it seem like the goo and Space Jesus are linked. The moment of his death somehow made the goo go crazy on an alien moon somewhere.

    Either way the whole Jesus thing is dumb and they were smart enough to get rid of it. Thing is though they didn't go back to make the rest of the story work without it.

    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.

    I thought Vickers would be the Ripley character in the end. A bureaucratic, no nonsense lady becomes the character we want to survive. Instead she gets crushed by a ship.
  11. DoomRulz
    You know, for all the analyses thus far of the film, the only scene that really stands out to me as being totally pointless was the revelation that Vickers is Weyland's daughter. That went nowhere.
  12. ChrisPachi
    Count me as another questioning why the death of Space Jesus would affect black slime on an alien ship a bajillion miles away on a military dumpsite planet.

    Isn't it obvious though? The Engineers were preparing to leave for Earth in order to wipe us out, which means that they were working with or at the very least handling the biological material in preparation, loading their ship/s etc. You could even assume that they weaponized it specifically for the Earth mission, and that's when things went awry.

    Or am I missing something?
  13. Gilfryd
    I like this analysis quite a lot


    Count me as another questioning why the death of Space Jesus would affect black slime on an alien ship a bajillion miles away on a military dumpsite planet.
  14. DoomRulz
    At least one of them died no doubt as a result from either a Facehugger or that tentacled thing that attacked Shaw and Jockey in the vessel at the end. The others, I think it was probably the same thing.
  15. TheGreatRedDragon
    Hi there.

    Just popping in to say no, I've never even seen that Wordpress blog.

    'Prometheus Unbound' is, as other people have pointed out, the title of a play by Percy Shelley from 1820. If you have any familiarity with Eng Lit, it's also about the most obvious thing to call an expository article about a film called Prometheus, which is why I, this other guy, and stacks of other people have all done so.

    Also, the word 'eponymous' means 'that for which a thing is named', in this case, the movie. If we were discussing the movie Titanic, the Titanic would be the eponymous ship. I can understand you might think the term was copied if you weren't used to seeing it used often, but I'm afraid that terms like that get bandied around a lot. I use a pretty broad vocabulary. Pan back through my LJ and check out my other work, you'll soon see what I mean.

    On top of that, the content of my article and his article are completely different. As in, none of the content is the same. I go on about the Golden Bough, Space Jesus, the black goo, themes of sacrifice and acceptance of death versus unnatural extension of life, and what I think the answers are; he talks about Milton, the space cobra thing, David, and how nice it would be to have some answers.

    In short, your accusation of plagiarism is based around the title, drawn from a common source (Shelley) in each case, and the fact that we both use a word - 'eponymous' - that you apparently didn't understand.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

    yo how did the Engineers die at LV-223? I didnt get that part. They created that black goo and it turned on the Engineers because humans killed Jesus? How can the black goo turn on the Engineers because of human action since Earth and LV-223 are lightyears away from each other.
  16. Cavalorn
    Hi there.

    Just popping in to say no, I've never even seen that Wordpress blog.

    'Prometheus Unbound' is, as other people have pointed out, the title of a play by Percy Shelley from 1820. If you have any familiarity with Eng Lit, it's also about the most obvious thing to call an expository article about a film called Prometheus, which is why I, this other guy, and stacks of other people have all done so.

    Also, the word 'eponymous' means 'that for which a thing is named', in this case, the movie. If we were discussing the movie Titanic, the Titanic would be the eponymous ship. I can understand you might think the term was copied if you weren't used to seeing it used often, but I'm afraid that terms like that get bandied around a lot. I use a pretty broad vocabulary. Pan back through my LJ and check out my other work, you'll soon see what I mean.

    On top of that, the content of my article and his article are completely different. As in, none of the content is the same. I go on about the Golden Bough, Space Jesus, the black goo, themes of sacrifice and acceptance of death versus unnatural extension of life, and what I think the answers are; he talks about Milton, the space cobra thing, David, and how nice it would be to have some answers.

    In short, your accusation of plagiarism is based around the title, drawn from a common source (Shelley) in each case, and the fact that we both use a word - 'eponymous' - that you apparently didn't understand.

    Hope that clears things up for you.
  17. DoomRulz
    Wow, this article borrows SHAMELESSLY from the wordpress review I am linking below which was published 5 DAYS before this Cavalorn one!

    It's even got the same title!

    http://benjitaylorwins.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/prometheusunbound/

    Out of order I would say.

    #NotCoolAtAll.

    Surely someone should apologize? Stealing the title is just out of order. And the WordPress article was blog of the day at some point, I remember.

    It's very likely that they had the same ideas. Much of what was said in either entry has been repeated in some ways in this forum as well so I doubt either one is copying from the other.
  18. NGR01
    NGR01, there are definitely execution and script issues in the film. I have to echo your initial thoughts a week or so back. Felt the same way. But this journal post presents some interesting subtext to frame the storyline. It is quite a rich storyline with so much history, mythology, and religion underlying the actions of the Engineers and crew of the Prometheus. I admit, this gives me more faith in the filmmakers that they knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, they dropped the ball on basic execution of pacing, characterization, and plotting.

    Yep that is my only gripe with the movie.
    Great concepts, ideas and mythology but in a indigent script.
  19. amazing_prometheus
    @Mr. Clemens

    ^ Of course he did! And the WordPress article uses it because of the context- especially as it refers to Milton, William Blake, etc...

    I just think it looks like this guy has taken a lot of inspiration from the WordPress blog, even using the witty/ catchy title, and given the dude who wrote it NO credit. Out of order.

     :-\
  20. RagingDragon
    Everybody ignored Laufey's great comment pages back, which makes this theory create just as many holes as it tries to fill.

    It was a great, great read, mind you, but unless they had a human to interact with 2,000 years ago on 223, the theory about the goo doesn't hold any water, unless it "interacted" with the jockeys differently because they decided to kill humanity rather than create life.

    It also all depends on whether the goo at the beginning is the same as the black goo in the temples.

    An interesting bit can be found on the projectprometheus web site, under Project: Genesis.  You can download Shaw's research dossiers, and one of them shows an Urn they found on earth, petrified, from circa 2,500 B.C.  This means that not only was the goo already on Earth, it was supposedly found 2,500 years before the engineers decided to wipe us out.

    Perhaps they were testing it?  Was this the urn that the sacrificial jockey got his goo from?  If so, it's pretty clear that it's the same goo.  If that's the case, the psychological aspect that dude pointed out seems the most likely, making the goo an intelligent organism that reacts with its' hosts base nature.

    But then that raises yet another question, in that if the goo reacts as such, and the Jockey had to prepare himself for the sacrifice that would create life, what was up with Holloway?  He clearly chose in the end to sacrifice himself, for one reason or another, and this would be the equivelant to what the sacrificial jockey had done.

    More missing pieces.
  21. DaddyYautja
    am i the only one who doesn't think Vickers is an android? The fact that she may have had a cold demeanor i understand, but she still showed emotion when she torched Holloway and definitely had fear when she got squished by the ship.

    I dont either. Why would Weyland create a robot that is going to be pissed at him all the time?
    Plus are they built to be fully functional? Cause, you know, Janek.
  22. ice9684
    am i the only one who doesn't think Vickers is an android? The fact that she may have had a cold demeanor i understand, but she still showed emotion when she torched Holloway and definitely had fear when she got squished by the ship.
  23. DoomRulz
    The execution wasn't inherently bad. The film ultimately in the end, wanted to set up a sequel which is why it asked so many questions that are indeed worth looking into but didn't answer them in one go.
  24. trailpimp
    For me, the screenwriters and director didn't have a clue of what their doing. They recalled a bunch of ancient astronauts theories, threw in a couple of monsters and fancy ships, some fx, HR Giger inspired surroundings and designs, and 3d filming and voil√°: "Prometheus" was in the cinemas.
    The "questions" raised by the movie, to me are an insult to moviegoers and Alien fans. The inconsistencies, the ambiguities, the appauling twists throughout the movie are not some  higher form of writting and film directing, they're just a sloppy mix of ideas and poor execution masked by a good budget.
    For me, the real challenge was to construct an innovative narrative, yet complex, but with a sense and purpose.
    In the end what we really get are advanced optics, digital visions and an incredible Michael Fassbender.

    "they were doing"
  25. DoomRulz
    HILARIOUS. Never realized how many people went to this movie seeking the answers to life. I went with the notion that this was a stand alone explanation of the SJ. And it piqued my interest, gave a splendid colorful version to the Ancient Astronaut thesis, and has me waiting for a sequel. It's called ENTERTAINMENT folks.

    Not answers to life, but answers to the events leading up to Alien, yes. And even then, it succeeds and fails at the same time.
  26. dachande89
    Well I like to believe it was all for the intent of creating the xeno. The mural on the walls depicted the xenos and I assume thats what the jockeys were intending to create. Maybe humans were merely guinea pigs to create the perfect weapon.
  27. cmdcnqr
    HILARIOUS. Never realized how many people went to this movie seeking the answers to life. I went with the notion that this was a stand alone explanation of the SJ. And it piqued my interest, gave a splendid colorful version to the Ancient Astronaut thesis, and has me waiting for a sequel. It's called ENTERTAINMENT folks.
  28. fortress77
    I have one question it is clearly that this is not the first creation of xenomorph i mean i saw a statue of xenomorph in the wall of the ship or what ever place that
    is it was like a statue on the wall :| did you guys see it on the movie what do you think it means
  29. TREVER
    ... Also noticed that the Engineer in the film's intro who sacrifices himself in order to create life is also dressed in nothing but robes, similar to the "Jesus" idea. The vessel was also more "flying saucer" style, which is a common report in history on earth. So0o perhaps the vessels and Engineers on this particular planet were truly the soldiers of the race, unlike the intro's Engineer? Kind of like the death/life theory? WHat y'all think?
  30. Hellspawn28
    I also hear that The Engineers were pissed off at us for 2000 because we killed Jesus? To me, that sounds really stupid. I always imagine that The Engineers wanted humans dead because we crated war and crime which is something that they didn't had in mind.
  31. Predaker
    As for the black goo, I think it was Xenomorphine who summed it up pretty good:

    The black goo is a plot device. It does whatever the writers want it to do. Nothing more, nothing less.
  32. Intrepid-Traveler
    Pretty good, it has some decent theories on the black substance and why the jockeys hate us. But there are still MANY unanswered questions even within the confines of the article. Such as the massive squid trilobite at the end, the mysterious pile of dead jockey bodies, the REASON the black goo does different things to different people. Yes there was much symbolism but I feel like there are very few answers and a lot of hypothesis.
  33. Hellspawn28
    I saw a page about this on Worst Previews not too while ago. While I did like some things left as a mystery but it was still interesting. I guess Scott was made to ask on what happen with the film with so many people confused. I remember the same happen with Kubrick after 2001 was released.
Facebook Twitter Instagram Steam RSS Feed